Lately I've been kind of keen to the idea of removing Perception as a skill. I have a couple of reasons for this. The first is that I have never really been able to justify training for perception outside of watching things. The second is the inevitable reliance on this skill for noticing things.
I've been mulling over the idea of having it be a static number with maybe a few modifiers, maybe handled somewhat like initiative. If someone wants to have better perception, they spend a feat on it.
I'm not sure how to handle stealth in reaction to this, or if I should do anything about stealth (or pick pockets).
I would leave it as skill. Most military and law enforcement officers are very capable at noticing things.
Anyone might get lucky and notice something, but those who have to do it all the time are really good at it. The skill mechanics does that wll IMHO.
I do think perception should have been left as spot and search though.
I've heard that veterans learn to notice things very far away. A friend of mine had a couple of guys in his unit that could spot people from far enough away that he couldn't see them even when they were pointed out.
I helped check IDs at a bar a couple of times. People could walk right past me; I wasn't very good at it. The girl I was helping could always tell, even if she walked away, she could come back and tell if someone got inside without a band. It seemed almost clairvoyant. Real busy place.
The fact that the things people notice are all grouped together doesn't make any more sense than manual dexterity and balance being tied together, but the fact is different people do have different capacities to notice things. That capacity is quickly trained through necessity built up on the job.
I also know people that are extremely slow to react, and some that are quick on the draw (ie initiative). I feel that racial modifiers, traits, and the wisdom score can sufficiently portray natural perception while feats (or custom class abilities) would portray the training to boost it up.
I agree with the idea of making it a fourth save. That sounds very interesting to me and I gave it some thought a while back. Problem is that you might have to rewrite some DCs and interactions to keep the numbers lined up.
I agree with the idea of making it a fourth save. That sounds very interesting to me and I gave it some thought a while back. Problem is that you might have to rewrite some DCs and interactions to keep the numbers lined up.
I'm not entirely opposed to making Perception a save, but it's going to bother me as a GM having two saves based off of wisdom. I suppose I could make that will save based off of charisma...
But if I go the route of the save, which classes should have it as the good save?
If you go with making it a fourth save, any class that gets Perception as a class skill now should get it as a high save. Draconic Sorcerers and others who can get it added to their class skills should get a bonus to this save, but still have it be a low save.
In addition, you would have to adjust spells that modify perception, since the scaling of spells that give bonuses to saves and those that give bonuses to saves are different. You would also need to remove any traits that give Perception as a class skill.I would be very interested to hear how a playtest of this idea.
Perception as a high save is just the perception skill with a penalty attached.
Except that it stops being a skill point tax, since by most people's standards its the most important skill in the game and you'd be silly not to put ranks in it.
That said, I don't think I'm one of those people. I rather like the fact that you can choose to have an inattentive character if you think it fits the flavor, or simply feel that skill points are better spent elsewhere to match your concept. I also like that you can have another character in the same party that is an awesome tracker and scout, head and shoulders above everyone else. Gives them a little place to shine. Yeah, I think I like it the way it is. :)
I like the idea that you can have an inattentive character as well. Removing it as a skill isn't supposed to remove that flavor. One who is inattentive lacks Wisdom / Experience. This makes the idea of making Will saves based off of Charisma that much more flavorful. Though certain Will saves will be turned into perception (such as determining if an illusion is real).
As far as playtesting, it will be a while as life has gotten in the way of our weekly scheduled meetings.
oh yeah, I'd most certainly make will charisma based if I were to add a perception save. No doubt.
In order to remove perception from the game you would have to make a lot of house rules.
In order to remove perception from the game you would have to make a lot of house rules.
Outside what I've already covered what house rules what I have to make?
Noticing invisible characters, rogues performing stealth, assassins about to assassinate you, noticing certain monsters; noticing traps, haunts, hazards, special terrains. Or do all those things automatically go off, or are automatically negated because perception no longer exists. There's a ton of rules you'd have change in order to accomodate the removal of the skill. And this is only scratching the surface.
I think removing perception would be insane, not something I could recommend.
When I create monsters for a single encounter, I usually don't list any skill except perception, because in game its a really important skill.
Just make it a level check like Concentration.
This is by far the simplest solution and it may be the best. It doesn't affect other parts of the game much at all. A great idea.
If perception became a level check, I'd want there to be a feat which granted a +3 bonus. Other than that I imagine you wouldn't need to change anything.
Seriously, does anyone actually read posts or anymore, or does everyone just respond to titles? 3, THREE different posters responded to my title without reading through the actual post...
I guess the original post was too high of a DC and there were people who didn't want to spend their skill points on Perception.
I would like you to consider what you actually posted in your initial post and think about what you just said.
I would like you to consider what you actually posted in your initial post and think about what you just said.
I think what I said was a fair assessment. There were 3 posts, including yours which assumed that I was just nixing perception without a second thought, even though I said I was thinking about making it a static number in the original post and discussed making it a save in later posts.
And if you were referring to how I was changing it not removing from the game entirely, then I apologize (It's difficult to tell with how it's worded) and I ask, what houserules outside those covered would I have to make?
