Is Spot/Notice/Search/Perception Really the “God Skill?”

[DRD1812]

I've got a comic on the subject over here, but here's the TLDR:

Players believe that they need max ranks in the "notice stuff" skills. I contend that, while very useful, it isn't strictly necessary. Many Perception rolls are inconsequential, and often serve as GM shorthand for “I’m about to describe something.” This creates the perception that "notice stuff" is the most useful skill in the game, when in reality it is only the most rolled.

What do you think? Are the "notice stuff" skills truly critical for every character? Would you be a fool (a damn fool!) to neglect them?

[Anonymouswizard]

This would probably do better in Roleplaying General.

Perception is so valued not because of the number of rolls, but because failing a perception roll that you didn't call for can have dire consequences. With other skills you can generally just not attempt the roll, perception doesn't allow you to mitigate danger in that way.

A pit trap, an ambush, a long invisible enemy, oncoming boulders, ect ect ect

[Tinkerer]

Hahaha, that's a great comic. It is one of those things which really depends on the GM though.

It's tied to the tracking problem, an old gaming sentiment which goes "The only time that tracking comes up is if somebody has tracking." Therefore if nobody takes tracking then nobody can fail a tracking attempt and you will never be lost on what way the bad guys went. Yes, taking tracking actually makes you worse at tracking. You will also run into this a lot with lockpicking, if nobody can pick a lock you will encounter about 95% fewer locked doors and chests. If you have a GM that works in this fashion then indeed the skill is nearly useless, as is nearly every skill in the game. However even then there is one situation where the Notice skill shines, see Ambushes below. Now naturally this doesn't apply to things like modules and APs where a third party wrote the module.

For my personal campaigns Notice checks are quite vital. I realized that a significant number of the rolls that I had the players make were just like what you mentioned, I wanted to describe something. So I completely eliminated that and now it serves two primary purposes. #1 Detecting bonus information. A significant portion of the bonus XP that I give out is based on the characters acquiring bonus information. Usually this information comes about as a result of a either a Notice check for physical evidence or a Persuasion/Intimidation check for testimony. #2 Detecting ambushes. Ambushes are a huge influence in pretty much every game system which utilizes combat and most of the time your parties defense against it is tied almost exclusively to their Notice skill.

EDIT: I forgot about traps since I don't often use them in my games but as was pointed out if those are present then that would also be a very important reason to have it.

[Thrudd]

It depends entirely on how the GM runs the game. If there are actually consequences for failing to notice things, they are much more useful than if you've got a cinematic/railroad DM who will make sure you find the important stuff regardless and won't penalize you if it means missing something related to their set piece or story.

They may be "god skills", or they may be entirely frivolous, or hopefully a balanced investment of resources that are neither 100% nevessary nor entirely pointless in relation to all other skills, with a competent DM that designs the game appropriately.

[LibraryOgre]

A lot depends on the GM, as said. I had one GM who decided a spot check was necessary to notice that the guy was wearing a 2-handed sword on his back... and others who would read the boxed text and tell us about traps.

[Honest Tiefling]

Kinda, yeah. If you don't max it out, traps and ambushes become very deadly as you'll probably trigger them all. All DMs love traps more than they love their own family members after all.

I also greatly suspect that many people max it out because some DMs are very bad at putting in multiple clues, so if you miss one, well, you get spend several hours doing nothing because you have no idea who the next NPC to talk at is.

[Geddy2112]

They are not required, but as others have said not noticing something can get you killed quickly. People who walk around blissfully unaware of their surroundings tend to suffer more misfortune and death than those who are hyper vigilant.

I think it is important, but you can get by without it. I have seen it shorthand roleplaying, or be used to describe things that are utterly inconsequential. Like any roll it should be called for when 1. There is a chance of success vs failure and 2. The success or failure has a significant, measurable consequence.
Noticing somebody sneaking up on you trying to stab you in the back calls for a roll. You might only get one chance before you are dead. Rolling to tell what color shirt somebody is wearing is pointless-it has no consequence(unlikely to have one even in a combat scenario) of success vs failure and there is little to no chance to fail. The DM should simply describe these things, or if a player asks give that information out. Like any skill, when a player asks a question where success and failure matter, as well as a chance for either, then a roll is called for.

