PDA

View Full Version : Rolling to spot ambushes and pursuers



Yora
2018-01-11, 04:53 AM
In my experience it's never really satisfying if the GM tells the players to roll for perception and then telling them nevermind. One option is for the GM to write down all the relevant passive ability values and make the rolls for them. But there are a couple of games now with a strict policy of the players making all the rolls, both active and passive. Taking that away from players doesn't feel appropriate for such games, and I don't find it fully elegant either.

With traps it's a bit simpler. You can simply wait until the moment a player would trigger the trap and then tell them they spot it before they trigger it or what happens after they triggered it, right after they make the roll.

If an ambush is confined to a single room with clear doors, it's also not too bad. You can tell the players to roll when they declare to go inside and they either spot the ambush before walking in, or they fail and walk fully into the room and roughly to the center if they did not specifically said otherwise.

But that requires that the NPCs strike immediately once the players walked into the right position. In some situation it makes sense for the NPCs to simply wait and observe the PCs or to follow them around for a while before they take action. How could you handle that elegantly without telling the players to roll perception and then nothing happens?

Psikerlord
2018-01-11, 05:17 AM
In my experience it's never really satisfying if the GM tells the players to roll for perception and then telling them nevermind. One option is for the GM to write down all the relevant passive ability values and make the rolls for them. But there are a couple of games now with a strict policy of the players making all the rolls, both active and passive. Taking that away from players doesn't feel appropriate for such games, and I don't find it fully elegant either.

With traps it's a bit simpler. You can simply wait until the moment a player would trigger the trap and then tell them they spot it before they trigger it or what happens after they triggered it, right after they make the roll.

If an ambush is confined to a single room with clear doors, it's also not too bad. You can tell the players to roll when they declare to go inside and they either spot the ambush before walking in, or they fail and walk fully into the room and roughly to the center if they did not specifically said otherwise.

But that requires that the NPCs strike immediately once the players walked into the right position. In some situation it makes sense for the NPCs to simply wait and observe the PCs or to follow them around for a while before they take action. How could you handle that elegantly without telling the players to roll perception and then nothing happens?
For ambushes and traps, I just wait until the moment before the ambush/trap springs - then they make the roll. If they make it, they spot the danger, if not, move onto saving throws or first round of surprise combat. Because the players are about to find out about the trap/ambush anyway, it doesnt matter if they roll.

Where I think perception related rolls sometimes raise issues is things like detecting lies and finding secret doors, which might otherwise go unnoticed, and the GM making rolls behind the screen might "tip off" the players (but, if the GM makes rolls from time to time behind the screen regardless - not combat dice mind you, other dice - the players wont be so suspicious).

BWR
2018-01-11, 05:38 AM
I roll this sort of thing for my players. While I'm prepping the session, if possible. If you have a system that requires players to roll all rolls themselves, you can fudge by having them roll a set of rolls beforehand that you can use for secret rolls as needed. This will obviously be less useful once you involved mechanics that allow rerolls or limited use boosts, but it's the best I have come up with. It works well for the games we play.

Celestia
2018-01-11, 06:10 AM
You could also write down their perception bonuses and then have them make random rolls throughout the game without telling. Them what they're for. Thus, they won't be able to discern the failed perception rolls from the fake rolls. It will also serve to make then paranoid, so win-win.

Pleh
2018-01-11, 09:28 AM
I am a big fan of using a hybrid of Active and Passive perception.

I break apart environmental information into four general categories: Obvious, Apparent, Inconspicuous, and Concealed.

Obvious information is simply described automatically if the players take the time to wait for my descriptive prompting. The only way to miss it is to demonstrate that they have their mind on other things and aren't even looking for further information because they've made their choice already.
Example:
"You enter a Tavern-"
"We ask the barkeep for a quest."
"... You walk past several tall and muscular men in bright, shining armor and attempt to get the attention of the barkeep..."