Thinking about Perception as a save, I don't think I'll like it. For the players using stealth, this means that there's always at least a 5% they'll be spotted every single turn which increases with every creature. Stick 20 creatures around and even the most stealthy, tiny, rogue taking a very obscure path still has over an 87% chance to get caught because a natural 20 on a save means automatic success.
For reasons dealing with stealth and to make luck less of an equation during important parts, I'm considering making it more like AC where stealth must beat a static number. 10 + Wisdom Modifier + Racial Bonuses + Misc.
I still want to have players roll to actually search for things, and for that, I might keep search as a skill.
I also know people that are extremely slow to react, and some that are quick on the draw (ie initiative). I feel that racial modifiers, traits, and the wisdom score can sufficiently portray natural perception while feats (or custom class abilities) would portray the training to boost it up.In what way is that different from the skill system, and the trained boost? Instead of allowing players to dip into it when they level, you instead force them to take feats to get the same benefit. That's a much more severe tax than a simple skill point/level.
The perception is going to start off being higher and not going to constantly change throughout the campaign. There will be a baseline that won't be determined on the party's level. They won't have to level up so that they can notice something. Spending a feat is less taxing than spending multiple levels and or feats to meet the expected baseline. If some character is inattentive, it's because they dumped wisdom and didn't take the feat, not because they didn't spend skill points in it.
I realize that this changes the way the game is played, that's the point. I can't see why or how anybody would make a rule change that doesn't change the way the game is played.
I won't be making things difficult to see based on the party's level. If there's something that's supposed to be sneaky, and the party wants to fight back they have to use strategy such as creating lighting, tossing flour, or position themselves strategically.
Stealthy characters such as rogues will certainly get a boost out of this as they level, but I don't feel that such a boost will be so game breaking.
As for actually searching for things such as traps, that will be a search skill based off of the character's intelligence.
Seriously, does anyone actually read posts or anymore, or does everyone just respond to titles? 3, THREE different posters responded to my title without reading through the actual post...
I guess the original post was too high of a DC and there were people who didn't want to spend their skill points on Perception.
No, I actually did read it, but making it a save is giving the skill to everyone which I think is wrong. So it's a skill point tax - it still needs to be. If you don't want to spend points on it, (no matter what your Wis or Cha), then you don't have to. Some players don't. I think its balance for some to want to spend less on it, to purchase other skills so I'm all for the skill tax portion of it.
Making it a save renders many other mechanics: traps, haunts, hazards too easy to bypass. Doing so nullifies huge chunks of the game. If you want to good at finding these things, you need to spend skill points to acquire. I'm not ready to give away this skill to everyone.
Also, for most casters, perception is not a class skill - which makes sense. I think it's best in the hands of martial characters, as they are now. I don't want to minimize non-casters anymore, but giving another part of the game in equal doses to casters too. You diminish the rogue, ranger, etc. even more by giving casters this advantage too.
Since most things that interact with Perception are related to other skill checks (Stealth, primarily, but traps and magical side-effects like noticing Abjurations and scrying censors), it might be easier to keep it skill-on-skill for rules resolutions.
Putting a Perception-Only feat into place would duplicate Skill Focus: Perception, Alertness, or similar things. As a skill, it is highly desirable- as a feat, it could become the big fish in the shark tank. Instead of competing with Acrobatics, Stealth, Craft or the Professions, it's competing with Power Attack, Track, Improved Initiative, Toughness, Greater Iron Will or Augment Summoning. Keep in mind, this isn't going to diminish its utility in the game, just change the category of resources it is competing against. To change its level of utility, you would have to alter how Stealth, Invisibility, Scent, lighting conditions, and quite a few spells work (Abjurations, Illusions, and a few Evocations like Darkness).
(on a side note, a fellow named Porpetine made a re-write of Stealth and Invisibility on the boards that was good. It was split into two threads, if I recall. They might serve your interests a bit, if only in a roundabout way. It both made magical Stealth reasonable and made Stealth more useable and possible, so it went both ways for rogues, which seems to be your concern.)
My main issue would be that as a GM, now that the Perception skill is entirely non-rolled or non-controlled and assumed to be on, I have to keep track of their Perception "saves" and fork over information without being prompted. I have this issue with always-on Scent, and have house-ruled that it either requires spending an action of some sort or is just plain unavailable before level 6 or so. I want to be prompted for information most of the time- partially to help me remember something among all of the other stuff I'm tracking, partially so that it's not turning into a narrated "storytime" and the players are actually involved in looking for things or thinking about what is useful and what they want to know. I don't necessarily hide things they don't ask about, but I don't want to "give away the farm," either. If it is reduced to a static number or is made entirely reactive (a saving throw), the only control they have over what info they get occurs at moments of character creation or customization.
At the very least, if it is made into some sort of static number, allow them to spend an action to improve it somehow, like fighting defensively. This is already somewhat done with the "passive perception" score of taking 10, vs. actively looking or making reactive checks.