[RazorChain]

This depends on the system

In point buy systems where you can spend your points at being better at

A) Hitting Things
B) Doing magic
C) Improving other myriad of things
D) Being better at spotting things

People tend to neglect perception or spot...or maybe one or two PC's are good at it. In those system there tends to be no max rank or if it is often you can max the skill from the start. This comes with the cost that the better you are at spotting things the worse you will be at something else.

If you are playing a game where you are raiding dark underground abodes and trying to avoid the poor denizens traps and ambushes to grab some ill begotten treasure in your quest for wealth and power. Then it should be evident that players will tend prioritize perception because they deem it important.

[Koo Rehtorb]

It depends. They're very important in sandbox/lethal games where missing something means you won't necessarily ever find it, or not finding the thing can and will get you killed.

I have absolutely averted certain death with a timely passed Observation test multiple times in one campaign.

[Honest Tiefling]

They are not required, but as others have said not noticing something can get you killed quickly. People who walk around blissfully unaware of their surroundings tend to suffer more misfortune and death than those who are hyper vigilant.

This has made something occur to me. I think a lot of people want their characters to be 'cool' or at the very least, 'mildly competent'. Acting like Mr. Magoo and blundering your way through things probably isn't going to accomplish either goal, and brings up the question of how your character survived to level 1. Furthermore, people in various PC professions (thief, guard, or hunter) are probably going to need those skills to be any good at their job from a role-play perspective.

[Thrawn4]

In my experience this is only true for Call of Cthulhu games where noticing odd things is vital (although still lethal at times).

[Tinkerer]

This has made something occur to me. I think a lot of people want their characters to be 'cool' or at the very least, 'mildly competent'. Acting like Mr. Magoo and blundering your way through things probably isn't going to accomplish either goal, and brings up the question of how your character survived to level 1. Furthermore, people in various PC professions (thief, guard, or hunter) are probably going to need those skills to be any good at their job from a role-play perspective.

Indeed. What's one of the fastest ways to point out the competent in fiction? You have them be the first to notice problems.

[calam]

I think it depends on the lethality and type of game. In games like warhammer where a perception roll is the difference between spotting a sniper and an enemy getting full accurate dice plus an ambush bonus directly to your head it can be the most life saving ability in the game. On the other hand if you're playing a game without combat that can end your life in one bad enough attack its far less important.

[Tanarii]

I agree it's commonly used to gate information that the GM should be providing, or typically WILL be providing, anyway. Same with knowledge / lore skills. And yes, I think that's part of the reason they're heavily valued.

But if there is a primary skill preventing ambushes and/or allowing players to find the enemy and launch their own ambushes, it's always going to be an important skill in any game in which ambushes play a significant part. Either individually, or for the scout characters, depending on if one character detecting enemies is sufficient.

Same for discovering traps. If traps are a thing, it's either important for the scout to have the skill, or for all characters. Although more commonly this one it's just the scout that matters, and it's mostly used saving his own skin.

This isn't just true in D&D-like fantasy games either. I've played more than a few military-like RPGs where such skills were critical for at least one team member, the point-man. Both Recon and Palladium games (in particular RDF/SC/REF in Robotech, and Coalition in Rifts), it's important for a foot patrol's point-man to find the enemy and traps before the enemy or traps find the PCs.

[Honest Tiefling]

I think it depends on the lethality and type of game. In games like warhammer where a perception roll is the difference between spotting a sniper and an enemy getting full accurate dice plus an ambush bonus directly to your head it can be the most life saving ability in the game. On the other hand if you're playing a game without combat that can end your life in one bad enough attack its far less important.

I disagree with this. In non-combat games, you often have puzzles, traps, or social encounters to replace the combat. While insight/sense motive type skills will suddenly be given the same status as perception in a social game, you'll still need perception to avoid detection, poisoning attempts, rifle through people's belongings and determine forgeries, and stalk people.

