Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Mar 2021
T
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
T
Joined: Mar 2021
*walks into room.
*random die appears
*"Perception check failed"
Great, now I know there's a trap right there. I am getting the exact same outcome of failing the check that I would have from passing the check.

*in conversation
*npc talking
*"Perception check failed" appears on screen.
*Oh, so this npc just pulled some slight of hand on me. I now know they either pickpocketed or played some kinda trick, even though I'm not supposed to know. In this example I don't get the exact same effect as passing the check, but the main difference between passing and failing is supposed to be noticing vs not noticing that something happened, and I've noticed both ways.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
You as a player do ...
Your character didnt ...

That is actual difference between noticing and not noticing. wink


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Aug 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
You as a player do ...
Your character didnt ...

That is actual difference between noticing and not noticing. wink
So... you won't walk the rest of your party where the first PC failed their Perception check because the character doesn't know? smile

Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
*walks into room.
*random die appears
*"Perception check failed"
Great, now I know there's a trap right there. I am getting the exact same outcome of failing the check that I would have from passing the check.

*in conversation
*npc talking
*"Perception check failed" appears on screen.
*Oh, so this npc just pulled some slight of hand on me. I now know they either pickpocketed or played some kinda trick, even though I'm not supposed to know. In this example I don't get the exact same effect as passing the check, but the main difference between passing and failing is supposed to be noticing vs not noticing that something happened, and I've noticed both ways.
Well it's a perception check, not a passive perception check. There's a key difference between the two whether the game automatically rolls for you or not.

Typically you should be able to follow up with an investigation check or another perception check. It's just odd that true passive perception isn't in the game, when Divinity: Original Sin 2 had wits acting as passive perception should.

Joined: Mar 2021
T
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
T
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by DragonSnooz
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
*walks into room.
*random die appears
*"Perception check failed"
Great, now I know there's a trap right there. I am getting the exact same outcome of failing the check that I would have from passing the check.

*in conversation
*npc talking
*"Perception check failed" appears on screen.
*Oh, so this npc just pulled some slight of hand on me. I now know they either pickpocketed or played some kinda trick, even though I'm not supposed to know. In this example I don't get the exact same effect as passing the check, but the main difference between passing and failing is supposed to be noticing vs not noticing that something happened, and I've noticed both ways.
Well it's a perception check, not a passive perception check. There's a key difference between the two whether the game automatically rolls for you or not.

Typically you should be able to follow up with an investigation check or another perception check. It's just odd that true passive perception isn't in the game, when Divinity: Original Sin 2 had wits acting as passive perception should.

It is absolutely passive perception.
They key, defining difference between passive and active isn't the dice roll, it's whether or not you manually request it.
If I didn't wilfully push a button to check for traps as I walked into a room, any detection I pass or fail was passive. If I didn't press a button labeled "I don't trust this npc and want to intentionally watch for them to do something or giveaways" any insight or noticed act was passive. There are dialogue moments that create active checks, and they could very well give fitting classes actions to actively check for traps. If they do give a skill like that to anyone, it will naturally be even more important to hide the passive checks.

It would be better, yes, if the passive check was merely "Is their passive perception stat at X? Yes sees it, no doesn't." but even with a roll it's still a passive check, and should therefor be hidden on failure. It's like the dm rolling for you, behind the barrier, without you even hearing the dice.
And no, you shouldn't be able to follow up with another investigation or perception check. You already failed to notice anything, so you have no reason to think there's anything to notice. Ever been in a DnD group where one person rolls poorly when making an active attempt to check for traps, says there aren't any, then another player who's metagaming by reacting to the poor roll says "I don't trust them this time, so I want to check too."? Nobody likes that player, and they get told to stop metagaming.

Last edited by The Old Soul; 06/03/21 04:01 AM.
Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
Originally Posted by DragonSnooz
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
*walks into room.
*random die appears
*"Perception check failed"
Great, now I know there's a trap right there. I am getting the exact same outcome of failing the check that I would have from passing the check.

*in conversation
*npc talking
*"Perception check failed" appears on screen.
*Oh, so this npc just pulled some slight of hand on me. I now know they either pickpocketed or played some kinda trick, even though I'm not supposed to know. In this example I don't get the exact same effect as passing the check, but the main difference between passing and failing is supposed to be noticing vs not noticing that something happened, and I've noticed both ways.
Well it's a perception check, not a passive perception check. There's a key difference between the two whether the game automatically rolls for you or not.

Typically you should be able to follow up with an investigation check or another perception check. It's just odd that true passive perception isn't in the game, when Divinity: Original Sin 2 had wits acting as passive perception should.

It is absolutely passive perception.
They key, defining difference between passive and active isn't the dice roll, it's whether or not you manually request it.
If I didn't wilfully push a button to check for traps as I walked into a room, any detection I pass or fail was passive. If I didn't press a button labeled "I don't trust this npc and want to intentionally watch for them to do something or giveaways" any insight or noticed act was passive. There are dialogue moments that create active checks, and they could very well give fitting classes actions to actively check for traps. If they do give a skill like that to anyone, it will naturally be even more important to hide the passive checks.

It would be better, yes, if the passive check was merely "Is their passive perception stat at X? Yes sees it, no doesn't." but even with a roll it's still a passive check, and should therefor be hidden on failure. It's like the dm rolling for you, behind the barrier, without you even hearing the dice.
And no, you shouldn't be able to follow up with another investigation or perception check. You already failed to notice anything, so you have no reason to think there's anything to notice. Ever been in a DnD group where one person rolls poorly when making an active attempt to check for traps, says there aren't any, then another player who's metagaming by reacting to the poor roll says "I don't trust them this time, so I want to check too."? Nobody likes that player, and they get told to stop metagaming.


The difference is whether or not dice is rolled, Passive Checks. It's one of the most clearly defined rules in D&D.

Quote
A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls.

If dice are rolled it is an auto-roll, not passive perception. The perception roll is treated as an automated Group Check in Baldur's Gate 3.

Joined: Mar 2021
T
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
T
Joined: Mar 2021
If if is done manually, it is an active check. If it happens automatically, it is a passive check. That is the full determination of those labels. Anything said to try to explain your way out of calling something that happened automatically "passive" is blatant falsehood, no matter who it comes from, devs and WotC included. If you don't want it to be called a passive check, then it needs the player to manually initiate it with an intentionally used action.

Last edited by The Old Soul; 06/03/21 05:48 AM.
Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
Rules are rules. If dice are rolled it's an auto-roll. Passive checks are a specific mechanic similar to wits in D:OS2.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
100% agree.

1) You always know where secret things are.
2) When I know I missed a secret, I'm frustrated.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 06/03/21 07:50 AM.
Joined: Jan 2017
C
member
Offline
member
C
Joined: Jan 2017
It's a bit odd though. Would be extremely frustrating to skip the rogue checking the room because the wizard was one step in the wrong direction.

"Nope, for some reason that was your party's check"

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by 1varangian
So... you won't walk the rest of your party where the first PC failed their Perception check because the character doesn't know? smile
I totaly will ...
I see it as "something seem off around here, but i cant see anything ... would you people help me look out?" :P wink

You never know what have you missed ...
Especialy on first playthrough. It can be trap, it can be secret stash, it can be keyhole ... it can be some clue to quest.

Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 06/03/21 09:19 AM.

In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Aug 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Imagine the DM at the table go "There was a secret something... but you missed it!".

That's what BG3 is essentially doing.

Joined: Feb 2021
JoB Offline
Banned
Offline
Banned
Joined: Feb 2021
Semantic definitions are irrelevant.

I agree. Hiding the checks would be better. It would allow for more immersion and increase replayability.

