>Players come across a thing
>Literally anything could be a damn sandwich
>Examine it
>Ask a person about it
>Person tells them a thing
>Players get suspicious call for a Perception roll
>They fail it
>"Just as they described it's a regular sandwich."
>Players are now plotting to burn the sandwich at the earliest provocation
Is there a way to do away with or to circumvent the almost assured paranoia and skepticism that goes hand in hand with a failed perception roll?
Lay off the Mimics.
>>Players get suspicious call for a Perception roll
>>They fail it
Then there must have been something to perceive.
How do the players know they failed the perception roll? Did they roll for it and get a 1? Why are you making them roll for something they could take 10 on? They're not under duress. How do they know what the DC for this check was anyway?
This. Train your players.
>there is a sandwich here
>I roll to perceive the sandwich
>what are you doing
>I'm rolling to perceive the sandwich
>what are you doing though
>I'm checking the sandwich for traps
>yeah but what are you doing
>I look at the sandwich
>it's a sandwich
>I poke the sandwich with a ten foot pole
>there is a dent in the sandwich now
>I roll to perc
>no
>Is there a way to do away with or to circumvent the almost assured paranoia and skepticism
The players have been conditioned to act this way by you or a previous GM. If you don’t want them to be paranoid then don’t put contact poison on door handles and pit traps under every rug.
Then if you do make them roll, they'll know that something is there even if they fail it.
The ingredients of the secret sauce, of course.
I never tried because I mastered few times but I think there are a couple of options:
1) have your players relevant stats and ability modifier and ask them for rolls without telling them what they're rolling for, and add some random rolls to confuse them
2) wheb they fail the roll, describe the thing they rolled for as a failure (nothing outside the norm) but add a detail that could seem important from players perspective, but isn't, or make them perceive another thing near which isn't the main thing, even though it holds no importance
Don't allow them to roll perception.
You roll for them to see if they're caught by surprise, you roll when they ask to perceive.
It's explained in almost every DMG ever printed.
If your players are going to metagame like that, just don't let them roll perception. That way they don't know when they've failed a perception check.
Let them roll perception, but don't tell them if they won or failed, just describe the result.
When I was a kid I used to do kinda the same IRL. I was paranoid about computer viruses and scanned almost every single thing I downloaded.
But that's bullshit, it assumes that players should be proficient in detecting traps in real life and should know how to check a sandwich for traps. And if the GM has imagination they can come up with all sorts of traps that players won't know how to check for.
I met plenty of players that were already paranoid when they started playing either because D&D is infamous enough about its trapped dungeons or because they believe RPGs are a contest where the GM tries to kill the players at any possible chance.
More to the point, how do players fail a perception roll when there's nothing to perceive?
This is exacerbated somewhat in AD&D. Considering that you can easily tell if you've failed.
>Players get suspicious call for a Perception roll
Player's don't get to call for rolls, the DM does.
Wel it wasn't a perfect sandwich. The turkey is a little dry.
It's fucking turkey. Order something else if you can't handle a dry kind of meat.
You roll in secret. Duh. GURPS spells this out clearly, does D&D not?
Oh foul accursed thing! What demon from the depths of hell created thee?
Excuse me?
that's not the issue
if the GM wants to fuck you over, he always has a way.
if the players want to ruin the setting the GM has prepared, they always have a way.
You can't make it impossible for them to do so, you just have to come to an understanding between all people at the table and make it clear that you're there to have fun
Yes, making players pay for wasting time.
They're investigating the sandwich like paranoid imbeciles only because they don't see any possible danger/detriment in doing so. Probably because you never made them pay for it.
Yeah but my point was that some players see in such behaviour the optimal way to beat scenarios. They need to be reconditioned that there is not a single pattern that can be followed slavishly. Instead, they need to read every situation correctly.
Write down your player's perception scores, roll it for them behind the screen. Don't even tell them you're rolling it. And fake a roll every once in a while. Make it impossible for them to know if you rolling dice behind your screen has any significance whatsoever.
Veeky Forums here. We humbly request that you destroy this abomination of a "sandwich" immediately.
Have the sandwich attack them if they fail immediately.
They'll second guess rolling for perception now on but they'll also not worry anymore.
Or limit the times they use it.
Roll perception where they can't see it. How the fuck do you KNOW if you failed a perception check?
>OP trying to kill his party with the ol' demon sandwich trick
Didn't work did it OP?
The characters don't know they failed, that's the problem. If they get suspicious over a failed roll, then it's metagaming.
Don't play Dnd
this is terrible advice, it just confuses and frustrates players and wastes everyone's time
Add more harmless/mundane stuff to room descriptions. Things naturally seem important if it was worth describing, so add enough fluff that turning every single location upside down makes them look foolish.
With Labyrinth Lord at least I do roll the search checks for the players. That way they wouldn't know whether they don't find anything due to them failing, or there just not being anything there. RAW that is how it works.
