One of the players in my game, a Druid, is only lvl 3 and already she has an insanely high Perception and Passive Perception. I'd kind of like to ambush or surprise the party once in a while but the enemy would either have to be utterly invisible (that's going to get old fast) or have a Stealth Skill close to double digits in order to sneak up.
How do the rest of you deal with this? She doesn't have Dark Vision but even a lantern provides pretty reliable light, never mind one of the several spells the party has.
Her character was built with this in mind so I don't want to take away her best thing but spotting a sniper at 100 yards is making my life harder.
I've got a Monk in the party with a Passive perception of 18, and a Rogue with 22 - as both have the Observant feat.
It just means that ambushes and traps aren't very effective against them. It hasn't prevented other party members from setting off a trap. I don't worry about it any more than I worry about the Champion Fighter killing all the bad guys.
When the antagonists of the adventure run across them the first time, they might try and ambush or trap the party. Then they start to learn. There are tactics the bad guys can use that don't involve surprise or ambush.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Sorry, I might not fully understand the issue here. One highly perceptive Druid usually can only prevent themself from being ambushed.
Referencing the Basic Rules compendium (last sentence underlined for emphasis):
Surprise.
A band of adventurers sneaks up on a bandit camp, springing from the trees to attack them. A gelatinous cube glides down a dungeon passage, unnoticed by the adventurers until the cube engulfs one of them. In these situations, one side of the battle gains surprise over the other.
The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter.
If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends. A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren't.
So, you can still effectively ambush the party--the Druid in question just has a better chance of not being surprised by the ambush. Technically, they don't always get to alert the party of an ambush before it happens.
The player character has something they excel at, so let them do so! :)
Having high perception won't necessarily give them all the information though - sure they can spot someone hidden up ahead, or perhaps the ambush is covered by an illusion - the high perception will alert the character that something isn't right there, you could probably describe them seeing a small animal disappear when moving between bushes. Perception isn't a perfect foil for a trap - it only reveals things that the character can sense.
Let them have it. Passively spotting things is one of the least interesting things you can do in D&D, and spot-it-or-get-hit traps are the least fun. A good trap ideally requires some decisions even if you find it, and a good clue still requires some thought to figure out its meaning. Just noticing things isn't all that it's hyped up to be.
She doesn't have Dark Vision but even a lantern provides pretty reliable light, never mind one of the several spells the party has.
Lights can be seen for miles in the darkness - well outside of the dim light radius it creates for the lantern's holder. Carrying around a light in a dark cave or dungeon isn't always a smart idea. Also, they still have a -5 penalty to sight-based perception checks (e.g. spotting traps, clues, and hidden doors) in the dim light area.
Also understand that you need to be free and in the right position to notice things. Someone in the middle of the marching order might not be in a position to notice an enemy following far behind. Someone that's drawing a map or foraging for food as they travel doesn't contribute their passive Perception either.
Thanks for the tips. My devious mind has evolved a cwever ruse mwahahahahaha!
Also remember that the dynamic isn't supposed to be: How can the DM thwart the player?
Play the bad guys to win ( they want to ), and play them smart ( they'll learn to adapt when they figure out the party is harder to take unawares ), but don't give them DM-level knowledge in their initial plans because you as the DM want to win against the Druid.
DMs who set up with the idea "How can I thwart the players" may find themselves with a table of players thinking "How can I derail the story and thwart what the DM has planned".
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
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.
I posted somewhere else about a player who used a familiar to make it so that ambushes and what not were almost impossible, and it all comes down to a simple summary:
Use it, don't punish the player for optimizing their character, find ways to make the ability mean something or give misinformation, and just roll with the punches.
Sure that druid won't be snuck up on easily, heck speak with animals could do the same if used properly. Ambushes, bah, we don't need no stinking ambush...on the druid...all the time. The rest of the group may not see or hear the coming attack in time, and the druid could misinterpret the cries of a wounded animal/person and walk willingly into an ambush. Then, of course, there's the time you throw a pit trap in the forest and the druid says "Hey guys...there's a trap here" and they walk around it, and no one dies, and everyone lives happily ever after.
I posted somewhere else about a player who used a familiar to make it so that ambushes and what not were almost impossible, and it all comes down to a simple summary:
Use it, don't punish the player for optimizing their character, find ways to make the ability mean something or give misinformation, and just roll with the punches.
