|
I'd be the GM who would be a complete jerk about it, and have hidden magic items in the rooms that my later baddies could swoop in and scoop up en route to taking out the party that left them all just "lying around."
How is that any different from those enemies just having the items with them from the start? Unless you tell them 'ha ha, should have found these before we did'?
I'd be the GM who would be a complete jerk about it, and have hidden magic items in the rooms that my later baddies could swoop in and scoop up en route to taking out the party that left them all just "lying around."Yeah, exactly. Don't do that.
Don't let them find the secret passage that would have let them bypass the traps or whatever when they search on the way out, either.Not unless you do want them to thoroughly search every room right away. Players learn from what you teach them. Screwing them over teaches them not to let you.
Of course if you also make sure their buffs wear off and they get ambushed when they do search thoroughly, you're teaching them they can't win and it doesn't matter what they do, they get screwed either way. Also not a good approach.
I love sending mixed messages. More realism.
I'd be the GM who would be a complete jerk about it, and have hidden magic items in the rooms that my later baddies could swoop in and scoop up en route to taking out the party that left them all just "lying around."How is that any different from those enemies just having the items with them from the start? Unless you tell them 'ha ha, should have found these before we did'?
It's no different. But it would make me laugh and laugh and laugh behind my screen.
People seem to be getting confused Re: The room full of boxes and Perception.
The room full of boxes takes longer to search, yes, but not because Perception takes longer than a non-action or a Move...it's because opening each box to look inside takes a Move action, whereupon you get your Move to search (or reactive check if what's inside the box is obviously visible).
But that's still going to be the kind of thing that gets abstracted. Unless you're going to roleplay through opening every box and every drawer, moving every rug and every piece of furniture - which puts the search skill entirely in the players hands.
After all, if there's a trap door under the rug, it's pretty obvious once you move the rug. No need for a high DC Perception. The high Perception should give you the clue that somethings under the rug.
Essentially, you need to pace searching to how you want the game to go. Whether that's by letting them search quickly or by adjusting the contents so that it will go quickly. Or vice versa - making take longer. But if you're trying to encourage them not to take time to thoroughly loot everything as they go by, make sure they still can easily find anything that's needed right away.
Right. I was just pointing out an actual rule that would get them the effect they want.
In my games, I generally make sure PCs have "significance sense". A successful Perception check on a scan of the room pinpoints the important chests, at which point it basically takes a round per chest.
"There' something under the rug" seems exactly the sort of thing Perception is for. There are sight based ways to determine that and most other things for the observamt (the rug is scrunched up, there are scuffmarks all around it, etc.).
|
One of my players, however, has been requesting that I make this quicker; he wants to be able to search the whole room with a take 20 check and not individually inspect those items of note. I.E. he wants the benefits of having inspected all those items individually by taking a 20 on search. Is that something I should be allowing or no according to the rules?
sure, this is not just style, it is speed, and what is fun for players.
If you want to add flavor you can tell him how he found it. But if you want to act out some part of the search you need to indicate somehow that the tapestry is important, more important than other items in the room. I would only use this rarely.
Think about this, in video games there is a name for this design (i forget what the name is) which is just is just random trying things until you hit the right one. Having to say "I search the desk, anything? ok now I search under the rug, anything? ok now the fireplace, now inside the fireplace, now the tapestry" is no different than having 4 buttons and only one does something, but the players have to say each one to you until they hit the right button. Unless it is a puzzle, with clues, this is frustrating for players as well as slows down the game for everyone.
This is the very reason why take 20 is added in the first place.
But if there is a clue, say with a low DC 15 "you notice the tapestry bulges out in the corner" then they can go look, that is better, since there is a guide for the player's actions, it is not just random trying until something works.
So, my advice is: making them explicitly say where they look is ok as long as it is not often, is a puzzle, and has clues to tell the player where to look. Not ok if they have to deliberately name everywhere they search, in those cases use take 20.
No.
The only real benefit of Sift is that it lets your Bard or Inquisitor "touch" things from 30 feet away.
