Recent Posts
I'm designing my first Pathfinder adventure and now that the storyline and all the different NPC's are in place i'm actually goin in with the pathfinder "mechanic".
Things that came out almost instantly were about search and spot.
For spot i understand that it is a perception check but there is a gray area to me... i know that smells, sounds, movement behind the brush and stuff like that are obviously perceptions.
But what about noticing that the weird markings on that black monolith are actually an extensive configuration of the "local" solar system? Is it a knowledge check?.. intel check?...perception check?
And what about searching, how is it handled under pathfinder? What if the Wizard actually search the black monolith in orther to understand something out of these weird markings?
I got my own ideas but i would like you to share.
Thanx all.
But what about noticing that the weird markings on that black monolith are actually an extensive configuration of the "local" solar system? Is it a knowledge check?.. intel check?...perception check?
Elo
In this case I would if they were not "actively" searching the monolith, roll the perception for them to spot it first (I have all the skills necessary from each character sheet), or if they were actively searching allow them to make their own perception roll cause I am nice like that ;)
Then I would explain what they see, with as many descriptive words as possible, let them draw whatever conclusions before responding to their queries or asking for the appropriate knowledge check when needed. This could come under knowledge local/planar/arcana even , different knowledges give different information obviously if something can be garnered from it.
I would only fall back to an int/wis check if they all failed something or no one had any specific knowledge and even if passed I would only give a small tidbit of information.
Also just a note to the general board or new players, remember if it was an adventure necessity to make out what that monolith was denoting, you should never do it in such a way that your adventure cant continue just because they failed some rolls. At least give them something to progress forward, even if they have to follow it up with some research.
In 3.5, a search check was really just an active perception check, using all five senses. Since perception under PFRPG takes into account the use of these senses, I would say that a perception check to spot or listen are passive and take into account scent and everything else, and that search is when you make a perception check actively, looking for something in particular.
But what about noticing that the weird markings on that black monolith are actually an extensive configuration of the "local" solar system? Is it a knowledge check?.. intel check?...perception check?
And what about searching, how is it handled under pathfinder? What if the Wizard actually search the black monolith in orther to understand something out of these weird markings?
I got my own ideas but i would like you to share.
Well you would get a perception check to notice the markings. Knowledge (arcana/ history/ religion/ nobility as appropriate) to identify and make sense of the runes. If there is something hidden in the markings (perhaps some of the glyphs are bigger than they should be for emphasis) I might consider a separate perception check to notice it.
If there is something hidden in the markings (perhaps some of the glyphs are bigger than they should be for emphasis) I might consider a separate perception check to notice it.Deciphering hidden meanings should be a Linguistics check.
You are probably right. In fact getting any meaning from runes should probably require a linguistics check.
In 3.5, a search check was really just an active perception check, using all five senses. Since perception under PFRPG takes into account the use of these senses, I would say that a perception check to spot or listen are passive and take into account scent and everything else, and that search is when you make a perception check actively, looking for something in particular.
I have to disagree. I like most of the pathfinder system changes but Search being rolled into Perception was not a good idea in my opinion. Spot and Listen were both Wisdom based checks and simply relied on the characters intuition and situational awareness. Similar skills in mechanic and flavour, so, sure put them together. After all, everyone pretty much rolled both of them in a given situation anyway, “I spot and listen.”
Search was different. It was an Intelligence based skill and flavour wise was more logic driven than spot. A character Spots a chest in a room, Searching the chest tells the character the inside of the chest is not as deep as the outside would lead you to believe, perhaps the bottom is hollowed.Spot would reveal unusual stonework; search would reveal the mechanic of opening the secret door and triggering (disabling) the trap. The Spot check in no way has to be passive, (most GMs sipmply assumed all characters are passively spotting at a 10) a character could actively spot, standing still and taking 20.
A lot of good feedback and comments that leads me to think about simply adding Search as a skill under pathfinder!
Of course i'm not a dev or R&D guy but i still have 20 years as a dm under the belt and i simply think that perception as presented in pathfinder got nothing to do with actively searching for something.
Search (int. based skill)
Class skill for ranger, rogue, wizard.
What you guyz think?
A lot of good feedback and comments that leads me to think about simply adding Search as a skill under pathfinder!
Of course i'm not a dev or R&D guy but i still have 20 years as a dm under the belt and i simply think that perception as presented in pathfinder got nothing to do with actively searching for something.Search (int. based skill)
Class skill for ranger, rogue, wizard.
What you guyz think?
I'm not sure about making it a wizard class skill I'd go for ranger, rogue, and bard.
If there is something hidden in the markings (perhaps some of the glyphs are bigger than they should be for emphasis) I might consider a separate perception check to notice it.Deciphering hidden meanings should be a Linguistics check.You are probably right. In fact getting any meaning from runes should probably require a linguistics check.
Don't forget an appropriate Knowledge check! :)