Sure that druid won't be snuck up on easily, heck speak with animals could do the same if used properly. Ambushes, bah, we don't need no stinking ambush...on the druid...all the time. The rest of the group may not see or hear the coming attack in time, and the druid could misinterpret the cries of a wounded animal/person and walk willingly into an ambush. Then, of course, there's the time you throw a pit trap in the forest and the druid says "Hey guys...there's a trap here" and they walk around it, and no one dies, and everyone lives happily ever after.
That reminded me of time when the party was walking through a foggy swamp when we heard the cries of a maiden calling for help. My Celestial Warlock, he washed out of Paladin College and so made a pact with celestial instead, which delusions of hero-dom. Shouted to the party "This is probably a trap, so you should stay back. I'm going to rescue the maiden!"
It was a trap. The party then rolled in after it was sprung to the surprise of the hag.
That reminded me of time when the party was walking through a foggy swamp when we heard the cries of a maiden calling for help. My Celestial Warlock, he washed out of Paladin College and so made a pact with celestial instead, which delusions of hero-dom. Shouted to the party "This is probably a trap, so you should stay back. I'm going to rescue the maiden!"
It was a trap. The party then rolled in after it was sprung to the surprise of the hag.
And this is the perfect example of what I mean, figured out it was a trap, sprung the trap...still had to deal with the realization that maidens sometimes eat you...
There's also the other thing that comes with perception, and this is a fun little game to play if you do it right.
I have a large group, 6 players, and each of them has specialized in their own ways, their perception scores range greatly, and they all like to help each other figure out the clues and hidden things I sprinkle throughout the game. It's not uncommon for 2-3 of them to "assist" in searching, reading a missive, or figuring out the meaning behind some embossed carving on a wall. This is where you can have fun with those numbers and make them really feel like they mean something. You'll also promote communication with the players as well, forcing them to talk and listen.
The trick: give specific information based on how well they do with their roll, or how much they beat the DC by. I'll give a couple examples.
-The group walks into a room, in the room there's a false floor set up to crumble if a player steps in the right place. Everyone misses the DC with the exception of the Druid, so you describe the room in detail to the group and then hand a post-it note, text, or whisper to the Druid that s/he sees the uneven floor and notices that it's very peculiar.
-The group finds themselves trapped in a crazy mansion, there's reason to believe that the paintings and murals that are scattered about hold clues to their escape. The group investigates and looks around for these clues. One particular painting catches the groups eye and a couple of them look at it, trying to figure out if there's something special. One person rolls below the DC, one matches the DC and another beats the DC by 6. Each of them hears the description that you give of the painting, then you describe some more detail to the group because someone met the DC. Finally you give a bit more detail to cover the third person's roll, something that gives them a bit more information than a simple success.
--
Now there's a risk to both types of approaches, and it's a matter of how the table works and understands how the information should be received. If you used post-its and whispers, there is a risk that the players may feel that this is something they must hold secret and may not share it easily. Generally this is taken care of by the group asking questions and the player feels the need to speak up, but there is that risk of the player "holding all the cards" rather than sharing.
If you openly divulge the information, and share it in parts based on the rolls, there is the possibility of people magically "knowing" all the information even though their character didn't roll high enough. Most tables, after being prompted with "your character doesn't know this" a few times will begin to understand the difference between the types of information. It helps to call out the person who learned something important rather than just making it an open statement to the table; "Jack, you can tell, from your experience with forgeries, that this is a mock up....".
Both approaches are useful in their own rights, and both methods should be used. It is simply figuring out when it's most appropriate and when it fits the narrative best.
Can the character realistically see the ambush? I had the group encounter a lone Hobgoblin on the road, with Goblins hiding in high points flanking the party, most of the party were concentrated on the lone Hobgoblin, only one player though "Ambush" and had a look around. He couldn't see the Goblins as they were hidden (completely) and below the ridge line, can't see through dirt and stone. Once the combat started the Hobgoblin let out a shout and the goblins moved to within visible range.
Just like you can't see a set ambush behind a door, there is no practical way to see it, regardless of your perception score.
I'll agree with the posters above: your player invested in Perception, so you should let them reap the rewards. I wouldn't go out of your way to thwart the druid.
