So after DMing for a while, I started to realize that I was asking for perception rolls a lot. In fact, your mileage might vary but I am willing to bet, perception is the most called for ability check in all of D&D. Very often, we completely neglect or outright ignore the passive perception of the players and monsters in favor of just asking for roll.
I have also heard a lot of people saying that Passive perception is different from Active perception. That the moment you begin actively thinking for something, your passive perception doesn't apply. I am here to tell you this is not the case. If you take away from this post remember this "Passive perception IS ACTIVE PERCEPTION" more specifically is generalized perception over a period of time.
I can prove it mathematically:
Let's suppose that we are playing a level 5 character with +5 to wisdom and proficiency on perception which would give them a +8 to perception checks and passive perception of 18. Let's say this character enters a room in a dungeon and decided to take 3 minutes to look around that room. In 3 minutes a character can take the search action 30 times and roll 30 perception checks. No matter how high or low they roll, after 30 attempts it is going to average to 10 plus their bonus of 8 for a total of 18, oh would you look at that it's their passive perception.
Do you see what I mean? Passive perception does not mean that "you are not actively searching" or "your not paying attention" Passive perception is active perception played out over time.
So here is the takeaway. When Time is not a factorand the characters are free to look, or listen or smell or use whatever sense without any constraints. Their passive perception becomes their baseline. The lowest they can possibly go.
So If there is a hidden trap, and you have determined that the DC for finding that trap is 18, a character with a passive perception of 18 or higher does not need to roll to find it, they simply find it if they decide they want to look for traps.
If two NPCs are talking and a player with 15 passive perceptions wants to eavesdrop on them and you determined that the DC was 14. They do not need to roll, they simply succeed automatically.
Now if a player with a passive perception of 10 wanted to attempt the same, well now is when you would call for a perception check.
The same goes for your monsters, if a player wants to stealth pass a monster and rolls a 15 on stealth but the monster's passive perception is 16, then guess what baby, the monster does not need to roll, it automatically succeeds in noticing the player.
The bottom line is, Stop with the endless barrage of perception checks all the time, relax and lean into passive checks. Reward a player for building a really keen and observant character, terrify them with an equally sharp monster that they cant seem to sneak by.
EDIT: It has come to my attention that some people think the info provided here is some sort of life hack or that I am making it up. Rest assured this is ACCURATE information taken Straight from The Players Handbook, Chapter 7: Using Ability Scores, Subsection - Passive Checks and Subsection - Stealth and Passive Perception
Passive Checks. A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the DM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster.
Passive Perception. When you hide, there's a chance someone will notice you even if they aren't searching. To determine whether such a creature notices you, the DM compares your Dexterity (Stealth) check with that creature's passive Wisdom (Perception) score, which equals 10 + the creature's Wisdom modifier, as well as any other bonuses or penalties. If the creature has advantage, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5.
This Video Can also provide some helpful insights.
As with all things D&D, You are free to do whatever you want. I am not saying anyone is doing anything WRONG for ignoring passive abilities. My goal was to raise awareness about passive checks and I think I have done that very accurately, truthfully, and succinctly.
Was I a bit.....harsh? maybe. But was I supposed to say all the disclaimer stuff? like oh, this is your game and everyone has their style of doing things and blah blah blah. We know, we have heard it a million times. It just I think that sometimes, information needs to be delivered unapologetically.
Your math is... flawed. Yes, your passive perception is the same as your average expected score, but if you're searching a dozen rooms for secret doors it doesn't matter that your average roll was 10, because it really doesn't matter how well you searched the rooms that didn't contain secret doors.
My rule for passive perception is simple: it is only ever used as a target number.
Let's suppose that we are playing a level 5 character with +5 to wisdom and proficiency on perception which would give them a +8 to perception checks and passive perception of 18. Let's say this character enters a room in a dungeon and decided to take 3 minutes to look around that room. In 3 minutes a character can take the search action 30 times and roll 30 perception checks. No matter how high or low they roll, after 30 attempts it is going to average to 10 plus their bonus of 8 for a total of 18, oh would you look at that it's their passive perception.