[Florian]

It´s a bit based on "frequency of use".

Perception tends to be rolled very often, followed by Knowledge and Spellcraft. Other skills need to be "player initiated" and come up less frequently, if at all. For ex, Athletics doesn't play a role unless someone wants to tumble frequently, then it comes up, but in the general scheme of things? Not that much.

In PF, the "real" god skills are the ones tied to the specific sub-systems, especially when you only have one roll to get it right.

[Darth Ultron]

Nope, in fact they are the Ruin the Fun skills.

It sounds good to Roll and avoid anything that might happen to your character ever....but in game play it's very dull and boring.

Sure, the optimizing jerk player will be sitting on the edge of their chair endlessly saying how super duper great their character is as they always Spot stuff and never fall for traps or such. But it's really only a great thing to this one type of player.

For normal players, it's not the End of the World if their character can't Spot an Ambush from the other side of the planet. So the character gets ambushed? So, what? A normal player can just keep on playing the game.

[Slipperychicken]

I wouldn't call it a 'god skill' -that's system dependent. I think it's just important in almost all roleplaying games. GMs tend to hide important stuff behind perception and knowledge skills.

You can neglect it if you really have something better to use your resources on. It's a question of your priorities. Also, if everyone else has it, you can probably free-ride off them without impacting the group's survival too much.

[tensai_oni]

They're god skills because if you fail to detect the trap, the DM may declare you dead. And then you have nothing left to live for in real life.

Sarcasm aside, it depends on the paranoia factor of the game. That's more GM-specific than system specific - everyone has a horror story or two (possibly second hand) about adventures where everything is trapped and every seemingly innocuous object or NPC is actually a doppelganger/succubus/invisible assassin. Basically, if it's a game you can't play without a ten foot pole at the ready, then perception skills are a must. Otherwise, like Darth Ultron said, falling into ambushes is more fun and interesting.

[Anonymouswizard]

For normal players, it's not the End of the World if their character can't Spot an Ambush from the other side of the planet. So the character gets ambushed? So, what? A normal player can just keep on playing the game.

Depends on the game. I once had a friend have to sit out the entirety of a combat because we got ambushed, his character was the closest to our ambushers, and he failed his defence roll. Then combat started, and as there were no penalties to defence rolls and as lot of bonuses once the remaining PCs dived for cover it took a long time. He spent a long time unable to play. This happened to my character in another game, although there I'd dumped Perception intentionally and the combat was over much quicker (it was a hit and run poison affair).

Now, my homebrew system is rather nasty for surprise, denying any ability to add your Athletics or Melee skill to your defence roll, making you rely on your Perception alone for defence, and most weapons will take you out with a solid hit (unless you've got your hands on good armour, which is rather rare). But the system is meant to have fast combat, hits either tick off grazes (enough and you take a Wound for more long term penalties) or take you out and potentially deal a wound. You're not meant to spend your time in personal combat, that's why it gets a page and a bit of rules compared to investigations, exploration, trade, and other activities PCs are expected to engage in.

[ross]

Perception is great if you want to analyze someone's body language for tells, like where their eyes flick to when they're talking (or when you ask them where something is, watching to see if they inadvertently give away its position), how much they fidget, if they're sweating, breathing pattern, etc.; for things like traps and ambushes since it's a group check usually, so it's pretty much trivial (example: in one game I'm in, there are seven players and perception is a d6 or d8 for all of them, making even the hardest check almost an auto win)

[flond]

Nope, in fact they are the Ruin the Fun skills.

It sounds good to Roll and avoid anything that might happen to your character ever....but in game play it's very dull and boring.

Sure, the optimizing jerk player will be sitting on the edge of their chair endlessly saying how super duper great their character is as they always Spot stuff and never fall for traps or such. But it's really only a great thing to this one type of player.

For normal players, it's not the End of the World if their character can't Spot an Ambush from the other side of the planet. So the character gets ambushed? So, what? A normal player can just keep on playing the game.

Depends on how deadly ambushes are. Also if you're using perception checksto hide important facts. I mean we've all seen the opposite, the game where the players stumble around confused and then die confused.

