What is my players is only level Five but through stats and feats has managed to easily have a passive perception of 20. This seems like it would be pretty broken until it occurred to me I may be using passive perception incorrectly. Is passive perception used for all perception checks without asking for A roll or only for things like stealth and consistent detection ability?
. Does it for example get used to notice something happening maybe behind the character? I know it’s used for detecting traps and secret doors and Stealth, but what would you have the character actually roll perception for that has a difficulty less than 20? I’m basically trying to figure out the correct way to use her powers of perception, and figure out when to actually have her Roll, but what would you have the character actually roll perception for that has a difficulty less than 20? I’m basically trying to figure out the correct way to use her passive perception, and figure out when to actually have her Roll.
Also, remember to check Vision & Light section for Obscurement
Light Obscured areas provide DisAdvantage to Perception checks (so -5 to passive) [dim light, light foliage, light fog, darkness + darkvision, etc...]
Heavy Obscured areas cause Blinded so "A blinded creature can't see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight." [(magical) darkness, obaque fog, dense foliage, etc...]
A lot of the Developer Advice is "DM's discretion" which is good and bad, because it doesn't give players or GMs a consistent set of tools to work with. (ie: player and GM all agree how an attack roll works, but stealth is much more "up in the air")
It's assumed IN combat that characters have 360` vision, because combat is 6 seconds and it's assumed everyone keeps vague track of what's going on around them, and it takes concerted effort to negate this panopticonal vision (ie: stealth test, and you need to be heavily obscured unless you have a special rule)
That said out of combat, it's perfectly expected for people not to have this kind of 360` vision... as they aren't ready to be stabbed from every where. So sneaking up behind people, distracting someone, etc... is all well within expectation.
As for traps and noticing things... the negative to being the "all seeing eyes of the party" is that you HAVE to be at the front. At this point I might recommend being more descriptive in your traps. Rather then have them be random damage encounters have them be puzzles. Ex: in a game I was a player, I was a Druid with training in Perception so my passive perception noticed that there are "weird grooves" on either end of the hallway. These go into hollow into the stone and go for about 30 feet (as far as the light went). We couldn't see anything inside the hollows, so some of the party tried to stop up the mechanism with scape. I laughed and OOC said "only the pendant man may pass"... and my character got down on his belly and started crawling down the hall...
The whole party crawled down the hall, as the blades wiped over us.
Other interesting traps, I've seen are ones actually IN the same room as encounters... so they were dangerous areas of the encounter.
There are specific examples in published adventures of traps which state that the player MUST use an active perception check. Which means that some traps CANNOT be noticed by Passive Perception, but also implies every other one can.
Other than that a character is generally considered to have 360 degrees of awareness. Perception, is named perception because it entails your Seeing, Hearing, Listening, Smelling, Feeling (tremors), and even sixth sense like premonitions, gut feelings, or even divine guidance for spiritual characters.
Generally speaking passive perception should be considered BEFORE you even ask for a roll.
Don't forget that sufficiently favorable or unfavorable circumstances provide a +5/-5 to passive perceptions because that's how adv/disadvantage interact with passive scores. So noticing that hidden door in a bustling tavern might be more difficult than in a quiet abandoned building.
There are specific examples in published adventures of traps which state that the player MUST use an active perception check. Which means that some traps CANNOT be noticed by Passive Perception, but also implies every other one can.
Those are specific examples of an author stepping on the DMs toes, as it is always the DMs decision whether a check will be active (the player rolls a die) or passive (a score is used).
It likely stems from the author not fully understanding what a passive check is, since there are a lot of people that get confused by the word "passive" and think it means the character isn't actually trying, which is absolutely not the case - no check of any kind is made if the character isn't performing an appropriate activity to call for a check.
The particular example was in an area of heavy fog, so I think the idea was that you couldn't simply look and notice it, you would actually need to feel around, which an active search might entail, but merely walking around the area would not (no matter how good you were at looking).
The particular example was in an area of heavy fog, so I think the idea was that you couldn't simply look and notice it, you would actually need to feel around, which an active search might entail, but merely walking around the area would not (no matter how good you were at looking).
First, go right ahead - I'm sure he knows he doesn't use the rules 100% as written. If not, it's well documented thanks to Dice, Camera, Action that he, like any DM, forgets rules, makes rulings in the moment that are actually how a prior version of the game handled something (like critical hits, which at the start of the show he was running as being max damage +a die roll), and even intentionally chooses not to follow the rules.