Except that you only need one success to perceive the thing, so average is irrelevant. In 30 rolls you're pretty likely to get a natural 20 at some point. So as long as the DC is 28 or less, they succeed, according to your approach.
However, D&D is not meant to be played by rules as written, no matter how much you abuse those rules. The appropriate response to someone asking to make 30 perception checks in a row is, "No." An ability check does not have to correspond to an action that can be executed in a round. You can roll one ability check to simulate an hour of a rogue trying to pick a lock.
Passive perception is useful when you want to know if your PCs perceive something, but you don't want them to be aware that there was something to perceive if they fail. However, it's a pain to use, because you need to memorize your players' passive perceptions, or at least the highest one. And you have to update that when they level up.
The ultimate reason I don't use passive perception is: rolling dice is fun. I mean, we could just use 10 + modifier for every roll in the game. In some ways, it would make more sense. Why is it sometimes the wizard can lift something the barbarian can't? But it's fun when there's risk and surprises.
I am sorry but, I did not understand your entire statement. Like, I read it but I did not get what you meant by any of it.
You say my math is flawed then in the following sentence you agree with the very thing that my math was meant to illustrate, so it wasn't really flawed now, was it?
If I search a dozen rooms, and time is not a factor, meaning I can take 1 or 2 minutes per room at my own discretion. Then my example about searching a singular room still applies, a dozen times over. In the rooms where there is nothing you would tell me "You search the room and there doesn't appear to be anything" in the rooms that contain traps, you would outright tell me that there is a trap if the DC for finding that trap is equal or lower than my passive perception, if the DC is higher then you would ask for a perception check. Simple.
Let's suppose that we are playing a level 5 character with +5 to wisdom and proficiency on perception which would give them a +8 to perception checks and passive perception of 18. Let's say this character enters a room in a dungeon and decided to take 3 minutes to look around that room. In 3 minutes a character can take the search action 30 times and roll 30 perception checks. No matter how high or low they roll, after 30 attempts it is going to average to 10 plus their bonus of 8 for a total of 18, oh would you look at that it's their passive perception.
Except that you only need one success to perceive the thing, so average is irrelevant. In 30 rolls you're pretty likely to get a natural 20 at some point. So as long as the DC is 28 or less, they succeed, according to your approach.
However, D&D is not meant to be played by rules as written, no matter how much you abuse those rules. The appropriate response to someone asking to make 30 perception checks in a row is, "No." An ability check does not have to correspond to an action that can be executed in a round. You can roll one ability check to simulate an hour of a rogue trying to pick a lock.
Passive perception is useful when you want to know if your PCs perceive something, but you don't want them to be aware that there was something to perceive if they fail. However, it's a pain to use, because you need to memorize your players' passive perceptions, or at least the highest one. And you have to update that when they level up.
The ultimate reason I don't use passive perception is: rolling dice is fun. I mean, we could just use 10 + modifier for every roll in the game. In some ways, it would make more sense. Why is it sometimes the wizard can lift something the barbarian can't? But it's fun when there's risk and surprises.
Again......You miss the entire point of my original post. Is like, it went way over your head.
It's not that the player is asking to make 30 perception rolls. It's just that, I can't turn off my eyeballs, or my nose, or my ears. At any given time, you, me, and everyone else are constantly perceiving the environment. Passive perception is a representation of how naturally perceptive you are, how keen and aware of your surroundings you are at any given moment.
So when I enter a room and search for traps I cannot do worst than whatever my passive perception is.
Rolling dice can be fun and it can lead to some interesting situations. However, I personally and very subjectively like my games to be logically consistent. I want for things to "make sense"
So if I am playing a goliath barbarian with 20 strength and proficiency in athletics. There are some things that I just cannot fail at. Let's say the task is to pick up a 300 lb bounder at DC 16 and time is not an issue. I don't need to roll for anything, I can just do it, this is a task that I just CANNOT FAIL at.
The same goes for perception. If I am playing a character, centered around being keen and observant, with 20 wisdom, expertise in perception, the observant feat, and a sentinel shield. Then you as the DM have to reckon with the fact that this player has a passive perception of 30+ and they are going to automatically succeed at finding A LOT of things.
