I have been DMing 5e for a few years now and a player in my current campaign asked a question I genuinely did not know the answer to and figured I would ask fellow DMs. The question was: "When does my Passive Investigation come into play?"
It occurred to me that of all the portions of a character sheet, I don't recall ever using a player's passive investigation before. Passive perception? Sure. And passive insight is used quite often in role play. I tried to wrap my brain around passive investigation and couldn't quite do it. Typically I consider Investigation to be the active and thorough action to inspect or search for something specific. This is why I always usually associated investigation with a chosen action rather than a passive ability, as investigating implies the character is making a conscious and active choice in the matter, requiring a skill check. But passive scores are meant for characters to acquire knowledge through casual and passive behavior.
So, all that being said...how would YOU go about helping a player utilize their passive investigation? As a DM I always try to give my players excuses to do what they are good at and use their skills in order to feel strong and capable, and I'd love to make this player with a high passive investigation feel as though their high passive investigation score is worth having.
Passive investigation sets a floor on what a character can decipher from the clues in their environment. Investigation does not help a character sense anything with their senses, that is Perception, Investigation helps them figure out what the things they sense mean. So deciphering languages, clues, puzzles, hidden or subtle meanings in artwork, researching information from lots of data.
Determining when enemies Investigate illusions. So if an enemy has a higher passive than the illusions dc they use their action to investigate the illusion at the first opportunity. I similarly give players hint that something is is an illusion if it's high enough.
When some one rolls deception against something the defender choses the highest of passive insight or investigation if applicable that skill is applicable. So investigation picks out logical inconsistencies and alike in lies.
Passive investigation can be used in place of passive perception to oppose hiding if you know to look. For example if they hide in combat
I also use passives as a floor for skills. If your passive is higher than a dc you will succeed but a failure on the roll means it takes longer or has some negative consequence. If the passive is low then failure can mean being locked out of doing that check again ( ie auto failing future checks) .
Investigation is basically a check to understand how something works. It can also represent intuition. If a room is too small compared to the architecture, a player with a decent passive insight might realise that there has to be another chamber on that floor. It could represent understanding how to disarm a trap (in my games at least, investigation is the roll a player needs to make to disarm traps. Perception tells you it's there and investigation lets you understand enough to disarm the mechanism.)
I don't let investigation act like other skills (insight or perception). What it is used for, in my games, is understanding systems and interacting and manipulating those systems. That's powerful enough.
Passive Investigation is kinda a thing where you can use it if your are running a published module that calls for it, but you can't use it in homebrew.
In a homebrew campaign, since you know all your PCs passives, setting a passive investigation/perception check is just binary: either you're going to tell a character something is there, or you aren't. So for Passive Perception, if I write that a secret door is spotted by characters with a PP of 15 or more, and I know the cleric has PP 17, then the door is not even a secret door at all; it's just a door. It feels different when it's someone else's module you're running since they haven't preordained the outcome because they didn't know the party composition.
Really I only use Passive Perception for stealth - if the PCs are making a stealth check, they have to beat the PP of something not actively looking for them, and vice versa if the monsters are being stealthy (and it's important not to roll for that, because if you have 6 PCs, one of them will roll an 18-20).
The same applies for Passive Investigation. There's no real reason that it would ever come into play.
Determining when enemies Investigate illusions. So if an enemy has a higher passive than the illusions dc they use their action to investigate the illusion at the first opportunity. I similarly give players hint that something is is an illusion if it's high enough. Personally I'd make this a Perception check
When some one rolls deception against something the defender choses the highest of passive insight or investigation if applicable that skill is applicable. So investigation picks out logical inconsistencies and alike in lies. This would be an Insight check
Passive investigation can be used in place of passive perception to oppose hiding if you know to look. For example if they hide in combat Again, this is Perception
I also use passives as a floor for skills. If your passive is higher than a dc you will succeed but a failure on the roll means it takes longer or has some negative consequence. If the passive is low then failure can mean being locked out of doing that check again ( ie auto failing future checks) . This is a good way to use Passive Perception/Investigation, I like it.
I don't generally use passive scores. The only reason I started was in response to two players who took feats to increase them. I wanted to validate those choices.
The wizard in my campaign has a passive investigation of 24 and the Investigator background. I give him unprompted information about clues in a room, connections between concepts he's researching, and (because he's a wizard) insight into how magic objects or spells interact to stimuli - particularly with respect to traps. If there's a pattern to notice or a logical deduction to make, his wizard gets the first crack at it.
