So new DM here, players have reached level 4 and one player, a Drakewarden Ranger has taken the Observent feat.
They took expertise in insight so now her passive Wisdom is 20, passive investigation is 18 and passive insight is 17.
To be clear this isn't a DM v Player situation. We talked it over before they picked the feat and understand I am still a learning DM so we are gonna have hiccups time to time.
I would like some hints, tips and any personal experiences with high passive player scores and what best to utilise, work around and include them in the game.
Like when is it appropriate to use a passive skill vs a roll check. How strong is a passive insight check on average, those sorta things.
A passive skill is one that'd be used whenever a player isn't attempting to make a roll, or doesn't know they need to roll. For example, when somebody's lying to them without them being initially suspicious of them, or someone trying to pickpocket them. It's basically a player's "DC." So if a thief is trying to pickpocket a party member, they need to beat the "DC" of that player's passive perception. Same if an NPC is trying to lie to that player, they need to beat the DC of that player's passive insight. If a player specifically says "I want to see if they're lying," or "I want to look to see if anyone's tailing us," that's when you make them actually roll. Passive scores essentially just exist so that you can make checks against them without them being instantly alerted because you asked them to roll perception/insight/investigation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Ignorance is bliss, and you look absolutely miserable."
You don't need to feel obliged to use every passive skill. You can bear it in mind so that you give the most observant characters a little more detail than the less observant ones.
Personally, I use Investigation as an active skill, not a passive one - the players have to say that they're investigating something for it to come into play. however if they are looking for an item and they meet an NPC who has the item and it's visible (EG wearing a stolen necklace) then you might let their passive investigation notice it, because their character would be looking for clues and such.
If someone is building towards this they want to be a master tracker, especially if they’re a ranger. So they might spot smells, tracks, broken branches, noises etc. they wouldn’t immediately spot an object hidden as it’s not actually in plain view, requiring an active investigation check to move the obstacles obscuring the item they are looking for. I had a DM who kept track of all the DC tests for a module and players passive skills and whenever it made sense for a player with high perception to spot something the information was freely given.
i try to distinguish investigation vs perception by what the players describe. If they walk in and glance around it’s perception looking for something they might catch out the corner of their eye. If the player says they look around but don’t actively investigate and move stuff I’d use passive investigation .
fortunately in my own campaign the player in by campaign with super high perception also dumped intelligence so They role play not necessarily understanding what they spot.
The DM calls for an ability check when something has a chance of failure and the outcome is uncertain, the dice then determine the results unless the DM decides to use a passive check instead. A passive check doesn't involve any die rolls and instead use a score, generally when the DM wants to secretly determine the outcome or to represent the average result for a task done repeatedly. Most of the time passive perception is the skill check used. I may often rely on other skill check in contest where one participant isn't aware such as a passive insight to secretly determine if a disguise is pierced for exemple.
This is great for a GM! Now the players won't miss the cool secrets you have made for them. Also they won't whine complain about not having any magic weapons because they missed all the secrets you made for them… :-)
Though remember that Wisdom (Perception) only reveals physical things (things that can be percieved) - not their meaning. Or to put it another way, it reveals signs of a secret, not the secret itself.
GM: As you all walk down the corridor, the Ranger's incredible senses notice some scratches on the floor in a circular pattern. Looks like a door might be here.
The players still have to work out how to open it.
The same goes for traps. The perceptive character notices a tripwire or a presure plate. It might be a trap, it might not. They don't know.
As for Wisdom (Insight), it is not a magical lie detector. You can't just look at someone and instantly determine their intent. You have to spend some time observing them, engaging in conversation, asking leading questions. Again, though, having a character with high proficiency means you get to share all the intrigues and secrets with the players, instead of getting frustrated because they missed everyn single clue (hi, Tuesday gamers, how are you?).
You don't need to feel obliged to use every passive skill. You can bear it in mind so that you give the most observant characters a little more detail than the less observant ones.
This is a great point by ThorukDuckSlayer. This is the case with knowledge skills too. At the end of the day you decide what the player can/should find or know.
Hmmm. Perhaps the following ground rules could help determine what clues/info could be shared with that player:
1. The discovery advances the story in a satisfying / fun way or creates a fun story sequence or RP moment.
2. The passive discovery doesn't make the efforts of the players feel useless or rush the game to an early end. Basically the opposite of satisfaction.