All jokes aside, and regardless of my personal biases and preferences. The information I have provided is accurate and adherent to the rules as written in DnD 5e. It is up to you whether you employ it or not in the end. I just wanted to raise awareness that passive abilities should not be ignored.
If I search a dozen rooms, and time is not a factor, meaning I can take 1 or 2 minutes per room at my own discretion. Then my example about searching a singular room still applies, a dozen times over. In the rooms where there is nothing you would tell me "You search the room and there doesn't appear to be anything" in the rooms that contain traps, you would outright tell me that there is a trap if the DC for finding that trap is equal or lower than my passive perception, if the DC is higher then you would ask for a perception check. Simple.
I take strong offense to '+1 skill increases your chance from 45% to 100%'. Therefore, my rule is that someone is always rolling. It doesn't have to be the PC, there might be something rolling against a target of passive perception.
Now, on the topic of searching a dozen rooms, if I need to speed things up I'll just have the PCs make a single roll for the entire building, but my point is that doing a good job of searching the dining room is utterly irrelevant if the thing you're looking for in the kitchen.
I had a DM who liked to make us roll for Perception over and over. We're in some tunnels under a hill. The whole place is shaking, there is dirt falling from the ever-widening cracks in the ceiling, and a rumbling sound in the background. Yeah. Roll Perception. My uncanny ability to roll below a 10 on a 20 sided die when making Perception checks kicks in. Passive Perception of 12, I get a total of 5 with all modifiers.
I took to making jokes about my character needing sunglasses and a white cane.
I fought against having to make checks. I looked on the forum and found the topic discussed in great detail and the common consensus was that Passive Perception should be the lowest you can get on a check. I delicately pointed this out to our DM, saying that it might speed up the game a touch if we quit with the rolling unless she asked specifically for a check and had a reason to do so. One of our players took to rolling before being asked, any time she wanted to look around, and saying that she would take her passive number if the roll on the die didn't suit her. So what happens the next time we are in a tunnel under a hill? You guessed it. The DM says roll a Perception Check.
I take strong offense to '+1 skill increases your chance from 45% to 100%'. Therefore, my rule is that someone is always rolling. It doesn't have to be the PC, there might be something rolling against a target of passive perception.
While rolling can be a lot of fun, and we all like picking up dice and rolling them. Don't forget one very important thing. The dice represent UNCERTAINTY. Meaning that you only resort to rolling the dice when the outcome is uncertain.
If I have a passive perception of 18 and the DC for finding a trap is 15, there is no uncertainty on whether I find the trap or not, I simply notice the trap, period full stop.
Let's say that I am playing a goliath barbarian with 20 strength, the Powerful build trait, and I am under the effects of the spell Enhance Ability: Bull's strength, giving me a push drag and lift capacity of 2400 pounds. Let's say I wanted to pick up a cow weighing 2300 pounds. I don't need to roll anything, I can just do it. there is zero uncertainty that in this moment picking up a cow is something I am capable of doing without fail.
So Why is it so difficult for people to wrap their heads around perception?
I get it, as DMs we like to have control and we seldom like to relinquish it without a fight. But that sort of cheapens and degrades the experience for the player who wants to make a perceptive character, or an insightful character, or an investigator character, but they suddenly have a moment of sheer stupidity and roll a natural 1, when they would otherwise succeed if the DM had just looked at their passives.
If I have a passive perception of 18 and the DC for finding a trap is 15, there is no uncertainty on whether I find the trap or not, I simply notice the trap, period full stop.
Only if the DM rules that passive perception is applicable to locating that trap. Which, because it makes for completely stupid game play, a lot of DMs don't do. In that situation, I might be rolling the trap's +5 stealth against your 18 passive, but there's no automatic detection.
I had a DM who liked to make us roll for Perception over and over. We're in some tunnels under a hill. The whole place is shaking, there is dirt falling from the ever-widening cracks in the ceiling, and a rumbling sound in the background. Yeah. Roll Perception. My uncanny ability to roll below a 10 on a 20 sided die when making Perception checks kicks in. Passive Perception of 12, I get a total of 5 with all modifiers.
I took to making jokes about my character needing sunglasses and a white cane.
I fought against having to make checks. I looked on the forum and found the topic discussed in great detail and the common consensus was that Passive Perception should be the lowest you can get on a check. I delicately pointed this out to our DM, saying that it might speed up the game a touch if we quit with the rolling unless she asked specifically for a check and had a reason to do so. One of our players took to rolling before being asked, any time she wanted to look around, and saying that she would take her passive number if the roll on the die didn't suit her. So what happens the next time we are in a tunnel under a hill? You guessed it. The DM says roll a Perception Check.
Yeah, As I said in my original post, I reckon more than 50% of all ability checks ever made in D&D are for perception. Some DMs like to have tight control over how much information the players have access to. The idea that a player automatically notices their carefully plotted ambush or their cleverly hidden monster sounds like heresy of the highest order to some DMs.
Call me boring but I actually hate Uncertainty, I find it anxiety-inducing. So I avoid having to make a lot of bullshit unnecessary rolls. But personally, I find that asking for a lot of rolls strips players of their agency. Instead of roleplaying their characters and doing all the fantastical things that those characters could do with their abilities, you are just at the mercy of the die.
If I have a passive perception of 18 and the DC for finding a trap is 15, there is no uncertainty on whether I find the trap or not, I simply notice the trap, period full stop.
Only if the DM rules that passive perception is applicable to locating that trap. Which, because it makes for completely stupid game play, a lot of DMs don't do. In that situation, I might be rolling the trap's +5 stealth against your 18 passive, but there's no automatic detection.
Do you see yourself? Do you notice what you are doing? You are still holding on and refuse to relinquish control.
So riddle me this, is this a mobile trap? a shifting trap? what is it doing to constantly change how well it is hidden?
You know what makes for asinine stupid gameplay when my war veteran fighter who used to be a mine detection unit for 15 years without an incident. Suddenly explodes because he rolled a nat 1 when looking for mines despite having a passive perception of 25.
Do you know what really grinds my gears? when my wizard who studied magical runes in college for 20 years suddenly explodes because he rolled a nat 1 on investigating some explosive runes despite having a passive investigation of 23.
You what really doesn't make sense? When my hardboiled detective rogue whos been in the business for 10 years gets easily fooled by a punk because he rolled a nat 1 on insight despite having a passive insight of 27.
Say it with me, Wacky randomness IS NOT FUN. Stop contriving it.
If I have a passive perception of 18 and the DC for finding a trap is 15, there is no uncertainty on whether I find the trap or not, I simply notice the trap, period full stop.
Only if the DM rules that passive perception is applicable to locating that trap. Which, because it makes for completely stupid game play, a lot of DMs don't do. In that situation, I might be rolling the trap's +5 stealth against your 18 passive, but there's no automatic detection.
Do you see yourself? Do you notice what you are doing? You are still holding on and refuse to relinquish control.
Refusing to relinquish control would be setting the DC to 30. Or setting it to 1 higher than the highest passive perception in the group. Automatic detection is a bad mechanic.
Call me boring but I actually hate Uncertainty, I find it anxiety-inducing. So I avoid having to make a lot of bullshit unnecessary rolls. But personally, I find that asking for a lot of rolls strips players of their agency. Instead of roleplaying their characters and doing all the fantastical things that those characters could do with their abilities, you are just at the mercy of the die.
Ok, so I think you're definitely a story leaning player. I think I get that. But you are aware much of the game is literally "in the dice." I suppose you might use listed instead of rolled damage (on both sides?), but part of what makes D&D a game and not simply an exercise in collaborative storytelling is the allowance and in some case requirement of dice as a determinant.
You know what makes for asinine stupid gameplay when my war veteran fighter who used to be a mine detection unit for 15 years without an incident. Suddenly explodes because he rolled a nat 1 when looking for mines despite having a passive perception of 25.
All due respect but, yeah, thing is, that sort of stuff actually happens though, people in high speed military units with multiple tours die searching an inconsequential hut because they walked right by the person hiding under some laundry. It does happen. This may make you uncomfortable and you may prefer a less risk averse game, but don't defend your practice on account of what you think realism should be. Deaths in risky occupations are almost overwhelmingly senseless where the parties involved "on paper" shouldn't have failed as catastrophically as they did, yet catastrophe happens. It's why we have the word.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Call me boring but I actually hate Uncertainty, I find it anxiety-inducing. So I avoid having to make a lot of bullshit unnecessary rolls. But personally, I find that asking for a lot of rolls strips players of their agency. Instead of roleplaying their characters and doing all the fantastical things that those characters could do with their abilities, you are just at the mercy of the die.
Ok, so I think you're definitely a story leaning player. I think I get that. But you are aware much of the game is literally "in the dice." I suppose you might use listed instead of rolled damage (on both sides?), but part of what makes D&D a game and not simply an exercise in collaborative storytelling is the allowance and in some case requirement of dice as a determinant.
You know what makes for asinine stupid gameplay when my war veteran fighter who used to be a mine detection unit for 15 years without an incident. Suddenly explodes because he rolled a nat 1 when looking for mines despite having a passive perception of 25.
All due respect but, yeah, thing is, that sort of stuff actually happens though, people in high speed military units with multiple tours die searching an inconsequential hut because they walked right by the person hiding under some laundry. It does happen. This may make you uncomfortable and you may prefer a less risk averse game, but don't defend your practice on account of what you think realism should be. Deaths in risky occupations are almost overwhelmingly senseless where the parties involved "on paper" shouldn't have failed as catastrophically as they did, yet catastrophe happens. It's why we have the word.
You are completely and precisely correct. Those things do happen, have happened. In making all of those examples with the purpose of getting a reply like this. An so here we are.
My point was not that catastrophic failure can't or should not befall your character. My point is that you should not rely on a roll to do something that is better covered by a passive ability check.
Catastrophic failure rarely makes for good, cathartic storytelling. That's why everyone hates the ending of Game of Thrones. Because Daenerys rolled a nat 1 on her wisdom save and went insane. And everyone around just kept making bad roll after bad roll.
Remember that in my original post I stated that passive abilities are a representation of active abilities played out over time. TIME is the key factor here.
If the veteran mine detector can inspect the minefield at his own discretion and not under duress, he could still blow up, but he would be working with his 25 passive perception score.
If the detective can interrogate the punk for a few minutes, he can get a good insightful read on him, he could still be deceived, but now he's working with his passive insight.
Refusing to relinquish control would be setting the DC to 30. Or setting it to 1 higher than the highest passive perception in the group. Automatic detection is a bad mechanic.Quote from Stusano>>
Woah, I guess I won't threaten you with a good time.
You: trying to find toilet paper after using the bathroom.
DM: roll a perception check.
You: rolls a 1
DM: You spent the next 15 minutes looking around with your soiled buttcheeks and you do not find the toilet paper.
Isn't it so wacky and random?! I mean the toilet paper was there in front of you the entire time, but your god-dammed eyeballs just didn't feel like working today!
That is literally what you are saying as I understand it, we simply do not automatically detect things in our environment, we must randomly determine everything.
I am sorry but that is asinine. This is where I would like to respectfully agree to disagree with you.
Fortunately, there is nothing wacky about the randomness.
That is literally what you are saying as I understand it, we simply do not automatically detect things in our environment, we must randomly determine everything.
Of course not. Plenty of things don't have a check DC at all. However, it is most certainly possible to have a 90% chance of spotting something and still failing to detect it, and using passive perception doesn't allow that to happen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So after DMing for a while, I started to realize that I was asking for perception rolls a lot. In fact, your mileage might vary but I am willing to bet, perception is the most called for ability check in all of D&D. Very often, we completely neglect or outright ignore the passive perception of the players and monsters in favor of just asking for roll.
I have also heard a lot of people saying that Passive perception is different from Active perception. That the moment you begin actively thinking for something, your passive perception doesn't apply. I am here to tell you this is not the case. If you take away from this post remember this "Passive perception IS ACTIVE PERCEPTION" more specifically is generalized perception over a period of time.
I can prove it mathematically:
Let's suppose that we are playing a level 5 character with +5 to wisdom and proficiency on perception which would give them a +8 to perception checks and passive perception of 18. Let's say this character enters a room in a dungeon and decided to take 3 minutes to look around that room. In 3 minutes a character can take the search action 30 times and roll 30 perception checks. No matter how high or low they roll, after 30 attempts it is going to average to 10 plus their bonus of 8 for a total of 18, oh would you look at that it's their passive perception.
Do you see what I mean? Passive perception does not mean that "you are not actively searching" or "your not paying attention" Passive perception is active perception played out over time.
So here is the takeaway. When Time is not a factor and the characters are free to look, or listen or smell or use whatever sense without any constraints. Their passive perception becomes their baseline. The lowest they can possibly go.
So If there is a hidden trap, and you have determined that the DC for finding that trap is 18, a character with a passive perception of 18 or higher does not need to roll to find it, they simply find it if they decide they want to look for traps.
If two NPCs are talking and a player with 15 passive perceptions wants to eavesdrop on them and you determined that the DC was 14. They do not need to roll, they simply succeed automatically.
Now if a player with a passive perception of 10 wanted to attempt the same, well now is when you would call for a perception check.
The same goes for your monsters, if a player wants to stealth pass a monster and rolls a 15 on stealth but the monster's passive perception is 16, then guess what baby, the monster does not need to roll, it automatically succeeds in noticing the player.
The bottom line is, Stop with the endless barrage of perception checks all the time, relax and lean into passive checks. Reward a player for building a really keen and observant character, terrify them with an equally sharp monster that they cant seem to sneak by.
EDIT: It has come to my attention that some people think the info provided here is some sort of life hack or that I am making it up. Rest assured this is ACCURATE information taken Straight from The Players Handbook, Chapter 7: Using Ability Scores, Subsection - Passive Checks and Subsection - Stealth and Passive Perception
This Video Can also provide some helpful insights.
As with all things D&D, You are free to do whatever you want. I am not saying anyone is doing anything WRONG for ignoring passive abilities. My goal was to raise awareness about passive checks and I think I have done that very accurately, truthfully, and succinctly.
This is some very good info, although I think you could have been a tad bit more.... tactful in your wording. Good ideas to consider, though!
I live with several severe autoimmune conditions. If I don’t get back to you right away, it’s probably because I’m not feeling well.
Was I a bit.....harsh? maybe. But was I supposed to say all the disclaimer stuff? like oh, this is your game and everyone has their style of doing things and blah blah blah. We know, we have heard it a million times. It just I think that sometimes, information needs to be delivered unapologetically.
Your math is... flawed. Yes, your passive perception is the same as your average expected score, but if you're searching a dozen rooms for secret doors it doesn't matter that your average roll was 10, because it really doesn't matter how well you searched the rooms that didn't contain secret doors.
My rule for passive perception is simple: it is only ever used as a target number.
Except that you only need one success to perceive the thing, so average is irrelevant. In 30 rolls you're pretty likely to get a natural 20 at some point. So as long as the DC is 28 or less, they succeed, according to your approach.
However, D&D is not meant to be played by rules as written, no matter how much you abuse those rules. The appropriate response to someone asking to make 30 perception checks in a row is, "No." An ability check does not have to correspond to an action that can be executed in a round. You can roll one ability check to simulate an hour of a rogue trying to pick a lock.
Passive perception is useful when you want to know if your PCs perceive something, but you don't want them to be aware that there was something to perceive if they fail. However, it's a pain to use, because you need to memorize your players' passive perceptions, or at least the highest one. And you have to update that when they level up.
The ultimate reason I don't use passive perception is: rolling dice is fun. I mean, we could just use 10 + modifier for every roll in the game. In some ways, it would make more sense. Why is it sometimes the wizard can lift something the barbarian can't? But it's fun when there's risk and surprises.
I am sorry but, I did not understand your entire statement. Like, I read it but I did not get what you meant by any of it.
You say my math is flawed then in the following sentence you agree with the very thing that my math was meant to illustrate, so it wasn't really flawed now, was it?
If I search a dozen rooms, and time is not a factor, meaning I can take 1 or 2 minutes per room at my own discretion. Then my example about searching a singular room still applies, a dozen times over. In the rooms where there is nothing you would tell me "You search the room and there doesn't appear to be anything" in the rooms that contain traps, you would outright tell me that there is a trap if the DC for finding that trap is equal or lower than my passive perception, if the DC is higher then you would ask for a perception check. Simple.
If you don't believe me. check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emHtNULI6c0&t=60s
Again......You miss the entire point of my original post. Is like, it went way over your head.
It's not that the player is asking to make 30 perception rolls. It's just that, I can't turn off my eyeballs, or my nose, or my ears. At any given time, you, me, and everyone else are constantly perceiving the environment. Passive perception is a representation of how naturally perceptive you are, how keen and aware of your surroundings you are at any given moment.
So when I enter a room and search for traps I cannot do worst than whatever my passive perception is.
Rolling dice can be fun and it can lead to some interesting situations. However, I personally and very subjectively like my games to be logically consistent. I want for things to "make sense"
So if I am playing a goliath barbarian with 20 strength and proficiency in athletics. There are some things that I just cannot fail at. Let's say the task is to pick up a 300 lb bounder at DC 16 and time is not an issue. I don't need to roll for anything, I can just do it, this is a task that I just CANNOT FAIL at.
The same goes for perception. If I am playing a character, centered around being keen and observant, with 20 wisdom, expertise in perception, the observant feat, and a sentinel shield. Then you as the DM have to reckon with the fact that this player has a passive perception of 30+ and they are going to automatically succeed at finding A LOT of things.
All jokes aside, and regardless of my personal biases and preferences. The information I have provided is accurate and adherent to the rules as written in DnD 5e. It is up to you whether you employ it or not in the end. I just wanted to raise awareness that passive abilities should not be ignored.
I take strong offense to '+1 skill increases your chance from 45% to 100%'. Therefore, my rule is that someone is always rolling. It doesn't have to be the PC, there might be something rolling against a target of passive perception.
Now, on the topic of searching a dozen rooms, if I need to speed things up I'll just have the PCs make a single roll for the entire building, but my point is that doing a good job of searching the dining room is utterly irrelevant if the thing you're looking for in the kitchen.
I had a DM who liked to make us roll for Perception over and over. We're in some tunnels under a hill. The whole place is shaking, there is dirt falling from the ever-widening cracks in the ceiling, and a rumbling sound in the background. Yeah. Roll Perception. My uncanny ability to roll below a 10 on a 20 sided die when making Perception checks kicks in. Passive Perception of 12, I get a total of 5 with all modifiers.
I took to making jokes about my character needing sunglasses and a white cane.
I fought against having to make checks. I looked on the forum and found the topic discussed in great detail and the common consensus was that Passive Perception should be the lowest you can get on a check. I delicately pointed this out to our DM, saying that it might speed up the game a touch if we quit with the rolling unless she asked specifically for a check and had a reason to do so. One of our players took to rolling before being asked, any time she wanted to look around, and saying that she would take her passive number if the roll on the die didn't suit her. So what happens the next time we are in a tunnel under a hill? You guessed it. The DM says roll a Perception Check.
<Insert clever signature here>
While rolling can be a lot of fun, and we all like picking up dice and rolling them. Don't forget one very important thing. The dice represent UNCERTAINTY. Meaning that you only resort to rolling the dice when the outcome is uncertain.
If I have a passive perception of 18 and the DC for finding a trap is 15, there is no uncertainty on whether I find the trap or not, I simply notice the trap, period full stop.
Let's say that I am playing a goliath barbarian with 20 strength, the Powerful build trait, and I am under the effects of the spell Enhance Ability: Bull's strength, giving me a push drag and lift capacity of 2400 pounds. Let's say I wanted to pick up a cow weighing 2300 pounds. I don't need to roll anything, I can just do it. there is zero uncertainty that in this moment picking up a cow is something I am capable of doing without fail.
So Why is it so difficult for people to wrap their heads around perception?