Passive Investigation is kinda a thing where you can use it if your are running a published module that calls for it, but you can't use it in homebrew.
In a homebrew campaign, since you know all your PCs passives, setting a passive investigation/perception check is just binary: either you're going to tell a character something is there, or you aren't. So for Passive Perception, if I write that a secret door is spotted by characters with a PP of 15 or more, and I know the cleric has PP 17, then the door is not even a secret door at all; it's just a door. It feels different when it's someone else's module you're running since they haven't preordained the outcome because they didn't know the party composition.
Really I only use Passive Perception for stealth - if the PCs are making a stealth check, they have to beat the PP of something not actively looking for them, and vice versa if the monsters are being stealthy (and it's important not to roll for that, because if you have 6 PCs, one of them will roll an 18-20).
The same applies for Passive Investigation. There's no real reason that it would ever come into play.
Except Passive scores aren't static and go up +5 or down -5 depending on advantage or disadvantage. So, while a party may notice something in bright light automatically, they might not notice it if they are relying on dark vision. Or if they take a level of exhaustion, then they get -5 to all passive scores. Or if they are in stressful conditions. Yes, you could just do this all by GM fiat, but isn't that exactly what granting advantage or diadvantage is?
First - consider what ARE passive skills in the first place?
"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."
You use passive skills for tasks that can be done repeatedly without significant consequences except loss of time OR when a DM doesn't want to give something away by asking for a roll.
So when do you use passive investigation? When the character takes time to investigate something - they look through a desk for secret drawers. Perhaps they search a bookcase looking for the release to a secret door or a hidden panel - perhaps they know the panel is there but they have to figure out how to open it. Investigation involves deduction, reasoning, figuring out something based on facts. If you are trying to notice something hidden, that is usually perception, if the clues are available but you need to figure out what they mean that is investigation. If you have time and no immediate consequences for failure that is the same as repeatedly investigating - so use passive investigation first. If that isn't enough, you can have the character roll for it - so for some checks the passive skill acts as a floor - but not when there are consequences.
For example, investigating a desk with a hidden trap that you might set off by investigating - could usually require a roll rather than a passive check because the activity has a consequence on failure. If you use a passive score in this situation then the character might either always set off the trap or never set it off - neither of which are reasonable. Similarly, if someone is searching for a hidden door, a place to hide or open a lock while the guard approaches down the corridor - that would be a die roll because if they fail, the guard may notice them. Using passives in these types of situations isn't appropriate because it isn't the same activity being done repeatedly because there are consequences for immediate success or failure.
If the characters are in combat or any other initiative situation then they will usually roll dice for skill checks because there is a reason for initiative. Taking time to figure things out will have consequences so passive investigation isn't usually appropriate. The reason passive perception still gets used in combat is because the character is paying attention all the time in combat - investigation, in my opinion, requires more time and effort so an action is needed in most situations to create the opportunity to roll a die for investigation (unless the DM doesn't want to have the player roll dice then they can choose to use the passive skill first).
"In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you."
I will use passive investigation first for any investigative activity that the character takes that doesn't have an immediate time limit. They could take 30 seconds or a minute or two or longer. If their passive isn't sufficient, I would ask for the character to roll a skill check.
Anyway, every skill has a passive version and appropriate times to use it.
Passive lock picking (character will get that lock eventually) ... passive insight (listen to a 20 minute speech and decide if it was truthful - roll if passive not high enough) ... passive arcana, nature etc (doing magic research in a library for example) ... passive survival (following tracks or gathering food when there is n consequence for taking longer to do it) ... passive animal handling (riding a bit more challenging horse under normal circumstances - someone with a low passive animal handling might not be able to keep a spirited horse under good control while a more experience rider wouldn't need to make a check)
Most DMs really under utilize passive skills though ...
I don't generally use passive scores. The only reason I started was in response to two players who took feats to increase them. I wanted to validate those choices.
If you don't use passive scores then the feats are pretty useless in your game since they won't do anything ... EXCEPT ... you go on to say that you actually apply passive investigation exactly as it is intended to be used .. so I am confused. You don't use passive investigation but then you do :)
The wizard in my campaign has a passive investigation of 24 and the Investigator background. I give him unprompted information about clues in a room, connections between concepts he's researching, and (because he's a wizard) insight into how magic objects or spells interact to stimuli - particularly with respect to traps. If there's a pattern to notice or a logical deduction to make, his wizard gets the first crack at it.