3. The player feels like their investment is paying off. It's usually the little things that create this feeling.
I'm just reflecting so this is probably not a very complete guideline. Maybe someone could add to this list? 😄
I hope this helps. I go through these same dilemmas all the time even after countless games. 😅 So remember to go easy on yourself.
All the DMs I know mess up all the time. The real skill is messing up so that the players don't realize it. 😂
GM: As you all walk down the corridor, the Ranger's incredible senses notice some scratches on the floor in a circular pattern. Looks like a door might be here.
This is a great example IMO. You make the player feel super important AND you build suspension AND you also help the party advance to the fun bits, as in the mystery/puzzle. 😄 You achieve so much with just two sentences, yet you reveal nothing that would do any harm to your camaign plans.
Though remember that Wisdom (Perception) only reveals physical things (things that can be percieved) - not their meaning. Or to put it another way, it reveals signs of a secret, not the secret itself.
GM: As you all walk down the corridor, the Ranger's incredible senses notice some scratches on the floor in a circular pattern. Looks like a door might be here.
I think this is a great example of Passive Perception and Investigation, the Perception being the scratches on the floor in a circular pattern; the Investigation being that there might be a door, as that's a conclusion they've reached.
If you feel it's too easy, it doesn't say anything about anything behind the door such as traps or beasties. At best that character (and only that character) might get advantage on a DEX save to avoid what's behind it, or perhaps a boost to initiative.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
For me, I tend to use passive investigation as kind of instinctual deduction. So for example maybe they're reading a book and they notice something's off about it - to find out what they can try and make an active investigation: high roll, it's a forgery; low roll, there's something off but they're just not sure what - maybe they should have an expert look at it.
Depending on how big a detail it is to whatever plot you're running, how difficult it is to deduce (and how high their passive investigation is), you could just tell them the information, but be wary about not giving away too much.
Personally for deduction or knowledge based check, i may also rely on passive check to keep the outcome secret since a player may otherwise know there is nothing to learn from a high check. It also avoid other players wanting to make one after a low check was made.
I like that idea, potentially you give the players enough information to move forward without being bogged down by having everyone attempt checks after they role low
I've started to think of passive ability scores in a different way. I think every check should involve a roll. Passive scores are just for when the DM does the roll. This is explicit with Stealth checks by monsters. It is a Stealth roll for the monster vs. the PCs' passive perception. I think you should apply the same things to detecting traps, for example. If the book says a trap requires 17 passive perception to notice it, instead roll a d20 and add 7 to determine the passive DC. The result is that even the clumsiest halfling notices the tripwire occasionally, and even elven eyes are sometimes blind. Also, when NPCs lie to the players, you roll a d20 and add their deception. Then match that against the PC's passive insight. Even with the most intuitive druid or cleric, if the NPC rolls high, they still might not be tipped off that something's not right about the apparently friendly NPC.
You can even roll these rolls before the session, and know ahead of time which, if any, of your players to reveal these hints to. So it's as easy to use as a passive DC in the module, but with more variability, so that high passive PCs don't discover every secret.
The cleric in my campaign had a passive insight of 22, and the wizard had a passive perception of 21 and passive investigation of 24. Sometimes, this meant I got to drop juicy lore/insights to my very invested players (which was great, since I ran an intrigue campaign). Sometimes, it meant that we could skip tedious perception checks during exploration, or avoid misunderstandings with key NPCs.
However, I also had a rogue in the party, so sometimes I ignored the wizard's passives to let the rogue's expertise shine. I usually made players roll checks in spite of their passives because I'm of the opinion that even extremely observant people can be distracted and miss things. But sometimes, I had a little fun with the high passives and gave my players red herrings to focus on. Not all the time, but occasionally...and especially when they were making themselves paranoid for no reason. "Gah, there's a fine powder on this doorframe! It's probably evidence of a horrible arcane trap! Oh, wait, no, that's just dust."
I have a cleric in one campaign with a Passive Perception of 22...then she got the Sentinal Shield. Her perception is now 27!