*Edited for wording.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I watched Rudyard Kipling's story Kim (made into a movie) about England vs Russia during the 2nd Afgan war in the 1800's. The Brits get this boy who is the son of a British soldier and an Indian woman. He speaks Punjabi and English and they teach him to be a spy. They go into great deal in teaching him perception. In this case in the movie they put things on a table - coins, marbles, pebbles etc. he looks at them for a few seconds and they cover them over with a blanket and he has to tell them what was on the table. Then they take off the cloth and see if he was right. They keep doing this and keep changing whats on the table. Sometimes they sneak objects off too. Listening can be taught as well- also touch (Braille) taste/smell- wine tasting etc. Its all skill. Also watching for little changes in facial muscle movements to tell the emotions of people and also see if they are lying. The show Lie to Me is based off of a real scientist.
And I'd mention what Arya is doing in one chapter of the 5th book of the Song of Ice and Fire saga - but that would spoiler I don't want to reveal. Though that too is perception as training.
@Parka: My post above isn't seeking some perception skill replacement mechanic, when I mention the dimisihing of rogues, rangers, ninja and the like. I would not remove perception as a skill and going some other way. I am trying debate against that idea. So how Porpetine did not, is not what I'm looking for. Keep perception as a skill, that's my contention.
|
This is by far the simplest solution and it may be the best. It doesn't affect other parts of the game much at all. A great idea.If perception became a level check, I'd want there to be a feat which granted a +3 bonus. Other than that I imagine you wouldn't need to change anything.
Pretty much. The only trouble is the loss of the +3 class skill bonus, giving Stealth/Sleight of Hand users an edge in opposed rolls.
Since most things that interact with Perception are related to other skill checks (Stealth, primarily, but traps and magical side-effects like noticing Abjurations and scrying censors), it might be easier to keep it skill-on-skill for rules resolutions.
You're probably right about it being easier. However it wouldn't be the first time that skills interacted with non-skill DCs. For example Acrobatics (Tumbling), Bluff (Feinting), and Intimidate (Demoralizing) can all interact with the target without being skill to skill.
Putting a Perception-Only feat into place would duplicate Skill Focus: Perception, Alertness, or similar things. As a skill, it is highly desirable- as a feat, it could become the big fish in the shark tank. Instead of competing with Acrobatics, Stealth, Craft or the Professions, it's competing with Power Attack, Track, Improved Initiative, Toughness, Greater Iron Will or Augment Summoning. Keep in mind, this isn't going to diminish its utility in the game, just change the category of resources it is competing against. To change its level of utility, you would have to alter how Stealth, Invisibility, Scent, lighting conditions, and quite a few spells work (Abjurations, Illusions, and a few Evocations like Darkness).
I don't quite understand what you're saying here. Making it a static number would mean that it wouldn't be a tax of resources, maybe 1 feat to make it higher, but that'd be like saying initiative is a tax of feats. In fact, I'm setting it up so that the only reason to take such a feat is if you want to be the uber ranger that can spot the rabbit hiding in the bushes hundreds of yards away.
What you see needs to be altered, I see as features that become enhanced as is when perception becomes static. I think that those that place ranks into stealth should appear more stealthy to their peers as they level. Invisibility was wonky before, I don't see how my use of perception really changes that. You mention scent, lighting conditions, and spells, which don't directly interact with perception (oddly enough) . I'm trying to dilute the reliance of perception, not expand it.
Rangers and Rogues who get specific bonuses to perception through certain class abilities would certainly excel.
(on a side note, a fellow named Porpetine made a re-write of Stealth and Invisibility on the boards that was good. It was split into two threads, if I recall. They might serve your interests a bit, if only in a roundabout way. It both made magical Stealth reasonable and made Stealth more useable and possible, so it went both ways for rogues, which seems to be your concern.)
Thank you for this information, I will try to hunt it down and see if it fits what I'm looking for.
My main issue would be that as a GM, now that the Perception skill is entirely non-rolled or non-controlled and assumed to be on, I have to keep track of their Perception "saves" and fork over information without being prompted. I have this issue with always-on Scent, and have house-ruled that it either requires spending an action of some sort or is just plain unavailable before level 6 or so. I want to be prompted for information most of the time- partially to help me remember something among all of the other stuff I'm tracking, partially so that it's not turning into a narrated "storytime" and the players are actually involved in looking for things or thinking about what is useful and what they want to know. I don't necessarily hide things they don't ask about, but I don't want to "give away the farm," either. If it is reduced to a static number or is made entirely reactive (a saving throw), the only control they have over what info they get occurs at moments of character creation or customization.
Lol Okay, I actually feel the same way as you about giving information to players. However I don't think it has much to do with whether or not they're rolling the dice for it. I find it more work to ask players to roll for perception every time (or worse roll perception myself in which case I still have to keep track of their perception scores which change every level) they pass by something which they may or may not notice. Maybe one of them decided to play an extremely perceptive character, but they roll some 1s. I find it my biggest pet peeve as a GM and a player is the random variance that perception can go through. This is another reason that I voted against the Perception in the end.
Having a static number for the number their perception does not mean the players can not ask about the scenery to discover more things. They just aren't rolling for it anymore. I might ask them what their perception is. I won't get that terrible feeling that they just missed out on something interesting because their die rolled too low. They simply weren't perceptive enough to see it.
At the very least, if it is made into some sort of static number, allow them to spend an action to improve it somehow, like fighting defensively. This is already somewhat done with the "passive perception" score of taking 10, vs. actively looking or making reactive checks.