Giving extra information to a character with a high passive score who is taking actions or always aware looking around and thinking IS using passive investigation. The only difference is that you did not consciously assign a DC to the items the character notices. If you set a DC, it would be higher than the passive investigation of the other characters in the party but lower than the passive investigation of the wizard. When taking an appropriate action (for example, they wouldn't usually pick up on things with their eyes closed or while distracted), the wizard notices more, and figures out more information than another character.
The wizard has a better chance at figuring things out than the barbarian with 8 int. The wizard has a chance to figure it out first because of their high passive score. Only when the wizard can't figure something out - or there is a time limit or consequence - then the characters might all make a die roll. The wizard likely still has the highest modifier but in a crunch the barbarian could get lucky while the wizard misses the obvious.
Anyway, what you appear to do is apply passive investigation as intended, the only difference is that you haven't explicitly set a DC for finding the information which is also perfectly ok - you figure the DC is above that for the rest of the party but below the very high bar set by the wizard.
One thing I do with it is apply the value when the character does a Perception check. They are now actively looking around and their Passive Investigation is making connections, checksums and so forth, to verify details about what they see. If 2 players roll an 18 Perception check, and one has a very high PI while the other doesn't, the might both notice the room seems a bit shorter than the building, but one notices where the door way must be due to furniture arrangement or a lack of a tapestry or something like that. A little more info or a recognition of an anomaly for a high PI.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Many illusions spells state that an Investigation check will reveal it to be an illusion. Some (like Minor Illusion) specify an Action. Others (Distort Value) do not specify an action.
If the spell does not specify an action, and the player does not state they are investigating it, just use Passive Investigation as a free action. If their Passive beats your spell DC, they know it is an illusion.
I don't generally use passive scores. The only reason I started was in response to two players who took feats to increase them. I wanted to validate those choices.
If you don't use passive scores then the feats are pretty useless in your game since they won't do anything ... EXCEPT ... you go on to say that you actually apply passive investigation exactly as it is intended to be used .. so I am confused. You don't use passive investigation but then you do :)
The wizard in my campaign has a passive investigation of 24 and the Investigator background. I give him unprompted information about clues in a room, connections between concepts he's researching, and (because he's a wizard) insight into how magic objects or spells interact to stimuli - particularly with respect to traps. If there's a pattern to notice or a logical deduction to make, his wizard gets the first crack at it.
Giving extra information to a character with a high passive score who is taking actions or always aware looking around and thinking IS using passive investigation. The only difference is that you did not consciously assign a DC to the items the character notices. If you set a DC, it would be higher than the passive investigation of the other characters in the party but lower than the passive investigation of the wizard. When taking an appropriate action (for example, they wouldn't usually pick up on things with their eyes closed or while distracted), the wizard notices more, and figures out more information than another character.
The wizard has a better chance at figuring things out than the barbarian with 8 int. The wizard has a chance to figure it out first because of their high passive score. Only when the wizard can't figure something out - or there is a time limit or consequence - then the characters might all make a die roll. The wizard likely still has the highest modifier but in a crunch the barbarian could get lucky while the wizard misses the obvious.
Anyway, what you appear to do is apply passive investigation as intended, the only difference is that you haven't explicitly set a DC for finding the information which is also perfectly ok - you figure the DC is above that for the rest of the party but below the very high bar set by the wizard.
I said I started using passives because they took the feats, and the rest of my post explains how I do so. I'm not sure why you're confused.
Kinda like a few others here, I use passive skills to structure exposition. So it's not so much I'm referencing checks but more like pointing out which characters know or identify what in establishing the scene before they start asking questions of the scenario requiring rolls. Background features play into the narration too. So for example, they're not going to roll if they do surveillance to figure out a watch rotation, but the characters with the threshold Investigation is going to figure out the clock, military backgrounds may supplement that with a read on ranks, professional/elite or conscripts etc. It's when they want to start using those skills to penetrate or are under some sort of constraints or stress to make determination that the rolls are called for.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I dislike giving giving people a free Reliable talent, which is the problem with using the passive check as a floor. My general rule on passive scores is that they're a DC for someone else's check, but most of the time I'll just let people roll and treat bonuses to passives as bonuses of some sort to that roll (treat anything that grants a +5 as Advantage. This does nerf stacking them, but that's fine as long as you tell people up front about it), because players like rolling dice. Thus, in a situation where the PCs are being potentially ambushed by monsters, the PCs get to make perception checks against the monster's passive stealth, rather than the monsters making stealth checks against the PCs passive perception (this gives a significantly higher chance of a 'only some PCs are surprised' result).
