Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
I think Passive Perception is fine as it is.
Despite a lot of this back and forth, I can see the raised eyebrows of passive skill checks taking the average* of the active. I don't think it really is bad enough to overturn the entire system by making passive checks the "default" and somehow only calling for active checks... when again?
Perhaps if passives were 8 + stat mod + prof (if applicable) and only adjusted +/- 3 for adv/dis, I could see that as a compromise and makes some sense, but again I don't think things are so busted right now that it really needs the change.
*ever so slightly less than average.
It’s very clear that sun isn’t willing to actually hear out anyone else's points. From the vote being biased against an answer and him saying stuff like “you’re changing the subject” to a question that’s extremely important to answer. There’s no point answering someone who won’t like what you say, ignoring this forum is probably a wiser idea.
it occurs to me that if "passive perception during combat is at disadvantage" and "passive perception in dim light is at disadvantage", then... disadvantages do NOT stack???
so for a lot of passive perception checks (i.e. in total darkness with darkvision making it dim light) it will already be at a -5, and being in combat... would still be at -5???
I dunno. I don't think I ever applied multiple disadvantages to a passive check, but I guess the rules would say its a single -5 penalty even if you have a half dozen sources of disadvantage....
every combat in a dim dungeon should already be applying a -5 to passive perception for the dim light. And being in combat wouldn't stack more disadvantage.
The only difference is being in combat in a brightly lit space would get the -5 for being in combat, since its a single disadvantage.
if its a -2 for combat and disadvantage for dim light (-5) would stack. and a -7 is pretty brutal, but fighting in a dim dungeon is pretty brutal.
if its a -2 for combat in bright light, it would just be a -2
so, I'm kinda leaning toward "disadvantage" because then it doesn't stack with dim light.
But the more I think about this, I'm wondering if the real issue is that a lot of folks don't apply the dim light penalty to perception checks (active or passive) every time they should. If they did, they're already at disadvantage (-5) in a dark dungeon, and if combat is another disadvantage, it wouldn't have any additional effect (still a -5 total penalty)
if my suggestion of making combat a disadvantage for perception makes combat completely unbalanced, breaks combat, then how is ANYONE surviving combat in a dark dungeon? According to everyone complaining about this suggestion, disadvantage on passive perception is unbearable. And yet dimly light dungeons are bread and butter in Dungeons and Dragons.
I think Advantage is actually a +4.25 to a roll, on average.
I don't remember the exact number. But I'm pretty sure its not actually 5.0 like they use in calculating passive perception.
so fixing the +/- 5 to +/- 4 or whatever advantage is, mathematically, might help.
looking now, cant find the number. can't math right now....
You find hidden creatures with the Search not Passive Perception. The survey is skewed.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
You may find a hidden creature with Passive Perception. Sometimes your DM will determine whether your character notices something without asking you to make a Wisdom (Perception) check afterall. In the adventure Dragon Delves there's an example of it:
It does feel illogical that half the time, the result from an active check is worse than the passive. Of course, they are not really meant to be direct substitutes for each other, so it's not much of a problem balance-wise.
There was a mathematician that came up with adv/disadv being equal to about +\- 3.3. However, it wasn’t a straight line, it was a bell curve that averaged to 3.3.
When you look at the bottom or top end of rolls, (for example, getting a 1 and a 2, or getting a 19 and a 20) the number is much smaller, and also isn’t likely to matter (roll a 1 and a 2, you added 1, and you’re probably going to fail either way). But, the top/middle of the curve, where the difference will really matter, gets you to about the +5.
At least, that was my understanding as an English major who hadn’t taken a math class since the early 90’s.
The thing that seems skipped in the whole conversation is the average on a d20 isn’t 10; it’s 10.5. This matters a lot when you set the passive at 10. It means the result isn’t a 50-50 chance you’ll do better. It’s more like a 45-5-50 chance. On a 1-9 (45%) you do worse. A 10 you do the same and a 11-20 you do better. So 55% of the time, rolling will do as well or better. Only 45% will be worse.
If a DM wish to determine whether your character notices something without asking you to make a Wisdom (Perception) check, it can always make it behind the DM screen rather than use Passive Perception, which is a pseudo Take 10 if some recall previous rules.