The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

How do you like to handle sensory perception?
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters -> How do you like to handle sensory perception? Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 7701
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
For you, is it merely because the D6 rules don't aready provide for what's at issue in this thread (passive perception)? Or do you feel that RPGs (or just Star Wars characters) should never be able to have higher-than-attribute general awareness?

If I converted a d20 character with max ranks in spot, and skill emphasis, etc, how would you handle that from a character concept perspective?

Like garhkal I'm in the camp of base Perception being passive awareness and the Search skill being active. Unlike garhkal I don't allow attributes to be raised after play begins. I've addressed some of this in my last post above.

If a character concept is all maxed out in awareness abilities they would probably start with a very high Perception or starters. The only real problem comes in if the character concept is that the character is supposed to be extremely socially inept while at the same time extremely physically aware.
Although I wouldn't even do a straight conversion from d20, there are always special abilities and advantages that could be put into place to fine tune a D6 character concept.

Anyway I just thought I'd mention it in case you didn't see my last post above. If you are specifically interested in garhkal's answer and not mine, that's ok. I post so much here I am quite used to half my posts being ignored. Feel free to ignore this one.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12940
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
garhkal wrote:
If you want a better perception, increase the attribute.

We should do the same with Dodge. If you’re deliberately Dodging an attack, you get to roll Dodge, but if you’re just “passively” Dodging (reacting to an attack while doing something else), you default to your Dexterity Attribute. Want to get better at Dodging unexpected attacks? You’ll have to increase your Dex Attribute.


Reacting is not a passive dodge though.

Naaman wrote:

How do you handle this in D&D? I'm not familiar with AD&D, but I know 3.x has separate search and spot skills, as well as defaulting to wisdom for characters "untrained" in the skill.

For you, is it merely because the D6 rules don't aready provide for what's at issue in this thread (passive perception)? Or do you feel that RPGs (or just Star Wars characters) should never be able to have higher-than-attribute general awareness?

If I converted a d20 character with max ranks in spot, and skill emphasis, etc, how would you handle that from a character concept perspective?


I have a Per attribute that is an average of their Int and Wis..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3030

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
Like garhkal I'm in the camp of base Perception being passive awareness and the Search skill being active. Unlike garhkal I don't allow attributes to be raised after play begins. I've addressed some of this in my last post above.


What's the reason you don't allow attribute raises? Is it to promote deliberate thought/consideration when designing a character?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3030

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
CRMcNeill wrote:
garhkal wrote:
If you want a better perception, increase the attribute.

We should do the same with Dodge. If you’re deliberately Dodging an attack, you get to roll Dodge, but if you’re just “passively” Dodging (reacting to an attack while doing something else), you default to your Dexterity Attribute. Want to get better at Dodging unexpected attacks? You’ll have to increase your Dex Attribute.


Reacting is not a passive dodge though.

Naaman wrote:

How do you handle this in D&D? I'm not familiar with AD&D, but I know 3.x has separate search and spot skills, as well as defaulting to wisdom for characters "untrained" in the skill.

For you, is it merely because the D6 rules don't aready provide for what's at issue in this thread (passive perception)? Or do you feel that RPGs (or just Star Wars characters) should never be able to have higher-than-attribute general awareness?

If I converted a d20 character with max ranks in spot, and skill emphasis, etc, how would you handle that from a character concept perspective?


I have a Per attribute that is an average of their Int and Wis..


Haha! So there are no skills attached to it? Do you have a spot skill?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 14042
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
Reacting is not a passive dodge though.

But it is, in a way. When someone attacks you, you react to that attack by dodging it. You can’t dodge if there is no attack (I mean, you could, but you’d look pretty silly).

Raven’s got a fair point in his quote; per WEG, you can use either Perception or Search to spot things, and there doesn’t seem to be a distinction between passive and active usage. Based on that, I’d probably throw out my proposed (A) Alertness skill and allow PCs to use Search for both types, subject to appropriate MAPs.

And maybe a variation on the D6 Space Strength Damage rule where characters rolling initiative can roll either Perception or 1/2 their Search dice.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 7701
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:
Whill wrote:
Like garhkal I'm in the camp of base Perception being passive awareness and the Search skill being active. Unlike garhkal I don't allow attributes to be raised after play begins. I've addressed some of this in my last post above.

What's the reason you don't allow attribute raises? Is it to promote deliberate thought/consideration when designing a character?

That's one of several reasons.

RAW for improving attributes is severely broken in multiple ways. The CP cost and time taken is variable due to rolling to see if it increases, with some CPs spent and some lost if unsuccessful (but you can keep trying). And since attribute improvement also improves every improved skill underneath it by the same amount, attribute value varies per attribute (by the number of skills and also the particular skill values the character has), but this is not at all reflected in RAW.

I also tossed RAW attribute dice calculation for alien PCs (typical attribute dice total +6D. I replaced it with a simpler rule: All PCs have exactly 18D in attributes regardless of species. Not all species evolve equally and there is no attempt to balance species to each other. I just balance PCs with each other. (I also make an effort to balance PC special abilities to each other so PCs of some less specially able species get bonus skill dice.) And there is no effort made to balance NPCs to each other or PCs. NPCs can be all over the place, including even with a wide range of total attribute values (some having even more than 18D).

