I just started running Dark Heresy and I need clarification on search/aware/perception.

Aware is for when they notice something.

Search is if they are actively looking for something.

Do I ever have the players roll a straight perception test or is it always under a skill like aware or search?

I know probably a stupid question, I just want to make sure I have it straight.

Other than for defaulting, there's not a lot of call for pure Perception checks. The primary use of those tests would be to identify a particular bit of sensory input. Awareness and Search are primarily for the discovery of anomalous details, but not analysing them

Examples:

Hearing -
You'd test Awareness to notice the sound of some nasty beast skittering around in the surrounding darkness.
You'd test Search if you suspect there's something horrible out there, and want to hear it coming up on you.
You'd test Perception if you heard something rustling in the shadows and want to decide whether it's a genestealer sneaking up on you or just a homeless dreg rooting around for food.

Sight -
You'd test Awareness to spot something moving around in the heavy fog up ahead.
You'd test Search to spot those blasted mutants lurking in the fog.
You'd test Perception to figure out if that indistinct shape in the mist a two-headed cannibal or a broken streetlamp.

Ok so awareness and search is to notice it and perception is to determine what it is?

Not quite. Awareness and Search cover that too. However, the developers admit in the Inquisitor's Handbook that this does make perception rather useless - and it also means people without Awareness and Search will have a very hard time finding stuff. This problem is lessened by changing the mechanics of the skill system for Awareness: You generally roll perception unless you have Awareness, in which case you roll awareness with a +20 bonus.

I prefer changing the basic/advanced system altogether: Just count every basic skill as one level higher on the scale of Untrained->Trained->+10->+20->+30. This makes it so that having something your career gives you anyway as a basic skill still matters and avoids the doublestandard of having a basic skill but not using it like one.

Cifer said:

How dose not having to make a strait Perception check make the Perception stat useless?

I never did like the IH's treatment of the Awareness/Search/Perception either. Not only do I hate off-handed exceptions to the rule but I actually don't see a problem at all with the way the system is set up in the RAW in regards to this. Why dose there have to be strait perception checks and how would not having strait perception checks weaken or make Perception useless? After all, when you make an awareness check, you're rolling your perception. I don't know about other games, but that is one of the most heavily used skills in mine. That makes it pretty darn important without having any obvious situations where Perception without a skill would be rolled.

The problem I see is if you don't have awareness trained you roll against perception at half stat and the PCs aren't noticing much of anything.

Our last session, which was our first, I had them roll straight perception roles to notice stuff. Looking over it again I think if I hadn't of done it that way they wouldn't have gained any ground.

I think I may go with Cifer's solution and continue calling for straight perception roles and give them a +10 or 20 if they have aware trained.

Erdrix said:

I guess that's the difference: I don't see that as a problem. Every career except for Tech-Priests have awarness availeable by rank 2 for a measely 100 xp. If the players chose not to get it for their character, I assume they have a reason: who am I to deny them the choice of having an oblivious character? ;-)

The reason generally is "because there are so many holes in my skill set I don't know where to start plugging them". The general idea that people could use basic skills for stuff they're supposed to be at least a little competent in despite not having trained the specific skill falls flat on its face considering that a very talented (characteristic of 50) character would at most have a chance of 55% of managing an "easy" task.

So most characters will have severe weaknesses in rather basic areas until the midgame, especially if they try being strong in their career's focus area instead of being mediocre everywhere.

We had this discussion with our GM some sessions ago and it did seem that noticing stuff important was really about total random chance until you get to 45-55% chance of a success and he pointed out that a "normal" difficulty roll is still at +10 to the chance to succeed

He also pointed out that most perception/search/awareness rolls are usually opposed checks of some sort - and usually the thing trying to either silent move up to you or use concealment to hide from you rolls first. With the same difficulties applying to most normal adversaries (and the "genestealer in the shadows" isnt one of those) its usually who rolls the worst that loses, not who rolls the best!

Solomon Kane said:

I'm glad to see I'm not the only GM who's caught on to that. Almost all basic untrained skill rolls are going to be opposed. Most players usually don't try to have their character do something they don't have a skill for which means if a basic untrained skill check is made, it's because I called for one. If I call for a roll, it's usually because someone or something is acting against the characters in some way which, dun dun dun, makes it an opposed check.

While, if I recall correctly, the RAW has some molarky about re-rolling opposed checks until someone succeeds or some such nonsense, I just cut to the chase and make it whom ever scores the least amount of DoF (or most DoS... rare!) succeed in the action they were trying against the other. After all, when someones trying to sneak by a guard who's watching for sneaks, he's either going to be spotted or he's not going to be spotted.