It had ranch on it
It was a ArchDemon Sandwich
This... it's not about public or hidden rolls it's about dramatic irony and the ability to role play knowing OOC that you failed.
I never do hidden rolls because my players know how to role play while having meta knowledge. In fact it often makes scenes more tense or entertaining especially if the players roll with it or even into it.
What´s wrong with wanting a toasted sandwich?
Stop inserting your magical realm into shit. Toasted? Really? Take that shit to /d/
Start making lots of beneficial things seem suspicious.
>not toasting your sandwiches
You will never know life's true pleasures, normie.
>Is there a way to do away with or to circumvent the almost assured paranoia and skepticism that goes hand in hand with a failed perception roll?
Play it straight.
>Later on the players go into a tavern
>Everyone stars at them and snickers
>The rogue walks up to a barmaid and orders a beer
>The barmaid covers her mouth, tries to stiffle a laugh and hurries away, excusing herself between quick, deep breaths
>Some burly lumberjack guy walks up to the party
>"HEY FELLAS! IT'S THE SANDWICH EXAMINATION GUY!"
>Everyone laughs
>Some fat fishhag throws a ham sandwich at the paladin's face
>"BE CAREFUL! IT MIGHT BE A WITCH IN DISGUISE!"
>Even greater laughter
>The barmaid returns with a cold beer, her face red and flustered from trying to hold in her laugh
>"H-Here's your trap! I-I MEAN BEER! Your beer!"
>She runs off again but collapses a few steps later, clutching her stomach and laughing wildly
>But that's bullshit, it assumes that players should be proficient in detecting traps in real life and should know how to check a sandwich for traps.
How does one trap a sandwich?
The sandwich contained a fairy.
Wouldn't playing it straight be more like people treating the guy checking sandwiches for traps like he was a little odd or touched in the head?
Don’t play with Cthulhu players. I was playing a Star Trek game recently and came under fire from players for using a computer on an alien ship.
Razer blades, poison, spit, having a real thin tin strip like a ham slice linked to a wire leading out the bottom of the sandwich to a detonator.
Poison it. But that doesn't usually use the game mechanics for traps.
This is great, gotta remember this one.
Is a trap sandwich Gay ?
>>Players come across a thing
>>Literally anything could be a damn sandwich
>Dungeon master mentions a thing
>"It's not relevant to the plot"
WhatDidHeMeanByThis.png?
It's not gay if it's a feminine piece of ham.
You're... you're confusing players and characters. It doesn't matter if it's public or hidden. I didn't even say anything about hidden rolls.
"Your character doesn't know they rolled low. They don't know what a perception check is. If you're not able to stop metagaming, then from now on I will ask you for your bonus and then roll behind the screen. This will slow down the game, but it's what we'll have to do if you leave me no option. So, what's your decision?"
I don't want a iceberg salad sandwich, though
Why? Because it isn't a mcchicken you worthless piece of shit?
a roll is only used when there's a chance for failure that could have meaningful consequences at a task
if there's no chance for a meaningful failure, don't ask for a roll
Didn't know this was a ylyl thread lost
They might even get angry - hospitality is usually a big deal, and suspiciously poking and prodding the food offered to you is hella insulting
>what is atmosphere
I had players who did this, so I just told them suspicious things about everything. One time they sat in front of a grove of trees for an in-real-life hour because I told them a tree detected as magical.
This should be true, but now every time you roll, your players KNOW something is bad with it
>Good job, you managed to take down the assassins ambushing you in the warehouse district. Now-
"I loot the assassin! How much is his stuff worth?"
>It's- he had a poster with your names on it, and there's a strange corroded golden medallion that-
"How much is it worth?"
>Looks like - uh, you put points in appraise - you could probably sell it for 20 GP, but-
"Shit, that must mean the loot's around here. He attacked us in the warehouse district, so therefore they're probably in on it. I break into the nearest warehouse.
>What? Uh, the nearest one's not locked, the nearest worker sees you marching in with a bloody sword and drops a crate and runs off screaming-
"I break open the crate. What loot is in it?
>What. It's just.. there's just farming tools, worth only about fifty gold pieces but they're really heavy-
"Where's the loot, GM? That guy was at least level 3, we should be getting at least +1 weapons and magic items by now."
>Magic items don't just spawn because you kill someone and open up a nearby container-
"Stop wanking over "muh gritty realistic low magic campaign", GM, I'm going to go complain about this on Veeky Forums"
>what
I've reversed two That Guy stories and one That GM story for the above, so am fairly confident someone will actually believe someone would be this self-entitled
Fuck off Chekhov
If the players attempt to do something they can perceive the result of immediately, they should only roll if there's a chance of meaningful failure.
The solution is for the DM to roll behind the screen for everything else that happens.
You find a sandwich?
The barmaid brings you beers?
The party crosses the street?
Roll away.