Failed perception checks should not be shown.

[ChentallyMallenged1]

I hate it when my Character fails a perception check for a trap. Not because they failed it but because I know they failed it. If a character fails their perception check they should not know that they failed it. When you put on the screen that they failed it I then know that I missed something and can just load the last save and redo that part until they pass it.

[Dragon Master]

I don't mind the failed perception checks being shown.

It's no different when in the tabletop game the DM asks you to roll a perception check and everyone at the table fails so the DM is like, the scenery is nice.

[War Maiden]

Originally posted by rehixjr:

I hate it when my Character fails a perception check for a trap. Not because they failed it but because I know they failed it. If a character fails their perception check they should not know that they failed it. When you put on the screen that they failed it I then know that I missed something and can just load the last save and redo that part until they pass it.

This is the first time I have ever heard of anyone actually not wanting a notification of a failed check. I certainly cannot see the logic behind one wanting to just 'pass it by' without knowing something was missed. However, not many people seem to know this, but you can leave the area, do a long rest, return to that same area and the failed check will re-attempt the check to see if you will pass it.

I certainly am not a fan of missing things, so for me, the small notification is fine, as it is.

[Aldain]

...Even in tabletop you have knowledge that you failed a perception check, if a DM asks for one, everyone rolls it and then just moves on you know you all failed it.

Not showing failed perception checks will just have the possibility of showing the wrong impression to players that the game is insanely shallow if they somehow bungle every perception roll.

[Jack Hawklight]

Yeah, I'd want to know. I remember one occasion where all characters failed the check. I summoned my raven and he saw it.

[War Maiden]

Originally posted by Funniesthobo:

Yeah, I'd want to know. I remember one occasion where all characters failed the check. I summoned my raven and he saw it.

Smart workaround!

[Indure]

Pathfinder: Kingmaker has hidden checks so I've experience both. I would prefer a notification on a fail. In Pathfinder there was a couple of important things you could miss, even some quests not being completable if you failed a perception check. Although some of that just comes down to poor design choices.

[Jack Hawklight]

Originally posted by War Maiden:

Originally posted by Funniesthobo:

Yeah, I'd want to know. I remember one occasion where all characters failed the check. I summoned my raven and he saw it.

Smart workaround!

Thanks. I was pretty glad about it too as it was for the lever bypassing the moon puzzle. I do not want to ever have to do the moon puzzle lol.

[War Maiden]

Originally posted by Funniesthobo:

Originally posted by War Maiden:

Smart workaround!

Thanks. I was pretty glad about it too as it was for the lever bypassing the moon puzzle. I do not want to ever have to do the moon puzzle lol.

Good on you. Yes, I did it once, and it was very time consuming. The kicker was, when I got all the pieces aligned it still wouldn't open. Go figure. So I just loaded the previous save before I did the passive check for the pull chain lever and reloaded it till I passed it. Admittedly, at the time, the passive check on the pull chain lever was a little buggy, so even the reloads took like 6-8 minutes of do-overs.

[RealDealBreaker]

Originally posted by Dragon Master:

I don't mind the failed perception checks being shown.

It's no different when in the tabletop game the DM asks you to roll a perception check and everyone at the table fails so the DM is like, the scenery is nice.

strictly speaking, in 5e a DM shouldn't be asking for a perception check unless the player does something/says something that indicates they are making a special effort to look/listen. Walking into a room or by a secret door is supposed to be handled by passive perception.

[Dragon Master]

Originally posted by RealDealBreaker:

Originally posted by Dragon Master:

I don't mind the failed perception checks being shown.

It's no different when in the tabletop game the DM asks you to roll a perception check and everyone at the table fails so the DM is like, the scenery is nice.

strictly speaking, in 5e a DM shouldn't be asking for a perception check unless the player does something/says something that indicates they are making a special effort to look/listen. Walking into a room or by a secret door is supposed to be handled by passive perception.

The DM could just as easily ask them what their passive perception checks are. When that happens the players immediately know a perception check is being made.

I do a combination of both. Asking for perception and using their passive perception, depending on the situation.

[Dragon Master]

Good thing this topic is in the suggestions and feedback. All I can say is is that I'm perfectly fine with it as it stands and it doesn't break my immersion, but I can only speak for myself.

[dolby]

This was already discussed abit back anyway, characters make sounds clues most of the time... i wish for more of that. SO even if the perception checks icone wouldn't show you would still know something is at foot. Before you stap on the trap that is.

So maybe the best middle ground would be have those and have option to toggle - turn off the perception check icones in settings... They cound even do subtle sound clues on a roll with hidden DC based on you percation roll.

But i reckon it's abit late to implmant this kind of stuff at this stage...

[Jack Hawklight]

Originally posted by dolby:

This was already discussed abit back anyway, characters make sounds clues most of the time... i wish for more of that. SO even if the perception checks icone wouldn't show you would still know something is at foot. Before you stap on the trap that is.

So maybe the best middle ground would be have those and have option to toggle - turn off the perception check icones in settings... They cound even do subtle sound clues on a roll with hidden DC based on you percation roll.

But i reckon it's abit late to implmant this kind of stuff at this stage...

I think you are right and the option to turn them on or off would placate everyone. Or rather I can't think of any reason it wouldn't (maybe others can). It is a fairly binary issue. People like them or they don't, so a simple toggle on/off option should make everyone happy.

[Jack Hawklight]

Originally posted by pandariuskairos:

Originally posted by Funniesthobo:

I think you are right and the option to turn them on or off would placate everyone. Or rather I can't think of any reason it wouldn't (maybe others can). It is a fairly binary issue. People like them or they don't, so a simple toggle on/off option should make everyone happy.

That's not quite sufficient. Yes, the toggle satisfies both those who want hidden checks as well as those who don't, but we also need an active search skill as well.

Well, we can't please everyone. Just kidding. Would the active check be used after you get the failed check notification or uncover things that passive checks wouldn't? Or both?

[Jack Hawklight]

Originally posted by pandariuskairos:

The active check is usable at all times. It's there so that when you fail hidden checks (which are hidden, so you don't even know that you failed them) you still have a chance at finding whatever might be there, should you take the time to actively search.

The difference between an active and a passive check is that the passive check relies on stuff the player notices as they go about their business anyway, while the active check is a choice to do something and takes time (I suggest a six second period where the character actually searches, making them unavailable to do anything else).

The point is not to lock the player out from finding stuff, but rather to give them a system where if they are hasty (and don't search everywhere) and/or don't have a high passive perception then they might skip over useful stuff...but if they are more meticulous (and take the time to actively search) they could find stuff that their passive perception checks missed.

The current implementation also promotes save scumming. When I see a failed roll, I just reload.

If the check was hidden, I might not even think to reload at all because I have no idea I just failed a roll - BUT I could, should I choose, search ANY area at any time.

Makes sense to me. More options is usually better.