Oh definitely. Highlighting yet another reason why perception would fail as a save. I'd basically allow them to concentrate on their surroundings as long as they weren't engaged in melee, aiming at a target, or casting a spell* basically anything that would take focus.
*only the casting part, so detection spells would still allow the character to concentrate on their surroundings
@Parka: My post above isn't seeking some perception skill replacement mechanic, when I mention the dimisihing of rogues, rangers, ninja and the like. I would not remove perception as a skill and going some other way. I am trying debate against that idea. So how Porpetine did not, is not what I'm looking for. Keep perception as a skill, that's my contention.
Sorry, g-p, I was mostly aiming at the OP with this.
Mainly trying to challenge what the root of the issue really is, and trying to raise awareness of alternatives that might be less invasive to the standard numerical assumptions of the system.
If you want Rogues or other types to be able to use Stealth decently, you could look at variations of Stealth instead of altering Perception. Stealth has a number of related issues (when it can be used, how Magic can shoot it through the roof even when you aren't trying to use it) that others have addressed.
If your core problem is the utility of Perception or how many resources it's taking up, that requires changing your RP methods and any portion of the rules they touch (for the utility aspect) or being aware of where you are shifting the resource emphasis (moving its bonuses from skills to feats).
I watched Rudyard Kipling's story Kim (made into a movie) about England vs Russia during the 2nd Afgan war in the 1800's. The Brits get this boy who is the son of a British soldier and an Indian woman. He speaks Punjabi and English and they teach him to be a spy. They go into great deal in teaching him perception. In this case in the movie they put things on a table - coins, marbles, pebbles etc. he looks at them for a few seconds and they cover them over with a blanket and he has to tell them what was on the table. Then they take off the cloth and see if he was right. They keep doing this and keep changing whats on the table. Sometimes they sneak objects off too. Listening can be taught as well- also touch (Braille) taste/smell- wine tasting etc. Its all skill. Also watching for little changes in facial muscle movements to tell the emotions of people and also see if they are lying. The show Lie to Me is based off of a real scientist.
Yep. Perception is a skill that can be improved. I won't even dispute that. So is swordsmanship and grappling and taking initiative. I'm just trying to manage how it's represented in game.
And I'd mention what Arya is doing in one chapter of the 5th book of the Song of Ice and Fire saga - but that would spoiler I don't want to reveal. Though that too is perception as training.
@Parka: My post above isn't seeking some perception skill replacement mechanic, when I mention the dimisihing of rogues, rangers, ninja and the like. I would not remove perception as a skill and going some other way. I am trying debate against that idea. So how Porpetine did not, is not what I'm looking for. Keep perception as a skill, that's my contention.
Well fortunately for you, you'll probably never have the misfortune of playing in my game. If for some reason you did end up in a game of mine, then you would always be free to leave the game.
When I ask for the best way to move perception out of the skills list, telling me "no, don't do it" is the most unhelpful thing ever.
|
I will say that the fact that there's one skill so much more useful (and used) than any other in the game makes my Fighter's life much tougher, since that's half his skill points per level going into Perception just to not be useless as point man. He'd like to have a few points to spare to put into Sense Motive, or Ride, or Knowledge: Dungeoneering, but he gets so few and he pretty much needs to keep Perception trained up.
Making Perception a fourth save or equivalent to Concentration checks could be a decent idea. Traps are pretty much already a horribly-implemented fixture, but if the Rogue had to make a Perception save instead of a Perception check followed by a Reflex save, then maybe traps would be worth fearing again. Just as Intimidate checks are currently made against a DC of 10+Wis+BAB, maybe Stealth and Sleight of Hand could have fixed DCs as well.
Personally, I always interpreted Charisma as "force of personality", how hard it is to say no to you. In that case, I'd make Will the Charisma-based save and let Perception be the Wisdom-based save. Derro already use Charisma for Will saves. ;)
Pretty much. The only trouble is the loss of the +3 class skill bonus, giving Stealth/Sleight of Hand users an edge in opposed rolls.Just make it a level check like Concentration.This is by far the simplest solution and it may be the best. It doesn't affect other parts of the game much at all. A great idea.
If perception became a level check, I'd want there to be a feat which granted a +3 bonus. Other than that I imagine you wouldn't need to change anything.
After giving it some consideration, although it is an interesting solution, it doesn't really solve my issues with the perception skill other than the resource issue.
I really want to remove the level dependency from perception. I just don't feel that an increase in level warrants betters perception. Nor do I feel that the PCs default as inattentive. Others may have different opinions, but I really do feel this way and I do believe that there is a way to do this without my players hating me and some may even thank me.
With a static perception I can more easily judge visibility DCs without having to keep in mind the different levels of groups. Stealth and Sleight of Hand are easier to judge in accordance to difficulty; Putting ranks into stealth should allow a character to feel more like a ghost then when they first started. When perception levels up with a character, those that put ranks in stealth only do so to keep up, and there's not the sense of becoming more skilled only a sense of keeping up.
So you want your character to be more observant? Raise your wisdom, characters can raise the amount they can carry by raising their strength scores. I also want to allow a feat that raises your perception to represent training one's observance (Since it's no longer a skill). Rangers get a bonus to perception within their favored regions, Rogues get half their level to perception to find traps.
I believe that certain challenges should increment with the party, but I don't feel that keeping track of your surroundings should be one of them.
I really want to remove the level dependency from perception.
[...]
With a static perception I can more easily judge visibility DCs without having to keep in mind the different levels of groups. Stealth and Sleight of Hand are easier to judge in accordance to difficulty; Putting ranks into stealth should allow a character to feel more like a ghost then when they first started. When perception levels up with a character, those that put ranks in stealth only do so to keep up, and there's not the sense of becoming more skilled only a sense of keeping up.
I'm not trying to tell you not to take it out as a skill - I'm not sure how you would or wouldn't do that - but may I just respond to the bit quoted here?
Pretty much every relevant offense (this includes attack rolls and stealth) and defense (this includes saves and perception) in Pathfinder is level-based. Do feinting types 'only put ranks in Bluff to keep up' with enemy HD? Maybe. That sort of comes with the territory of Pathfinder being a game. When you get better at something, to keep it from becoming automatic, the difficulty tends to try to keep up. The one exception to this that I can think of is Concentration, I think, where it's been stated that casting defensively is just designed to be basically automatic at high levels.
Remember: a character who puts ranks into stealth WILL feel more like a ghost -- relative the peasants and low-level NPCs they were sneaking by 'when they first started.' Should the person who's been training just as hard for just as many levels to gain awareness of stealthy types really not be allowed to notice that 'ghost?'
Maybe our experiences playing the game are different. I don't think of someone untrained in Perception as being "inattentive" (if you look at Perception DCs, someone with a +0 Perception automatically notices most things a totally normal human being would notice). Also, not everyone at my tables puts ranks into Perception, not because they are inattentive but just because they have other things to do with their skill ranks. They're not penalized too heavily for it by our GM -- again, this might just be my experience of the game. And I'm not trying to tell you not to change things up. I just don't see why the current paradigm is being interpreted by you as "low-level characters: inattentive; high-level characters: skill-rank-taxed into making stealth unviable."
If you take out the level-based component, does a rogue with 10 ranks in stealth, a class skill bonus, and skill focus (+19 without ability or miscellaneous modifiers) simply bypass all detection? Remember: if you make it a save against which the stealth-user has to roll, that's still level-based... and if you do it like Intimidate or Bluff, that's still basically level-based... so what're the remaining options?
Let's say you give every creature in the world a basic "perception score" of 20.
What are the implications?
One of the major roots of the problem seems to be the level-based, class-based system encourages the "arms race" model. Stealth and Perception are opposed. If you are only facing challenges according to your level and the type of class you are, you must keep up. It can also be exacerbated in that at high levels, what challenges a Cleric in Perception is trivial for a Rogue, while what challenges a Rogue is outright impossible for a Cleric.
Frank K. and others had some discussion on this addressing skills in their "-nomicon" series, and this thread mentions a bit of it in the first post (though is largely addressing other systemic issues).
There are ways of lightening this without re-writing the system, but that involves really, really altering your playstyle, requires cooperation from everyone present, and will probably feel quite awkward for an adjustment period.
The other option involves pretty heavy re-writes of the skill system or core rolling mechanics. This is more than a passing amount of work, but a couple of people (even recently) have reworked the skill system. You could try taking a look at their work. (Hodge Podge did so not long ago, before making it a fair way into RPG Superstar).
Pretty much every relevant offense (this includes attack rolls and stealth) and defense (this includes saves and perception) in Pathfinder is level-based. Do feinting types 'only put ranks in Bluff to keep up' with enemy HD? Maybe. That sort of comes with the territory of Pathfinder being a game. When you get better at something, to keep it from becoming automatic, the difficulty tends to try to keep up. The one exception to this that I can think of is Concentration, I think, where it's been stated that casting defensively is just designed to be basically automatic at high levels.
AC (which pretty much every attack tries to hit) does not increase with level. With increased BAB comes more attacks. The DCs to environment are set. Even the DCs are set to their spell level unless they are empowered. The DC to dodging a fireball from a 5th level wizard is the same as from a wizard two levels higher if they have the same intelligence.
Remember: a character who puts ranks into stealth WILL feel more like a ghost -- relative the peasants and low-level NPCs they were sneaking by 'when they first started.' Should the person who's been training just as hard for just as many levels to gain awareness of stealthy types really not be allowed to notice that 'ghost?'
This is the big difference in how I want to challenge my players. While the fighter is deciding equipment, tactical locations, use of feats and combat maneuvers, the wizard gets new spells to overcome challenges in a new way, the "ghost" is still playing the same game. Stealth players should be given an upgraded challenge where they can enter locations with more guards, and magic scrying, where they have to tactically maneuver past dogs etc. Something that feels high security before even mentioning levels. Getting past that is a much more intriguing challenge than the same amount of guards acting the same way as a basic camp except with higher perception.