I use this to my advantage though. Perception is what is noticed, so if said player walks into a room she's going to notice just passively that the whole room looks very tidy, but that scattering of papers on the desks looks out of place. Likewise, if she's walking through a forest she might catch a glimpse of a figure moving through the trees parallel to the party.
Oddly, it forces you as a DM to up your game. I can't hide things from that player, so if I do want a surprise attack to be pulled on the party that player must be separated from everyone.
Basically, my advice is to use it as an opportunity to mix things up as a DM. Stop relying on surprise tactics. Stop relying on hiding things from the players' perceptions. Either that or split the party up. Have narrow corridors where only one party member can lead the way. That way the high perception player might notice an odd smell or sound, but the person in the lead or in the rear might not.
Passive scores in the PHB apply to a couple of situations, however, it is important to keep in mind that "passive" is referring to the PLAYER and not the character. Some folks seem to think that a passive score is what the character uses when they aren't doing anything which isn't correct. If a character isn't taking an action relevant to a check then they don't get either a roll or a passive score. Passive refers to the player not rolling dice.
The two cases passives are commonly used:
1) When the DM does not want the character to roll dice since it might give something away or slow the game or whatever reason they like.
2) For a task done repeatedly. If a character is doing something several times, then the passive score represents the average result the character would obtain.
DMs don't usually want the characters rolling dice for every 5' of corridor they walk through so instead the DM uses the passive perception score for a task done repeatedly. As long as the character is walking along being alert for traps/secret doors/etc then the DM can use the passive score to find things. If the passive isn't high enough then the DM could ask for a die roll in a specific case to see if the character happened to be more alert than average when passing the hidden item.
Passive insight would come into play when listening or watching someone convey information then trying to decide whether they are being truthful. It won't tell you whether the information is truthful only if the creature believes it is truthful. The passive insight would be opposed by a deception check from the creature not telling the truth. Its up to the DM how much information the character might obtain.
Passive investigation can be used when a character is spending a few minutes searching a desk or room. Each minute could be thought of as 10x checks - so it would be a task done repeatedly. Investigation reveals information determined from logic or reasoning. Investigation is figuring out the meaning of what you sense.
Investigation and Perception are closely related. If all the clues are reasonably obvious then Investigation is more appropriate to figure out what they mean. If the clues are difficult to notice but what they mean is pretty obvious then a Perception check would be more appropriate. In situations where both clues and meaning are obscured then a DM can decide which skill would be more appropriate, in some cases they could decide both a Perception and Investigation success would be required but DMs don't usually want to gate this information behind too many skill checks.
Passive skills are also useful for emphasizing a character's investment in specific skills and abilities. The DM narrates things being noticed BY the character with the high passive scores (or all the characters with higher passive scores) which validates the character choices. Rolling dice can be fun but there are lots of things to roll dice for and there are few things both more unrealistic and frustrating to a character that has invested in skills than failing a die roll they are good at when a character with a negative modifier succeeds. Why was it worth investing in these abilities?
For example, DC 15 Arcana check to figure out a magical puzzle, the Barbarian with -1 int and no proficiency in the Arcana skill rolls a 20 (gets a 19) while the wizard with 20 int, expertise in Arcana at level 8 (+11 total mod) rolls a 2 and gets a 13. The wizards passive score in this case is 21. Unless the situation is in combat or another time limited situation where every second counts and there are consequences for failure - the wizard should always succeed while the barbarian would rarely be successful. Skill resolution really needs to reflect the character investment most of the time - which is where passive scores come in. The DM just needs to make sure the credit for success goes to the character with the investment rather than the lucky one most of the time.
P.S. Keep in mind that a DM should usually want the players to find the hidden things - otherwise WHY is the thing hidden in the first place? If the players miss finding something, they will NEVER know it was there to find in the first place unless the DM goes "Haha - you missed the loot" which is a confrontational DM approach. Ideally, hidden items should have a narrative roll to play later even if it isn't found.
Passive Insight and Perception I think I got a better understanding. But how do I go about passive investigation?
What would a character notice?
Investigation isn’t about what a PC “notices,” that’s Perception. Investigation is about what hat a PC deduces, what they understand or figure out. Perception finds the clues, Investigation figures out what the clues point to. So if a player is having a hard time figuring something out, their passive Investigation can give the DM an in-game reason to give them a nudge in the right direction without the player needing to declare an action that would give the DM a reason to call for an active Investigation check that they might fail at any rate. Make sense?
