Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Ulrich Haupt <sandman@****.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 10:30:50 +0100
Gurth wrote:
<snip>
> > Make that perception check in secret as a GM roll.
>
> For random checks, just throw a couple of dice a few times, preferably at
> a time when they might notice something (when entering a room, for exampl)
> and then continue the game without saying anything about the "test's"
> results.

I'd just like to know - do you roll for each player / NPC a
perception test or do make just one roll for the whole group?

Sandman
Message no. 2
From: Rook <rook@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 13:35:17 -0800
> > > Make that perception check in secret as a GM roll.
> >
> > For random checks, just throw a couple of dice a few times, preferably at
> > a time when they might notice something (when entering a room, for exampl)
> > and then continue the game without saying anything about the "test's"
> > results.
>
> I'd just like to know - do you roll for each player / NPC a
> perception test or do make just one roll for the whole group?

You know, ussually when a GM makes a perception check they have
something they want or need the PC's to notice.

Given that a better approach might be to just roll a dice to see which
person notices it.

Or for more complexity compare the ratio of everyone's perception
abilities, and roll a dice with that many sides...
So if there are two PC's present and one has a 4 perception and the
other a 6,
roll a dice. On a 1-2 the low guy sees it first, on a 3-5 the high guy,
on a 6 both. Or whatever. Admitidly not a perfect system.

Perception is really an ability the GM is best 'winging' diceless.
Since you should make sure they see what you want them to.
Now and then for things like ambushes you might want to let them roll.
Unless you need the ambush to suceed or fail.
Message no. 3
From: Justin Elliott <justin.elliott@********.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 10:57:24 +1300
> You know, ussually when a GM makes a perception check they have
>something they want or need the PC's to notice.


I guess this comes down to GMing style. For example my style is pretty much
an open style or free style. I go in with a basic knowledge of the run
(NPC's, Target, etc ) and basically wing it from there. So if my players
miss something I can always make it reappear somewhere else, or make sure
there is they can get the info from another source.

On the other hand I guess if you run a more "rigid" style, your statement
above would be correct.

Justin.
Message no. 4
From: Rook <rook@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 14:04:57 -0800
> > You know, ussually when a GM makes a perception check they have
> >something they want or need the PC's to notice.
>
> I guess this comes down to GMing style. For example my style is pretty much
> an open style or free style. I go in with a basic knowledge of the run
> (NPC's, Target, etc ) and basically wing it from there. So if my players
> miss something I can always make it reappear somewhere else, or make sure
> there is they can get the info from another source.
>
> On the other hand I guess if you run a more "rigid" style, your statement
> above would be correct.

Actually I run completely freeform. If something occurs of note though,
why should I bother having it 'occur' if no player notices it? So I
rarely deal with perception checks. I describe the world the PC's are
encountering and fill in/update outside events as needed.
I do a very drama/story oriented style. Ussually I throw a basket full
of events at my players and let them rumage through it. The game is
mostly told by them. If a GM is bothering with perception checks to me
it feels as if they are up to something.
The only time I bother with perception is when I know something is just
about to happen and I want to give them a chance to notice it or react
to it before it does.

--
Rook ¿Õ ¿ë ±â WebRPG TownHall Magistrate
townhall.webrpg.com <0){{{{><
__ Super WebRing http://orion.supersoldiers.com/heroes/webring.html
/.)\ Nothing vast enters the life of mortals without a curse.
\(@/ http://www.infinex.com/~rook/SH/ Super Hero RPG Site
Message no. 5
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 11:23:38 +0100
According to Ulrich Haupt, at 10:30 on 26 Nov 98, the word on
the street was...

> > For random checks, just throw a couple of dice a few times, preferably at
> > a time when they might notice something (when entering a room, for exampl)
> > and then continue the game without saying anything about the "test's"
> > results.
>
> I'd just like to know - do you roll for each player / NPC a
> perception test or do make just one roll for the whole group?

That doesn't matter, does it? The GM just throws some dice behind the GM
screen, looks at them, and then says or does nothing with the results.
However, if you want to really make the players think you're rolling a
Perception test, roll some dice (how many doesn't matter, as long as the
players can hear them roll) for each PC who walks into the room.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Stay in.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 6
From: Rune Fostervoll <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 14:36:36 GMT
A quick question..

How do you guys handle karma use in perception rolls?

In most cases it's fairly obvious wether it's a good idea to spend karma or
not, but perception tests isn't one of them.

The two extremes I can think of is either let them reroll any perception test
without letting them know which are important or not and not allowing karma to
be spent after they hear the result, OR let them spend karma after hearing the
result of the test. Somewhere in between is warning them of what tests are
immediately, physically dangerous.

Regards,
Fade

--

ADVICE, n. The smallest current coin.
-Ambrose Bierce
Message no. 7
From: Charles E Thul <cthul@****.COM>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 12:21:21 -0600
>How do you guys handle karma use in perception rolls?
>In most cases it's fairly obvious wether it's a good idea to spend
>karma or not, but perception tests isn't one of them.

The way I've handled things like that (including the Phys. Ad. power of
Danger Sense) is that I have the players allocate a certain number of
Karma Points to perception tests. i.e., when a session begins they
allocate 3 points to perception tests/Danger Sense. This allows me to do
some rerolls for them on important perception tests without them knowing
which tests are important. This could also be applied to tests where one
Initiate has a chance of breaking another's masking, since those tests
are done secretly, the initiate character could then allocate a few Karma
points to rerolls for that test.

___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 8
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: perception rolls (was: Something serious..)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 17:29:27 EST
Fade wrote this, but I was still trying to stay awake long enough to tell my
Gazebo story... ;)

> >How do you guys handle karma use in perception rolls?
> >In most cases it's fairly obvious wether it's a good idea to spend
> >karma or not, but perception tests isn't one of them.

When it comes to reroll Karma, and it is a perception test that we give the
player no target number for (the mystery spotting of a necessary or paranoid
detail), we have the player select a target number of their own choice (4, 9,
20, etc...). They then perform the rerolls against that given target number.

The dice rolls that exist as of that final reroll (how ever many they have
performed) is as things stand. Such that, let's say Perry (character name
Hive) was asked to have Hive make a perception test, but Mike B. doesn't give
him a target number. He states he's going to reroll twice for success, and
Mike B. asks him what reroll target number he's going to shoot for. Perry
decides (given a mixture of gut instinct and consideration for what is going
on within the game both ATM and overall) to go for a "9". He rolls his dice.

The first time he gets' one success (an 11), set's it aside, then rerolls the
remaining 8 dice. The second time he get's no additional successes. The
third roll of the dice (the second actual reroll), he gets' 2 more successes
(a 9 and a 22). But he also get's whatever else the dice turned up ... in
this case, bringing his total dice to ...

22, 11, 9, 8, 7, 4, 4, 4, 2, 1, 1

That becomes the final perception test for the purposes of the request that
Mike B. has asked of him. Perry should be happy in this case, for Mike had
decided that the target was an "8", and thus he actually got 4 successes, a
benefit to his character.

-K (and yes, Hive really does have an 11 (or more???) Intel...Otaku
Deckers........)

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about perception rolls (was: Something serious..), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!