Spot checks,perception,searching and You!

[GameOgre]

I used to rule that to spot something hidden or to see notice something hard to find the characters had to make a wis check.

Frankly that often meant that someone had very little chance to notice something. Wis is not often a prime for any of my players other than the cleric. Even then he argued that because he was a wise old man he was very observant?

So after a bit I made a home rule about perception.

Perception = Int+Wis+Chr /3

That was the target number for any perception check.

Now there really isnt a issue with doing it this way for me other than it just seems to stick out like a sour thumb as it doesnt use the Siege engine at all.

I had a few such sticking points but have thrown all of them away other than this one.

What do you guys think?
_________________
Baron Golden, Knights of the Tin Palace (GameOgre)

Subscriber to Crusader Magazine!
http://www.cncsociety.org

[Jonathan of White Haven]

My Spot checks are variable. If it's something that I want the players to see, just about anyone can see it. Or, if it's painfully obvious (let's see, just how difficult is it to not see the huge, ancient red dragon swooping in from the front?), it's easy to spot.

Otherwise, Assassins, Rogues, Rangers, and Elves have the advantage, especially when they're actively searching for something hidden.

If all the players happen to badly blow their Spot checks (the characters are all inspecting their navels for accumulated lint, or have rolled 1's and have field-stripped their Mark 1 Eyeballs in order to clean them), then that's just tough. Excrement occurs...
_________________
"You don't understand, Beaufingle", said Lungwort cryptically. "You ARE dinner." -- M.M. Moamrath

[serleran]

In general, in my games, if you're looking, paying attention, and being observant, you'll notice the most obvious things. But, if there's some special thing that might be important, like, if the she-demon has a googly hazel eye or Colonel Chick has a feather emblem on his necktie, then a standard SIEGE check is made -- thieves and assassins tend to have level added to most of these checks with rangers getting them in other situations, such as thinking "oh lordy, that's a good'en spot fer an ambush!"

But, other times, its not a SIEGE check -- you can describe what you're looking at, or for, and I'll probably give it to you.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

[Treebore]

I did something like that in my 2E days. I had them average their INT and WIS and that was what had to be rolled UNDER on a d30. It actually worked pretty darn well. Maybe I should go back to it. Hmmmm...
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Lord Dynel]

I think there are two ways to look at spotting/percieving - there are those that know what to look for (Intelligence) and then there are those that know how to look for it (Wisdom). That's just my opinion, though. I think either attribute could call for for Spot checks. And you could keep the sanctity of the SIEGE check preserved.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

[Treebore]

Let me see if I can remember how I had this reasoned out in my 2E days, and why I used the average of INT and WIS.

INT is when you know what kind of things you are looking for. Such as hidden door latches, traps, secret compartments, a Ruby among Spinels, etc...

WIS is simply "awareness", that 6th sense that makes your hair stand up on edge, your "danger sense". The purely instinctual level gut reaction that something wrong is going on. Plus it is just your hyper awareness of your surroundings. You take note of the outline of a necklace under someones shirt/blouse, you take note that someone is wearing mismatched socks under their pants, you take note that the wine pitcher isn't in the exact same location it was in half an hour ago, etc...

So rather than have two mechanics, and having to decide which they would fall under, consistently, I combined them both into an attribute of its own.

Yes, how well you spot/search/notice things is an attribute, not a skill, even though you can learn to be even more observant than you already are. So ultimately it is both, which is why in C&C I would allow levels to be added.

However I do not see an easy answer that works under the SIEGE system, simply because many people are highly intelligent, but still very out of touch with their gut instincts, and vice versa, its a pretty rare individual that is strong in both INT and WIS.

So I would probably go with creating yet another pseudo attribute which is the average of INT and WIS, and have this pseudo attribute treated as Prime if the PC has either INT or WIS as a Prime, to give them the benefit of the doubt, and I would allow thieves and rangers and assassins to add their full levels and everyone else, who has INT or WIS as a Prime, to add half their levels. Anyone who has neither INT or WIS as a Prime, or be one of the previously mentioned classes, would never add levels.

In my case I would probably handle this more in line with my current incarnation of house rules, everyone adds their levels, but those with a "class skill" get an additional +3 bonus to checks related to that class skill.

So for me it would break down to those who have either as a Prime are TN 12 base, those who are non Prime get TN 18 base, everyone gets to add their level and highest attribute bonus as well as any racial advantages, and those with it as a class skill get an additional +3 to all of their checks related to their class skill.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Omote]

When applicable, I have used a siege check, and more foten then not I am not using a flat d20 roll modified by the spotters wis bonus.

-O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

[Buttmonkey]

Seems to me that if you use WIS for spot checks consistently and the players know this, it's on them if they decide to select something other than WIS as a prime. Character creation is all about trade-offs. I don't see a reason to coddle your players if they have decided being observant is not as important to them as something else.

[gideon_thorne]

Buttmonkey wrote:
Seems to me that if you use WIS for spot checks consistently and the players know this, it's on them if they decide to select something other than WIS as a prime. Character creation is all about trade-offs. I don't see a reason to coddle your players if they have decided being observant is not as important to them as something else.

Couldn't have said it better myself.
_________________
"We'll go out through the kitchen!" Tanis Half-Elven

Peter Bradley

[seskis281]

As the Knight most commonly says when he tries to make a spot or a listen siege check against his non-prime, pretty average WIS - "Heh - I hear the clinking of my armor and am looking at the coat of my horse to intently."

_________________
John "Sir Seskis" Wright

Ilshara: Lands of Exile:
http://johnwright281.tripod.com/

High Squire of the C&C Society
www.cncsociety.org

[Lord Dynel]

Indeed. I agree. I think, at best, I would allow someone to make an attribute/SIEGE check to spot off of their intelligence, if it was better or prime, over wisdom but I like to keep things simple myself. To each their own, though - just have fun!
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

[anonymous]

Depends what sort of spotting it is. Wis or Int is more applicable to situations where something's been deliberately hidden in order to deceive. Con is more applicable if it's simply a matter of acuity of senses, such as hearing a twig snap behind you or seeing the masts of a ship on the horizon.

[Julian Grimm]

Here's mine: All characters have a detect skill for searching. Level may be added to it and it is based off and average of the Wis and Int bonus.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

[Lord Dynel]

All good methods, if you ask me. I do wonder if this will be addressed in the CKG.
_________________
LD's C&C creations - the witch, a half-ogre, skill and 0-level rules

Troll Lord wrote:
Lord D: you understand where I"m coming from.

[anglefish]

But how "wise" Rogues are out there to take advantage of their Listen checks?
It seems that in my current game, the rogue is slightly outclassed by familiars, animal compainions and Stunning Fist strikes. So , I've expaned Listen to a general perception check and use Intellegence as the Prime.

This way, my Rogue is the only one who can do it with his levels. Another reason to keep the sly dog around.

[Julian Grimm]

The way I do this is that 'detect' references only searching rooms for treasure and such. This way the Rogues trap and listen skills are not outshined. I'll admit, it's a bit wonky in execution but I haven't come up with a better way yet.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

[Galadrin]

Here's how I run spot checks:

If the players need to spot the hidden object (in order for game play to continue smoothly), I indicate "something" is there and let the players decide if they investigate and give them automatic detection if they do.

Otherwise, if the players describe an action that would unwittingly reveal the hidden item, I give them automatic detection. If they don't, and the item is of no significance to the plot, I move on.

I really don't see the need for dice rolls here (old-school thinking perhaps). Not that I am completely opposed to rolling dice, and maybe once in a while I will roll a random-shaped die and make an ad hoc judgement based on how high or low the roll is, but generally speaking dice are unnecessary.

I should mention, I played at Frank Mentzer's table last Saturday and he appeared to be doing the exact same thing in regards to a lot of stuff.

[anonymous]

In "old school" gaming, of course, there wouldn't be any rolling at all involved in a search, unless it did require sense acuity. There would be a description of what was hidden where and how and if the players said they were doing something that would find it, their characters would find it, otherwise they wouldn't.
"One of the bricks in the wall is loose, but the brick is 7' from the ground so a human-sized character must reach up to find it. If it is removed, it reveals a small leather bag containing a gold ring worth 450gp"

versus
"A gold ring worth 450gp is hidden (DL8) in the room."

[Julian Grimm]

Both work well and can be combined. Many players including myself have found ways around the classic methods up to and including 'blanket' room searches.

So something like this would be my answer:

Quote:
The desk has a hidden compartment in the main drawer. (CL 4 INT to find) Inside is a silver ring worth 350 gp.

So you have to have what you're searching plus the die roll to find it. But I play more game oriented where die rolls do matter. As well it adds in the bonus of not finding everything and others coming behind may. It makes rerunning dungeons worthwhile.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

[paladin2019]

Just to be clear, "DL4 INT" means a SIEGE check based on intelligence, with 4 added to the base of 12 or 18, correct?

(Sorry, I haven't had the opportunity to look through a C&C module except the one from the white box.)

[Julian Grimm]

Bingo except it should be CL4.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog