Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Roll Perception:
Dumpshock Forums > Discussion > Shadowrun
Moon-Hawk
This topic was booted out of another thread, but I'd like to see it explored.
If you only ask for perception tests when it's really important, you get the "Okay, I roll perception and draw my gun" scenario. You can mix things up by asking for unimportant perception tests, but then there's the possibility of players spending edge on an unimporant roll. Is this fair? Does this break the intended spirit of edge use? If it's not fair, how do you avoid it?

edit: Original thread was here.
DireRadiant
I just tell the player not to bother rolling edge.
sunnyside
Just to put my couple nuyens worth in again.

My biggest issue with having players roll perception is actually the time wasted in game. Sure you could have them roll perception all the time, causing them to stop with the knee jerk reactions, but it breaks up the flow of play.

Also perception test in general slow things up, especially if lots of them are involved.

Additionally I feel letting them know the outcome of their roll gives them too much info. If someone has hot dice and they throw a dozen hits they know if something was there they'd know about it.

Therefore before gametime I roll a whole bunch of dice and write down the results on a piece of paper. Then when I want general perception tests I decide on the order I'd have the players roll and just look along the page for the results. Then I work what they see into what I'm describing (for example when I describe an NPC I tell one of the players who got enough hits that they can tell that the NPCs arm is actually cybernetic).

I also use that if there is something they could miss. Like something hidden in a room or someone sneaking away.

I let them roll perception themselves if they declare the action and if it's something that will immediatly become apparant, like an ambush.

I find it works smoothly and well.
Moon-Hawk
edit: This was a reply to DireRadiant

Yeah, but then they know that, if they fail the test, that they aren't really missing anything important, and doesn't that kind of detract from the suspense?

I guess along with my original questions this could easily segue into talking about the same old problem of the player knowing that they rolled well or poorly and thus knowing that there's something there they aren't seeing, etc.
You can get around it by having the GM roll all the perception tests behind the screen, but that's a ton of work for the GM, plus you're back to the problem of how can the players use edge.

I don't so much have a singular question as I just want to exchange some ideas on perception tests, how you make them without giving away too much information, and how you incorporate edge into that scheme.
Nerf'd
I usually only ask for a perception test if there is something important to be perceived.

That being said, "important" can be interpreted as you wish. I'll usually allow people unconscious perception tests (rolling raw intuition on their behalf), but I interpret active perception as "I stop, take a moment, and really pay attention to the surroundings."

dionysus
On the question of wasting edge, I think that's the gamble any time you use edge. There's a 2.5 rule floating around the forums that's a good guide for people probabilistically inclined. Players should always be able to waste money, ammo, edge, etc. Being holed up in a corner, bleeding, hoping the evil sammie from hell stalking you wont hear the sound of you kicking yourself for wasting that point of edge on that stupid perception test an hour ago is (for me) part of what shadowrun is *about*. wink.gif
DireRadiant
If Perception tests are always important, then the players should have the choice to use edge.

There are other ways of using perception test, one common one I use to to ask all team members to roll, and the ones who meet a certain threshold receive relevant information. This makes it somewhat random who gets the info, rewards players who bought higher perception, and allows for IC motivations to determine how and when information is shared, which can have entertaining effects.

If the problem is always that a PC pulls a gun all the time, have a perception test be to see if they notice the Lone Star LMG armed drone is scanning them for weapons and failing... oops... guess it won't fail now.
Moon-Hawk
QUOTE (DireRadiant)
If the problem is always that a PC pulls a gun all the time, have a perception test be to see if they notice the Lone Star LMG armed drone is scanning them for weapons and failing... oops... guess it won't fail now.

Haha.
But the point is not the physical act of them drawing their gun, the point is them going "on alert" simply because you asked for a test, regardless of the result of said test.
Nerf'd
If they're on a run...and not on alert, then there is something very, very wrong with your players
Unarmed
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk)
QUOTE (DireRadiant @ Jun 28 2007, 12:40 PM)
If the problem is always that a PC pulls a gun all the time, have a perception test be to see if they notice the Lone Star LMG armed drone is scanning them for weapons and failing... oops... guess it won't fail now.

Haha.
But the point is not the physical act of them drawing their gun, the point is them going "on alert" simply because you asked for a test, regardless of the result of said test.

Well, really the best way to avoid that is to roll the perception tests yourself. I think sunnyside's method of pre-rolling works even better, because then the players don't even start to get paranoid because you're rolling something behind the screen.
Adarael
Oddly, I'm used to calling for perception tests as a player. In any situation where the character's senseware and ambush-sense should be going off - I.E. if I think I need to be on my guard - then I'll call for a perception test, roll it, and the gm will keep it in mind for any immediate threats or such.
sunnyside
The "pull a gun" is a bit of humor. That isn't typically what happens but they do tend to get on their guard, and check things out more thouroughly than they otherwise would. It can also stay with them subconsciously.

Another thing that applies if you let them roll their own tests. It's true that if you call a roll they don't know if you're screwing with them or not.

But they DO know that if you DIDN'T have them roll nothings up. No real way around that. Your face isn't going to be happy if a J lies right to his face and you don't even give him a roll for it. So if someone says something to the face and you don't have them roll it means the person believes they're telling the truth. Ditto on perception or any other test like that.


One other thing that really bugs me about letting players roll their own perception is that it really messes with what they might have otherwise done.

For example lets say that my players are walking to the meet down a dock. It is quite possible that the rigger will get a little paranoid and have a drone do a fly over to check for ambushes on the way. However if I called a perception test just before he thought of that he now almost can't call the drone in because everyone will assume he's being a little metagaming munchkin. He may even wonder if he would have thought of it on his own or if he is being a little metagaming munchkin. So I just spoiled a players clever action.

Therefore I feel having the GM queue or roll for the players is the best way to go.

As for edge I'll sometimes say things like "You guys all just failed a perception test, this ones kinda important" Note that I only do that when I think it'll make the story better.

And again I let them roll for things like seeing an ambush the half second before the lead starts flying, stuff where I don't have to worry about the metagame, I let them decide to use edge or not as they choose.
Lagomorph
I usually ask for perception based on user action.

"I look for the car" -Roll perception
"I try to read whats on the J's comm" -Roll Perception

Or if I think there is something they should notice but aren't thinking about it, I'll ask them to roll perception.

Once they realize that it's not always about combat and ambushes, they won't always be on guard.

Alternately, if thats too many rolls, just use the 4:1 conversion so that they can only roll for the vastly important things, and can generally get their average hits on unimportant things.
Dashifen
Maybe my players are a little slow, but I call for perception tests and they do a good job about not metagaming things. 'Course, usually someone sees or finds that which the characters needed to perceive and under most situations, that person then tells the rest of the group, so usually when I call for perception tests, as long as one succeeds, they all succeed.

I have, though, reminded people who act on information that they don't know yet that they can't do that at this time.
Rifleman
My thoughts on this are that tests for things like ambushes, snipers, and other actions of immediate importance should be rolled by the GM, but others, such as those for searching a house or for a stake out, where the players have a bit more time to question themselves, those are rolled by them.

But I admit, my players are able to go 'Ah, shoot' out of character and go 'There he goes!' in character after rolling a botch on a perception check. They may know they are after the wrong guy, but they are pretty good about not letting that stop them. So, this probably won't work for everyone. Still, I'll put it out there.

As far as the question of edge... It's tricky with the silent rolls for me. But I tend to play it that if a character rolls close to the edge of success or they succeed but not to the best of their ability, I'll ask that individual something to the tune of 'You get a funny feeling' and then allow them to roll edge if they desire. Otherwise... a funny feeling is just that. Not enough to tip them off in character but enough to justify their jumpiness.