Maybe our experiences playing the game are different. I don't think of someone untrained in Perception as being "inattentive" (if you look at Perception DCs, someone with a +0 Perception automatically notices most things a totally normal human being would notice). Also, not everyone at my tables puts ranks into Perception, not because they are inattentive but just because they have other things to do with their skill ranks. They're not penalized too heavily for it by our GM -- again, this might just be my experience of the game. And I'm not trying to tell you not to change things up. I just don't see why the current paradigm is being interpreted by you as "low-level characters: inattentive; high-level characters: skill-rank-taxed into making stealth unviable."
Actually between sleep, distance, and obstruction rules, many level 1 characters could sleep soundly at the inn as a battle (not a fight, a battle) takes place down the road. Another odd aspect of the wide variation of the d20 roll is that a character with +6 (let's say they have 14 Wisdom, a rank in perception, and perception as a class skill) can go from not being able to hear a person walking right beside them to being able to hear the details of a whispered conversation 100 feet away. The other problem with Perception as skill ranks, is that a lot of times only one person takes it because for anyone else taking it, it's a waste of skill points. If for any reason that person is missing, the party is screwed. The other end is when everyone takes it because they got screwed over when the person who had perception went missing. I have never had a DM not make use of the perception check, because if you didn't then you are making the player who did decide to stick points in Perception waste skill points.
If you take out the level-based component, does a rogue with 10 ranks in stealth, a class skill bonus, and skill focus (+19 without ability or miscellaneous modifiers) simply bypass all detection? Remember: if you make it a save against which the stealth-user has to roll, that's still level-based... and if you do it like Intimidate or Bluff, that's still basically level-based... so what're the remaining options?
Let's say you give every creature in the world a basic "perception score" of 20.
What are the implications?
Level 10 rogue? At this level a rogue should be able to slip in and out of museums replacing various valuables with frauds. Guards can aid another to keep watch. So let's assume I have a group of six guards, one of them is perhaps an extremely vigilant elf who happens to be trained in perception. That's 10 (base)+4 (18 Wisdom) +2 (Elf) +4 (Feat) +6 (On duty, so he's keeping an eye out for any intruders) +10 (5 other guards aiding him) = 36. Those who've dealt with sneaky types should remember that stealth requires concealment or cover so it's not like the rogue is walking in light either, and with an elf even low-light is not enough, this rogue needs to run in the dark or behind some cover. With such serious investment into Stealth (Two feats and 10 skill points), I don't see why it would be such a problem to let the rogue slip past a simple but effective group of the guards on a decent roll.
A well lit clean area with lots of guards can easily take care of stealth. For extra security, get a dog, or a diviner.
Note that this does not take into account magical spells such as invisibility nor does it take into account animals with scent nor scrying spells.
A few nitpicks...
AC (which pretty much every attack tries to hit) does not increase with level. With increased BAB comes more attacks. The DCs to environment are set. Even the DCs are set to their spell level unless they are empowered. The DC to dodging a fireball from a 5th level wizard is the same as from a wizard two levels higher if they have the same intelligence.
Well, AC increases with level due to WBL increasing. A 7th level wizard's fireball might not have a higher DC but he has a higher-level spell with a higher DC. :P
Another odd aspect of the wide variation of the d20 roll is that a character with +6 (let's say they have 14 Wisdom, a rank in perception, and perception as a class skill) can go from not being able to hear a person walking right beside them to being able to hear the details of a whispered conversation 100 feet away.
I agree--d20 is fundamentally flawed. But you're not trying to fix that, are you? You're still using d20 rolls for your new non-skill perception?
With such serious investment into Stealth (Two feats and 10 skill points)
10 ranks is not a serious investment for a rogue who gets 8+/level, and it's only 1 feat not 2.
Now let's get to the meat of your post, which as I see it is this:
Stealth players should be given an upgraded challenge where they can enter locations with more guards, and magic scrying, where they have to tactically maneuver past dogs etc. Something that feels high security before even mentioning levels. Getting past that is a much more intriguing challenge than the same amount of guards acting the same way as a basic camp except with higher perception.
(primarily responding to the 'more guards' bit)
There are so many ways of making this (or other 'stealth challenges') either more or less challenging. You seem to be saying two conflicting things, though: you want stealthy characters to both A) be ghosts and B) be challenged by surveillance. ... Which is it? The balance between the two is obviously to have perception and stealth be an "arms race" as Parka described it (and as is currently the case).
A) If you want to give stealth an edge over perception in general, but make the described situation tricky, you're going to need a lot of guards. If having a lot of guards is what you want to do, you can already do that in the current rules by simply not having them be high-level (or not pumping their perception through the roof).
B) If you want to give perception an edge over stealth in general, but make the described situation manageable, you're going to need fewer guards--which you can already do simply by increasing the levels of the guards/giving them skill focus perception etc.
If you make perception a static number, then you're going to always need more guards (using 'aid another' as you mention) to make a stealth mission harder-- regardless of their level! So a level 20 rogue is as likely to be caught be 50 L1 guards as 50 L20 guards. This seems janky to me.
Level 10 rogue? At this level a rogue should be able to slip in and out of museums replacing various valuables with frauds.
