So I made a rogue guy who's INT based, idea was make a Sherlock Holmes type hero, but also turns out great for exploring dangerous dungeons. He's ok in a scrap, but he's mostly about finding things out and keeping the party from stepping on booby traps. Got the Observant feat, but the bonus to perception and investigation only apply to Passive checks. Problem is my DM doesn't like the way that passive just succeeds or fails without any roleplaying behind it, and when I've got a guy with expertise in both skills already, with solid stats behind them, a passive 24 Investigation and 22 Perception, he feels its just taking all the fun out of traps and such. So he makes us roll actively for things most of the time, except when it basically doesn't matter.
This obviously bypasses the feat entirely, and I sorta feel like its a wasted feat now. I've suggested that we just call it advantage on such checks, as that makes your base passive roll a 15 instead of a 10 which mimics the feat RAW, but doesn't completely ignore the feat during active checks, but he feels that's too overpowered. So basically I've got a feat that doesn't really do much the way the campaign is run. I sorta feel like not having that feat is against what i was going for on this guy, but if the DM wants it run that way in the campaign I really don't see much point in having it. Am I being unreasonable in this?
Sounds like you have a poorly adjusted DM. There are many things that affect Perception. Is the check based on sight while in dim or dark lighting? Easily puts you at a -5 passive(Disadvantage). Magical darkness makes Perception checks reliant on sight just fail. There are conditions that can affect all the other senses and the associated Perception checks. A little logic or slightly more creativity and your god-like 24 very easily becomes just a strong 19. If you are not having fun then try to work with the DM to drop it and possibly take an ASI or different feat. If they refuse then I would say that is a problem.
The problem may be more about your (mis)understanding about passive scores and the feat's purpose.
The idea of passives is so the DM can determine what the players would casually see rather than something being actively searched for.
A thief in a crowd as you walk down the street would make a Sleight of Hand check against your Passive Perception. If you were actively looking for the thief, though, that's an active Perception check for you against their active Stealth.
Observant won't help if you're actively checking for traps. But the DM might use your passive score when you're not active checking to see if you might notice it anyway.
Passives are for when there's no need to call for a roll - useful in keeping things moving forward without having everyone stop to throw dice every few seconds.
Passives are DM tool, so things can progress more naturally. The Observant feat is intended to expand on that, so the higher score may mean your DM might say you notice more than normal - perhaps something interesting in the distance, or a glmpse of an incoming ambush even though nobody was acting as lookout.
With perception - using the passive as a floor is up to the DM and isn't a rule. Most do, as the idea of not noticing from a roll what you would have noticed without rolling is a very weird thing to try and rationalise. However, it is not actually a rule.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
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.
For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.
The rules on hiding in the “Dexterity” section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules in chapter 8, “Adventuring.”
In the example of a 1st-level character given by the PHB a passive Perception of 14 would notice a trap that had a DC 13 to be found. So long as they had the capability to spot the trap they would see it.
This section from the DMG shows us routine things like breaking down doors (or spotting traps) can be automatic if it just makes sense.
Variant: Automatic Success
Sometimes the randomness of a d20 roll leads to ludicrous results. Let’s say a door requires a successful DC 15 Strength check to be battered down. A fighter with a Strength of 20 might helplessly flail against the door because of bad die rolls. Meanwhile, the rogue with a Strength of 10 rolls a 20 and knocks the door from its hinges.
A character who has gone out of their way (by taking a feat and not an ASI) to be more observant should be more observant and less prone to chance failures.
A 1st-level character with a 14 passive Perception noticing a trap with a DC 13 while the OP's character with 22 passive Perception is forced to roll and possibly fail is absurd. It is a juxtaposition of the DMG example given with the fighter.
The tone I get from the OP is that if his character had something like a 16 passive Perception the DM would not be forcing rolls all the time.
It is like saying a 1st-level fighter with the Sharpshooter feat(variant human) and the Archery Fighting Style is too good at shooting stuff so I'll just make you roll with disadvantage on all attack rolls just because. Your character is too good at finding traps so you can't use passive Perception and you have to roll. Yeah, I would be ticked at that too.
Many DMs find this feat to be too powerful but, they usually tell you that before you start playing or give the option to change it. You are not being unreasonable for wanting to drop the feat if your DM isn't going to let it function.
So I made a rogue guy who's INT based, idea was make a Sherlock Holmes type hero, but also turns out great for exploring dangerous dungeons. He's ok in a scrap, but he's mostly about finding things out and keeping the party from stepping on booby traps. Got the Observant feat, but the bonus to perception and investigation only apply to Passive checks. Problem is my DM doesn't like the way that passive just succeeds or fails without any roleplaying behind it, and when I've got a guy with expertise in both skills already, with solid stats behind them, a passive 24 Investigation and 22 Perception, he feels its just taking all the fun out of traps and such. So he makes us roll actively for things most of the time, except when it basically doesn't matter.
This obviously bypasses the feat entirely, and I sorta feel like its a wasted feat now. I've suggested that we just call it advantage on such checks, as that makes your base passive roll a 15 instead of a 10 which mimics the feat RAW, but doesn't completely ignore the feat during active checks, but he feels that's too overpowered. So basically I've got a feat that doesn't really do much the way the campaign is run. I sorta feel like not having that feat is against what i was going for on this guy, but if the DM wants it run that way in the campaign I really don't see much point in having it. Am I being unreasonable in this?
Sounds like you have a poorly adjusted DM. There are many things that affect Perception. Is the check based on sight while in dim or dark lighting? Easily puts you at a -5 passive(Disadvantage). Magical darkness makes Perception checks reliant on sight just fail. There are conditions that can affect all the other senses and the associated Perception checks. A little logic or slightly more creativity and your god-like 24 very easily becomes just a strong 19. If you are not having fun then try to work with the DM to drop it and possibly take an ASI or different feat. If they refuse then I would say that is a problem.
The problem may be more about your (mis)understanding about passive scores and the feat's purpose.
The idea of passives is so the DM can determine what the players would casually see rather than something being actively searched for.
A thief in a crowd as you walk down the street would make a Sleight of Hand check against your Passive Perception. If you were actively looking for the thief, though, that's an active Perception check for you against their active Stealth.
Observant won't help if you're actively checking for traps. But the DM might use your passive score when you're not active checking to see if you might notice it anyway.
Passives are for when there's no need to call for a roll - useful in keeping things moving forward without having everyone stop to throw dice every few seconds.
Passives are DM tool, so things can progress more naturally. The Observant feat is intended to expand on that, so the higher score may mean your DM might say you notice more than normal - perhaps something interesting in the distance, or a glmpse of an incoming ambush even though nobody was acting as lookout.
With perception - using the passive as a floor is up to the DM and isn't a rule. Most do, as the idea of not noticing from a roll what you would have noticed without rolling is a very weird thing to try and rationalise. However, it is not actually a rule.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
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.
For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.
The rules on hiding in the “Dexterity” section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules in chapter 8, “Adventuring.”
In the example of a 1st-level character given by the PHB a passive Perception of 14 would notice a trap that had a DC 13 to be found. So long as they had the capability to spot the trap they would see it.
This section from the DMG shows us routine things like breaking down doors (or spotting traps) can be automatic if it just makes sense.
Variant: Automatic Success
Sometimes the randomness of a d20 roll leads to ludicrous results. Let’s say a door requires a successful DC 15 Strength check to be battered down. A fighter with a Strength of 20 might helplessly flail against the door because of bad die rolls. Meanwhile, the rogue with a Strength of 10 rolls a 20 and knocks the door from its hinges.
A character who has gone out of their way (by taking a feat and not an ASI) to be more observant should be more observant and less prone to chance failures.
A 1st-level character with a 14 passive Perception noticing a trap with a DC 13 while the OP's character with 22 passive Perception is forced to roll and possibly fail is absurd. It is a juxtaposition of the DMG example given with the fighter.
The tone I get from the OP is that if his character had something like a 16 passive Perception the DM would not be forcing rolls all the time.
It is like saying a 1st-level fighter with the Sharpshooter feat(variant human) and the Archery Fighting Style is too good at shooting stuff so I'll just make you roll with disadvantage on all attack rolls just because. Your character is too good at finding traps so you can't use passive Perception and you have to roll. Yeah, I would be ticked at that too.
Many DMs find this feat to be too powerful but, they usually tell you that before you start playing or give the option to change it. You are not being unreasonable for wanting to drop the feat if your DM isn't going to let it function.
Just use the observant for the lip reading.
level 6 barbarian. Aspect of the eagle. And observant.
”dm. That two dudes, 1 mile away talking, yeah the one facing me, what’s he saying. I want to read his lips.”
Watch me on twitch