Skills advance as the character gains experience, and skills have a cost. I don't feel attributes and skills can be equated very easily through an exchange rate, which is why I also dislike D6 Space's point buy system (that puts an attribute as 4 times the cost of a skill), and the Star Wars rules for droid character creation that even exchange skill and attribute dice.

I've never had a PC that adventured for more than four years of in-game time so attribute/skill atrophy or gain is just not important on the time scales of my campaigns. The rules for improving skills are sufficient for character growth. Improving attributes just doesn't seem necessary for the system. I feel the game system is simpler and more balanced if all PCs have exactly 18D in attributes, no more, no less.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12940
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 1:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Naaman wrote:

Haha! So there are no skills attached to it? Do you have a spot skill?


For 2e, no there's no spot skill.. Though in a way it is via the 'locate secret doors' chance, of 1 in 6 for non-elves..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 7701
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Raven's got a fair point in his quote; per WEG, you can use either Perception or Search to spot things, and there doesn’t seem to be a distinction between passive and active usage. Based on that, I’d probably throw out my proposed (A) Alertness skill and allow PCs to use Search for both types, subject to appropriate MAPs.

I didn't think RAW interpretation was in question here. In all variations of 1e and Blue Vader 2e, passive awareness was in base Perception while active awareness was in Search. R&E was where they added passive awareness to the Search skill. Please see my post earlier in the thread where I speculated about the reason for the change, break down what is lost and gained by the change, and explain why I kept the old way but added an advantage to gain some passive awareness above base attribute without a skill.

MAPs sometimes being factor is a good point. Even for characters with the same passive and active awareness ability, active is usually a focused activity while passive could be while doing something else. But if characters are just drinking a beer in a cantina and waiting on a contact, I'm not going to MAP their Perception check to overhear a discussion at another table. It will have a difficulty based on the noise level, etc. Per RAW, even a quick active look around the room is a free action in many situations anyway.

CRMcNeill wrote:
And maybe a variation on the D6 Space Strength Damage rule where characters rolling initiative can roll either Perception or 1/2 their Search dice.

I really like that! I'm going to keep passive being attribute and my optional Awareness advantage, but let all characters be able to use 1/2 Search for passive awareness if it would be advantageous to do so. That really helps character concepts of being physically aware but not socially aware. A PC might could start with Perception 2D and Search 4D. They could eventually raise their Search to 5D, and 1/2 of 5D is better than 2D. With or without the Awareness advantage which gives an additional +2 either way. Thanks for the idea!
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Director of Engineering


Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 14042
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 6:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
I didn't think RAW interpretation was in question here. In all variations of 1e and Blue Vader 2e, passive awareness was in base Perception while active awareness was in Search.

After taking some time to consider it, I like the 2R&E version best as it is more in-line with the RAW w/r/t skills and attributes, where the player defaults to the attribute if they don't make the effort to improve the appropriate skill.

Quote:
MAPs sometimes being factor is a good point. Even for characters with the same passive and active awareness ability, active is usually a focused activity while passive could be while doing something else. But if characters are just drinking a beer in a cantina and waiting on a contact, I'm not going to MAP their Perception check to overhear a discussion at another table. It will have a difficulty based on the noise level, etc. Per RAW, even a quick active look around the room is a free action in many situations anyway.

I'd say a full Search roll is for when you're obviously looking around the room for something. If you're otherwise preoccupied, even if just casually sitting at a table drinking your lum, I'd say a 1D or 2D MAP penalty is appropriate.

Quote:
Thanks for the idea!

Glad to be of service.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
RAW for improving attributes is severely broken in multiple ways. The CP cost and time taken is variable due to rolling to see if it increases, with some CPs spent and some lost if unsuccessful (but you can keep trying).
If one's concern was primarily the lost CPs, one fix would be to require repetition of the time, but no extra CP cost. That maintains the increasing difficulty for raising stats as one approaches (or even exceeds) species maximum, while not increasing character point costs due to bad die rolling.

Quote:
And since attribute improvement also improves every improved skill underneath it by the same amount, attribute value varies per attribute (by the number of skills and also the particular skill values the character has), but this is not at all reflected in RAW.
I see this as more of a feature not a bug. When deciding whether or not to raise an attribute, I compare the CP cost of the attribute raise vs. the CP cost of raising all the relevant (to that character) skills under that attribute, then factor in the difficulty of the die roll. Unless the cost benefit ratio looks better for the stat raise, I continue to focus on raising the skills instead of the attribute.

Quote:
...I also dislike...the Star Wars rules for droid character creation that even exchange skill and attribute dice.
Yeah the droid PC creation rules are completely broken.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12940
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Tue May 28, 2019 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:

Quote:
And since attribute improvement also improves every improved skill underneath it by the same amount, attribute value varies per attribute (by the number of skills and also the particular skill values the character has), but this is not at all reflected in RAW.
I see this as more of a feature not a bug. When deciding whether or not to raise an attribute, I compare the CP cost of the attribute raise vs. the CP cost of raising all the relevant (to that character) skills under that attribute, then factor in the difficulty of the die roll. Unless the cost benefit ratio looks better for the stat raise, I continue to focus on raising the skills instead of the attribute..


I also see that as a feature, not a bug.. I've often (except str) computed it up, and in many cases, it was more worthwhile, to go 4-5 sessions, bankroll the CP, and raise Dex or Know or Per, than to spend it all raising individual skills.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0