So new DM here, players have reached level 4 and one player, a Drakewarden Ranger has taken the Observent feat.
They took expertise in insight so now her passive Wisdom is 20, passive investigation is 18 and passive insight is 17.
To be clear this isn't a DM v Player situation. We talked it over before they picked the feat and understand I am still a learning DM so we are gonna have hiccups time to time.
I would like some hints, tips and any personal experiences with high passive player scores and what best to utilise, work around and include them in the game.
Like when is it appropriate to use a passive skill vs a roll check. How strong is a passive insight check on average, those sorta things.
Any help is appreciated thank you.
A passive skill is one that'd be used whenever a player isn't attempting to make a roll, or doesn't know they need to roll. For example, when somebody's lying to them without them being initially suspicious of them, or someone trying to pickpocket them. It's basically a player's "DC." So if a thief is trying to pickpocket a party member, they need to beat the "DC" of that player's passive perception. Same if an NPC is trying to lie to that player, they need to beat the DC of that player's passive insight. If a player specifically says "I want to see if they're lying," or "I want to look to see if anyone's tailing us," that's when you make them actually roll. Passive scores essentially just exist so that you can make checks against them without them being instantly alerted because you asked them to roll perception/insight/investigation.
"Ignorance is bliss, and you look absolutely miserable."
Passive Insight and Perception I think I got a better understanding. But how do I go about passive investigation?
What would a character notice?
You don't need to feel obliged to use every passive skill. You can bear it in mind so that you give the most observant characters a little more detail than the less observant ones.
Personally, I use Investigation as an active skill, not a passive one - the players have to say that they're investigating something for it to come into play. however if they are looking for an item and they meet an NPC who has the item and it's visible (EG wearing a stolen necklace) then you might let their passive investigation notice it, because their character would be looking for clues and such.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
The Observant feat doesn't affect Insight.
If someone is building towards this they want to be a master tracker, especially if they’re a ranger. So they might spot smells, tracks, broken branches, noises etc. they wouldn’t immediately spot an object hidden as it’s not actually in plain view, requiring an active investigation check to move the obstacles obscuring the item they are looking for. I had a DM who kept track of all the DC tests for a module and players passive skills and whenever it made sense for a player with high perception to spot something the information was freely given.
i try to distinguish investigation vs perception by what the players describe. If they walk in and glance around it’s perception looking for something they might catch out the corner of their eye. If the player says they look around but don’t actively investigate and move stuff I’d use passive investigation .
fortunately in my own campaign the player in by campaign with super high perception also dumped intelligence so They role play not necessarily understanding what they spot.
The DM calls for an ability check when something has a chance of failure and the outcome is uncertain, the dice then determine the results unless the DM decides to use a passive check instead. A passive check doesn't involve any die rolls and instead use a score, generally when the DM wants to secretly determine the outcome or to represent the average result for a task done repeatedly. Most of the time passive perception is the skill check used. I may often rely on other skill check in contest where one participant isn't aware such as a passive insight to secretly determine if a disguise is pierced for exemple.
I know, they took expertise in insight with the Canny ability.
This is great for a GM! Now the players won't miss the cool secrets you have made for them. Also they won't
whinecomplain about not having any magic weapons because they missed all the secrets you made for them… :-)Though remember that Wisdom (Perception) only reveals physical things (things that can be percieved) - not their meaning. Or to put it another way, it reveals signs of a secret, not the secret itself.
GM: As you all walk down the corridor, the Ranger's incredible senses notice some scratches on the floor in a circular pattern. Looks like a door might be here.
The players still have to work out how to open it.
The same goes for traps. The perceptive character notices a tripwire or a presure plate. It might be a trap, it might not. They don't know.
As for Wisdom (Insight), it is not a magical lie detector. You can't just look at someone and instantly determine their intent. You have to spend some time observing them, engaging in conversation, asking leading questions. Again, though, having a character with high proficiency means you get to share all the intrigues and secrets with the players, instead of getting frustrated because they missed everyn single clue (hi, Tuesday gamers, how are you?).
