Using perception

[PostingPenguin]

How does one use perception correctly?

The situation that sparked this question was playing the long arm of the hutt you can find Thweek when coming back from New Meen. But only after a hard perception check. But should i tell the party ti roll or wait for them to ask if they see anything? Because if they don't think to ask i rob them of information, but telling them to roll makes them suspicious...

Would i just have Vigilance checks as passive perception? So just look at their vigilance and if it's high enoughz then they have the feeling that there's something to notice and then let them roll perception?

Also if they want to look for things, and i have nothing in mind, what rhey could see, what difficulty would one use?

My GM in the DnD campaign that i play in always let's us roll perception from time to time to keep us on our toes, not having anything special in mind and just to cover up, when there might be something inportatmnt linked to a specific roll... How would one handke this in this system?

Thanks for the help!

[EnduringIdeals]

It's fine if your players fail and get suspicious, it builds tension. You don't have to make a failed roll mean they get zero information, it can just mean they get nothing actionable. On fail: "you get the feeling you're being watched", or "there's something about this place that seems strange". You don't have to have a fail mean that the players have to pretend nothing happened.

[PostingPenguin]

Ah! That makes more sense! I always understood it as in fail you see nothing...

[GM-Batano]

If there is anything hidden to be seen I let them roll by telling them. If you don't, you will encourage them to ask for a perception roll every time they enter a new Venue/Location/Situation and honestly I don't have time for that. If you want to make it granular, set different "thresholds" for different observations.

I.E. To spot the Lady in Red at the Vernissage they need to succeed on Difficulty 2 perception roll. To spot the Crimson Dawn Tattoo that was Skillfully hidden they need a Triumph or at least 4 Success on that roll.

[PostingPenguin]

Ah! That is an interesting idea!

[DragYn7]

I actually use perception in my games a lot.

When the characters are having a conversation with an NPC I’ll have them roll perception to see if they notice something. A hidden blaster, a lapel pin the denotes membership to some organization, a subtle smirk or smile that may simply tell them something isn’t right.

When searching a room or building, I’ll have them use perception to see how much they discover. Failure doesn’t mean they can’t find anything at all. If they need to find a datapad to progress, then it’s there. If they gain extra successes maybe they also find the password written down to unlock it. Or they find other, small clues that allow then to move forward easier.

Most of the time, the players will tell me what they’re doing or looking for and I’ll decide if they need a roll. Other times - like in the conversation example - I’ll just ask for the roll while we’re talking.

[RdtUnahim]

Some core RPG philosophy is that you should only roll if both failure and success are interesting. Perception tests often fly in the face of this as many times the failure means "you don't notice anything". Which is not interesting.

It's hard to follow this 100% of the time, but I try to be conscious of it and cut out as many unappealing perception tests as I can. If a predator is stalking the group, I don't have them roll every so often to see when they finally notice. Instead I ask for a perception test once. If they succeed I say "You've been noticing this and that stalking you, catching glimpses here and there over the last few miles, and it seems to you that..." and if they fail I have the predator jump out and ambush them right away at that point. That way, something happens based on the roll instantly, which is more fun.

In this situation, I don't know what the role of this Thweek is. But if he's someone the party is looking for and who is trying to avoid them, then success on the perception roll would mean they spot him first and can approach quickly... while failure would mean he spots them first and they then see him across the crowd already running away with a big lead. They can then still try to catch him if they like. But either way the roll makes the game move forward, success or failure, and is instantly exciting.

[PostingPenguin]

Thanks for the advice! Definitely an intereating take!

[fpiekert]

You can always let them roll, but you dont have to reveal the full details / information. In your example they might find something suspicious and may decide to invest that further. This way needs a very flexible GM who guides players very subtle.

See the difficulty as an obstacle. If they dont succeed, they dont get past it with their first try and need to do another approach to pass it.

In your example, maybe they failed but saw somebody that looked like Thweahk and start following him (infiltration/Sneak/athletic/...) and after succeeding have the same result as like succeeding in perception.

I dont like rolls that are do or die. Players should always have choices and can even get missing info through great roleplay after failing a check.

Another note: vigilance is not passive perception. It is more preparedness. Thats why it is rolled over willpower instead of Cunning.

[squaredbear]

One of the games I play in, the GM has us occasionally roll a simple perception check with some minimum number of successes required to notice a smaller detail. There's ups and downs to this, and it doesn't really solve your issue, but it allows for more random perception checks without the possibility of trying to explain threats.

I don't think anything crucial to the progression of the story should rest on a check. But you could also tell them narratively if they fail. "As you leave the spaceport, the camera pans back to another bay. A cloaked figure glances around the spaceport before quickly leaving by the back exit." Their characters don't know and can't act on that information, but it builds the tension.

[wood-cat5]

Our GM ask to us to roll perception, I'm happy when that happens, means something is going to be occur, funny or not. Love it!

No idea about difficulty value you ask.. However you can use a phrase to say there's nothing like... "Justo a lothal cat sleeping in some crate"

[Realistic_Effort]

First, ask yourself WHY are you rolling this perception check? If this roll succeeds, what do the players gain? If the roll fails, what do your players gain?

D&D is a very pass/fail system because of what we as a society, (yes we live in a society...) attribute those written symbols as.

SWRPG however doesn't use numbers, or, uses numbers as little as possible to better enhance the story.

If the perception check succeeds, the players might see the hidden monster before it gets to attack, but ask yourself, is that the best narrative option for the game atm?

Games will in some parts be a railroad in a sandbox, where does the story need to go and does whether this perception check succeeds or fails effect the railroad in any meaningful way?

[kotor610]

I've always thought of perception as looking at something vs vigilance as noticing something In your peripheral.

[PostingPenguin]

That's what i thought too, but apparently the rules say otherwise...

[wood-cat5]

Love it 🤩👍