That said, you should make sure you're actually ruling on Perception correctly. There are numerous circumstances that could impose disadvantage on Perception (the PHB mentions dim light, patchy fog, and foliage, among others), which is a -5 penalty to passive Perception. Dim light is likely to come up pretty frequently, as all the common light sources only shed bright light in a specific area. Illusions, magical darkness, etc. are other ways to facilitate an ambush, but clever characters (and players) might still sense a trap.
He couldn't see the Goblins as they were hidden (completely) and below the ridge line, can't see through dirt and stone. Once the combat started the Hobgoblin let out a shout and the goblins moved to within visible range.
Just like you can't see a set ambush behind a door, there is no practical way to see it, regardless of your perception score.
You're ruling on Perception wrong. It doesn't just represent vision. In the example you described, a highly perceptive character might still have been able to detect the goblins by sound or even smell. Alternatively, they might have noticed a disturbance to the surrounding terrain that was caused by the goblins getting into position. There is no such thing as an impossible Perception check except under highly contrived circumstances.
False Appearance (Object Form Only). While the mimic remains motionless, it is indistinguishable from an ordinary object.
Indistinguishable; adjective: not able to be identified as different or distinct.
No amount of perception checks will help here, as words mean things, and these words basically spell out that a character isn't capable of determining a mimic is a mimic through perception. If you can't tell it's a mimic, you have no way of anticipating an attack. Mechanically speaking, there is no direct way of making the determination offered, unlike something with camouflage, which merely grants advantage on stealth rolls.
You're ruling on Perception wrong. It doesn't just represent vision. In the example you described, a highly perceptive character might still have been able to detect the goblins by sound or even smell. Alternatively, they might have noticed a disturbance to the surrounding terrain that was caused by the goblins getting into position. There is no such thing as an impossible Perception check except under highly contrived circumstances.
They were at range, so no chance to detect by smell, creatures are smart they are not going to be leaving tracks, and I play perception by real world rules, ever heard of the Battle of Lake Trasimene?
Sam_Hain, right you are. A case where a specific rule overrides the general one. There are a couple other creatures with False Appearance as well, I believe. Blights come to mind.
Herald, so your interpretation is that goblins are capable of perfect stealth and never leave any sign of their passing or their presence? It seems what you're describing is a highly contrived situation.
Also, D&D is a fantasy setting and the rules are an intentional abstraction. "Real world rules" need not apply.
Herald, so your interpretation is that goblins are capable of perfect stealth and never leave any sign of their passing or their presence? It seems what you're describing is a highly contrived situation.
Also, D&D is a fantasy setting and the rules are an intentional abstraction. "Real world rules" need not apply.
Players can and have done the same.
Real world rules may not apply but common sense does, having a high perception does not mean you have "Eyes of True Seeing" and perceive "everything". There is a 30' boulder a 100 feet away and I can smell/hear/see the goblin from here, does that make sense to you? The ambushed was performed by intelligent beings and their plans well though out, to say they left tracks on the road that some one "saw" now that's contrived.
The OP asked for some advice, I gave it, they can use it or not, the fact you don't like it is moot.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
One of the players in my game, a Druid, is only lvl 3 and already she has an insanely high Perception and Passive Perception. I'd kind of like to ambush or surprise the party once in a while but the enemy would either have to be utterly invisible (that's going to get old fast) or have a Stealth Skill close to double digits in order to sneak up.
How do the rest of you deal with this? She doesn't have Dark Vision but even a lantern provides pretty reliable light, never mind one of the several spells the party has.
Her character was built with this in mind so I don't want to take away her best thing but spotting a sniper at 100 yards is making my life harder.
Suggestions?
I've got a Monk in the party with a Passive perception of 18, and a Rogue with 22 - as both have the Observant feat.
It just means that ambushes and traps aren't very effective against them. It hasn't prevented other party members from setting off a trap. I don't worry about it any more than I worry about the Champion Fighter killing all the bad guys.
When the antagonists of the adventure run across them the first time, they might try and ambush or trap the party. Then they start to learn. There are tactics the bad guys can use that don't involve surprise or ambush.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Sorry, I might not fully understand the issue here. One highly perceptive Druid usually can only prevent themself from being ambushed.