Secondly, like I said, that is clearly a misunderstanding of what "passive check" means. A passive check is not "merely walking around the area", unless there is nothing preventing that in-character activity from having a chance to be successful. A passive check is when the player describes their character feeling around cautiously in the fog and the DM deciding to use a passive check (meaning the player is passive as they are not rolling dice, not that the character is passive in any way) instead of saying "roll a Wisdom (Perception) check." or even "You find [insert thing]" because they ruled that feeling around was a sure-fire way of finding the trap and thus didn't need a chance of failure.
And that's not me being an arrogant fool that thinks he's the best DM around - that's just me explaining what the text in the rule-books actually say, no matter how many DMs or what their particular position/status might be do it differently in the moment or whatever reason they have for doing it differently (forgot, think it's "dumb", never knew how it worked because they're more running their favorite older edition and implementing what 5th edition rules their players make them aware of than they are actually running 5th edition so they've never really bothered to read the books, etc.)
I think you're reading more into this paragraph than is actually there:
"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 suspect the underlined section is the part we disagree on. You seem to think that this still requires the characters to actively state they're doing something to warrant the check. Any time, as a DM, my characters actively state they're doing something to warrant a check, I see no reason not to let them roll. There's no surprise factor ruined by telling them to do so. The value of this is when they do not actively state they're doing something to warrant a check - because then asking them to tips my hand that there's something around.
No-where in the above statement does it say that characters still have to be actively trying to do something for a passive check to be used, and it makes sense. Everyone notices things they're not expecting to when they're not actively trying to do so. Now, do you have to be in circumstances where it's possible to notice such a thing without actively trying to do so? Absolutely. However, assuming that characters completely fail to notice the dart-holes in the walls because no one said "I'm looking!" seems silly to me.
Secondly, like I said, that is clearly a misunderstanding of what "passive check" means. A passive check is not "merely walking around the area", unless there is nothing preventing that in-character activity from having a chance to be successful. A passive check is when the player describes their character feeling around cautiously in the fog and the DM deciding to use a passive check (meaning the player is passive as they are not rolling dice, not that the character is passive in any way) instead of saying "roll a Wisdom (Perception) check." or even "You find [insert thing]" because they ruled that feeling around was a sure-fire way of finding the trap and thus didn't need a chance of failure.
Hmmm, that isn't how the rule is written nor is it how i think anyone could logically interpret it.
From the rulebook:
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.
The situation, as described, is basically what allows a character who is 'alert' to notice things simply whilst travelling. Someone noticing the partially-concealed-spike-pit-trap whilst walking through the forest, a sharp-eyed half-elf with darkvision noticing the dark shape in the shadows and recognising it as a monster before it can surprise them - that kind of thing. Things that allow a character who would not reasonably miss such things (thematically, or simply due to skills or high stats) and remove the requirement to constantly announce that you are 'on the lookout' for such things.
A passive check is when the player describes their character feeling around cautiously in the fog
What you describe here seems a textbook active perception check - the player has described that their character is doing something to a particular end. If that same situation was approached by the DM, not by the player (i.e the DM tells the players that their characters are, by default, progressing slowly and cautiously through the fog) you could make a strong argument for passive perception, but that isn't actually the clear direction of the rule as it is written despite your suggestion.
Hmmm, that isn't how the rule is written nor is it how i think anyone could logically interpret it.
You can ask ol' Jeremy Crawford on twitter about it. My interpretation lines up with what he's previously said on the matter of what exactly a Passive Check is (read: identical in all ways to an Ability Check that is rolled save for the single detail of not being rolled), but he has started ruling counter to some of his own previous rulings as time has rolled on so maybe he'll have changed what he thinks on this matter to agree with a different interpretation.
I have one player with a passive Perception of 16, the rest is lower than that. I make sure that whenever there are small things to notice, of which the DC would be lower than 16 to roll Perception for, I add to my description of the area. Like:
You stand before the dark and gloomy cave. Something feels off here. There is a soft breeze coming from within the cave, indicating that it may lead to another opening somewhere down below. It smells faintly of moss and funghi but there are no sounds other than the dripping of water closeby.
Turn to player with the high Passive Perception
As you look into the cave, you notice a faint shimmer on the left of the cave entrance.
