noticing animals acting weird?

[Cakeking]

I am running a semi political campaign, and long story short a gnomish king uses animals as spies.

It's fine if the players notice and figure it out, but at the same time i feel like they should earn it. I have been using their passive perception when they say "we're making sure noone is eavesdropping" to notice if animals are hanging around them, but i wanna be fair...should i give active checks? they arent looking for animals specifically, that's why i just used passives

[Feederman111]

I think a survival check would work. If they are in the wilderness and they are "making sure", that's need not to be a perception. How about a survival check so that they use their wild sense to notice that animals are acting wrong ?

[Potato_Priest]

If you think you're skilled enough, describe exactly how the animals are acting on a successful perception check. Some animals would be just gathering nuts, rooting around, etc. The spies, on the other hand, might be clinging to branches and watching the party or lying down to "sleep" unusually close to the humanoid adventurers. Dogs/wolves/foxes/coyotes in particular are terrible at acting nonchalant (as you will know if yours has ever misbehaved) and should be obviously in a sneaky/crouching posture. When you describe that, make it clear that they aren't approaching or looking like they're going to attack, just skulking around with their tail between their legs.

This sort of reminds me of one of my favorite encounters of all time, wherein the DM described us walking up to a farmhouse, a single scare crow in the fields. I was suspicous, so I stayed outside the house when the others went in, and despite the fact that the 3 scarecrows weren't moving or anything, I remained on guard. The others explored some more, and when the narrative came back to me the 5 scarecrows were still in the same spot... so on and so forth until we finally noticed that scarecrow numbers were increasing. It's still memorable to this day as it had the DM skillfully manipulating the narrative to make the players feel like they, and not the characters, accomplished something.

[hymer]

I'm not sure Perception is the right ability to use, though it could be if it's a question of noticing an animal that hides. The animals can presumably hide in plain sight. Handle Animal, Nature and Survival could all say something about strange behaviour of birds and beasts, and Insight could perhaps say something about these animals behaving with stronger intent and apparent curiosity than they should. Another thing is that when this keeps happening, it makes it more likely that the PCs can connect the dots. Which gives you an excuse to have them roll now rather than earlier.

It may make more sense if you ask each of them to roll d20, and then you add the relevant skill modifier without telling them what it is (or even why they're rolling). Standing behind them and looking at their sheets help. The reasoning here is that if they say they make sure nobody's listening in, and you call for Handle Animal, it's hard for them not to metagame that knowledge.

As an aside, it's generally a good idea to have players roll whenever they look or listen intently, even if there's nothing to see or hear. Just like you have them roll to look for traps whether there's a trap or not. It keeps them guessing.

[Cakeking]

I think a survival check would work.
great idea...idk why i always wanna use perception for everything

If you think you're skilled enough, describe exactly how the animals are acting on a successful perception check. Some animals would be just gathering nuts, rooting around, etc. The spies, on the other hand, might be clinging to branches and watching the party or lying down to "sleep" unusually close to the humanoid adventurers. Dogs/wolves/foxes/coyotes in particular are terrible at acting nonchalant (as you will know if yours has ever misbehaved) and should be obviously in a sneaky/crouching posture. When you describe that, make it clear that they aren't approaching or looking like they're going to attack, just skulking around with their tail between their legs.
DUDE...perfect i didn't even think of that

It may make more sense if you ask each of them to roll d20, and then you add the relevant skill modifier without telling them what it is (or even why they're rolling). Standing behind them and looking at their sheets help. The reasoning here is that if they say they make sure nobody's listening in, and you call for Handle Animal, it's hard for them not to metagame that knowledge.
i definitely have to do that, because like you said how can they use that knowledge

[Joe the Rat]

I think a survival check would work. If they are in the wilderness and they are "making sure", that's need not to be a perception. How about a survival check so that they use their wild sense to notice that animals are acting wrong ?

You might also consider Animal Handling, depending on a) the animals used, and b) how much you treat it as Applied Behaviorism vs. Farmhand and Muleskinner Proficiency.

Note that this would be a great use for a passive Survival check.

[nickl_2000]

If it were a natural animal in the area, a passive nature check would be extremely appropriate.


Alternately, you can fudge the check and tell the PCs at a time that will advance the plot most effectively or make them the most paranoid