Referencing the Basic Rules compendium (last sentence underlined for emphasis):
So, you can still effectively ambush the party--the Druid in question just has a better chance of not being surprised by the ambush. Technically, they don't always get to alert the party of an ambush before it happens.
I'd say that you should embrace it!
The player character has something they excel at, so let them do so! :)
Having high perception won't necessarily give them all the information though - sure they can spot someone hidden up ahead, or perhaps the ambush is covered by an illusion - the high perception will alert the character that something isn't right there, you could probably describe them seeing a small animal disappear when moving between bushes. Perception isn't a perfect foil for a trap - it only reveals things that the character can sense.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Thanks for the tips. My devious mind has evolved a cwever ruse mwahahahahaha!
Let them have it. Passively spotting things is one of the least interesting things you can do in D&D, and spot-it-or-get-hit traps are the least fun. A good trap ideally requires some decisions even if you find it, and a good clue still requires some thought to figure out its meaning. Just noticing things isn't all that it's hyped up to be.
Lights can be seen for miles in the darkness - well outside of the dim light radius it creates for the lantern's holder. Carrying around a light in a dark cave or dungeon isn't always a smart idea. Also, they still have a -5 penalty to sight-based perception checks (e.g. spotting traps, clues, and hidden doors) in the dim light area.
Also understand that you need to be free and in the right position to notice things. Someone in the middle of the marching order might not be in a position to notice an enemy following far behind. Someone that's drawing a map or foraging for food as they travel doesn't contribute their passive Perception either.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Also remember that the dynamic isn't supposed to be: How can the DM thwart the player?
Play the bad guys to win ( they want to ), and play them smart ( they'll learn to adapt when they figure out the party is harder to take unawares ), but don't give them DM-level knowledge in their initial plans because you as the DM want to win against the Druid.
DMs who set up with the idea "How can I thwart the players" may find themselves with a table of players thinking "How can I derail the story and thwart what the DM has planned".
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
Lot's of good stuff here. There's also an older thread about active vs. passive perception that has some interesting thoughts.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/2212-passive-vs-active-perception
Also, here's the PHB on the matter.
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.
I posted somewhere else about a player who used a familiar to make it so that ambushes and what not were almost impossible, and it all comes down to a simple summary:
Use it, don't punish the player for optimizing their character, find ways to make the ability mean something or give misinformation, and just roll with the punches.
Sure that druid won't be snuck up on easily, heck speak with animals could do the same if used properly. Ambushes, bah, we don't need no stinking ambush...on the druid...all the time. The rest of the group may not see or hear the coming attack in time, and the druid could misinterpret the cries of a wounded animal/person and walk willingly into an ambush. Then, of course, there's the time you throw a pit trap in the forest and the druid says "Hey guys...there's a trap here" and they walk around it, and no one dies, and everyone lives happily ever after.
That reminded me of time when the party was walking through a foggy swamp when we heard the cries of a maiden calling for help.
My Celestial Warlock, he washed out of Paladin College and so made a pact with celestial instead, which delusions of hero-dom. Shouted to the party "This is probably a trap, so you should stay back. I'm going to rescue the maiden!"
It was a trap. The party then rolled in after it was sprung to the surprise of the hag.
And this is the perfect example of what I mean, figured out it was a trap, sprung the trap...still had to deal with the realization that maidens sometimes eat you...
Keep talking...I'm just over here making notes lol
There's also the other thing that comes with perception, and this is a fun little game to play if you do it right.
I have a large group, 6 players, and each of them has specialized in their own ways, their perception scores range greatly, and they all like to help each other figure out the clues and hidden things I sprinkle throughout the game. It's not uncommon for 2-3 of them to "assist" in searching, reading a missive, or figuring out the meaning behind some embossed carving on a wall. This is where you can have fun with those numbers and make them really feel like they mean something. You'll also promote communication with the players as well, forcing them to talk and listen.
The trick: give specific information based on how well they do with their roll, or how much they beat the DC by. I'll give a couple examples.
-The group walks into a room, in the room there's a false floor set up to crumble if a player steps in the right place. Everyone misses the DC with the exception of the Druid, so you describe the room in detail to the group and then hand a post-it note, text, or whisper to the Druid that s/he sees the uneven floor and notices that it's very peculiar.