I get it, as DMs we like to have control and we seldom like to relinquish it without a fight. But that sort of cheapens and degrades the experience for the player who wants to make a perceptive character, or an insightful character, or an investigator character, but they suddenly have a moment of sheer stupidity and roll a natural 1, when they would otherwise succeed if the DM had just looked at their passives.
Only if the DM rules that passive perception is applicable to locating that trap. Which, because it makes for completely stupid game play, a lot of DMs don't do. In that situation, I might be rolling the trap's +5 stealth against your 18 passive, but there's no automatic detection.
Yeah, As I said in my original post, I reckon more than 50% of all ability checks ever made in D&D are for perception. Some DMs like to have tight control over how much information the players have access to. The idea that a player automatically notices their carefully plotted ambush or their cleverly hidden monster sounds like heresy of the highest order to some DMs.
Call me boring but I actually hate Uncertainty, I find it anxiety-inducing. So I avoid having to make a lot of bullshit unnecessary rolls. But personally, I find that asking for a lot of rolls strips players of their agency. Instead of roleplaying their characters and doing all the fantastical things that those characters could do with their abilities, you are just at the mercy of the die.
Do you see yourself? Do you notice what you are doing? You are still holding on and refuse to relinquish control.
So riddle me this, is this a mobile trap? a shifting trap? what is it doing to constantly change how well it is hidden?
You know what makes for asinine stupid gameplay when my war veteran fighter who used to be a mine detection unit for 15 years without an incident. Suddenly explodes because he rolled a nat 1 when looking for mines despite having a passive perception of 25.
Do you know what really grinds my gears? when my wizard who studied magical runes in college for 20 years suddenly explodes because he rolled a nat 1 on investigating some explosive runes despite having a passive investigation of 23.
You what really doesn't make sense? When my hardboiled detective rogue whos been in the business for 10 years gets easily fooled by a punk because he rolled a nat 1 on insight despite having a passive insight of 27.
Say it with me, Wacky randomness IS NOT FUN. Stop contriving it.
Refusing to relinquish control would be setting the DC to 30. Or setting it to 1 higher than the highest passive perception in the group. Automatic detection is a bad mechanic.
Fortunately, there is nothing wacky about the randomness.
Nah, you’re good
i just used my passive perception on the tone & intent of your delivery so I didn’t get offended
😃
Ok, so I think you're definitely a story leaning player. I think I get that. But you are aware much of the game is literally "in the dice." I suppose you might use listed instead of rolled damage (on both sides?), but part of what makes D&D a game and not simply an exercise in collaborative storytelling is the allowance and in some case requirement of dice as a determinant.
All due respect but, yeah, thing is, that sort of stuff actually happens though, people in high speed military units with multiple tours die searching an inconsequential hut because they walked right by the person hiding under some laundry. It does happen. This may make you uncomfortable and you may prefer a less risk averse game, but don't defend your practice on account of what you think realism should be. Deaths in risky occupations are almost overwhelmingly senseless where the parties involved "on paper" shouldn't have failed as catastrophically as they did, yet catastrophe happens. It's why we have the word.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
You are completely and precisely correct. Those things do happen, have happened. In making all of those examples with the purpose of getting a reply like this. An so here we are.
My point was not that catastrophic failure can't or should not befall your character. My point is that you should not rely on a roll to do something that is better covered by a passive ability check.
Catastrophic failure rarely makes for good, cathartic storytelling. That's why everyone hates the ending of Game of Thrones. Because Daenerys rolled a nat 1 on her wisdom save and went insane. And everyone around just kept making bad roll after bad roll.
Remember that in my original post I stated that passive abilities are a representation of active abilities played out over time. TIME is the key factor here.
If the veteran mine detector can inspect the minefield at his own discretion and not under duress, he could still blow up, but he would be working with his 25 passive perception score.
If the detective can interrogate the punk for a few minutes, he can get a good insightful read on him, he could still be deceived, but now he's working with his passive insight.
10/10
See above.
Of course not. Plenty of things don't have a check DC at all. However, it is most certainly possible to have a 90% chance of spotting something and still failing to detect it, and using passive perception doesn't allow that to happen.