Yes, for sure! But museums would tend to have L1 or L2 NPC-classed security guards, not L10 PC-classed guards. Which in the current rules, makes a difference. If you make perception flat, it won't make a difference. Except, I guess, the risk of getting caught is greater. And higher-level guards would be more likely to take your proposed "Perception +3 feat." *shrug*
(IMHO, 18 Wisdom and 1 feat and dedicating your life's work to being on guard with 5 other people seems like a much bigger investment to me than 10 ranks and 1 feat but again, we might have different gaming experiences.)
I think what this boils down to, is I agree with you on what kinds of challenges are appropriate. But I don't see why it's such a pain to create them using the current rules--OR how your proposed flat perception works. Did I miss a post where you explained the concrete mechanics of it?
That would be helpful. Though I thought that you didn't have a system ironed out yet? Anyway I'd love to hear more. I'm really interested in alternatives, even if it sounds like I'm resistant! :)
Every DC in the game is level dependent. What I mean is that a level X character should be able to do Y(make a save of___, hit an AC of ____). Making it no longer a skill won't change that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really want to remove the level dependency from perception. I just don't feel that an increase in level warrants betters perception. Nor do I feel that the PCs default as inattentive. Others may have different opinions, but I really do feel this way and I do believe that there is a way to do this without my players hating me and some may even thank me.
I certainly do have a different opinion. I don't see a level dependency at all, nor consider PCs with no ranks 'inattentive'. You can't make Perception like Initiative, only improvable by feats, while the usual skills that oppose it are still improved with skill points.
You say Stealth users don't get the sense of becoming more skilled, but that's because you're only comparing them to Perception users who are also becoming more skilled. Have your 10th level Rogue go back to his 1st level haunting grounds, and the CR 1 guards that used to catch him all the time now never even realize he's there. That's proof of how they have become more skilled.
If you only ever throw equal CR opposition at the party, they will never feel like they are progressing, it is true. That's why you don't have to world scale with them. You let them go back and find that 4th level Fighter that curb-stomped them when they were 1st level, and let them repay him in kind now that they are 6th level.
Everything you say about Perception is an argument to not have Stealth be increased by level.
'An increase in level doesn't warrant better stealth.'
'PCs shouldn't default as bumbling oafs.'
'When stealth levels up with a character, those that put ranks in perception only do so to keep up, and there's not the sense of becoming more sharp-eyed and aware.'
'Want your character to be more sneaky? Raise your dexterity.'
Are you sure that what you want wouldn't be better served by a game that doesn't use levels?
AC (which pretty much every attack tries to hit) does not increase with level. With increased BAB comes more attacks. The DCs to environment are set. Even the DCs are set to their spell level unless they are empowered. The DC to dodging a fireball from a 5th level wizard is the same as from a wizard two levels higher if they have the same intelligence.
But these things do increase in level and this is a fundamental principle of the game. It requires recognizing a lot of linked together factors. For example the wizard could use Heighten Spell, or just cast a higher level spell and get a higher DC. A character of higher level will probably have more powerful magic items, increasing the likelihood of a higher AC. The wizard is also more likely to have a higher intelligence through items and level increases combined.
I think there are a lot of people who are missing my reasoning. When a fighter goes up in level, they get more attacks, they gain more options (Power Attack, Vital Strike, Cleave), even the limited fighter can tell that they've become more powerful without having to hop on over to fight goblins. The wizard gains a wider selection of spells, the tactic can change from using a fireball to chaining some lightning. The wizard can go from just being able to put the enemy asleep to completely dominating their mind. Even against appropriate CR, there is that sense of tactics changing and evolving. Things start flying, using breath attacks, drain attributes, and teleport, not just increase in HP, AC, and Saves.
I want Stealth to feel like that. Like it's gotten better even in areas of appropriate CR. Flak mentions that AC gets better with appropriate WBL, just the same perception can get better with appropriate WBL which is how I would like perception to increase. This means characters can get goggles to improve their perception, as well as animals, better forces, magical alarms, scrying, better lighting, having loud floors. Guards become better at searching* with level so if they know the rogue is there, they're more likely to find him. Look at the ways AC increases, why can't perception increase like that?
*For those missed it, I said I want to have a search skill
By level 20, I would assume guards would be geared up and be able to set up appropriate defenses. I would assume higher security places would have more budget to work out magic and better forces of guards.
While a level 1 guard may be able to spot a rouge as well as a level 20 guard without feats or equipment, that doesn't mean they can catch them. Do people complain that a goblin can hit a level 20 person without their feats or their gear?
(IMHO, 18 Wisdom and 1 feat and dedicating your life's work to being on guard with 5 other people seems like a much bigger investment to me than 10 ranks and 1 feat but again, we might have different gaming experiences.)
It seems like a lot, but it's 1 feat to have awesome perception, even at level 1, and having a couple of buddies doesn't seem like a big deal for a place that's expected to, also there's no dedication of one's life's work to being on guard in the example, just a studious guard. As one levels, they can get magic items to increase their perception if they need to.
I realize I've probably had much different gaming experiences from most of the people in this forum, but for me as a GM, perception being random has led to situations where I have regretted even asking the players to roll. As a player, I've had situations where taking 10 wasn't enough or wasn't allowed, I've had times when DMs would tell me, "Too bad you missed the DC by 1". I don't mind the d20 system in general, but perception is just something that's always irked me.