This is a great point by ThorukDuckSlayer. This is the case with knowledge skills too. At the end of the day you decide what the player can/should find or know.
Hmmm. Perhaps the following ground rules could help determine what clues/info could be shared with that player:
1. The discovery advances the story in a satisfying / fun way or creates a fun story sequence or RP moment.
2. The passive discovery doesn't make the efforts of the players feel useless or rush the game to an early end. Basically the opposite of satisfaction.
3. The player feels like their investment is paying off. It's usually the little things that create this feeling.
I'm just reflecting so this is probably not a very complete guideline. Maybe someone could add to this list? 😄
I hope this helps. I go through these same dilemmas all the time even after countless games. 😅 So remember to go easy on yourself.
All the DMs I know mess up all the time. The real skill is messing up so that the players don't realize it. 😂
Finland GMT/UTC +2
This is a great example IMO. You make the player feel super important AND you build suspension AND you also help the party advance to the fun bits, as in the mystery/puzzle. 😄 You achieve so much with just two sentences, yet you reveal nothing that would do any harm to your camaign plans.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
I think this is a great example of Passive Perception and Investigation, the Perception being the scratches on the floor in a circular pattern; the Investigation being that there might be a door, as that's a conclusion they've reached.
If you feel it's too easy, it doesn't say anything about anything behind the door such as traps or beasties. At best that character (and only that character) might get advantage on a DEX save to avoid what's behind it, or perhaps a boost to initiative.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
For me, I tend to use passive investigation as kind of instinctual deduction. So for example maybe they're reading a book and they notice something's off about it - to find out what they can try and make an active investigation: high roll, it's a forgery; low roll, there's something off but they're just not sure what - maybe they should have an expert look at it.
Depending on how big a detail it is to whatever plot you're running, how difficult it is to deduce (and how high their passive investigation is), you could just tell them the information, but be wary about not giving away too much.
Hope this helps.
Personally for deduction or knowledge based check, i may also rely on passive check to keep the outcome secret since a player may otherwise know there is nothing to learn from a high check. It also avoid other players wanting to make one after a low check was made.
I like that idea, potentially you give the players enough information to move forward without being bogged down by having everyone attempt checks after they role low
I've started to think of passive ability scores in a different way. I think every check should involve a roll. Passive scores are just for when the DM does the roll. This is explicit with Stealth checks by monsters. It is a Stealth roll for the monster vs. the PCs' passive perception. I think you should apply the same things to detecting traps, for example. If the book says a trap requires 17 passive perception to notice it, instead roll a d20 and add 7 to determine the passive DC. The result is that even the clumsiest halfling notices the tripwire occasionally, and even elven eyes are sometimes blind. Also, when NPCs lie to the players, you roll a d20 and add their deception. Then match that against the PC's passive insight. Even with the most intuitive druid or cleric, if the NPC rolls high, they still might not be tipped off that something's not right about the apparently friendly NPC.
You can even roll these rolls before the session, and know ahead of time which, if any, of your players to reveal these hints to. So it's as easy to use as a passive DC in the module, but with more variability, so that high passive PCs don't discover every secret.
The cleric in my campaign had a passive insight of 22, and the wizard had a passive perception of 21 and passive investigation of 24. Sometimes, this meant I got to drop juicy lore/insights to my very invested players (which was great, since I ran an intrigue campaign). Sometimes, it meant that we could skip tedious perception checks during exploration, or avoid misunderstandings with key NPCs.
However, I also had a rogue in the party, so sometimes I ignored the wizard's passives to let the rogue's expertise shine. I usually made players roll checks in spite of their passives because I'm of the opinion that even extremely observant people can be distracted and miss things. But sometimes, I had a little fun with the high passives and gave my players red herrings to focus on. Not all the time, but occasionally...and especially when they were making themselves paranoid for no reason. "Gah, there's a fine powder on this doorframe! It's probably evidence of a horrible arcane trap! Oh, wait, no, that's just dust."
I have a cleric in one campaign with a Passive Perception of 22...then she got the Sentinal Shield. Her perception is now 27!
I use this to my advantage though. Perception is what is noticed, so if said player walks into a room she's going to notice just passively that the whole room looks very tidy, but that scattering of papers on the desks looks out of place. Likewise, if she's walking through a forest she might catch a glimpse of a figure moving through the trees parallel to the party.