The "shimmer" was an illusion hiding a secret entrance. The DC for finding it (if they would have searched for it) was 14, so the player with passive perception 16 should find it anyway. However, the players in my group often go "yeah, but I don't think my character would notice that since they were talking to *fellow player*" so this works in my game better than it might in others.
Also, whenever I ask for a Perception roll, I basically use the passive score as a "floor", so to speak. Meaning that they can roll higher than that, but never lower.
This helps the players, but then again I want them to succeed. And if they've spent points on doing something, I want them to be good at that something. It also speeds up the gameplay and remember; it also counts for the monsters. Whenever the rogue tries to hide and move stealthily, the same rules apply. Meaning that it could bite them in the butt :P
Hmmm, that isn't how the rule is written nor is it how i think anyone could logically interpret it.
You can ask ol' Jeremy Crawford on twitter about it. My interpretation lines up with what he's previously said on the matter of what exactly a Passive Check is (read: identical in all ways to an Ability Check that is rolled save for the single detail of not being rolled), but he has started ruling counter to some of his own previous rulings as time has rolled on so maybe he'll have changed what he thinks on this matter to agree with a different interpretation.
I thought notable opinions were not relevant, only the word of the rulebook! (just pulling your leg)
Speaking of Mr Crawford, here are a few of the things that he has explicitly stated on the matter:
Passive Perception is an option that a DM chooses to use or not. If you use it, Perception checks are typically made only when characters actively search for something, and normally, they're searching because their passive Perception failed to notice something.
Design intent: passive Wisdom (Perception) is the norm. Only have someone roll if they initiate a search.
I usually don't ask for a Wisdom (Perception) check unless a character is actively trying to perceive something.
None of this seems to contradict the definition that a few of us here have put forth as the intended interpretation of the rule book, so it now seems to be a concern purely limited to what you, as a DM, consider to be 'active' within your games. In a few of your examples above, you describe characters taking deliberate courses of action with the aim to achieve specific results, or avoid specific results and that is exactly what i would rule as an 'active' process. Compared to a passive process - the characters are walking through a dungeon, one of them has darkvision, one of them has expertise in Perception...do they notice the secret door slightly recessed in the wall, or the trip wire a few paces in front? The players aren't telling the DM that they are doing anything in particular, but that doesn't mean that their characters couldn't reasonably have noticed these things just by having eyes/ears/noses/darkvision/magical abilities/items.etc - the character is not doing anything, so the check is passive.
To each their own though, if you prefer to run your games in a particular way it's nobodies business...but it would probably be best not to come in and start suggesting that the rule is clear and any way other than what you do is wrong and purely DM creative control. I'm not saying that my interpretation is necessarily 100% correct and exactly how they play it over at WotC HQ, just that the rules dont clearly state what you have claimed as 'fact' and it would probably be best not to brand your interpretation as 'the correct way' and dismiss any others as 'house rules'.
None of this seems to contradict the definition that a few of us here have put forth as the intended interpretation of the rule book...
Including that it doesn't contradict the definition I've put forth.
The players aren't telling the DM that they are doing anything in particular...
In my view the players have told the DM that the particular thing they are doing is walking through the dungeon with their eyes open. By which I mean the characters are actively paying attention to their surroundings, unless something is distracting them from that action (along the lines of the travel activity rules) - they aren't "not doing anything" as you've described.
...it would probably be best not to come in and start suggesting that the rule is clear and any way other than what you do is wrong...
I've never said anyone doing differently than I do is "wrong." I've only said that anyone doing differently than I've described isn't following the rule as written (which is no big deal, so long as they don't claim that what they are doing is following the rule as written).
I'm not dismissing the validity of anyone's ruling by calling it "house rules" - I use plenty of house rules myself, and in fact I believe that house rules are nearly inevitable and their use should be encouraged. I'm dismissing the validity of people's claims that their house rules aren't house rules.
But that's just me and my belief that someone interpreting a bit of written text differently than someone else does is not necessarily evidence that said bit of text is not clear about what it states.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What is my players is only level Five but through stats and feats has managed to easily have a passive perception of 20. This seems like it would be pretty broken until it occurred to me I may be using passive perception incorrectly. Is passive perception used for all perception checks without asking for A roll or only for things like stealth and consistent detection ability?
