To be honest, I never even roll for the orcs. I usually just decide how “Stealthy” they are being and assign an appropriate DC between 12-17 most of the time.
This is a completely viable alternative. If you want the party to see them, set the DC at or below their Passive Perception, if you want them to have a chance, set it a little higher so they have to roll.
I like a little bit of randomness in my campaign, but hate when too many die rolls stop the flow...thus my alternative. The Orcs (or whatever NPC group) may do a very good job or a not so good job setting up, so having a bit of randomness to see how well they do aids in the story my group tells.
To be honest, I never even roll for the orcs. I usually just decide how “Stealthy” they are being and assign an appropriate DC between 12-17 most of the time.
This is a completely viable alternative. If you want the party to see them, set the DC at or below their Passive Perception, if you want them to have a chance, set it a little higher so they have to roll.
I like a little bit of randomness in my campaign, but hate when too many die rolls stop the flow...thus my alternative. The Orcs (or whatever NPC group) may do a very good job or a not so good job setting up, so having a bit of randomness to see how well they do aids in the story my group tells.
I can dig that. But sometimes I have the players roll just for the feeling of randomness too and they don’t seem to notice the difference. I like to stand and walk around while I DM, so I also frequently have them make rolls that DMs typically roll behind a screen. I don’t use one of them either. So I’ll say “someone roll percentile for me” or “someone roll me a d20” so they KNOW I’m not fudging rolls. When I need to make sure that I roll the dice I sit down before the encounter, make the roll(s) I MIGHT need to fudge like combat, and then go back to standing/walking.
Passive are literally awareness of your surrounding.
Aka invrstigation would be the brai doing maths unconsciously. Same with passives insight and perception. It is unconscious things that your mind picks. Active is not unconscious it is conscious. As such its ridiculous to think people are better at unconscious stuff. The same happens when you realise that orc passes right besides someone and yet that person doesnt see it if the players dont tell they check. Thus sometimes the dm requires roll. Thats literally the job of the dm.
To me... Using passives for a dm is just showing how lazy that dm is. But thats my thinking and im not telling you not to. But to me... Fate of the dice. Thats something most of you from reading your posts. Most of you preffer to fudge rolls in order for better story... I dont... I roll in front of players and i require them to live by the rolls.
Fate has a great way of making things fun at the right moments. Dont try to convince me of using passives... You wont... They dont make sense.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
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.
Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:
10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check
If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.
Regardless of what you call it, the mechanical use of "Passive Checks" is to take 10 + all modifiers which is the same mechanical use of "Taking a 10". Just because we generally only use it for Perception, Insight, Investigation doesn't mean that is the only way. Jumping across a ditch can be a Passive Athletics check. Knowing George Washington was the 1st POTUS can be a Passive History check if you are American. Recognizing Poison Ivy could be a Passive Nature check. Normally, we wouldn't consider those as needing to be rolled for...you know it or you don't, but as a Game Mechanic, it is the same as taking a 10.
Passive are literally awareness of your surrounding.
Aka invrstigation would be the brai doing maths unconsciously. Same with passives insight and perception. It is unconscious things that your mind picks. Active is not unconscious it is conscious. As such its ridiculous to think people are better at unconscious stuff. The same happens when you realise that orc passes right besides someone and yet that person doesnt see it if the players dont tell they check. Thus sometimes the dm requires roll. Thats literally the job of the dm.
To me... Using passives for a dm is just showing how lazy that dm is. But thats my thinking and im not telling you not to. But to me... Fate of the dice. Thats something most of you from reading your posts. Most of you preffer to fudge rolls in order for better story... I dont... I roll in front of players and i require them to live by the rolls.
Fate has a great way of making things fun at the right moments. Dont try to convince me of using passives... You wont... They dont make sense.
Wait, wait, wait....the first half talks about not using passive scores, instead allowing players to "take 10", then you talk about the "fate of the dice" and to live by the rolls. So my question to this is what makes 'taking 10" better than passive scores when it comes to "fate of the dice"? Because that post is HIGHLY contradictory.
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.
Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:
10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check
If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.
Regardless of what you call it, the mechanical use of "Passive Checks" is to take 10 + all modifiers which is the same mechanical use of "Taking a 10". Just because we generally only use it for Perception, Insight, Investigation doesn't mean that is the only way. Jumping across a ditch can be a Passive Athletics check. Knowing George Washington was the 1st POTUS can be a Passive History check if you are American. Recognizing Poison Ivy could be a Passive Nature check. Normally, we wouldn't consider those as needing to be rolled for...you know it or you don't, but as a Game Mechanic, it is the same as taking a 10.
I think the difference is if you tell your player to roll for investigation and they say well I just want to use my passive score, that's probably not allowed. But taking 10 is an active thing you can do instead of rolling....of course I might be reading that wrong. If I am reading that wrong, then "taking 10" is literally the exact same thing as passive scores.
The problem is the use of the word "Passive." We take it as meaning the Character is Passively doing something...walking along and you see something out of the corner of the eye. I think DnD uses "Passive" as being the opposite of the Player making an Active roll. I believe they changed it from "taking a 10" in order to have it only be used when it's either A, something the Character is not aware of, or B, something you do so often you don't even think about it.
