Perception is only 10' per round, right?

[outshyn]

In the middle of a game right now, and need a rule quote. GM says that perception can only be applied to a 10' section at a time. I mentioned the -1 per 10 feet so we can account for more, but he said not as a move action or "active" perception. We are going 10' a round because of this. He said Ultimate Intrigue changed/limited things. Advice? Rule citations?

[Nixitur]

Check this out.

Ultimate Intrigue wrote:

Active and Automatic Perception: There are two ways Perception checks happen in the game. The first way is automatic and reactive. Certain stimuli automatically call for a Perception check, such as a creature using Stealth (which calls for an opposed Perception check), or the sounds of combat or talking in the distance. The flip side is when a player actively calls for a Perception check because her PC is intentionally searching for something. This always takes at least a move action, but often takes significantly longer.

The core rules don’t specify what area a PC can actively search, but for a given Perception check it should be no larger than a 10-foot-by-10-foot area, and often a smaller space if that area is cluttered. For instance, in an intrigue-based game, it is fairly common to look through a filing cabinet full of files. Though the cabinet itself might fill only a 5-foot-by-5-foot area, the number of files present could cause a search to take a particularly long time.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of that rule. As the rules even say, it depends on the context. If I'm scanning the horizon for something, requiring that I take a move action for every 10 feet of whatever "the horizon" is, is ludicrous.

But even if you go with that rule, you could examine two 10 feet by 10 feet areas per round because you can take two move actions per round.

[Nefreet]

Yup. Although it was not well received, the extreme opposite practice was to walk into a room, roll Perception, and move on to the next, which often broke verisimilitude itself.

[Ryan Freire]

I mean, its a game and things should move quickly but 6 seconds to thoroughly search a 10X10 area for hidden compartments or trap triggers is really quite quick in the scheme of things.

[Gallant Armor]

I would say take 10 with the highest mod and have two others aid another for +4 and have the GM tell you if you find anything to avoid tediously rolling your way down each hallway.

[Chakat Firepaw]

I'd consider things like scanning the horizon as more of an automatic perception check, (similar to the stock "can you hear that?" check). The action being taken is less the searching of an active check and more taking a moment to remove penalties, (e.g. I would consider walking to be a distraction for visual checks at a distance).

For active checks, the amount you can search would have to depend a lot on context. Searching a file cabinet for a particular file¹ would probably be an action per drawer, (possibly two actions for large drawers), while trying to pick out a particular painting would be a check per room. As a rule of thumb, I would probably start with "can you do the search without taking more than a single step or turning in place?"

1: Assuming it is not labelled and sorted in a way that would render the search trivial.

[Mathmuse]

Pathfinder combined three Dungeons & Dragons skills, Spot, Search, and Listen, into one skill, Perception. Spot was the ability to notice something that was in line of sight, but perhaps partially concealed, blending in, in stealth, or very distant. Search was the ability to check for secret doors, triggers for traps, or objects totally concealed in a drawer or other unlocked storage.

The section Nixitur quoted sounds a lot like the Search skill. It even says, "because her PC is intentionally searching for something.

One common feature of early Dungeons & Dragons was the hallway loaded with lethal traps. The players would move only 10 feet per round, reminding the DM every round that they were "Searching for traps," so that he would not spring the traps on them without warning.

The phrasing in Ultimate Intrigue is terrible. If a PC enters a room, which would give an automatic Perception check to spot the monster in the back of the room, but the player says, "I am looking for monsters," then the player has actively called for a Perception check. The free action of the automatic Perception check would be slowed down to a move action required for a active Perception check. And he would be able to see only a 10-foot square. In other words, because the PC is trying harder to see, he has more trouble seeing.

I think Ultimate Intrigue wanted to recreate the Search check, since searching for secret doors and secret letters is an element of intrigue, but forgot to differentiate Search from Spot as D&D did. Thus, it accidentally claimed that Spot is as slow as Search.

[Melkiador]

I don't think you have to be in the 10 by 10 area to use perception on it. That is why the -1 per 10 feet distance guidline is there. Because you could stand at one end of a hall and use perception on the squares on the other end of the hall.

[Bill Dunn]

Melkiador wrote:

I don't think you have to be in the 10 by 10 area to use perception on it. That is why the -1 per 10 feet distance guidline is there. Because you could stand at one end of a hall and use perception on the squares on the other end of the hall.

Ultimately, this is going to depend on what you're actually doing. If you're scanning the horizon, it doesn't make sense. Just make the perception roll and if anything of note is along that horizon, it should be covered by that roll.

Searching through a wizard's laboratory full of drawers, boxes, crates, cubbyholes, equipment, notes, tablets, and so on - one round per 10x10 area is probably too fast but an OK abstraction for finding that loose hidden clue, hidden compartment, secret door, porn stash, etc. and you're going to need to be in the area to do it.

[Matthew Downie]

Bill Dunn wrote:

Searching through a wizard's laboratory full of drawers, boxes, crates, cubbyholes, equipment, notes, tablets, and so on - one round per 10x10 area is probably too fast but an OK abstraction for finding that loose hidden clue, hidden compartment, secret door, porn stash, etc.

"Probably" too fast? Opening a single drawer and glancing inside it would probably take about a round. Checking it for traps first should take another round. Checking the contents could take multiple rounds if it's crammed full of stuff. And you'll want to check for secret compartments too, which requires taking out all the contents to give you a clear view...

[Claxon]

Actively searching an area is limited to 10ft.

Perceiving something in line of sight is a non-action and covers everything in line of sight.

[Volkard Abendroth]

Spend the next hour rolling for each and every 10'x10' square.

Have the party members assist with each and every roll.

See if the DM is still going to enforce constant rolls after the first hour.

[Kitty Catoblepas]

Melkiador wrote:

I don't think you have to be in the 10 by 10 area to use perception on it. That is why the -1 per 10 feet distance guidline is there. Because you could stand at one end of a hall and use perception on the squares on the other end of the hall.

Of course, you should get some pretty limited information. Compare to Sift which lets you search at 30' with a -5 to Perception as a Standard (spell) action.

[Bill Dunn]

Volkard Abendroth wrote:

Spend the next hour rolling for each and every 10'x10' square.

Have the party members assist with each and every roll.

See if the DM is still going to enforce constant rolls after the first hour.

Fortunately with Take 10 and Take 20, we don't need to do that.

[TOZ]

But we will, to make the point.

[skizzerz]

There is also this FAQ which largely restated what was written above. It also offers some advice for GMs to make actively searching take less time in-session.