Hi,
This came up in a game this week.
I have a character who has Oppressive Expectations (Quests and Campaigns) as a Drawback. It says: If you fail a skill roll you get -2 to that skill until you success in that skill or fail another.
How does this work with GM rolls? GM rolls for detect traps and such "hidden" info. If my character fails the roll (roll < DC) does it fail for Oppressive Expectations too? If yes, I see some problems with this.
If I succeed, I notice the trap. If I don't I'm told that I failed my roll - thus detecting the trap.
How should this be played? Are the GM rolls unaffected by Oppressive Expectations and Doubt and Mark of Slavery or are they affected thus alerting the player on failed rolls.
The same thing comes up with some other rolls too. I search a room - I get 19 - I don't find anything - I fail (DC20 to detect the hidden box). Am I notified that I failed or am I not? Same with all other similar situations: If there isn't a certain way for me to know that I succeed/fail, should the GM notify me of it?
It doesn't make sense to notify the player that he failed; the character isn't aware of it.
I haven't read the drawback myself, and I don't have access to my books right now, but, from the name, it seems like the sort of thing that only really can come into play when the character knows about the failure. So I would say that it should not apply to rolls where failure isn't apparent. Now perhaps if you fail to spot a pit trap, then fall into it, then the penalty would apply to Perception... you figured out (the hard way) that you didn't detect the trap.
Alternately, the GM would quietly keep track of the penalty if it was triggered by a secret roll, raising the DC by 2 for your character, and only your character, for subsequent rolls. But this is complicated and doesn't make sense.
Here's SRD link: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/drawbacks/oppressive-expectations.
The GM keeps track part would be rather hard as if two characters (one with Oppressive Expectations on) rolled the same on the same check with OE character failing would be a very good indication that the character has failed in some check between the last failure/success and this point.
The best way would be indeed that if you fail a trap search or similar and the trap is there OE would trigger (you failed and now you know it too).
|
I have a character who has Oppressive Expectations (Quests and Campaigns) as a Drawback. It says: If you fail a skill roll you get -2 to that skill until you success in that skill or fail another.
How does this work with GM rolls? GM rolls for detect traps and such "hidden" info. If my character fails the roll (roll < DC) does it fail for Oppressive Expectations too? If yes, I see some problems with this.
If I succeed, I notice the trap. If I don't I'm told that I failed my roll - thus detecting the trap.
How should this be played? Are the GM rolls unaffected by Oppressive Expectations and Doubt and Mark of Slavery or are they affected thus alerting the player on failed rolls.
The same thing comes up with some other rolls too. I search a room - I get 19 - I don't find anything - I fail (DC20 to detect the hidden box). Am I notified that I failed or am I not? Same with all other similar situations: If there isn't a certain way for me to know that I succeed/fail, should the GM notify me of it?
I would say that, no matter how the issue is dealt with, Oppressive Expectations would definitely apply. If it triggers on a failed skill roll, then regardless of whether you, the player, know your character has failed or not, the failure still exists, and the drawback is still triggered. The question is, how is this then handled? There's a few choices.
1. The GM could make a note that you failed that skill check. Then, whenever that skill comes up next, he can keep a track of it and apply it as necessary. This creates more work for the GM, but it keeps you from knowing the result of a secret roll.
2. Same as 1, but as soon as the skill comes up next, or sufficient time has passed that you can't go back, the GM then lets you know you're suffering a penalty from OE. The GM only has to remember long enough for the skill to come up next, and you won't necessarily know when you failed to be suffering the penalty.
3. The GM tells you that you take a negative to whatever skill is involved (guessing Perception). You now know you failed a test. You don't know what, or where, this failure arises from. Maybe that door you were checking is actually trapped? Or maybe there were voices beyond the door you could have heard had you passed? You're made aware of the modifier, putting the tracking back on you, but you're also made aware a secret roll was made, and failed.
4. Same as 3, but you simply choose not to metagame. I like this one, personally. Yes, you, the player, now know your character failed a Perception test. The character still doesn't though. Act like it. You failed the Perception test to notice a trap in the door? Then act like there's no trap, because your character doesn't believe there is one. Your character fails the perception test to notice the hidden loot? Then stop searching and move on.
GM rolls should be made in secret and the GM should not tell you if you fail or succeed. He should tell you that (in the case of perception) either you notice something or just tell you nothing. This really applies any check that might be made reflexively.
The only things a player should know they've failed at is when they are actively doing something. For my games thats: Acrobatics, Climb, Craft, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Fly, Handle Animal, Ride, Sleight of Hand, Survival and Swim. And those are all because when you fail that check you wont do the thing you're trying, so it will become very obvious that you've failed.
But you shouldn't know if you've successfully bluffed an enemy or use dipomacy well enough to make them friendly. Opposed checks and reflexive checks are things that should become apparent only from the actions of other characters or should not become known at all. If everyone makes an perception check tp find an item and everyone fails why would you tell everyone they failed? You should instead just tell the whole group that they haven't seen anything. I take this to an extreme and I say that if the group isn't actively searching for something, I just give them a 10 on perception to notice things around them. If no one notices the item I make no mention of it because otherwise players know they've failed and then have to engage themselves not to metagame with this information of their failure. Some players can do that, many cannot. It is safer to avoid it altogether by not notifying players of their failure on such reflexive or opposed checks.
I believe that it makes no sense for oppressive expectations to exist where the character is unaware of failing (or even making) a check, but the way the drawback is written, it does, which makes it very difficult to adjudicate without giving away information.
Not really. Always tell them GM what you rolled. He has to keep track of the peanlty and will tell you whether or not you make your check successful. It's more paperwork for the GM, but thats it.
Agree that it makes no sense. The character has to fail in a way that they KNOW for it to apply. Further... Say that you roll Perception. DC 20 to find a box. DC 30 to find a secret door. Does 25 mean a failure? Say someone already found the box and told the character. Now only the secret door remains to be found. Is 25 a failure now?