I have been DMing 5e for a few years now and a player in my current campaign asked a question I genuinely did not know the answer to and figured I would ask fellow DMs. The question was: "When does my Passive Investigation come into play?"
It occurred to me that of all the portions of a character sheet, I don't recall ever using a player's passive investigation before. Passive perception? Sure. And passive insight is used quite often in role play. I tried to wrap my brain around passive investigation and couldn't quite do it. Typically I consider Investigation to be the active and thorough action to inspect or search for something specific. This is why I always usually associated investigation with a chosen action rather than a passive ability, as investigating implies the character is making a conscious and active choice in the matter, requiring a skill check. But passive scores are meant for characters to acquire knowledge through casual and passive behavior.
So, all that being said...how would YOU go about helping a player utilize their passive investigation? As a DM I always try to give my players excuses to do what they are good at and use their skills in order to feel strong and capable, and I'd love to make this player with a high passive investigation feel as though their high passive investigation score is worth having.
Thanks in advance!
I dont use passive investigation. I had never even heard of it before today.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
One thing I do with it is apply the value when the character does a Perception check. They are now actively looking around and their Passive Investigation is making connections, checksums and so forth, to verify details about what they see. If 2 players roll an 18 Perception check, and one has a very high PI while the other doesn't, the might both notice the room seems a bit shorter than the building, but one notices where the door way must be due to furniture arrangement or a lack of a tapestry or something like that. A little more info or a recognition of an anomaly for a high PI.
Almost everyone I've played with treats Investigation as interchangeable with Perception and I've given up fighting it, so I typically just call for a Search action that uses their chosen skill check plus the passive of the other.
If you make a Perception check, your PI determines how well you interpret the clues you find. If you make an Investigation check, your PP determines what data points you have for your deductions. Thus a high PI allows you to figure things out even if you spot fewer clues and a high PP gives you extra info to draw conclusions with. And I will describe what they find accordingly.
And I will also use it as auto-successes for some things. I'm a big proponent of giving out a baseline level of info without checks, so PP and PI are useful for gauging what things the party might notice automatically.
Almost everyone I've played with treats Investigation as interchangeable with Perception and I've given up fighting it, so I typically just call for a Search action that uses their chosen skill check plus the passive of the other.
I blame Wizards for that; the description of the skill is horrible, plus no-one really wants "make this roll to figure out the clues" because figuring out clues is something people like to do for themselves.
Hello fellow DMs!
I have been DMing 5e for a few years now and a player in my current campaign asked a question I genuinely did not know the answer to and figured I would ask fellow DMs. The question was: "When does my Passive Investigation come into play?"
It occurred to me that of all the portions of a character sheet, I don't recall ever using a player's passive investigation before. Passive perception? Sure. And passive insight is used quite often in role play. I tried to wrap my brain around passive investigation and couldn't quite do it. Typically I consider Investigation to be the active and thorough action to inspect or search for something specific. This is why I always usually associated investigation with a chosen action rather than a passive ability, as investigating implies the character is making a conscious and active choice in the matter, requiring a skill check. But passive scores are meant for characters to acquire knowledge through casual and passive behavior.
So, all that being said...how would YOU go about helping a player utilize their passive investigation? As a DM I always try to give my players excuses to do what they are good at and use their skills in order to feel strong and capable, and I'd love to make this player with a high passive investigation feel as though their high passive investigation score is worth having.
Thanks in advance!
Passive investigation sets a floor on what a character can decipher from the clues in their environment. Investigation does not help a character sense anything with their senses, that is Perception, Investigation helps them figure out what the things they sense mean. So deciphering languages, clues, puzzles, hidden or subtle meanings in artwork, researching information from lots of data.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I have a few uses:
Investigation is basically a check to understand how something works. It can also represent intuition. If a room is too small compared to the architecture, a player with a decent passive insight might realise that there has to be another chamber on that floor. It could represent understanding how to disarm a trap (in my games at least, investigation is the roll a player needs to make to disarm traps. Perception tells you it's there and investigation lets you understand enough to disarm the mechanism.)