Oddly, it forces you as a DM to up your game. I can't hide things from that player, so if I do want a surprise attack to be pulled on the party that player must be separated from everyone.
Basically, my advice is to use it as an opportunity to mix things up as a DM. Stop relying on surprise tactics. Stop relying on hiding things from the players' perceptions. Either that or split the party up. Have narrow corridors where only one party member can lead the way. That way the high perception player might notice an odd smell or sound, but the person in the lead or in the rear might not.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Passive scores in the PHB apply to a couple of situations, however, it is important to keep in mind that "passive" is referring to the PLAYER and not the character. Some folks seem to think that a passive score is what the character uses when they aren't doing anything which isn't correct. If a character isn't taking an action relevant to a check then they don't get either a roll or a passive score. Passive refers to the player not rolling dice.
The two cases passives are commonly used:
1) When the DM does not want the character to roll dice since it might give something away or slow the game or whatever reason they like.
2) For a task done repeatedly. If a character is doing something several times, then the passive score represents the average result the character would obtain.
DMs don't usually want the characters rolling dice for every 5' of corridor they walk through so instead the DM uses the passive perception score for a task done repeatedly. As long as the character is walking along being alert for traps/secret doors/etc then the DM can use the passive score to find things. If the passive isn't high enough then the DM could ask for a die roll in a specific case to see if the character happened to be more alert than average when passing the hidden item.
Passive insight would come into play when listening or watching someone convey information then trying to decide whether they are being truthful. It won't tell you whether the information is truthful only if the creature believes it is truthful. The passive insight would be opposed by a deception check from the creature not telling the truth. Its up to the DM how much information the character might obtain.
Passive investigation can be used when a character is spending a few minutes searching a desk or room. Each minute could be thought of as 10x checks - so it would be a task done repeatedly. Investigation reveals information determined from logic or reasoning. Investigation is figuring out the meaning of what you sense.
Investigation and Perception are closely related. If all the clues are reasonably obvious then Investigation is more appropriate to figure out what they mean. If the clues are difficult to notice but what they mean is pretty obvious then a Perception check would be more appropriate. In situations where both clues and meaning are obscured then a DM can decide which skill would be more appropriate, in some cases they could decide both a Perception and Investigation success would be required but DMs don't usually want to gate this information behind too many skill checks.
Passive skills are also useful for emphasizing a character's investment in specific skills and abilities. The DM narrates things being noticed BY the character with the high passive scores (or all the characters with higher passive scores) which validates the character choices. Rolling dice can be fun but there are lots of things to roll dice for and there are few things both more unrealistic and frustrating to a character that has invested in skills than failing a die roll they are good at when a character with a negative modifier succeeds. Why was it worth investing in these abilities?
For example, DC 15 Arcana check to figure out a magical puzzle, the Barbarian with -1 int and no proficiency in the Arcana skill rolls a 20 (gets a 19) while the wizard with 20 int, expertise in Arcana at level 8 (+11 total mod) rolls a 2 and gets a 13. The wizards passive score in this case is 21. Unless the situation is in combat or another time limited situation where every second counts and there are consequences for failure - the wizard should always succeed while the barbarian would rarely be successful. Skill resolution really needs to reflect the character investment most of the time - which is where passive scores come in. The DM just needs to make sure the credit for success goes to the character with the investment rather than the lucky one most of the time.
P.S. Keep in mind that a DM should usually want the players to find the hidden things - otherwise WHY is the thing hidden in the first place? If the players miss finding something, they will NEVER know it was there to find in the first place unless the DM goes "Haha - you missed the loot" which is a confrontational DM approach. Ideally, hidden items should have a narrative roll to play later even if it isn't found.
Investigation isn’t about what a PC “notices,” that’s Perception. Investigation is about what hat a PC deduces, what they understand or figure out. Perception finds the clues, Investigation figures out what the clues point to. So if a player is having a hard time figuring something out, their passive Investigation can give the DM an in-game reason to give them a nudge in the right direction without the player needing to declare an action that would give the DM a reason to call for an active Investigation check that they might fail at any rate. Make sense?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting