My group is plagued with poor dice rolls and it seems that most times when my players roll Insight or Perception checks they invariably roll less than their passive numbers.
To remedy this I have instituted a house rule that Insight and Perception checks are now Passive number + a d10.
What do people here think and is there a mechanical problem that I am not seeing.
thanks
I am not sure if this has come up before, but here goes.
My group is plagued with poor dice rolls and it seems that most times when my players roll Insight or Perception checks they invariably roll less than their passive numbers.
To remedy this I have instituted a house rule that Insight and Perception checks are now Passive number + a d10.
What do people here think and is there a mechanical problem that I am not seeing.
thanks
Bad luck happens, you don't need a house rule to fix it, just better dice rolls or more aid another checks or the like.
Besides, more often than not it's not that they roll poorly most of the time, just that you only notice their poor rolls when it happens like that.
Plus, you could just start using Passive Perception/Insight for more things, rolling against their defense rather than relying on their rolls.
Logically how can you have a better chance to find something hidden by just walking into a room than you do when you actively start looking for it.
that's easy to say, but when 5 players walk into a room and the lowest Passive Perception is 25 so they do not see the DC 30 secret door. Then the players start actively searching and 6 times in a row they roll less than 10 it gets more than a little frustrating.
Logically how can you have a better chance to find something hidden by just walking into a room than you do when you actively start looking for it.
I use the Take 20 rule: if they've got the time, I just assume that they roll over and over again until nat 20s are rolled.
First, what level are the players? I assume Paragon if not Epic to have a DC 30 secret door. So if none of them can passively hit the secret door, then your group find perception to be a waste and they just won't find it.
If on the other hand their level 4-6 and and are elite perception people with passive perception of 25. Then you as a DM decided that there should be a door in this room that the players won't find. Which is fine, especially if this is the room you expect your players to take their short rest, or maybe even an extended rest in. Then basically this room is a stall tactic, that you say by the end of the rest they have been here long enough that they effectively did the take 20, and over the course of their rest somebody found a hidden door.
Usually for a character to have to roll perception, they already know something is there, and they are in a combat situation. So either the enemy just went hidden, and rolled well enough on stealth that their passive isn't cutting it, or they have an idea that there probably is a trap in the room, but they're not exactly sure where it is. Or its just that your players are trying to gather more information from a specific thing, such as looting the bodies, and somebody decides that they want to examine the clothes to see if there are an identifying insignia, and ends up finding a hidden pocket that passively couldn't possibly have known was there.
If you want a hidden object to play a part of your story, don't make it so hidden that they can't find it. Rolling lower than passive on a perception check is perfectly acceptable, its called looking around the house for your car keys, only to find them in your pocket, your so certain your looking in the right place, that you are actually ignoring your other senses.
Ex.
Passive Percept: 12
DM: you enter the room and see several furniture pieces. the desk has some papers and also an ink well with several quills.
PC1: i want a better look at those papers; are any written, is the drawer of the desk unlocked.
DM: roll active percept.
PC1: but i have such a low bonus, i might not learn anything. besides it is here in the open, why do i have to roll? *rolls 8*
DM: you take the time to actually read what is written and notice that the ink is low and the drawer is unlocked with several letters still inside and sealed closed. they are all addressed to Theodora.
PC2: i want to take a look too. *rolls 1*
DM: you become very interested in the quills and ink. you fail to notice anything else of importance.
The active use of a skill should simply trump the passive use. the passive numbers give you an idea of who could lie to them, steal from them, hide from them, haggle with them, intimidate them and many other things. but those active numbers should only count lower than a passive number if the roll is nat 1.
Passive Perception is you noticing something that you didn't know was there, without looking for it. You might notice that there are important letters on a desk, you might notice there is writing on the ceiling, you might notice that a book-case looks funny. You are -not-, however, looking for things. Passive perception would not tell you that there is a key inside of a chest, nor would it tell you what language a book laying on a desk is written in. It's nothing more than looking around for a few seconds, before doing something else.
Active Perceptions is literally searching. Opening things, running your finger along walls, digging through desk drawers, etc. It's a more in-depth look using a different method.
While the two are closely related (and if you're going to be good at one, you'll be good at another) they are not quite the same thing. You might as well consider them to be entirely different skills.
While the two are closely related (and if you're going to be good at one, you'll be good at another) they are not quite the same thing. You might as well consider them to be entirely different skills.
Agreed.
To the OP: this is the solution new to 4th which fixes 3.5's skill separation flaw. You have Spot as your Passive Insight, showing only more obvious things or overcoming a shoddy roll for Bluff by an NPC or the like; and Search is now your d20+Insight bonus, revealing the hard to find stuff if the roll is high enough, but always revealing those things that Passive would.
So while rolling 1 on the Active use might not reveal the hidden door, it would show them all the stuff a passive check of 10 would show. And the PCs ought to be pretty damned sure that nothing at all was hidden here after searching so well (with a roll of 1).