Joined: Mar 2021
T
apprentice
OP Offline
apprentice
T
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by CamKitty
It's a bit odd though. Would be extremely frustrating to skip the rogue checking the room because the wizard was one step in the wrong direction.

"Nope, for some reason that was your party's check"

That would be an active check dynamic, not a passive check dynamic.
And a group would presumably have the rogue (or perchance the monk/druid who likely have more wisdom and therefor possibly better perception) do the active check in the first place, not the wizard. It would then be the wizard who doesn't look at the rouge's bad roll and say "I want to do it too"

The passive check dynamic is when everybody walks into the room, nobody asks to roll, the dm either does hidden roles or just checks the passive stat of every party member, and if nobody passes nobody gets given *any* information. They don't know they missed something. If the wizard fails and the rogue passes the rogue gets told about the trap, but the group doesn't know the dm checked that the wizard failed first, the rogue could have been first.

Joined: Sep 2015
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2015
I agree that passive rolls to detect something should not be shown because the purpose of a failed check is that you did not notice something.

At this point I do not care about the official difinition of passive and I use it as most people do:
active = you select to do something, passive = you don´t have to select something


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Joined: Jan 2021
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
The definition matters if Larian does actually add passive checks to the game. This isn't to take away from the intent of the thread, but definitions matter. Passive checks are a specific mechanic we do not have in Patch 4. It is up the the GM whether passive checks should be in the game.

I can agree the perception checks in the game seem flawed. Only getting one roll for perception feels weird, usually you can get multiple checks in if you really want to find out what's happening.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
*walks into room.
*random die appears
*"Perception check failed"
Great, now I know there's a trap right there. I am getting the exact same outcome of failing the check that I would have from passing the check.

*in conversation
*npc talking
*"Perception check failed" appears on screen.
*Oh, so this npc just pulled some slight of hand on me. I now know they either pickpocketed or played some kinda trick, even though I'm not supposed to know. In this example I don't get the exact same effect as passing the check, but the main difference between passing and failing is supposed to be noticing vs not noticing that something happened, and I've noticed both ways.


Agreed!!

Joined: Feb 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
If if is done manually, it is an active check. If it happens automatically, it is a passive check. That is the full determination of those labels. Anything said to try to explain your way out of calling something that happened automatically "passive" is blatant falsehood, no matter who it comes from, devs and WotC included. If you don't want it to be called a passive check, then it needs the player to manually initiate it with an intentionally used action.
You are applying definitions used in the real world to a fantasy world that uses its own definitions. The etymological semantics are completely irrelevant to the discussion. In DnD a passive check does not involve dice rolls. An active check does. Get off your grammatical high horse and understand that the real world and the DnD world are not the same.

Last edited by Elessaria666; 06/03/21 10:19 PM.
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
ITT: People argue semantics. How about we replace "passive" with "secret"? (You could also replace "Passive Check™" with "a check that is passively done")
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
If if is done manually, it is an active check. If it happens automatically, it is a [secret] check.
The title changes to
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
We shouldn't be notified of failed [secret] checks (especially perception)
In which case the title becomes a tautology. Obviously we shouldn't be notified of secret checks because, by definition, they are secret. Unless we succeed at the check, in which case the game should of course tell us what we noticed.

Joined: Sep 2015
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2015
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
ITT: People argue semantics. How about we replace "passive" with "secret"? (You could also replace "Passive Check™" with "a check that is passively done")
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
If if is done manually, it is an active check. If it happens automatically, it is a [secret] check.
The title changes to
Originally Posted by The Old Soul
We shouldn't be notified of failed [secret] checks (especially perception)
In which case the title becomes a tautology. Obviously we shouldn't be notified of secret checks because, by definition, they are secret. Unless we succeed at the check, in which case the game should of course tell us what we noticed.

+1


groovy Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist groovy

World leading expert of artificial stupidity.
Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already :hihi:
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Nicou 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5