[icefractal]

I would say it's the most generally useful skill, not necessarily the most useful for a given character.

Unlike many skills though, /anyone/ can benefit from a bonus to it. There's not usually much point going from "terrible at UMD" to "mediocre at UMD", despite how good UMD is - leave that **** to the pros. But everyone ends up rolling Perception, at a variety of difficulties, so improving it is always a good thing (unless being oblivious is specifically part of your concept).

[calam]

I would say it's the most generally useful skill, not necessarily the most useful for a given character.

Unlike many skills though, /anyone/ can benefit from a bonus to it. There's not usually much point going from "terrible at UMD" to "mediocre at UMD", despite how good UMD is - leave that **** to the pros. But everyone ends up rolling Perception, at a variety of difficulties, so improving it is always a good thing (unless being oblivious is specifically part of your concept).

I can't believe this hasn't been suggested before. Perception skills is definitely the only skill that I know of where everyone can test it at every time without there being shortcuts like sending down a rope is for climbing.

[DRD1812]

What do you guys think about making "Notice Stuff" skills scale like BAB? Classes like Ranger and Rogue get "Full Perception" ranks, while classes like Fighter and Barbarian get 3/4 and full casters get half?

[LibraryOgre]

What do you guys think about making "Notice Stuff" skills scale like BAB? Classes like Ranger and Rogue get "Full Perception" ranks, while classes like Fighter and Barbarian get 3/4 and full casters get half?

In a lot of ways, 4e did that... skill checks added half your level, so if I was trained in Notice and you were equally trained in sneak, it was an equal match-up.

[RazorChain]

What do you guys think about making "Notice Stuff" skills scale like BAB? Classes like Ranger and Rogue get "Full Perception" ranks, while classes like Fighter and Barbarian get 3/4 and full casters get half?

Or how about people just distribute skillpoints so they can decide themselves instead? That way we can avoid being constrained by your preconceptions that rogues and rangers have to be perceptive

[Honest Tiefling]

What do you guys think about making "Notice Stuff" skills scale like BAB? Classes like Ranger and Rogue get "Full Perception" ranks, while classes like Fighter and Barbarian get 3/4 and full casters get half?

I don't like the idea of class skills, but I also don't like the idea of a skill monkey as a role in a party overall. A lot of editions of DnD already rely on having a trapspringer, and this only enforces that rule even in games not focused on exploration or combat.

Having perception be a god stat isn't a problem in my opinion, due to role-playing reasons. Don't like it? Make other skills more valuable. Sure, everyone COULD take perception, but then you might not have other skills to solve issues and get past obstacles. Sure, someone will always need to invest in it, but there should be a cost to having everyone take it.

[Psikerlord]

I think it;s smart for at least one PC to have high perception/spot whatever. It is just really handy for avoiding ambushes, traps and so on.

Generally speaking I think it's the best skill in most Dnd like games.

But I dont think every PC needs it. One or two spotters is enough. You can be of more use to your party with other skills if you already have good spotters.

[Psikerlord]

Depends on the game. I once had a friend have to sit out the entirety of a combat because we got ambushed, his character was the closest to our ambushers, and he failed his defence roll. Then combat started, and as there were no penalties to defence rolls and as lot of bonuses once the remaining PCs dived for cover it took a long time. He spent a long time unable to play. This happened to my character in another game, although there I'd dumped Perception intentionally and the combat was over much quicker (it was a hit and run poison affair).

Now, my homebrew system is rather nasty for surprise, denying any ability to add your Athletics or Melee skill to your defence roll, making you rely on your Perception alone for defence, and most weapons will take you out with a solid hit (unless you've got your hands on good armour, which is rather rare). But the system is meant to have fast combat, hits either tick off grazes (enough and you take a Wound for more long term penalties) or take you out and potentially deal a wound. You're not meant to spend your time in personal combat, that's why it gets a page and a bit of rules compared to investigations, exploration, trade, and other activities PCs are expected to engage in.

Do you have a draft of your system I could read? I'd be interested to see it.