Apparent information isn't automatically disclosed, but doesn't require a perception roll if the player bothers to ask about it.
Example:
"You enter a Tavern. The barkeep greets you and asks how he can be of service?"
"Are there any shady looking individuals lurking about the place?"
"They are not attempting to hide their presence, so you notice a group of hooded figures seated at a far table in the back of the establishment with their backs to the wall so as not to be approached undetected."

Inconspicuous information is where Skill is required to discern reality. Players may elect to take Perception rolls at any time if they suspect there may be Inconspicuous or Concealed information present, but regardless if they do or do not elect to do this, their Passive Perception is constantly active and assumes an average roll (basically taking 10 for d20 game systems).
Example:
The party meets an important NPC figure wearing a Plot McGuffin Ring on one finger partially concealed by a long, frilly sleeve. It is neither being hidden, nor does it especially stand out from the rest of the NPC's attire.
The DM doesn't mention the details of the NPC's attire except that it is elaborate and expensive, and the players do not suspect the inconspicuous McGuffin's presence.
A Player's passive perception is high enough to warrant information disclosure.
To the Player (perhaps in a hidden message) "A ring on this person's hand catches your eye."

Concealed information is more or less the same as Inconspicuous except that it involves an opposed Stealth of some kind. Someone or something is actively attempting to elude detection. Again, players are free to make their Active rolls as much as they please, but the Passive will be constantly active (so long as they are in a fit mental state, such as being lucid and awake).
Example:
Players settle down to rest for the night, setting up shifts for Sleep Watch. One player chooses to do some whittling to keep awake and alert. Their concentration is focused on the carving, so they are not making active perception checks. A sneaking ambusher rolls low on a stealth check, which is caught by the player's Passive Perception.
"As you pause between strokes in your woodcarving, the hairs on the back of your neck stand up and you get the feeling that you are being watched/not alone."
"I make a Perception check and ready an action to wake the others, placing my hand on my nearest ally's shoulder."

---

One thing you'll likely notice is that I rarely allow Passive Perception to dispense total information. More commonly, it triggers a prompting to the player to inform them that this might be an advantageous time to roll Perception to investigate further.

This way, I'm not rolling anything for the players, but I'm also not blowing the metagame of stealth by having them roll "for nothing." It's still based largely on their investment into the skill without making every character not skilled in perception essentially blind.

Lapak
2018-01-11, 09:54 AM
Our group’s standard for this is to have a set of rolls on standby. We roll a set of perception checks at the beginning of the session, they get recorded, the DM references them if/when they become relevant, and if need be we make another round mid-session. Since it’s scheduled, we don’t assume that there is a reason for the check itself, but we did get to make them as players.

Earthwalker
2018-01-11, 10:52 AM
I now only play games with meta-currencies and so all players know what dice rolls are for when they make them.

As such things like perception happen when it effects the game.

It does put limits on when to roll and what rolls do.

So the one example from the OPs list is do the players notice the other people following them. I still announce it as roll perception, if you make a 19 you spot the other group following you. If you don't make it you don't.

Which I would imagine might feel weird to some people here.

CharonsHelper
2018-01-11, 11:23 AM
I tend to prefer systems where perception is passive & stealth is active.

That way there are just DCs (or TNs depending upon the system) to beat rather than opposed rolls.

Also speeds up play a smidge.

Thrudd
2018-01-11, 12:09 PM
I really think the best way is to keep perception related issues behind the screen. Since in all other cases you are the sole arbiter of what the characters see/hear/sense without recourse to players rolling, for the sake of consistency and immersion these situations should be no different. Roll secretly or compare static values. The concept of "players roll everything" should be amended to "players roll everything that the characters actively do and that has an effect which can be immediately seen."

The other option, if the "only players roll" is an ideal you feel cannot be violated, is to not make such situations appear in the game or make the decision about how they turn out by simple fiat (personally I think a mistake, but maybe the game is very cinematic and you just have scenes play out the way you decide is most cinematically appealing.)

Faily
2018-01-11, 01:52 PM
Some systems have passive scores to check against for the ones doing the sneaking. A Song of Ice and Fire RPG is one that uses passive stats for things like that, so it would be the GM rolling to overcome a flat difficulty, rather than the players rolling opposed to the stealther.

Yora
2018-01-11, 02:07 PM
Some systems have passive scores to check against for the ones doing the sneaking. A Song of Ice and Fire RPG is one that uses passive stats for things like that, so it would be the GM rolling to overcome a flat difficulty, rather than the players rolling opposed to the stealther.

While it's not "player roll everything", this would be a very workable variant for my case of Symbaroum. Since NPCs are pretty much made the same way as PCs, static values can be seamlessly switched into modifiers and vice versa. This does in fact allow the GM to make rolls for the PCs without the players knowing. You only need to write down their Vigilance scores and convert them into a modifier on the Discrete roll you make for the NPCs.

Aliquid
2018-01-11, 02:11 PM
I now only play games with meta-currencies and so all players know what dice rolls are for when they make them.

As such things like perception happen when it effects the game.

It does put limits on when to roll and what rolls do.

So the one example from the OPs list is do the players notice the other people following them. I still announce it as roll perception, if you make a 19 you spot the other group following you. If you don't make it you don't.

Which I would imagine might feel weird to some people here.
I have played like that before (if I am reading this correctly). The DM simply says “a large predator is stalking you as you travel through the mountains. Roll to see if your characters notice.”

The trick is having players that are good at segregating player knowledge from character knowledge.

Max_Killjoy
2018-01-11, 02:15 PM
While ambushes are easier to deal with because action starts next either way, there are instances where information the characters don't have is relayed to the players via the mechanics regardless of the outcome of the roll. While this is to some degree dealt with by the basic separation of player vs character knowledge and the good-faith effort of the player to "be cool" about things their character doesn't know, it does have a negative effect on immersion and impact.

Examples -- being followed or watched. If the character doesn't know because the roll failed or was beaten by a contested roll, the player knows something is going on, and has now been asked to ignore that information even if they know it's vital and could have dire consequences for their character.

Earthwalker
2018-01-12, 06:24 AM
Examples -- being followed or watched. If the character doesn't know because the roll failed or was beaten by a contested roll, the player knows something is going on, and has now been asked to ignore that information even if they know it's vital and could have dire consequences for their character.

Being followed and such is clearly the biggest problem when using meta-currencies and re-rolls. I am happy to pay the price in less immersion because I care less about that, than other gaming factors.

I think my issue stems from gaming advice from one system being applied to others. For example playing call of cathulu there are recommendations (at least on the interwebz) to make the plays make perception tests even if nothing is there, as it puts the player (not the character) on edge. This works in cathulu as that plays well in the game, building suspense.

When you start applying the same say in shadowrun where I have edge I can use to re-roll a failed roll I need to know I have failed a roll. Also if I am spending Edge the perception test better be for something.

Altair_the_Vexed
2018-01-12, 06:51 AM
I have played like that before (if I am reading this correctly). The DM simply says “a large predator is stalking you as you travel through the mountains. Roll to see if your characters notice.”

The trick is having players that are good at segregating player knowledge from character knowledge.

I really don't want to play with people who can't do that - understanding dramatic irony and playing up to it is fun.
Also, this sort of thing allows your super-intelligent PCs to have ideas that the players wouldn't otherwise think of (with the appropriate skill checks, of course).

Psikerlord
2018-01-12, 07:00 AM
Our group’s standard for this is to have a set of rolls on standby. We roll a set of perception checks at the beginning of the session, they get recorded, the DM references them if/when they become relevant, and if need be we make another round mid-session. Since it’s scheduled, we don’t assume that there is a reason for the check itself, but we did get to make them as players.

We've done this too with great success. Roll up 10 perc checks at start of session - GM rolls d10 for which line to use if required.

Yora
2018-01-12, 07:38 AM
I really don't want to play with people who can't do that - understanding dramatic irony and playing up to it is fun.
Also, this sort of thing allows your super-intelligent PCs to have ideas that the players wouldn't otherwise think of (with the appropriate skill checks, of course).

It's not about being able to. Of course you can continue that way without any players saying "I got a bad feeling about this, I keep searching". But is it going to be as fun?

Altair_the_Vexed
2018-01-12, 10:05 AM
It's not about being able to. Of course you can continue that way without any players saying "I got a bad feeling about this, I keep searching". But is it going to be as fun?

I know what you're saying - not everyone wants to play that way. My group does like it, so we're all fine with playing along with the GM and acting like we don't know we're being followed (or whatever).

On the other hand, when I used to run games at a local club, an old-school gamer turned up to the table a few times - and he hated it. The rest of the gamers were relative newbies and had mainly played in my games only up to that point, whereas this guy was from the 70s-era old-school - "How would my character know that?" he said when I tried to run a cut scene of the BBEG gloating over how the PCs were walking into his trap. He practically demanded that I stop.

So yes, your mileage may vary - but I like it.

Thrudd
2018-01-12, 12:20 PM
Old school players want to actually be surprised, and to make actual decisions that impact the outcome of the game (because they know their characters are in mortal danger and in no way guaranteed to survive anything). New players want to be entertained by an exciting story and have their characters do awesome genre-appropriate things in the course of it. They expect the GM will not harm the characters in any permanent way unless it would be a cool or dramatic/climactic scene.

So cinematic players are fine with playing along pretending they don't know an ambush waits for them, because they know it will be a cool and dramatic fight that they get to act through. Old players think an ambush will potentially kill all their characters quickly and ignominiously, and will roll constantly to detect it if they have any way to control that detection or have any hint there might be something hidden.

Unless the game is explicitly meant to be cinematic, I want immersion and real decision making. Don't give a hint that there's an ambush and expect me to pretend I don't know, if you want me to think my game decisions are actually relevant. Tell me we're playing a cinematic game with no/low stakes, if that's the truth of it.

Max_Killjoy
2018-01-12, 12:38 PM
Old school players want to actually be surprised, and to make actual decisions that impact the outcome of the game (because they know their characters are in mortal danger and in no way guaranteed to survive anything). New players want to be entertained by an exciting story and have their characters do awesome genre-appropriate things in the course of it. They expect the GM will not harm the characters in any permanent way unless it would be a cool or dramatic/climactic scene.

So cinematic players are fine with playing along pretending they don't know an ambush waits for them, because they know it will be a cool and dramatic fight that they get to act through. Old players think an ambush will potentially kill all their characters quickly and ignominiously, and will roll constantly to detect it if they have any way to control that detection or have any hint there might be something hidden.

Unless the game is explicitly meant to be cinematic, I want immersion and real decision making. Don't give a hint that there's an ambush and expect me to pretend I don't know, if you want me to think my game decisions are actually relevant. Tell me we're playing a cinematic game with no/low stakes, if that's the truth of it.


That's not far from my position.

I can do separation of player and character knowledge, but there's something decidedly UNfun about sitting there knowing something terrible is going to happen to my character that I can't fairly do anything about... even though I know it's coming, maybe for a good chunk of the game session.

I've been in that situation for several hours a few times, and after a while I was just sitting there feeling trapped and going through the motions waiting for the unavoidable.

Not a big fan of pointless random death "because the dice said so, too bad about those three 1s in a row, go roll another character", but also not a big fan of "meanwhile, in the villain's HQ..." cutaway scenes and other cinematic devices. I put a lot of effort into the characters, but I'm also not looking for drama and "cinematic" stuff.

Pleh
2018-01-12, 01:24 PM
I very much prefer cinematic games more than dungeon grinding like in older editions.

I very much prefer not knowing when perception is being failed by my character. That's why I have my hybrid passive and active perception, so players can be as thorough as they want in examining things, but even if they have other priorities, their character still has a decent chance to notice things the player isn't paying attention to.