. Does it for example get used to notice something happening maybe behind the character? I know it’s used for detecting traps and secret doors and Stealth, but what would you have the character actually roll perception for that has a difficulty less than 20? I’m basically trying to figure out the correct way to use her powers of perception, and figure out when to actually have her Roll, but what would you have the character actually roll perception for that has a difficulty less than 20? I’m basically trying to figure out the correct way to use her passive perception, and figure out when to actually have her Roll.
This Sage Advice PodCast: http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/james-haeck-dd-writing
Stealth and Perception is around 9 minutes in.
Also, remember to check Vision & Light section for Obscurement
A lot of the Developer Advice is "DM's discretion" which is good and bad, because it doesn't give players or GMs a consistent set of tools to work with. (ie: player and GM all agree how an attack roll works, but stealth is much more "up in the air")
It's assumed IN combat that characters have 360` vision, because combat is 6 seconds and it's assumed everyone keeps vague track of what's going on around them, and it takes concerted effort to negate this panopticonal vision (ie: stealth test, and you need to be heavily obscured unless you have a special rule)
That said out of combat, it's perfectly expected for people not to have this kind of 360` vision... as they aren't ready to be stabbed from every where. So sneaking up behind people, distracting someone, etc... is all well within expectation.
As for traps and noticing things... the negative to being the "all seeing eyes of the party" is that you HAVE to be at the front. At this point I might recommend being more descriptive in your traps. Rather then have them be random damage encounters have them be puzzles.
Ex: in a game I was a player, I was a Druid with training in Perception so my passive perception noticed that there are "weird grooves" on either end of the hallway. These go into hollow into the stone and go for about 30 feet (as far as the light went). We couldn't see anything inside the hollows, so some of the party tried to stop up the mechanism with scape. I laughed and OOC said "only the pendant man may pass"... and my character got down on his belly and started crawling down the hall...
The whole party crawled down the hall, as the blades wiped over us.
Other interesting traps, I've seen are ones actually IN the same room as encounters... so they were dangerous areas of the encounter.
There are specific examples in published adventures of traps which state that the player MUST use an active perception check. Which means that some traps CANNOT be noticed by Passive Perception, but also implies every other one can.
Other than that a character is generally considered to have 360 degrees of awareness. Perception, is named perception because it entails your Seeing, Hearing, Listening, Smelling, Feeling (tremors), and even sixth sense like premonitions, gut feelings, or even divine guidance for spiritual characters.
Generally speaking passive perception should be considered BEFORE you even ask for a roll.
Don't forget that sufficiently favorable or unfavorable circumstances provide a +5/-5 to passive perceptions because that's how adv/disadvantage interact with passive scores. So noticing that hidden door in a bustling tavern might be more difficult than in a quiet abandoned building.
Those are specific examples of an author stepping on the DMs toes, as it is always the DMs decision whether a check will be active (the player rolls a die) or passive (a score is used).
It likely stems from the author not fully understanding what a passive check is, since there are a lot of people that get confused by the word "passive" and think it means the character isn't actually trying, which is absolutely not the case - no check of any kind is made if the character isn't performing an appropriate activity to call for a check.
I will inform Chris Perkins of his noobness.
The particular example was in an area of heavy fog, so I think the idea was that you couldn't simply look and notice it, you would actually need to feel around, which an active search might entail, but merely walking around the area would not (no matter how good you were at looking).
I think you're reading more into this paragraph than is actually there:
"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 suspect the underlined section is the part we disagree on. You seem to think that this still requires the characters to actively state they're doing something to warrant the check. Any time, as a DM, my characters actively state they're doing something to warrant a check, I see no reason not to let them roll. There's no surprise factor ruined by telling them to do so. The value of this is when they do not actively state they're doing something to warrant a check - because then asking them to tips my hand that there's something around.
No-where in the above statement does it say that characters still have to be actively trying to do something for a passive check to be used, and it makes sense. Everyone notices things they're not expecting to when they're not actively trying to do so. Now, do you have to be in circumstances where it's possible to notice such a thing without actively trying to do so? Absolutely. However, assuming that characters completely fail to notice the dart-holes in the walls because no one said "I'm looking!" seems silly to me.
Hmmm, that isn't how the rule is written nor is it how i think anyone could logically interpret it.