Consequently, a botch on one such silent check caused a false-positive 'funny feeling', and because he didn't spend the edge (To cancel out the botch, Something I allow), one player nearly blew the head off of their willing extraction target who was sneaking out the back way to meet them. frown.gif

Mistwalker
I get my players to roll perception, and they decide if they want to spend edge on it. No regrets if it is a "wasted" roll or not.

Not all my rolls have to do with combat. They often roll to notice things that have nothing to do with the run, like noticing the cute girl giving them to "come hither" look, who is wearing the latest style, who is packing, drones loitering around rather than flying by, etc...

When I ask for the perception test, it only takes a couple of seconds, as everyone knows their numbers, but I do add in if it is visual, auditive, or regular.

I hand out info depending on who is in position to see or hear.

Seems to work for our group.

Edit: my players do not really like it when I roll perception for them, past experiences with other GMs who used that to railroad them.
Talia Invierno
Well, this was what I posted in that thread:
QUOTE
The GM could always accept the burning of the EG point in the spirit in which it is intended; and save that particular Perception roll for a near-future time when it really counts.

... since I'm of the random Perception roll school. Curious thing though: I always seem to be able to find something interesting on which to develop greater plot or red herring, so I suppose they aren't wasted Perception rolls after all. In fact, much of the time I found that my players were asking me if they could roll Perception. (But I don't see why they should have had to spend the EG point on something not really significant.)
Gargs454
Personally, as a player, if another player wants to use a point of Edge on a Perception test, then let them, even if its just a random test. Anytime you use Edge, you run the risk of wasting it.

For example, I've used Edge on a Dodge roll only to get no hits. Obviously that Edge point didn't help me. Additionally, I could use Edge to try to take down the opposing Sammy only when because of all his injuries, I only need a couple "hits". In either case, the Edge point pretty much gets wasted, but that's part of the risk inherent in the Edge attribute, sometimes, you just aren't lucky.

The other thing is, if you throw in enough random rolls, your players will likely start to prioritize their Edge uses. Personally, I don't think that Perception is really worth using Edge on anyway, unless maybe I'm getting peppered by a sniper that I can't find. I would rather use my Edge 9 times out of 10 on a roll to avoid damage to cause more damage, etc.
VivianDQ
I'm part of the just roll the results yourself and keep em quiet school but I can understand those who don't want to do that. In the campaign's I've done, former D&D gm by the way haven't run an sr campaign yet, just make it very clear that abusing ooc information is not allowed. When someone does something like the op mentioned, pulling their gun after being told to roll perception, its a clear abuse of information that their character isn't supposed to know. Just penalize them a point of karma whenever they pull that, it will stop real quick.
Tarantula
QUOTE (Gargs454)
Personally, as a player, if another player wants to use a point of Edge on a Perception test, then let them, even if its just a random test. Anytime you use Edge, you run the risk of wasting it.

For example, I've used Edge on a Dodge roll only to get no hits. Obviously that Edge point didn't help me. Additionally, I could use Edge to try to take down the opposing Sammy only when because of all his injuries, I only need a couple "hits". In either case, the Edge point pretty much gets wasted, but that's part of the risk inherent in the Edge attribute, sometimes, you just aren't lucky.

The other thing is, if you throw in enough random rolls, your players will likely start to prioritize their Edge uses. Personally, I don't think that Perception is really worth using Edge on anyway, unless maybe I'm getting peppered by a sniper that I can't find. I would rather use my Edge 9 times out of 10 on a roll to avoid damage to cause more damage, etc.

Your examples aren't really comparative though.

You used edge while trying to dodge and avoid getting shot.
Alternately, you used it while trying to shoot the sammie.

If you fail to dodge, you take damage, if you do dodge, you don't
If you fail to hit, he lives and might shoot you, if you hit him, he might not.

If you roll perception and fail on an unimportant test, you don't notice anything.
If you roll it and succeed on an unimportant test, again, you don't really notice anything still, because it was unimportant.