BTW: you don't show them that below-10-roll and let them metagame based on it do you? for shame.....hide that **** behind the screen, son.
i usually handle checks whose result will give away the need to try again, so they can't see that they might need to try again. i describe it as if they are sure every time. never any of that "you couldnt anything in this room, but you get the feeling there might be something.." for an average roll that is close to the DC for the door hidden. I might tell the player "you searched thoroughly, finding nothing new." to instill confidence that their character didn't miss something. if they want to search again anyways as a team, at least now its because they want to double sure, and not cause they saw the 9 get rolled...
First, what level are the players? I assume Paragon if not Epic to have a DC 30 secret door. So if none of them can passively hit the secret door, then your group find perception to be a waste and they just won't find it.
If on the other hand their level 4-6 and and are elite perception people with passive perception of 25. Then you as a DM decided that there should be a door in this room that the players won't find. Which is fine, especially if this is the room you expect your players to take their short rest, or maybe even an extended rest in. Then basically this room is a stall tactic, that you say by the end of the rest they have been here long enough that they effectively did the take 20, and over the course of their rest somebody found a hidden door.
Usually for a character to have to roll perception, they already know something is there, and they are in a combat situation. So either the enemy just went hidden, and rolled well enough on stealth that their passive isn't cutting it, or they have an idea that there probably is a trap in the room, but they're not exactly sure where it is. Or its just that your players are trying to gather more information from a specific thing, such as looting the bodies, and somebody decides that they want to examine the clothes to see if there are an identifying insignia, and ends up finding a hidden pocket that passively couldn't possibly have known was there.
If you want a hidden object to play a part of your story, don't make it so hidden that they can't find it. Rolling lower than passive on a perception check is perfectly acceptable, its called looking around the house for your car keys, only to find them in your pocket, your so certain your looking in the right place, that you are actually ignoring your other senses.
the players are all level 15 and I put things like this into my adventures as side quests or bonuses that they can find, my players like it, that's all.
[snip]
BTW: you don't show them that below-10-roll and let them metagame based on it do you? for shame.....hide that **** behind the screen, son.
i usually handle checks whose result will give away the need to try again, so they can't see that they might need to try again. i describe it as if they are sure every time. never any of that "you couldnt anything in this room, but you get the feeling there might be something.." for an average roll that is close to the DC for the door hidden. I might tell the player "you searched thoroughly, finding nothing new." to instill confidence that their character didn't miss something. if they want to search again anyways as a team, at least now its because they want to double sure, and not cause they saw the 9 get rolled...
i don't prefer for my DM to roll my checks, so i don't roll checks for the PCs that I DM for.
If they see the low roll and want to try again, there are rules that cover that circumstance. if they roll low and a teammate wants to try again because they saw the low roll, that is like watching a teammate do a poor job at something and deciding to pitch in. I treat it as an Aid Another rather than meta-gaming.
for some skills this, "I know I didn't succeed" is more noticeable than others. If they are trying to disable a lock with theivery and the lock doesn't open, they know that they didn't open the lock. the roll being hidden or open doesn't really matter at that point.
searching a room may not lead them to feel certain that they've seen everything, but still if they'd like to search again, the circumstance better change dramatically before i'd allow a Try Again. The team can assist and all can offer to aid. Or, they could burn down the room and sift through the ashes. that would be a dramatic change in circumstances which would readily allow a Try Again.
i don't prefer for my DM to roll my checks, so i don't roll checks for the PCs that I DM for.
If they see the low roll and want to try again, there are rules that cover that circumstance. if they roll low and a teammate wants to try again because they saw the low roll, that is like watching a teammate do a poor job at something and deciding to pitch in. I treat it as an Aid Another rather than meta-gaming.
for some skills this, "I know I didn't succeed" is more noticeable than others. If they are trying to disable a lock with theivery and the lock doesn't open, they know that they didn't open the lock. the roll being hidden or open doesn't really matter at that point.
For those which it doesn't matter, it doesn't matter. Obviously an open lock Thievery check doesn't matter so much if they see the roll.
But for those in which it does- I must disagree with information bearing checks being revealed to the players.
If the player rolls for something, and fail miserably, but acting in character would result in surely bad consequences for that character, do you think that the player is gonna walk the character into the path of doom? Or try to make the "situation change" enough to make another check and get his character that same information that he or she is metagame-suspecting is there?
In a perfect world, the former would be true. But unfortunately, the latter is true. Most players will not act in character to the point of dying, but this is precisely what could happen when the characters say... get tricked into thinking that the sacred temple they are going to, isnt actually a portal for hellspawn..
EDIT: Trying again as a team is certainly a good example of acting in character. "Hey I don't trust Gimel's eyes much, he's pretty oblivious..let's all try to search as a team and see what we find."
That seems like character-acting alot better than trying again (as a team or not) cuz there was a low roll.
well I hope you didnt spend too much time writing it before they found it; looks like their characters' minds were elsewhere during their search and they've missed this one
no biggie...i can just add it someplace else, that way no lost work.