The way I run things, most basic skills are opposed:

• Awareness , always opposed usually with Silent Move or Concealment.
• Barter ; always opposed with Barter.
• Carouse ; okay, this one has never come up, but I can't see it being opposed.
• Charm ; always opposed, usually with Scrutiny.
• Concealment ; always opposed, usually by Search.
• Deceive ; always opposed by scrutiny.
• Disguise ; always opposed, usually by Scrutiny.
• Dodge ; duh.
• Evaluate ; when rolled, it's opposed by Barter else it simply adds a +10 to a characters barter check if they have the skill or succeed in an Evaluate check if they don't.
• Gamble ; almost always opposed by Gamble (and can be assisted by scrutiny and logic).
• Inquiry ; this one isn't opposed, but it's never binary. Given enough time and patience, if even remotely possible, the information sought will be found. It's merely rolled to see how long it takes. Those with it trained will usually end up taking far less time rooting information out then those who don't.
• Intimidate ; always opposed by Intimidate (wp).
• Logic ; okay, this one has yet to be opposed but it tends to either assist another skill or offer up leaps of logic when a player is stumped, no biggie.
• Climb ; another that isn't opposed, but when used, usually has a lot of equipment and assistance modifiers with 3 DoF needed to actually fall as opposed to simply losing ground... rarely used as it's usually not that fun of a skill to employ.
• Scrutiny ; always opposed by either Disguise or Deception.
• Search ; either opposed with Silent Move or Concealment or is handled like Inquiry.
• Silent Move ; always opposed either by Awareness or Search.
• Swim ; used like Climbing.

All in all, in handling the skills in this manner, I have yet to encounter a problem with the way basic skills function as, for the most part, the PC's capability is measured by their oppositions capabilities (and I tend to stick with the stats in the back of the book, so, the PC's are quite capable most of the time against most vanilla foes) or they can over come not having the training with the right perpetration, assistance, and equipment.

Thanks, Mr. Kane, that was actually quite enlightening!

I see that I've been going at the Awareness skill all wrong, using it as a catch-all, and not opposed. I shall practice the mantra "Opposed, Opposed, Opposed" and start wrecking my players plans immediately

Graver that is really helpful. I'm putting that in my notes.

If the PCs are in a room and its been torn apart, furniture every where, stuff like that. How do I handle..say..the drawers haven't been pulled out of the dresser, because it wasn't a robbery. Do they only notice that detail if they are actively searching or can they notice that just from scanning the room and how should that be handled? Should I just tell them they see that or should they roll something to notice that? (sorry if I'm confusing.)

Your description of such a room should include anything important that could be seen by just scanning the room. If the players catch on to the significants of of the drawers being closed, great for them! If not, then a successful search will allow you to tell them the significance of the closed drawers and possibly other tings as well.

In cases of "searching a crime scene" the Search roll should only have two functions. The first being how long it takes them to find the information they are looking for, though this is only really important if time is of the essence, say if they are searching a heretic's layer while he's out grocery shopping but due back any time now. In such a situation failure could simply add to the time it takes to find the vital clues and successes deduct from the time it takes. The second use is determining the quality of information gained.

While pivotal clues should be given to the players sans rolling (though figuring out what it means should be up to them unless they succeed at their search check and get some more info on it). Using search will net them more information about the clue or additional leads that can make the investigation easer on them, avoid some traps laid for them, as well as helping them avoid red herrings and wild goose chases. In effect, those who fail at Search will take the long way through an investigation, stumble on all the bad parts, and otherwise have a very bad/dangerous time getting to the end, while those who succeed will be able to cut to the chase and get to the heart of matters far more expediently and professionally.

Likewise, when searching a scene, don't forget that only one search roll is needed, just make the character with the highest score make the roll adding a +10 for every character involved in the search. And don't forget about other skills helping, such as being trained in Scrutiny (knowing common human behavior will help one know where someone is most likely to hide something and that, if one were truly robbing a place, they would have pulled those drawers out, etc), Logic (probability and statistics could very well help), etc.

Remember always: If you have your players roll for something, then something must happen if they succeed and if they fail. If nothing can happen if they fail a roll, then don't have them make the roll in the first place, or have action automatically succeed in the most basic way with success allowing for a better or more dramatic resolution of the action that the roll was made for. Failing a roll should never lead to inaction or story death.