On the topic of... this topic, I want to know if I've been doing things roughly right in my campaigns:
1) Party enters a room. I quietly roll perception checks for the party to see if they spot any extra details.
2) I now read or paraphrase the room description that I've written. If they spotted something, I note that when appropriate.
This is where I get concerned that I'm doing things wrong:
Looks good so far. Me, I just assume they all Take-10 for all the mundane stuff and save the rolling for when it really matters, but your way works just fine (unless you get tired of rolling for everybody in every room).
3) Normally, I let them investigate different objects of note one-by-one. I also let them search for objects of note actively in case they missed anything. This means that if I have a room description that includes tapestries dangling from the wall (with one of them covering a secret knob in the wall you twist to open a secret door) and a table with stuff on it, I let them investigate the table as a standard action, the tapestries as a standard action, and I let them take 10 or 20 on a search check around the room.
Investigating the table and tapestries is a move action, not standard but otherwise this is fine.
Note that Take-10 is a substitute for making a single perception check, so when you say "let them take-10 on a search check around the room" that means they are searching the entire room with a single perception check - they could roll their d20 or they could just take-10, but either way it's one check, right?
And when you say "let them take-20 on a search check around the room" that means they are making 20 perception checks to search around the room. The first check rolls a 1, the second check rolls a 2, etc., right up to the last check rolling a 20. This takes 20 move actions (10 rounds).
One of my players, however, has been requesting that I make this quicker; he wants to be able to search the whole room with a take 20 check and not individually inspect those items of note. I.E. he wants the benefits of having inspected all those items individually by taking a 20 on search. Is that something I should be allowing or no according to the rules?
There is nothing wrong with that.
Me, I don't like it. That's what we do in video games, but at least for me, I play RPGs for the sense of exploration and interacting with the (make-believe) world. Abstracting that down to a d20 roll (and then not even rolling because I Take-20) removes that sense of interacting with the world. But that's just me; obviously your player feels differently - he wants to skip the middleman and hand-waive all the interaction with the world and just have you read the list of things he finds. Each to their own.
What you really should do is find otu what all the players (including you) want from your game. Is it a race to the finish line with just lists of items handed out after an abstract instant-search? Or is it a semi-realistic adventurous exploration in the imaginary environment? Or somewhere in between? If most players prefer it the abstract way, then I'd let the guy Take-20 and simply tell him what he found. If most players like the experience of exploring the world, then I'd just tell this one player that he's going to have to be more interactive but maybe let him finish with his Take-20 AFTER the majority of your players have had their interaction.
Note: if a given item isn't hiding anything important, my policy thus far has been to let him look at all those items; but in the case of the tapestry it's hiding a secret knob so I'm leaning toward "he doesn't find that."
This is where I'd disagree.
He's taking 20 actions to search the room. That sounds like he's being super thorough. It's very reasonable to assume that such a high level of thoroughness includes looking behind a tapestry.
This is what Take-20 is supposed to be.
Further, it rewards him for having a specialist character who is good at something (searching) even if the player is not. It allows for the possibility that Fred, an typical guy, with typical alertness, could play a great rogue with great ability to search a room and find the good stuff without Fred actually having to be good at that.
I'm pretty sure it wasn't "10 tries" in 3.0 either.
Well it appears I have been smoking crack. Would anyone else like some?
|
...but for entire rooms I don't usually go through the pain of counting squares or asking for multiple perception checks... I tell them "it would take 30 min to search this room inside out, Yes or No?"
Then I'd accept the highest Perception based on taking 20, modified by +2 for each additional searcher.
So much depends on what's in the room, and what you're searching for.
If you're trying to find the pouch of gold hidden somewhere, it's not so hard. If you're trying to find the one scrap of paper in the middle of 10,000 books (possibly used as a bookmark by the evil wizard who was in the habit of using lots of bookmarks), it could take hours.
GM judgment call. Rules are an imperfect model of the world.
It takes me a single round to know about easy to find important stuff. My flying familiar that has constant detect magic will usually be able to navigate the entire room in one movement and let me know how many magical auras are around. In fact as combat is starting she is already being aware of what is in the room and relaying that info to me.