From the rulebook:
The situation, as described, is basically what allows a character who is 'alert' to notice things simply whilst travelling. Someone noticing the partially-concealed-spike-pit-trap whilst walking through the forest, a sharp-eyed half-elf with darkvision noticing the dark shape in the shadows and recognising it as a monster before it can surprise them - that kind of thing. Things that allow a character who would not reasonably miss such things (thematically, or simply due to skills or high stats) and remove the requirement to constantly announce that you are 'on the lookout' for such things.
What you describe here seems a textbook active perception check - the player has described that their character is doing something to a particular end. If that same situation was approached by the DM, not by the player (i.e the DM tells the players that their characters are, by default, progressing slowly and cautiously through the fog) you could make a strong argument for passive perception, but that isn't actually the clear direction of the rule as it is written despite your suggestion.
You can ask ol' Jeremy Crawford on twitter about it. My interpretation lines up with what he's previously said on the matter of what exactly a Passive Check is (read: identical in all ways to an Ability Check that is rolled save for the single detail of not being rolled), but he has started ruling counter to some of his own previous rulings as time has rolled on so maybe he'll have changed what he thinks on this matter to agree with a different interpretation.
For my games, I use Perception in this way:
I have one player with a passive Perception of 16, the rest is lower than that. I make sure that whenever there are small things to notice, of which the DC would be lower than 16 to roll Perception for, I add to my description of the area. Like:
The "shimmer" was an illusion hiding a secret entrance. The DC for finding it (if they would have searched for it) was 14, so the player with passive perception 16 should find it anyway. However, the players in my group often go "yeah, but I don't think my character would notice that since they were talking to *fellow player*" so this works in my game better than it might in others.
Also, whenever I ask for a Perception roll, I basically use the passive score as a "floor", so to speak. Meaning that they can roll higher than that, but never lower.
This helps the players, but then again I want them to succeed. And if they've spent points on doing something, I want them to be good at that something. It also speeds up the gameplay and remember; it also counts for the monsters. Whenever the rogue tries to hide and move stealthily, the same rules apply. Meaning that it could bite them in the butt :P
Hope that helps :)
Subclass: Dwarven Defender - Dragonborn Paragon
Feats: Artificer Apprentice
Monsters: Sheep - Spellbreaker Warforged Titan
Magic Items: Whipier - Ring of Secret Storage - Collar of the Guardian
Monster template: Skeletal Creature
I thought notable opinions were not relevant, only the word of the rulebook! (just pulling your leg)
Speaking of Mr Crawford, here are a few of the things that he has explicitly stated on the matter:
None of this seems to contradict the definition that a few of us here have put forth as the intended interpretation of the rule book, so it now seems to be a concern purely limited to what you, as a DM, consider to be 'active' within your games. In a few of your examples above, you describe characters taking deliberate courses of action with the aim to achieve specific results, or avoid specific results and that is exactly what i would rule as an 'active' process. Compared to a passive process - the characters are walking through a dungeon, one of them has darkvision, one of them has expertise in Perception...do they notice the secret door slightly recessed in the wall, or the trip wire a few paces in front? The players aren't telling the DM that they are doing anything in particular, but that doesn't mean that their characters couldn't reasonably have noticed these things just by having eyes/ears/noses/darkvision/magical abilities/items.etc - the character is not doing anything, so the check is passive.
To each their own though, if you prefer to run your games in a particular way it's nobodies business...but it would probably be best not to come in and start suggesting that the rule is clear and any way other than what you do is wrong and purely DM creative control. I'm not saying that my interpretation is necessarily 100% correct and exactly how they play it over at WotC HQ, just that the rules dont clearly state what you have claimed as 'fact' and it would probably be best not to brand your interpretation as 'the correct way' and dismiss any others as 'house rules'.
Including that it doesn't contradict the definition I've put forth.
In my view the players have told the DM that the particular thing they are doing is walking through the dungeon with their eyes open. By which I mean the characters are actively paying attention to their surroundings, unless something is distracting them from that action (along the lines of the travel activity rules) - they aren't "not doing anything" as you've described.I'm not dismissing the validity of anyone's ruling by calling it "house rules" - I use plenty of house rules myself, and in fact I believe that house rules are nearly inevitable and their use should be encouraged. I'm dismissing the validity of people's claims that their house rules aren't house rules.
But that's just me and my belief that someone interpreting a bit of written text differently than someone else does is not necessarily evidence that said bit of text is not clear about what it states.