PDA

View Full Version : Perception in Pathfinder?



eyebreaker7
2020-09-30, 03:44 PM
Perception
Your senses allow you to notice fine details and alert you to danger. Perception covers all five senses, including sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell.

What does this convert to in 3.5? Listen & spot I'm sure but anything else? Maybe search?

Efrate
2020-09-30, 04:16 PM
Listen spot and search.

Psyren
2020-09-30, 05:12 PM
This is useful because Perception - unlike Search - can pick up on anything your senses would pick up on at the range of those senses, and furthermore do so in half the time. So where a 3.5 rogue searching for traps might have to move down a hallway very slowly, and methodically searching each square once they get within 10ft of it, a PF rogue works more like this. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0855.html)

Crake
2020-09-30, 09:45 PM
This is useful because Perception - unlike Search - can pick up on anything your senses would pick up on at the range of those senses, and furthermore do so in half the time. So where a 3.5 rogue searching for traps might have to move down a hallway very slowly, and methodically searching each square once they get within 10ft of it, a PF rogue works more like this. (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0855.html)

This talent (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue/rogue-talents/paizo-rogue-talents/trap-spotter-ex) implies that the trap spotting is not automatic and must be actively done.

The perception skill description also says this: "Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action."

It would seem thus that traps fall under the minority of perception checks that are not reactive, and must be intentionally searched for, unless you have the trap spotter talent.

Edit: That being said, since perception simply has penalties for range, a rogue can search a long hallway with a single check, and the DM simply applies the appropriate range penalty. If you're walking at a steady pace, you can also just use your extra action each round to continuously search for all traps around you rather than searching one 5ft square at a time.

Psyren
2020-09-30, 10:23 PM
This talent (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue/rogue-talents/paizo-rogue-talents/trap-spotter-ex) implies that the trap spotting is not automatic and must be actively done.

The perception skill description also says this: "Action: Most Perception checks are reactive, made in response to observable stimulus. Intentionally searching for stimulus is a move action."

These don't countermand anything I said. I didn't say Perception was automatic - I said it's faster in PF and has greater range. Without that talent, you have to say you're searching for traps - but even if you do so, it's still a move action (per your own quote) instead of a full-round action as it is in 3.5, and you aren't limited to a single square within 10ft.

Using the OotS example - each round, Haley is moving down the hallway (move action 1) and actively searching for stimulus (move action 2). This is not possible in 3.5 unless you're taking 5-ft. steps, or searching every other round instead of every round.

Crake
2020-09-30, 11:08 PM
These don't countermand anything I said. I didn't say Perception was automatic - I said it's faster in PF and has greater range. Without that talent, you have to say you're searching for traps - but even if you do so, it's still a move action (per your own quote) instead of a full-round action as it is in 3.5, and you aren't limited to a single square within 10ft.

Using the OotS example - each round, Haley is moving down the hallway (move action 1) and actively searching for stimulus (move action 2). This is not possible in 3.5 unless you're taking 5-ft. steps, or searching every other round instead of every round.

Yup, I mentioned all that in my edit, not sure if you saw.

Psyren
2020-09-30, 11:51 PM
Yup, I mentioned all that in my edit, not sure if you saw.

Your edit began with "that being said" as though the points you had raised were somehow valid counters to what I had said, which I disagreed with.