-The group finds themselves trapped in a crazy mansion, there's reason to believe that the paintings and murals that are scattered about hold clues to their escape. The group investigates and looks around for these clues. One particular painting catches the groups eye and a couple of them look at it, trying to figure out if there's something special. One person rolls below the DC, one matches the DC and another beats the DC by 6. Each of them hears the description that you give of the painting, then you describe some more detail to the group because someone met the DC. Finally you give a bit more detail to cover the third person's roll, something that gives them a bit more information than a simple success.
--
Now there's a risk to both types of approaches, and it's a matter of how the table works and understands how the information should be received. If you used post-its and whispers, there is a risk that the players may feel that this is something they must hold secret and may not share it easily. Generally this is taken care of by the group asking questions and the player feels the need to speak up, but there is that risk of the player "holding all the cards" rather than sharing.
If you openly divulge the information, and share it in parts based on the rolls, there is the possibility of people magically "knowing" all the information even though their character didn't roll high enough. Most tables, after being prompted with "your character doesn't know this" a few times will begin to understand the difference between the types of information. It helps to call out the person who learned something important rather than just making it an open statement to the table; "Jack, you can tell, from your experience with forgeries, that this is a mock up....".
Both approaches are useful in their own rights, and both methods should be used. It is simply figuring out when it's most appropriate and when it fits the narrative best.
I like to play it like this:
Can the character realistically see the ambush? I had the group encounter a lone Hobgoblin on the road, with Goblins hiding in high points flanking the party, most of the party were concentrated on the lone Hobgoblin, only one player though "Ambush" and had a look around. He couldn't see the Goblins as they were hidden (completely) and below the ridge line, can't see through dirt and stone. Once the combat started the Hobgoblin let out a shout and the goblins moved to within visible range.
Just like you can't see a set ambush behind a door, there is no practical way to see it, regardless of your perception score.
I'll agree with the posters above: your player invested in Perception, so you should let them reap the rewards. I wouldn't go out of your way to thwart the druid.
That said, you should make sure you're actually ruling on Perception correctly. There are numerous circumstances that could impose disadvantage on Perception (the PHB mentions dim light, patchy fog, and foliage, among others), which is a -5 penalty to passive Perception. Dim light is likely to come up pretty frequently, as all the common light sources only shed bright light in a specific area. Illusions, magical darkness, etc. are other ways to facilitate an ambush, but clever characters (and players) might still sense a trap.
You're ruling on Perception wrong. It doesn't just represent vision. In the example you described, a highly perceptive character might still have been able to detect the goblins by sound or even smell. Alternatively, they might have noticed a disturbance to the surrounding terrain that was caused by the goblins getting into position. There is no such thing as an impossible Perception check except under highly contrived circumstances.
Also: mimics.
Indistinguishable; adjective: not able to be identified as different or distinct.
No amount of perception checks will help here, as words mean things, and these words basically spell out that a character isn't capable of determining a mimic is a mimic through perception. If you can't tell it's a mimic, you have no way of anticipating an attack. Mechanically speaking, there is no direct way of making the determination offered, unlike something with camouflage, which merely grants advantage on stealth rolls.
Ongoing Projects: The Mimic Book of Mimics :: SHARK WEEK
Completed Projects: The Trick-or-Treat Table
My Homebrews: Races :: Classes :: Spells :: Items :: Monsters
They were at range, so no chance to detect by smell, creatures are smart they are not going to be leaving tracks, and I play perception by real world rules, ever heard of the Battle of Lake Trasimene?
Sam_Hain, right you are. A case where a specific rule overrides the general one. There are a couple other creatures with False Appearance as well, I believe. Blights come to mind.
Herald, so your interpretation is that goblins are capable of perfect stealth and never leave any sign of their passing or their presence? It seems what you're describing is a highly contrived situation.
Also, D&D is a fantasy setting and the rules are an intentional abstraction. "Real world rules" need not apply.
Kill that druid
Free the DMs
Players can and have done the same.
Real world rules may not apply but common sense does, having a high perception does not mean you have "Eyes of True Seeing" and perceive "everything". There is a 30' boulder a 100 feet away and I can smell/hear/see the goblin from here, does that make sense to you? The ambushed was performed by intelligent beings and their plans well though out, to say they left tracks on the road that some one "saw" now that's contrived.
The OP asked for some advice, I gave it, they can use it or not, the fact you don't like it is moot.