Everything you say about Perception is an argument to not have Stealth be increased by level.
'An increase in level doesn't warrant better stealth.'
'PCs shouldn't default as bumbling oafs.'
'When stealth levels up with a character, those that put ranks in perception only do so to keep up, and there's not the sense of becoming more sharp-eyed and aware.'
'Want your character to be more sneaky? Raise your dexterity.'
TOZ, I'm fine with the levels. I just can not equate perception to stealth. I like the idea of beginners starting off as bumbling and being able to get better with levels. I just don't want perception to based off of skill ranks, to have insane amounts of variation within one person. I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but this is mine.
I know that everyone can nickpick at any one of my statements, but as a whole, I feel my line of reasoning is pretty justified. I've given a lot of reasons on why I wanted to remove perception as a skill, really the only place where it gets sort of wonky that I see that's been brought up is stealth, which my original question was how to handle stealth. (BTW I've had thoughts of making it scale like BAB or CL but I just don't know)
I mean why is it that BAB isn't a skill, why aren't CMB or CMD just skills, or why isn't caster level a skill, why isn't initiative a skill, why isn't AC a skill, why isn't carrying capacity a skill, why isn't hp just a skill, why aren't saves just skills, why isn't just a skill based system? There are plenty of things in this game that aren't skills, so why do I have to justify moving something from a skill to a base assumption.
Let us look at who has good perception (based on profession) and why.
Rangers - To hunt their prey / bounties. With their favored enemies / favored terrain, their perception jumps up based on what they're looking for and where.
Rogues - To find traps. They have trap finding, so their ability to notice traps is unrivaled.
Notice how their ability to find things increases with level even when I make perception stable. With everyone else, they need feats and/or magic. Rogues and Rangers can get those too making their perception even higher.
I think it's fair as wizards don't need to get +5 full plate and a magic shield (and that would be worse for them anyway).
I really feel I should make another feat accessible at a higher level to improve perception even further though.
The feats are for fighters who want to be body guards.
So if Stealth improves, but perception does not, that means opponents who are in stealth are just as impossible to detect as rogues. So battles turn into more instances of Sneak Attacks, Assassinations, and less instances of prevention of that through discovery by perception.
I think it's seriously unbalanced to nerf perception in the ways you are suggesting. I do get why you want it, yet it seems very unreasonable to the overall game. If this doesn't seem helpful, you're not looking at it correctly. I'm trying to help you, by helping you recognize, why you shouldn't do this.
I'd be up for play testing these rules once they get semi-ironed out. Gimme a shout and i'll throw it at my players for a one shot and see how it goes.
So if Stealth improves, but perception does not
I've pointed out that there are multiple ways to improve perception (feats, magic items, class abilities). It just doesn't improve the same way.
opponents who are in stealth are just as impossible to detect as rogues.
This is because of how stealth scales and has absolutely nothing to do with how I handle perception. And the way I'm proposing doesn't make it impossible to detect a stealthy character, just more difficult. There are also a plethora of options to expose a stealth character outside of boosting perception including light, flour, scent, tremor sense, groups, and spells.
So battles turn into more instances of Sneak Attacks, Assassinations, and less instances of prevention of that through discovery by perception.
Only those who get sneak attack as a class ability can sneak attack ie the rogue. What is the point of it if it is easily seen through? So, yes those that sneak attack and assassinate should be able to sneak attack and assassinate. The way I've seen actually played out, rogues are looking for flanking in order to pull of any damage because stealth is just not viable in most cases even when you actually have cover or concealment.
I think it's seriously unbalanced to nerf perception in the ways you are suggesting. I do get why you want it, yet it seems very unreasonable to the overall game.
Unbalanced to who? The OP rogues who are sneak attacking everybody up in here? Rogues being bounds above other classes at finding traps? Rangers being loads better than other classes at finding their favored enemies? I'm also allowing characters to move cautiously to gain bonuses to their perception. I don't get how it's unreasonable. Is it because stealthy characters are stealthy? They have many other obstacles to overcome other than just perception.
If this doesn't seem helpful, you're not looking at it correctly. I'm trying to help you, by helping you recognize, why you shouldn't do this.
How is it incorrect? Is there really only one right way to run a game? Is there a correct way for a campaign to play out?
Incorrectly reading my post. I didn't say incorrectly playing the game. I was asking because you seem to misunderstand my last post, you might be misunderstanding my point or more. I'm also playing devil's advocate, because I am sure one of your players will have these same arguments.
I am all for improvements and additions to the game. I'm not for alterations of the fundamentals of the game, which perception is a part. Consider that in the Beatiaries, only one skill is mentioned twice in each listing. Perception is mentioned under Senses and on the skill list of each monster. It's mentioned twice because it is so critical. Making a change to a game fundamental changes the whole game in ways that may seem invisible, but is connected to many facets of the game.
Skill tax is small, feat tax is huge, so making it a feat is even less effective. Making it a 4th saving throw adds so many ramifications, I don't see it as a practical choice.
I'm a published designer, with Paizo credits - I'm not some yahoo. I'm just trying to help you see the ramifications of altering perception, which are huge. It's no small thing you are considering.