Think about your day. Driving to work technically is a "Vehicle" skill check, but because it is common, there is no reason to make a roll so a Passive Vehicle check is used. A child runs across the road, suddenly a roll would be needed. The front door is stuck so you tug on it to open it is an "Athletics" skill check, but it's not that difficult so no need to make a roll so its Passive Athletics. You didn't realize it was locked, make a roll and if you succeed you break the door. Your keys fell behind the dresser, Passive Investigation is used because it's the most likely place to look. They keys fell into a hole in the floor under the dresser, make an Active check.
In all of these situations, it's not the Player saying I'll take a 10. It's the DM determining that it is so easy or commonplace that the Character will succeed. The DM and Player aren't necessarily making the conscious decision to take a 10 or use Passive, but they are effectively doing it. With the Door situation above, the stuck door has a DC of 10 to open. The 16 Str character would just shoulder it open and the DM and Player aren't likely to think of a "roll" being made. But if the 7 Str character tries, both DM and Player would consider it normal to make a roll.
One of the funniest scenes in Critical Role Season 1 is when Scanlan, under the influence of a Love Philter, tries to sneak into bed with Percy and Vex. Laura yells out she has a 21 Passive Perception. Because Vex is not aware that Scanlan is trying to sneak into the bed, using the Passive number as the DC for Scanlan's Stealth check makes sense as opposed to her making a roll. Had she been in a chair facing the door, Matt may have required her to make a check to see if she saw Scanlan sneak in through the secret door using Scanlan's Stealth roll as the DC. Had she failed, it would have been because she was so focused on the door, she didn't see him coming from the side.
A good rule of thumb, if the Attribute is higher than the DC, consider using the Passive score. If the character is walking along and jumps over a 5' wide ditch with a DC of 10 (Average difficulty), let them take the Passive score if their Str is 10 or higher. If there are spikes in the ditch, even though the jump is still Average difficulty, have them make a roll.
The Player shouldn't get to decide that they are going to use their Passive ability. As soon as they decide to use an Ability, it becomes Active. Even though it is on the Player Sheet, the Passive ability is a tool for the DM to use.
A very smart man with a very bad temper once said that the dice are both the reason the game works and your worst enemy. Only use them if:
A.) there is a reasonable chance of success. No letting players cast Minor Wish on a Nat 20 - if somebody tries to jump a 300-foot gorge using a bedsheet as a set of wings, the DM is not obliged to let them roll. B.) There is a reasonable chance of failure. If the PC is putting their armor on in the inn that morning, no need for a Dexterity check to see if they can get all the straps buckled down. Don't be that guy. Nobody likes that guy. And C.) the party does not have time for multiple attempts. If nothing is stopping the party from, for example, standing around while the thief takes however long it takes to crack the lock? Just let the thief crack the lock and move on with your game.
Passive scores are useful for, as Griz says, informing the DM of what he can reveal to the players without bothering with rolls. I keep track of passive sensory and knowledge abilities, and if a scene calls for information related to spotting something OR if the scene has significance recognizable by someone familiar with Arcana, History, Religion, or such and so forth, I'll just give them the information if their passive hits the DC rather than make them roll for it. it saves time at the table and it also actually encourages players to take knowledge proficiencies instead of just zerging the same four always-on Everybody Needs These options all'a damn time. Since they know passive knowledge scores will actually help them, the way that things like studying useful knowledge of the world should.
The reason they put passive rolls is simply to stop a roll from being made. as in, they wanted a ay for players to have a roll without having the DM or player to know the roll was made, and thus came out with passive. as in, instead of asking th eplayer to roll, you are simply checking his stat and take the average. that way if something is hidden your players wont know. this ruling was not addded to 5e as a measure of showing off what you can and cannot roll, but it was simply added forthe DM to have "hidden" rolls. you guys are going way too far into thinking and thus you literally distort the official ruling. the original ruling of this was very simple... if there is something hidden and you dont want your players to know its there, just roll for them. but roling for them still gives them a hint of something amist, because you rolled dice out of nowhere. so to stop that as well, why not just put a number for the players. thats why passive came up for. it is simply a way for DM to keep things hidden without players having to roll or worse the DM having to roll out of nowhere telling their players that something is a mist.
heres why it doesn't work at all... while the premise is good and the idea is sound, there are two flaws to the ruling... - you expect your players to roll average on their dice and thus take that average. thats not right because if there was a chance of seeing something to begin with, then a real roll should of been done right away. if there is a chance for players to see something, they should definitely roll for it. as a DM it is literally your duty to tell them there is a chance at it. they, with that chance, should also have the right to roll a higher chance then a 10. the same way they should also have a chance at rolling lower then 10. thus, the average bullshit is broken right away.
- players metagaming, thus you want to keep the secret from them and not them knowing there is something. This renders the whole concept a stupidity for sake of keeping things a secret. if you wanted it to be a secret, then why are you even playing passives ? if i want something secret, i will not ask any rolls, and i will not tell my players, thats gonna be it, secret kept. no need for any passive checks.
these two things are what makes passives a stupidity from the get go. its not working as intended, and now players are literally distorting it to their own ends and means without caring for the reason the thing even exists. which prooves even more that the system doesn't work. this seems to me like just a gimmick to stop metagaming problems. this is something you should talk to your players about, not use it for whatever reason you can think of.
@yurei1453 A.) there is a reasonable chance of success. No letting players cast Minor Wish on a Nat 20 - if somebody tries to jump a 300-foot gorge using a bedsheet as a set of wings, the DM is not obliged to let them roll. Answer: But it is much more fun to let them do it and roll knowing the DC is set to 50. which not even a rogue on a crit can attain. thus why are you stopping a potential fun scene from happenning just because you think its dumb to begin with ? in the end the scene will make your friends laugh. Exemple of keyleth in critical roll who dive jump a thousand feet from a sheered cliff. very very dumb... but very very fun scene for everyone who played !
B.) There is a reasonable chance of failure. If the PC is putting their armor on in the inn that morning, no need for a Dexterity check to see if they can get all the straps buckled down. Don't be that guy. Nobody likes that guy. Answer: If there is a chance of faillure to begin with, then why use passives ? the players should roll that die. but i agree that rolling for straps on armor is dumb and stupid... unless it is because the armor is made specially to backlash on the player ! *thinks madly about cursing an armor like that*
And C.) the party does not have time for multiple attempts. If nothing is stopping the party from, for example, standing around while the thief takes however long it takes to crack the lock? Just let the thief crack the lock and move on with your game. Answer: Except if you are a great DM and you know lockpicks can break in a lock, things the players use aren't infinite and they also run the risk of simply breaking th elock to begin with. there is a real chance at destroying a lock and not being able to lock it back or unlock it via normal means. in the exemple you give, i'd give the players about 3 tries before something bad happens with the lock. the only exception would be... a natural 1 breaking either the lock for good, or the lock picks.and a natural 20 which would pick the lock without any scratch or drawback. in any case the exemple given does have a reason to have numerous tries. either way i'm back to the first point... saying no simply leads to the normal boring route, where rolling the dice may lead to fun scenes.
in their vessel in the great wild space, the security chief centaur Kog uses the ships inboard scrying to watch men doing their shifts. except after the inital rolling to see if the agents succeed on their wisdom saves or not... he see one of them in his bed actually doing something that should be censured... this leads to an interesting scene where the security chief just want to toy with the guy by speaking in the speakers, and the rest of the boat knowing about it. was that invented on the moment ? sure, could i have skipped to the next day because i had nothing planned that night ? sure, but would it have been fun for the players to end on a funny scene ? nope it would of been boring old routines. instead it placed drama and fun in the hands of the players. all of that because one player decided to use the scrying cameras of the ship.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Dude, you don't ask for passive checks, you do them "in secret" Get everyone to tell you their passive numbers in advance and keep them listed so that you never have to ask and it stays a secret.
Anyways. On the actual topic of 'Homebrew rules you use in your game', has anyone else looked into two-weapon fighting tweaks? it's pretty intensely good until level 5 for most martials, at which point TWF swiftly falls off as more powerful bonus-action options come online and the value of rolling a 1d4 dagger attack with no ability bonus drops precipitously. And yet, the Cool Dual-Wield Guy is a popular and enduring character archetype which is very poorly served by the utterly awful Dual Wielder feat.
In recent games I've experimented with allowing characters to use TWF if one of the weapons they're using is Light, rather than requiring that both are. This leads to interesting dissimilar weapon pairings, while also letting players use classic standby options like rapier/dagger (seriously, in what world do you need a feat to do the Original Standard Fencing Combo?) or longsword/shortsword daisho pairs for the anime fans in your game. it improves flexibility and makes the folks who want to be a slick dual-wield guy feel a little less like the Special Needs kids next to a sword-and-boarder with double their AC or a Great Weapon Master guy dealing forty damage per attack. it's been fun to see some of the cool stuff players come up with to do.
I also allow for Rapier/Dagger like that, I mean why not, right?
Another thing I allow is for some weapons to different Damage types. If a Character is "Slashing" with an Axe to ill effect (because of resistance for example) I will allow that player to strike with Disadvantage and do Bludgeoning with it instead. Or allow a Long Sword to do Piercing, or a Shortsword to do Slashing with disadvantage as well. Stuff like that.
I don't even give the player disadvantage. If they're using a weapon well known for being particularly versatile (warhammers being the classic example) and they tell me they want to adjust their style and reverse the weapon or switch to different attack types? I'll just let them have the logical damage type change. Heh, some of that may be from playing Pillars of Eternity and getting super spoiled on the game just assuming someone trained with the use of the weapon will use whatever the best tools of that weapon is for the situation.
You'd be surprised how much more strategic players will start to be with martial attacks once they know they can get effects like that. Suddenly they start considering which weapon they're using much more carefully rather than just fishing for the biggest damage die, and you start getting them asking for things like hooking limbs with the backspike of a halberd or pulling other actual martial stuff. Makes the game so much more interesting.
That’s honestly my biggest complaint with 5e is how little agency there is after Character creation. Around level 3 you make one more real choice and that’s it unless you go with something like the battle master and even that’s limited. Even choosing spells for a caster is a little ho-hum. I remember in older editions spending a week to decide if I wanted to improve an existing proficiency or add a new one, or if I should pick up expertise in a weapon or learn how to use a new one and which one to learn. Now every Rogue of the same level is equally proficiency at hiding and lock picking and climbing. I miss having to make those kinds of meaningful choices every level.
I dunno my current rogue is not even proficient in stealth and only has thief tool proficiency because it comes with the class. Your vision of rogues is pretty limited if they all have stealth and thief tool expertise.
@iamspotsta hidden checks.... lol ! i have been asking you the question since the get go, yet you never answer it. why are you even entertaining the possibility of them having successes if you dont want them to even know there are things around them ? if you just dont want them to know your stuff is there, then just make it so. there is no need for a check at all at that point. yet you continu to think they should need a check just in case you change your mind.
as for your point on the whole choice... choices that one makes every time they level up... - do i multiclass to gain other benefits i want. - do i pick a feat to add to my versatility or do i choose the stat boost. - role play wise, do i need those instruments ? do i pick new languages, do i want to get the new tools the DM showed us
honestly i agree, your views are quite limited if you don't see any choices for your characters.
@yurei
i think the dual wiedler feat makes the game much more balanced then you think... because the dual wielder feat lets you use two long swords. and dual wielders can also gain extra attacks still. a ranger, paladin or fighter all benefits from the dual wielder feat and actually challenges anyone except the rogue in damage. mathematically speaking, the feat makes it worth it. thats why its a popular build. while even there the rogue is nothing without sneak attack, so he also benefits from dual wielding just because more attacks, means more chances at criticals and more chances at bringing their own abilities down on the opponents. all those advantages makes the thing worth it. the same way barbarian with reckless attacks are worth it just because more chances at critically hitting something.
i think what makes you wary of the feat and the whole thing, is that you look at classes features and wonder why anybody would lose their bonus action hex or hunters mark for another attack. if you look at the monk and its flurry of blows, you realise how martial arts sucks baecause nobody just do a single bonus attack, they all waste the ki for flurry of blows. but reality is, all the classes that actually benefits from the bonus attack, actually don't have that much bonus action, action. Rogues only have cunning action, thats literally all they have and thats literally just to get away from their enemy, they dont want to get away too often, they often want to stay there and make sure their sneak attack passes thru for major damage. the bonus action is a well worth choice in case the first attack misses. Paladins can smite every attacks, they get only two attacks, having a third attack to smite on really piles the damage in their favor. the fighter can get a whooping 8 attacks at level 20 along with action surge, a 9th attack seems not worth it, but it really is. the ranger is rarely a melee guy, thats why you dont see him as that, but his arsenal isn't just used for long range fighting. he has a numerous ways of taking the pain to the enemy in melee. once he has put hunters mark, that bonus attack will make him more lethal.
overall, damage wise and mathematically, the whole thing is sound and works. and in many games that bonus action attack actually helped my barbarian to deal the extra damage he missed in the first attack. and when i touched with all attacks, the damage was awesome. fighter, ranger and paladins also ave access to their fighting style which also adds up to the damage of each attacks.
DM of two gaming groups. Likes to create stuff. Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games --> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
@iamspotsta hidden checks.... lol ! i have been asking you the question since the get go, yet you never answer it. why are you even entertaining the possibility of them having successes if you dont want them to even know there are things around them ? if you just dont want them to know your stuff is there, then just make it so. there is no need for a check at all at that point. yet you continu to think they should need a check just in case you change your mind.
The group of orcs setting up an Ambush....the DC for their Stealth is the Passive Perception of their target. Party member with the highest Passive Perception is 21, so the Orcs have to beat that DC in order to be hidden from them. They fail, the party notices them. They succeed, and they are hidden. If the Party rides through the site without taking the precaution of having a lookout, the orcs stay hidden and spring the surprise. If they have Characters keeping an eye out, those character roll a Perception Check against the Stealth roll of the Orcs. If they succeed, they warn the party in time. If not, the party gets Surprised.
Had the DM just had them make the roll when they enter the site, the Players now know something is up even if they fail...information the Characters don't have. It is a way to stay immersive. From what you've said, you don't care enough about Passive Checks to understand how to use them properly, and that's fine. If that's how you want to play the game, nobody is going to stop you. Everyone else who has replied, however, understands how they are used and find them effective.
@Arden: Your point is valid. I am simply making a broad generalization about 5e as compared to older editions which were much more noodley, back when Pick Pockets, Find/Remove Traps, Hide in Shadows, Climb Walls, etc. were purchased by percentage. Now things are much more streamlined which makes for faster play and easier entry into the hobby, but I feel a loss of overall player agency as compared to older editions. There are pros and cons to both ways, I just wish the Subclasses had more choices at their appropriate lvls.
I was talking about the actual Dual Wielder feat. The one that says "you can dual wield Big Boi weapons instead of Little Boi weapons, You can draw them both at the same time, and you get half a shield bonus to your AC because we know this feat otherwise completely sucks and we're trying to trap you into taking it."
I am fully aware that Two-Weapon Fighting exists and can be a use of the bonus action for any class. TWF is actually a very powerful ability up until level 5, when martials gain their actual second attack, as TWF allows for a second swing at reduced damage from level 1. After level 5 the value of two-weapon fighting drops precipitously, especially if you only have one worthwhile magical weapon and your off-hand attack is a mundane dagger.
Tha actual Dual Wielder feat is only useful if you have multiple large magical weapons you want to swing with in one turn. Otherwise you can do dual shortswords for a d6 damage die in each hand on Dex or dual handaxes for a d6 damage die in each hand on Strength. Dual Wielder lets you turn the d6s into d8s by using Big Boi sticks instead. That's an average of one point of extra damage per swing if one discounts magical bonuses
That is what the Dual Wielder feat gets you - two to three extra points of damage a turn and +1AC. The Dual Wielder feat is bad and it should feel bad, especially if you don't also have Two-Weapon Fighting Style from being a Fighter or Ranger. TWFS with a modest +3 attack skill modifier is worth the same average damage boost as Dual Wielder, and you don't have to be greedy with your party's magical loot to keep it going.
Add in a twin strike portion perhaps, allow them to use their reaction to attack a target that attacked them to land a hit with both weapons or when you make an attack of opportunity you can attack with both weapons. They could add the dual wield fighting style damage for off-hand attacks to the feat. There are lots of options, I also feel the extra free action and 1ac is lackluster compared to its two-hand and ranged counterparts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is a completely viable alternative. If you want the party to see them, set the DC at or below their Passive Perception, if you want them to have a chance, set it a little higher so they have to roll.
I like a little bit of randomness in my campaign, but hate when too many die rolls stop the flow...thus my alternative. The Orcs (or whatever NPC group) may do a very good job or a not so good job setting up, so having a bit of randomness to see how well they do aids in the story my group tells.
If you're gonna be a bear...be a Grizzly.
I can dig that.
I can dig that. But sometimes I have the players roll just for the feeling of randomness too and they don’t seem to notice the difference. I like to stand and walk around while I DM, so I also frequently have them make rolls that DMs typically roll behind a screen. I don’t use one of them either. So I’ll say “someone roll percentile for me” or “someone roll me a d20” so they KNOW I’m not fudging rolls. When I need to make sure that I roll the dice I sit down before the encounter, make the roll(s) I MIGHT need to fudge like combat, and then go back to standing/walking.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
To each its own...
But i will say... Passives is not taking 10.
Passive are literally awareness of your surrounding.
Aka invrstigation would be the brai doing maths unconsciously. Same with passives insight and perception. It is unconscious things that your mind picks. Active is not unconscious it is conscious. As such its ridiculous to think people are better at unconscious stuff. The same happens when you realise that orc passes right besides someone and yet that person doesnt see it if the players dont tell they check. Thus sometimes the dm requires roll. Thats literally the job of the dm.
To me... Using passives for a dm is just showing how lazy that dm is. But thats my thinking and im not telling you not to. But to me... Fate of the dice. Thats something most of you from reading your posts. Most of you preffer to fudge rolls in order for better story... I dont... I roll in front of players and i require them to live by the rolls.
Fate has a great way of making things fun at the right moments. Dont try to convince me of using passives... You wont... They dont make sense.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
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.
Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:
10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check
If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.
Regardless of what you call it, the mechanical use of "Passive Checks" is to take 10 + all modifiers which is the same mechanical use of "Taking a 10". Just because we generally only use it for Perception, Insight, Investigation doesn't mean that is the only way. Jumping across a ditch can be a Passive Athletics check. Knowing George Washington was the 1st POTUS can be a Passive History check if you are American. Recognizing Poison Ivy could be a Passive Nature check. Normally, we wouldn't consider those as needing to be rolled for...you know it or you don't, but as a Game Mechanic, it is the same as taking a 10.
If you're gonna be a bear...be a Grizzly.
Wait, wait, wait....the first half talks about not using passive scores, instead allowing players to "take 10", then you talk about the "fate of the dice" and to live by the rolls. So my question to this is what makes 'taking 10" better than passive scores when it comes to "fate of the dice"? Because that post is HIGHLY contradictory.
I think the difference is if you tell your player to roll for investigation and they say well I just want to use my passive score, that's probably not allowed. But taking 10 is an active thing you can do instead of rolling....of course I might be reading that wrong. If I am reading that wrong, then "taking 10" is literally the exact same thing as passive scores.
Published Subclasses
The problem is the use of the word "Passive." We take it as meaning the Character is Passively doing something...walking along and you see something out of the corner of the eye. I think DnD uses "Passive" as being the opposite of the Player making an Active roll. I believe they changed it from "taking a 10" in order to have it only be used when it's either A, something the Character is not aware of, or B, something you do so often you don't even think about it.
Think about your day. Driving to work technically is a "Vehicle" skill check, but because it is common, there is no reason to make a roll so a Passive Vehicle check is used. A child runs across the road, suddenly a roll would be needed. The front door is stuck so you tug on it to open it is an "Athletics" skill check, but it's not that difficult so no need to make a roll so its Passive Athletics. You didn't realize it was locked, make a roll and if you succeed you break the door. Your keys fell behind the dresser, Passive Investigation is used because it's the most likely place to look. They keys fell into a hole in the floor under the dresser, make an Active check.
In all of these situations, it's not the Player saying I'll take a 10. It's the DM determining that it is so easy or commonplace that the Character will succeed. The DM and Player aren't necessarily making the conscious decision to take a 10 or use Passive, but they are effectively doing it. With the Door situation above, the stuck door has a DC of 10 to open. The 16 Str character would just shoulder it open and the DM and Player aren't likely to think of a "roll" being made. But if the 7 Str character tries, both DM and Player would consider it normal to make a roll.
One of the funniest scenes in Critical Role Season 1 is when Scanlan, under the influence of a Love Philter, tries to sneak into bed with Percy and Vex. Laura yells out she has a 21 Passive Perception. Because Vex is not aware that Scanlan is trying to sneak into the bed, using the Passive number as the DC for Scanlan's Stealth check makes sense as opposed to her making a roll. Had she been in a chair facing the door, Matt may have required her to make a check to see if she saw Scanlan sneak in through the secret door using Scanlan's Stealth roll as the DC. Had she failed, it would have been because she was so focused on the door, she didn't see him coming from the side.
A good rule of thumb, if the Attribute is higher than the DC, consider using the Passive score. If the character is walking along and jumps over a 5' wide ditch with a DC of 10 (Average difficulty), let them take the Passive score if their Str is 10 or higher. If there are spikes in the ditch, even though the jump is still Average difficulty, have them make a roll.
The Player shouldn't get to decide that they are going to use their Passive ability. As soon as they decide to use an Ability, it becomes Active. Even though it is on the Player Sheet, the Passive ability is a tool for the DM to use.
If you're gonna be a bear...be a Grizzly.
A very smart man with a very bad temper once said that the dice are both the reason the game works and your worst enemy. Only use them if:
A.) there is a reasonable chance of success. No letting players cast Minor Wish on a Nat 20 - if somebody tries to jump a 300-foot gorge using a bedsheet as a set of wings, the DM is not obliged to let them roll.
B.) There is a reasonable chance of failure. If the PC is putting their armor on in the inn that morning, no need for a Dexterity check to see if they can get all the straps buckled down. Don't be that guy. Nobody likes that guy.
And C.) the party does not have time for multiple attempts. If nothing is stopping the party from, for example, standing around while the thief takes however long it takes to crack the lock? Just let the thief crack the lock and move on with your game.
Passive scores are useful for, as Griz says, informing the DM of what he can reveal to the players without bothering with rolls. I keep track of passive sensory and knowledge abilities, and if a scene calls for information related to spotting something OR if the scene has significance recognizable by someone familiar with Arcana, History, Religion, or such and so forth, I'll just give them the information if their passive hits the DC rather than make them roll for it. it saves time at the table and it also actually encourages players to take knowledge proficiencies instead of just zerging the same four always-on Everybody Needs These options all'a damn time. Since they know passive knowledge scores will actually help them, the way that things like studying useful knowledge of the world should.
Please do not contact or message me.
The reason they put passive rolls is simply to stop a roll from being made. as in, they wanted a ay for players to have a roll without having the DM or player to know the roll was made, and thus came out with passive. as in, instead of asking th eplayer to roll, you are simply checking his stat and take the average. that way if something is hidden your players wont know. this ruling was not addded to 5e as a measure of showing off what you can and cannot roll, but it was simply added forthe DM to have "hidden" rolls. you guys are going way too far into thinking and thus you literally distort the official ruling. the original ruling of this was very simple... if there is something hidden and you dont want your players to know its there, just roll for them. but roling for them still gives them a hint of something amist, because you rolled dice out of nowhere. so to stop that as well, why not just put a number for the players. thats why passive came up for. it is simply a way for DM to keep things hidden without players having to roll or worse the DM having to roll out of nowhere telling their players that something is a mist.
heres why it doesn't work at all... while the premise is good and the idea is sound, there are two flaws to the ruling...
- you expect your players to roll average on their dice and thus take that average.
thats not right because if there was a chance of seeing something to begin with, then a real roll should of been done right away.
if there is a chance for players to see something, they should definitely roll for it. as a DM it is literally your duty to tell them there is a chance at it.
they, with that chance, should also have the right to roll a higher chance then a 10. the same way they should also have a chance at rolling lower then 10.
thus, the average bullshit is broken right away.
- players metagaming, thus you want to keep the secret from them and not them knowing there is something.
This renders the whole concept a stupidity for sake of keeping things a secret. if you wanted it to be a secret, then why are you even playing passives ? if i want something secret, i will not ask any rolls, and i will not tell my players, thats gonna be it, secret kept. no need for any passive checks.
these two things are what makes passives a stupidity from the get go. its not working as intended, and now players are literally distorting it to their own ends and means without caring for the reason the thing even exists. which prooves even more that the system doesn't work. this seems to me like just a gimmick to stop metagaming problems. this is something you should talk to your players about, not use it for whatever reason you can think of.
@yurei1453
A.) there is a reasonable chance of success. No letting players cast Minor Wish on a Nat 20 - if somebody tries to jump a 300-foot gorge using a bedsheet as a set of wings, the DM is not obliged to let them roll.
Answer: But it is much more fun to let them do it and roll knowing the DC is set to 50. which not even a rogue on a crit can attain. thus why are you stopping a potential fun scene from happenning just because you think its dumb to begin with ? in the end the scene will make your friends laugh. Exemple of keyleth in critical roll who dive jump a thousand feet from a sheered cliff. very very dumb... but very very fun scene for everyone who played !
B.) There is a reasonable chance of failure. If the PC is putting their armor on in the inn that morning, no need for a Dexterity check to see if they can get all the straps buckled down. Don't be that guy. Nobody likes that guy.
Answer: If there is a chance of faillure to begin with, then why use passives ? the players should roll that die. but i agree that rolling for straps on armor is dumb and stupid... unless it is because the armor is made specially to backlash on the player ! *thinks madly about cursing an armor like that*
And C.) the party does not have time for multiple attempts. If nothing is stopping the party from, for example, standing around while the thief takes however long it takes to crack the lock? Just let the thief crack the lock and move on with your game.
Answer: Except if you are a great DM and you know lockpicks can break in a lock, things the players use aren't infinite and they also run the risk of simply breaking th elock to begin with. there is a real chance at destroying a lock and not being able to lock it back or unlock it via normal means. in the exemple you give, i'd give the players about 3 tries before something bad happens with the lock. the only exception would be... a natural 1 breaking either the lock for good, or the lock picks.and a natural 20 which would pick the lock without any scratch or drawback. in any case the exemple given does have a reason to have numerous tries. either way i'm back to the first point... saying no simply leads to the normal boring route, where rolling the dice may lead to fun scenes.
in their vessel in the great wild space, the security chief centaur Kog uses the ships inboard scrying to watch men doing their shifts. except after the inital rolling to see if the agents succeed on their wisdom saves or not... he see one of them in his bed actually doing something that should be censured... this leads to an interesting scene where the security chief just want to toy with the guy by speaking in the speakers, and the rest of the boat knowing about it. was that invented on the moment ? sure, could i have skipped to the next day because i had nothing planned that night ? sure, but would it have been fun for the players to end on a funny scene ? nope it would of been boring old routines. instead it placed drama and fun in the hands of the players. all of that because one player decided to use the scrying cameras of the ship.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
Dude, you don't ask for passive checks, you do them "in secret" Get everyone to tell you their passive numbers in advance and keep them listed so that you never have to ask and it stays a secret.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Sigh.
OTL
Run your games however you want, Paladin.
Anyways. On the actual topic of 'Homebrew rules you use in your game', has anyone else looked into two-weapon fighting tweaks? it's pretty intensely good until level 5 for most martials, at which point TWF swiftly falls off as more powerful bonus-action options come online and the value of rolling a 1d4 dagger attack with no ability bonus drops precipitously. And yet, the Cool Dual-Wield Guy is a popular and enduring character archetype which is very poorly served by the utterly awful Dual Wielder feat.
In recent games I've experimented with allowing characters to use TWF if one of the weapons they're using is Light, rather than requiring that both are. This leads to interesting dissimilar weapon pairings, while also letting players use classic standby options like rapier/dagger (seriously, in what world do you need a feat to do the Original Standard Fencing Combo?) or longsword/shortsword daisho pairs for the anime fans in your game. it improves flexibility and makes the folks who want to be a slick dual-wield guy feel a little less like the Special Needs kids next to a sword-and-boarder with double their AC or a Great Weapon Master guy dealing forty damage per attack. it's been fun to see some of the cool stuff players come up with to do.
Please do not contact or message me.
I also allow for Rapier/Dagger like that, I mean why not, right?
Another thing I allow is for some weapons to different Damage types. If a Character is "Slashing" with an Axe to ill effect (because of resistance for example) I will allow that player to strike with Disadvantage and do Bludgeoning with it instead. Or allow a Long Sword to do Piercing, or a Shortsword to do Slashing with disadvantage as well. Stuff like that.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I don't even give the player disadvantage. If they're using a weapon well known for being particularly versatile (warhammers being the classic example) and they tell me they want to adjust their style and reverse the weapon or switch to different attack types? I'll just let them have the logical damage type change. Heh, some of that may be from playing Pillars of Eternity and getting super spoiled on the game just assuming someone trained with the use of the weapon will use whatever the best tools of that weapon is for the situation.
You'd be surprised how much more strategic players will start to be with martial attacks once they know they can get effects like that. Suddenly they start considering which weapon they're using much more carefully rather than just fishing for the biggest damage die, and you start getting them asking for things like hooking limbs with the backspike of a halberd or pulling other actual martial stuff. Makes the game so much more interesting.
Please do not contact or message me.
That’s honestly my biggest complaint with 5e is how little agency there is after Character creation. Around level 3 you make one more real choice and that’s it unless you go with something like the battle master and even that’s limited. Even choosing spells for a caster is a little ho-hum. I remember in older editions spending a week to decide if I wanted to improve an existing proficiency or add a new one, or if I should pick up expertise in a weapon or learn how to use a new one and which one to learn. Now every Rogue of the same level is equally proficiency at hiding and lock picking and climbing. I miss having to make those kinds of meaningful choices every level.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I dunno my current rogue is not even proficient in stealth and only has thief tool proficiency because it comes with the class. Your vision of rogues is pretty limited if they all have stealth and thief tool expertise.
@iamspotsta hidden checks.... lol ! i have been asking you the question since the get go, yet you never answer it. why are you even entertaining the possibility of them having successes if you dont want them to even know there are things around them ? if you just dont want them to know your stuff is there, then just make it so. there is no need for a check at all at that point. yet you continu to think they should need a check just in case you change your mind.
as for your point on the whole choice...
choices that one makes every time they level up...
- do i multiclass to gain other benefits i want.
- do i pick a feat to add to my versatility or do i choose the stat boost.
- role play wise, do i need those instruments ? do i pick new languages, do i want to get the new tools the DM showed us
honestly i agree, your views are quite limited if you don't see any choices for your characters.
@yurei
i think the dual wiedler feat makes the game much more balanced then you think... because the dual wielder feat lets you use two long swords. and dual wielders can also gain extra attacks still. a ranger, paladin or fighter all benefits from the dual wielder feat and actually challenges anyone except the rogue in damage. mathematically speaking, the feat makes it worth it. thats why its a popular build. while even there the rogue is nothing without sneak attack, so he also benefits from dual wielding just because more attacks, means more chances at criticals and more chances at bringing their own abilities down on the opponents. all those advantages makes the thing worth it. the same way barbarian with reckless attacks are worth it just because more chances at critically hitting something.
i think what makes you wary of the feat and the whole thing, is that you look at classes features and wonder why anybody would lose their bonus action hex or hunters mark for another attack. if you look at the monk and its flurry of blows, you realise how martial arts sucks baecause nobody just do a single bonus attack, they all waste the ki for flurry of blows. but reality is, all the classes that actually benefits from the bonus attack, actually don't have that much bonus action, action. Rogues only have cunning action, thats literally all they have and thats literally just to get away from their enemy, they dont want to get away too often, they often want to stay there and make sure their sneak attack passes thru for major damage. the bonus action is a well worth choice in case the first attack misses. Paladins can smite every attacks, they get only two attacks, having a third attack to smite on really piles the damage in their favor. the fighter can get a whooping 8 attacks at level 20 along with action surge, a 9th attack seems not worth it, but it really is. the ranger is rarely a melee guy, thats why you dont see him as that, but his arsenal isn't just used for long range fighting. he has a numerous ways of taking the pain to the enemy in melee. once he has put hunters mark, that bonus attack will make him more lethal.
overall, damage wise and mathematically, the whole thing is sound and works. and in many games that bonus action attack actually helped my barbarian to deal the extra damage he missed in the first attack. and when i touched with all attacks, the damage was awesome. fighter, ranger and paladins also ave access to their fighting style which also adds up to the damage of each attacks.
DM of two gaming groups.
Likes to create stuff.
Check out my homebrew --> Monsters --> Magical Items --> Races --> Subclasses
If you like --> Upvote, If you wanna comment --> Comment
Play by Post Games
--> One Shot Adventure - House of Artwood (DM) (Completed)
The group of orcs setting up an Ambush....the DC for their Stealth is the Passive Perception of their target. Party member with the highest Passive Perception is 21, so the Orcs have to beat that DC in order to be hidden from them. They fail, the party notices them. They succeed, and they are hidden. If the Party rides through the site without taking the precaution of having a lookout, the orcs stay hidden and spring the surprise. If they have Characters keeping an eye out, those character roll a Perception Check against the Stealth roll of the Orcs. If they succeed, they warn the party in time. If not, the party gets Surprised.
Had the DM just had them make the roll when they enter the site, the Players now know something is up even if they fail...information the Characters don't have. It is a way to stay immersive. From what you've said, you don't care enough about Passive Checks to understand how to use them properly, and that's fine. If that's how you want to play the game, nobody is going to stop you. Everyone else who has replied, however, understands how they are used and find them effective.
If you're gonna be a bear...be a Grizzly.
@Arden: Your point is valid. I am simply making a broad generalization about 5e as compared to older editions which were much more noodley, back when Pick Pockets, Find/Remove Traps, Hide in Shadows, Climb Walls, etc. were purchased by percentage. Now things are much more streamlined which makes for faster play and easier entry into the hobby, but I feel a loss of overall player agency as compared to older editions. There are pros and cons to both ways, I just wish the Subclasses had more choices at their appropriate lvls.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Paladin.
Paladin.
I was talking about the actual Dual Wielder feat. The one that says "you can dual wield Big Boi weapons instead of Little Boi weapons, You can draw them both at the same time, and you get half a shield bonus to your AC because we know this feat otherwise completely sucks and we're trying to trap you into taking it."
I am fully aware that Two-Weapon Fighting exists and can be a use of the bonus action for any class. TWF is actually a very powerful ability up until level 5, when martials gain their actual second attack, as TWF allows for a second swing at reduced damage from level 1. After level 5 the value of two-weapon fighting drops precipitously, especially if you only have one worthwhile magical weapon and your off-hand attack is a mundane dagger.
Tha actual Dual Wielder feat is only useful if you have multiple large magical weapons you want to swing with in one turn. Otherwise you can do dual shortswords for a d6 damage die in each hand on Dex or dual handaxes for a d6 damage die in each hand on Strength. Dual Wielder lets you turn the d6s into d8s by using Big Boi sticks instead. That's an average of one point of extra damage per swing if one discounts magical bonuses
That is what the Dual Wielder feat gets you - two to three extra points of damage a turn and +1AC. The Dual Wielder feat is bad and it should feel bad, especially if you don't also have Two-Weapon Fighting Style from being a Fighter or Ranger. TWFS with a modest +3 attack skill modifier is worth the same average damage boost as Dual Wielder, and you don't have to be greedy with your party's magical loot to keep it going.
Please do not contact or message me.
How would you improve Duel Wield Feat then?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Add in a twin strike portion perhaps, allow them to use their reaction to attack a target that attacked them to land a hit with both weapons or when you make an attack of opportunity you can attack with both weapons. They could add the dual wield fighting style damage for off-hand attacks to the feat. There are lots of options, I also feel the extra free action and 1ac is lackluster compared to its two-hand and ranged counterparts.