In your examples, there is a very notable bad outcome if you failed those dice rolls. Thus, your edge was not wasted to give you extra dice to try to avoid failing.

With unimportant perception rolls, nothing bad is going to happen from failing the roll, so using edge on one is a waste.

On important perception rolls, (such as noticing an ambush) success might mean you don't get ambushed, and failure means you do. In such a case, there is a bad outcome, and using edge on such a check would not be a waste.
Kyoto Kid
...I have copies of everyone's character in a database. This way I can keep the purpose of some rolls such as perception or reaction a bit more nebulous by saying "You, roll (x-many) dice".
DireRadiant
You mean my trick of calling for a perception test for no reason when the non interacting players look bored and not interested in isn't a good way to keep everyone's attention now and then?
DireRadiant
QUOTE (Lagomorph)
Alternately, if thats too many rolls, just use the 4:1 conversion so that they can only roll for the vastly important things, and can generally get their average hits on unimportant things.

That's a good one, if you don't want them to roll edge, just doing the buying hits will work.

e.g. instead of asking for a perception roll, just ask who has a visual perception dice pool of 12 or better.

Better perception is important, but the player will recognize using edge for this probably isn't critical.
Buster
I like GMs who get a copy of our character sheets and make secret rolls behind the screen (or on their laptop). That way we have no idea of what he's rolling or even when he's rolling. I had one DM that would compulsively roll dice when he was bored, so we never knew if we were about to be ambushed or if he was just twitchy.
Gargs454
Tarantula: Fair enough, though I suppose if we thought hard enough we could likely find comparable examples. I guess part of my reasoning is just that I personally don't think the perception roll is important enough to use edge on to begin with, which might of course make me a little bit biased.

As for your example of a really good roll on an unimportant perception roll though, the GM can, and in this case should, always come up with something for you to have noticed. For instance, you could see the drone that is hovering near the building a block and half away. Whether this drone is monitoring the group, or just monitoring the building a block and a half away remains to be seen. This at least keeps the players from knowing that the roll was definitely unimportant.

Heck, if the GM is really feeling bad about it, he can even incorporate this drone into the adventure. Maybe now the drone is associated with their mission (i.e. monitoring the warehouse they are about to infiltrate from afar) and the players actions toward the drone will either a) make life easier for them once inside or b) alert security to the fact that something is about to go down now that their drone has been taken out etc.

Perhaps even better could be that the drone is completely unrelated to what the PC's are doing but if they a) take the drone out, they annoy the Corp that was using the drone and now the corp wants to find out who did it, or b) taking out the drone allows another group of runners to succeed on a mission against the other building and now a new can of worms has opened up, or c) by ignoring the drone, the PC's have now let themselves be recorded entering the warehouse they were actually targetting and they are now being blackmailed, etc. In these examples, the completely random "unimportant" perception test has now spawned a new adventure.

In any event, I don't think that there is really any right way or wrong way to handle it. If the players don't abuse the perception tests (i.e. no "I pull my gun as I'm looking around.") then you really don't have to worry too much about making random rolls. The most important thing is that the everyone has fun, so if the random rolls slow down your game and the PCs don't abuse the important tests, then do away with the random rolls.
Demon_Bob
Just an idea. How about asking the players to roll perception when none is really needed and then keeping track of the hits untill something does pop-up. That way you can know if the characters spot something, any edge rolled might not be wasted for a bogus roll, and players don't have the chance to say, "Hey we all failed out perception roll. Perhaps we should search the area?"
Pendaric
Compulsively rolling dice, asking for 'false' rolls, rolling for your players and on some occassions out right lying to your players are tried and true ref techniques.
In SR3 the classic was, "Do I get Alertness for this roll?"
Answer yes. All the time. That way they never know if someone is sneaking up on them or picking their pocket unless they pass the roll.
Kyoto Kid
QUOTE (Buster)
I had one DM that would compulsively roll dice when he was bored, so we never knew if we were about to be ambushed or if he was just twitchy.