I don't let investigation act like other skills (insight or perception). What it is used for, in my games, is understanding systems and interacting and manipulating those systems. That's powerful enough.
Passive Investigation is kinda a thing where you can use it if your are running a published module that calls for it, but you can't use it in homebrew.
In a homebrew campaign, since you know all your PCs passives, setting a passive investigation/perception check is just binary: either you're going to tell a character something is there, or you aren't. So for Passive Perception, if I write that a secret door is spotted by characters with a PP of 15 or more, and I know the cleric has PP 17, then the door is not even a secret door at all; it's just a door. It feels different when it's someone else's module you're running since they haven't preordained the outcome because they didn't know the party composition.
Really I only use Passive Perception for stealth - if the PCs are making a stealth check, they have to beat the PP of something not actively looking for them, and vice versa if the monsters are being stealthy (and it's important not to roll for that, because if you have 6 PCs, one of them will roll an 18-20).
The same applies for Passive Investigation. There's no real reason that it would ever come into play.
I don't generally use passive scores. The only reason I started was in response to two players who took feats to increase them. I wanted to validate those choices.
The wizard in my campaign has a passive investigation of 24 and the Investigator background. I give him unprompted information about clues in a room, connections between concepts he's researching, and (because he's a wizard) insight into how magic objects or spells interact to stimuli - particularly with respect to traps. If there's a pattern to notice or a logical deduction to make, his wizard gets the first crack at it.
Except Passive scores aren't static and go up +5 or down -5 depending on advantage or disadvantage. So, while a party may notice something in bright light automatically, they might not notice it if they are relying on dark vision. Or if they take a level of exhaustion, then they get -5 to all passive scores. Or if they are in stressful conditions. Yes, you could just do this all by GM fiat, but isn't that exactly what granting advantage or diadvantage is?
First - consider what ARE passive skills in the first place?
"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."
You use passive skills for tasks that can be done repeatedly without significant consequences except loss of time OR when a DM doesn't want to give something away by asking for a roll.
So when do you use passive investigation? When the character takes time to investigate something - they look through a desk for secret drawers. Perhaps they search a bookcase looking for the release to a secret door or a hidden panel - perhaps they know the panel is there but they have to figure out how to open it. Investigation involves deduction, reasoning, figuring out something based on facts. If you are trying to notice something hidden, that is usually perception, if the clues are available but you need to figure out what they mean that is investigation. If you have time and no immediate consequences for failure that is the same as repeatedly investigating - so use passive investigation first. If that isn't enough, you can have the character roll for it - so for some checks the passive skill acts as a floor - but not when there are consequences.
For example, investigating a desk with a hidden trap that you might set off by investigating - could usually require a roll rather than a passive check because the activity has a consequence on failure. If you use a passive score in this situation then the character might either always set off the trap or never set it off - neither of which are reasonable. Similarly, if someone is searching for a hidden door, a place to hide or open a lock while the guard approaches down the corridor - that would be a die roll because if they fail, the guard may notice them. Using passives in these types of situations isn't appropriate because it isn't the same activity being done repeatedly because there are consequences for immediate success or failure.
If the characters are in combat or any other initiative situation then they will usually roll dice for skill checks because there is a reason for initiative. Taking time to figure things out will have consequences so passive investigation isn't usually appropriate. The reason passive perception still gets used in combat is because the character is paying attention all the time in combat - investigation, in my opinion, requires more time and effort so an action is needed in most situations to create the opportunity to roll a die for investigation (unless the DM doesn't want to have the player roll dice then they can choose to use the passive skill first).
"In combat, most creatures stay alert for signs of danger all around, so if you come out of hiding and approach a creature, it usually sees you."
I will use passive investigation first for any investigative activity that the character takes that doesn't have an immediate time limit. They could take 30 seconds or a minute or two or longer. If their passive isn't sufficient, I would ask for the character to roll a skill check.
Anyway, every skill has a passive version and appropriate times to use it.
Passive lock picking (character will get that lock eventually) ... passive insight (listen to a 20 minute speech and decide if it was truthful - roll if passive not high enough) ... passive arcana, nature etc (doing magic research in a library for example) ... passive survival (following tracks or gathering food when there is n consequence for taking longer to do it) ... passive animal handling (riding a bit more challenging horse under normal circumstances - someone with a low passive animal handling might not be able to keep a spirited horse under good control while a more experience rider wouldn't need to make a check)
Most DMs really under utilize passive skills though ...
