D&D 5E Passive Checks as Ersatz "Take 10" ?

G

Ganymede81

First Post

• Aug 24, 2017

• #1

Back in May, Crawford tweeted about one way to handle passive checks: "If a DM decides (a) to use a passive check and (b) it's always active, it can function as a skill check minimum. Entirely up to the DM."

That got me thinking: which of you out there use passive checks as an ersatz form of 3E's "Take 10" mechanic?

The basic premise is that, when you make a skill check in a low-pressure/low-danger situation with a proficient skill, you can use your passive skill score instead (either as a minimum or in lieu of rolling).

It seems like a viable way to go to me; it seems like a good way to both cut down on rolls and players asking me that they want to make a particular roll. Which of you would try this?

 

log in or register to remove this ad

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

• Aug 24, 2017

• #2

I use passive checks as a way to resolve uncertainty for tasks that the characters are doing generally or repetitively. So, for example, when the PCs enter a dungeon, I ask them what task each is undertaking on an ongoing basis as they go about their business. That might be Keep Watch, Search for Secret Doors, Draw a Map, etc. Each of these choices represents a trade-off because you can only do one ongoing task (unless you're a ranger in favored terrain). When I'm not sure if they successfully spot the hidden monster or trap, notice the secret door, make an accurate map, etc. as they travel the dungeon, I look to the passive check to resolve it.

The way I deal with players asking me to make checks is I tell them players don't get to do that. Per the rules, they may only describe what they want to do. I decide from there if they need to make a check and what that check is. I add that players shouldn't want to make checks because the d20 is not their friend. Since all action declarations pass through the DM who decides on whether there is uncertainty enough to warrant an ability check, they should be striving for automatic success by removing as much uncertainty as possible. Asking to roll a fickle d20 is never a good idea in my view.

 

G

Ganymede81

First Post

• Aug 24, 2017

• #3

iserith said:

The way I deal with players asking me to make checks is I tell them players don't get to do that.

Click to expand...

Haha, I promise you: I've tried that.

At one point, I was like, "I swear, I will punch the next person that asks me to 'roll persuasion against the guard.'"

 

Tony Vargas

Legend

• Aug 24, 2017

• #4

A passive check vs a dc is basically pointless (there's no uncertainty, it's not really a 'check' at all), at that point you should just be narrating success or failure.

I like using passives as a way of taking rolls behind the screen without actually 'rolling for' the players. I also like them as an easy calculated DCs when calling for a roll, such as a stealth check - and avoiding contested checks, which I feel are overly 'swingy' (as it tends to get used on the boards).

 

Y

Yunru

Banned

Banned

• Aug 24, 2017

• #5

One side should always be passive unless both are actively doing something (e.g. grappling). The other, however, should always be rolled (1d10+5).

 

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

• Aug 24, 2017

• #6

Ganymede81 said:

Haha, I promise you: I've tried that.

At one point, I was like, "I swear, I will punch the next person that asks me to 'roll persuasion against the guard.'"

Click to expand...

If it matters to you, it might be worth appealing to their desire for success. When I play in other people's games, inevitably there are some players who ask to make checks. I never do. I state as cogent a goal and approach as possible and then wait for the DM to ask for a check or narrate the result. What I've noticed is that I'm about 50% more successful than people who ask to make checks.

 

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

• Aug 24, 2017

• #7

In case, it's helpful, here's an example of how I set up Exploration Tasks. This is from a dungeon crawl one-shot.



With this information, the party can configure its marching order, pace, and tasks in a manner according to what's important to them and to the strengths of the party members. You will note that I depart from other posters with regard to passive checks versus static DCs. I see no issue with this.

 

Y

Yunru

Banned

Banned

• Aug 24, 2017

• #8

iserith said:

In case, it's helpful, here's an example of how I set up Exploration Tasks. This is from a dungeon crawl one-shot.

View attachment 87756

With this information, the party can configure its marching order, pace, and tasks in a manner according to what's important to them and to the strengths of the party members. You will note that I depart from other posters with regard to passive checks versus static DCs. I see no issue with this.

Click to expand...

Stealing and printing.

 

G

Ganymede81

First Post

• Aug 25, 2017

• #9

iserith said:

If it matters to you, it might be worth appealing to their desire for success.

Click to expand...

That isn't really the issue, as I'm not going to humor them by having them roll just because they want to. Instead, I ask them to describe what they are doing and wait for me to ask them to roll.

They're just newish players and it hasn't clicked yet.

 

Herobizkit

Adventurer

• Aug 27, 2017

• #10

iserith said:

With this information, the party can configure its marching order, pace, and tasks in a manner according to what's important to them and to the strengths of the party members. You will note that I depart from other posters with regard to passive checks versus static DCs. I see no issue with this.

Click to expand...

I feel this can also solidify a character's role in the adventure party, specifically in the campaign world versus their character class.

It also sort of follows the Acquisitions Incorporated party model. ^_^