...you weren't in my old Space Opera campaign by chance?. While the players were sitting there talking things over amongst themselves I would pick up some dice, roll them, then look around at the group occasionally raising an eyebrow. I would follow this by making it appear I was "writing" something down on the notepad I had behind the screen (actually, I was just doodling).

Man they became a paranoid lot vegm.gif

toturi
Multi Tasking + 22+ Perception Dice = I'm always Observing in Detail unless otherwise stated and with 22 dice, I got 16 dice even in Full Darkness. Ambush? What be that? You will tell me everything that is relevant, or you can keep coming up with unimportant minutae that my PC will Inituitively filter out anyway.
hyzmarca
You could require that players determine when to make perception tests and simply assume that they aren't paying attention when they don't. Or, you could go the route of making secret team perception rolls every now and then and just don't tall your players what the rolls are about.
Rotbart van Dainig
QUOTE (hyzmarca)
You could require that players determine when to make perception tests and simply assume that they aren't paying attention when they don't.

That's a great way of making them leave.
Slash_Thompson
or of bogging your game down as they make another perception test before and after every single action they or any npc takes.
eidolon
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk)
I don't so much have a singular question as I just want to exchange some ideas on perception tests, how you make them without giving away too much information, and how you incorporate edge into that scheme.

Can't help on edge, but in answer to the rest of this question:

Easy, have players that aren't metagaming their asses off every five seconds.

Perception test results dictate whether the characters know/see/hear/smell/taste that something is up. If they fail, and the player tries to take some sort of action that would have been the product of a success, tell them to knock that lame crap the fuck off.

Then drop a cow on them. wink.gif
Ravor
I don't know, personally I just tend to use the 'buy hits' rule as a guideline for what the Runners tend to notice if they aren't playing close attention to something.

Of course, once in a while I call for a roll either real or imagined, and if they spend Edge on a useless roll then that's just hard luck, but most of the time my players know better then to spend Edge when I call for a Perception Test unless they Glitch.

It's not perfect by any means, but it works for my group.
Moon-Hawk
QUOTE (eidolon)
Easy, have players that aren't metagaming their asses off every five seconds.

Perception test results dictate whether the characters know/see/hear/smell/taste that something is up. If they fail, and the player tries to take some sort of action that would have been the product of a success, tell them to knock that lame crap the fuck off.

No disrespect man, but you and a lot of other people are missing my point. I think the way I phrased the issue confused things a bit; sorry about that.

It's not about the character literally drawing a gun, or the character taking any sort of action at all.
It's about the players knowing that something is up. If they're good players, they won't metagame and act based on that knowledge. You're absolutely right. I have generally been blessed with very good players who are great at not metagaming. In fact it really isn't something I've had a problem with, but it came up in another thread and seemed interesting. And the edge thing is something I'm not quite sure how to handle.

But as great as my players are, no one can completely ignore something once it is known, and at the very least it affects the mood at the table.

It's not about character actions, and it's not about character knowledge. Non-metagaming takes care of that just fine. It's about player knowledge, and the unavoidable and subconscious effects.
Rifleman
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk @ Jun 29 2007, 01:04 PM)
It's not about character actions, and it's not about character knowledge.  Non-metagaming takes care of that just fine.  It's about player knowledge, and the unavoidable and subconscious effects.

The only way to stop that is to do what many of us have advised, which is to roll in secret or to just use the 'buy hits' rule.

If you ask for a roll, it will cause concern. If they fail, they know they did. The only way out therefore is if there is no roll. at least no roll for the PC to see.
hyzmarca
Make secret rolls for them, that's the best way to keep them in the dark. I think that its pretty silly to spend edge on a routine perception test. I'd let them do so if they were intentionally observing, but not for a routine perception test. Just use the team perception test rules (highest pool, +1 for every member of the team, -2 penalty for not actually looking for anything in particular).
Rotbart van Dainig
Routine tests don't need rolls - they are just bought.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Dumpshock Forums © 2001-2012