If you don't use passive scores then the feats are pretty useless in your game since they won't do anything ... EXCEPT ... you go on to say that you actually apply passive investigation exactly as it is intended to be used .. so I am confused. You don't use passive investigation but then you do :)
Giving extra information to a character with a high passive score who is taking actions or always aware looking around and thinking IS using passive investigation. The only difference is that you did not consciously assign a DC to the items the character notices. If you set a DC, it would be higher than the passive investigation of the other characters in the party but lower than the passive investigation of the wizard. When taking an appropriate action (for example, they wouldn't usually pick up on things with their eyes closed or while distracted), the wizard notices more, and figures out more information than another character.
The wizard has a better chance at figuring things out than the barbarian with 8 int. The wizard has a chance to figure it out first because of their high passive score. Only when the wizard can't figure something out - or there is a time limit or consequence - then the characters might all make a die roll. The wizard likely still has the highest modifier but in a crunch the barbarian could get lucky while the wizard misses the obvious.
Anyway, what you appear to do is apply passive investigation as intended, the only difference is that you haven't explicitly set a DC for finding the information which is also perfectly ok - you figure the DC is above that for the rest of the party but below the very high bar set by the wizard.
One thing I do with it is apply the value when the character does a Perception check. They are now actively looking around and their Passive Investigation is making connections, checksums and so forth, to verify details about what they see. If 2 players roll an 18 Perception check, and one has a very high PI while the other doesn't, the might both notice the room seems a bit shorter than the building, but one notices where the door way must be due to furniture arrangement or a lack of a tapestry or something like that. A little more info or a recognition of an anomaly for a high PI.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Illusions.
Many illusions spells state that an Investigation check will reveal it to be an illusion. Some (like Minor Illusion) specify an Action. Others (Distort Value) do not specify an action.
If the spell does not specify an action, and the player does not state they are investigating it, just use Passive Investigation as a free action. If their Passive beats your spell DC, they know it is an illusion.
I said I started using passives because they took the feats, and the rest of my post explains how I do so. I'm not sure why you're confused.
Kinda like a few others here, I use passive skills to structure exposition. So it's not so much I'm referencing checks but more like pointing out which characters know or identify what in establishing the scene before they start asking questions of the scenario requiring rolls. Background features play into the narration too. So for example, they're not going to roll if they do surveillance to figure out a watch rotation, but the characters with the threshold Investigation is going to figure out the clock, military backgrounds may supplement that with a read on ranks, professional/elite or conscripts etc. It's when they want to start using those skills to penetrate or are under some sort of constraints or stress to make determination that the rolls are called for.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I dislike giving giving people a free Reliable talent, which is the problem with using the passive check as a floor. My general rule on passive scores is that they're a DC for someone else's check, but most of the time I'll just let people roll and treat bonuses to passives as bonuses of some sort to that roll (treat anything that grants a +5 as Advantage. This does nerf stacking them, but that's fine as long as you tell people up front about it), because players like rolling dice. Thus, in a situation where the PCs are being potentially ambushed by monsters, the PCs get to make perception checks against the monster's passive stealth, rather than the monsters making stealth checks against the PCs passive perception (this gives a significantly higher chance of a 'only some PCs are surprised' result).
I dont use passive investigation. I had never even heard of it before today.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Almost everyone I've played with treats Investigation as interchangeable with Perception and I've given up fighting it, so I typically just call for a Search action that uses their chosen skill check plus the passive of the other.
If you make a Perception check, your PI determines how well you interpret the clues you find. If you make an Investigation check, your PP determines what data points you have for your deductions. Thus a high PI allows you to figure things out even if you spot fewer clues and a high PP gives you extra info to draw conclusions with. And I will describe what they find accordingly.
And I will also use it as auto-successes for some things. I'm a big proponent of giving out a baseline level of info without checks, so PP and PI are useful for gauging what things the party might notice automatically.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I blame Wizards for that; the description of the skill is horrible, plus no-one really wants "make this roll to figure out the clues" because figuring out clues is something people like to do for themselves.
If you're using D&D Beyond they're on the character sheet in the block under the saving throws block, and discussed in the PHB in chapter 7.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
OK, thanks
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.