It was, of course, Graver I meant to thank in my last post, and you continue to add insightful posts about this subject! Keep it up.

I found myself asking "what's the point of investing XP in skill x" on some counts, and also being concerned about situations where a campaign would crash to a halt if the PCs failed an important test. The approach of going with an automatic basic sucess, but good rolls = better/more information is good, but requires some decent preparations from the GM.

Running tests as opposed rather than static ensures 2 things:

a) there is always an incentive to increase skill mastery, as you never know how good your opponent is

b) enables the GM to withold the result, even if the player succeeds in his roll. (The opposing party could succeed by more DoS, and so the player doesn't know that there isn't anybody hiding in the bushes just because he succeeded on his Search test)

I'm gonna steal your list too, and stick it to my GM screen

Thanks again Graver. I put your whole last post into my notes.

I dont know if this awareness that "most rolls you make are opposed against the opponents rolls" is something you pick up as a more experienced gamer, because most of my group have been playing one system or another for 10+ years and are perfectly aware of it, yet we had a newbie join a few weeks ago and they were oblivious to it...

Any other people find this to be correct?

I have to say, I mostly don't find it to be correct. I frequently set difficulty levels without reference to an opposed check. I use awareness for "did you notice this random detail" all the time. I think there is a place for opposed checks, but quite often there are things which a character might or might not notice, but which nobody was especially trying to conceal, and which if you just read it out as part of the description of a room would immediately stand out to the players, even though their character would perhaps not have noticed it.

On the OP: I don't think I have ever called for a straight perception check (other than as a basis for awareness). As others have said, this shouldn't be a problem - a major function of your characteristics is to make your skill percentages nice and high. You can't have a crap perception and an awesome awareness (not easily), so it doesn't matter if you never actually use perception on its own.

An official clearification would be helpfull, but as long as we not getting any we are still up to our own *sigh*

My take:
First of all, I "house ruled" that the "basics" are "Attribute -10", not "1/2 Attribute". Helped to "streamline" thinks...and to actually make basics usefull!

Awareness:
I only use this one as an "opposing skill", representing the pc to be on guard and looking out for tell-tale signs of some-one sneaking up from behind, concealing a weapon or preparing for anything harmfull. In addition, I allow/ask for awareness checks during combats if the combat involves a suitable number of opponents. Success helps not to lose the "big picture"; things like that Brother Emuli got knocked out and his opponent (the guy they tried to arrest in the first place) starts to run for it while everyone else is fighting with his comrades.

Search:
I only allow for search when a room (or body; or car; or anything) is "searched". It represents a knowledge of "what to look for", known methods of hiding things or where people tend to put certain things (whenever for "hiding" or simply "storing" them

Perception (Attribute):
To me, the main problem is "is there any perception roll that is not a an awarness check?" I found some examples where I personally say "yes", but they are few in number

Examles:
Tracking
You first need to find tracks Perception] in order to read and follow it. This my "favorite". Without this "take", person could be deaf and blind (very low Perception) but could still be a master tracker (since Tracking is based on IN).

Eaves droping:
If it would only be about "hearing voices" some-one would expect to here I would/could call for "Awareness", but in order to understand anything I only go for Perception.

Seeing something in the distance:
My secound group starts on dusk. Since this means "stays in the wild", there will be occasions where they seem something in the open from a long distance. Perhaps something that is going to run or to disappear from the major scene. I will ask for Perception before telling them what details they were able to perceive.

Description of opponents in darkness/very dim light:
While awareness will help the pc to "see it coming", it will not help them to get a better "view" of what they are up to. A successfull perception test will give them the hints (like a smell charred flesh and a taste of ashes in the air; the silent clicking of servos and the blistering of a shock maul) that this they might better try to run for it!
I plan to use things like this later in a "mystery" scheme where the pc are confronted with surprise assassine attacks in the dark. The murders will not try to "fight till death". I they cannot take the opponent by surprise within the first moments, they will try to flee and lay another ambush later. The "hints" will help the pc to find clues of what/whom they might be up gainst.


Thats my take, perhaps you will find this helpfull.

I'm about to start a campaign in two weeks. Glad I found this thread. After looking thru it I think I'm going to combine Perception and Awareness. Basiclly make them the same skill and let my players know. Search I'm inclined to make an active skill while Awareness/Perception is passive. An Awareness check would give the player a feeling that something is wrong as they walk into the ambush and be used to oppose Concealment and Silent Move type skills. Search would be an active skill as a player search's a specific area for a clue or hidden door. Not perfect as I'm sure it will be a work in progress.