D&D 5E ranger getting caught all of time---What to do?

Nemio

First Post
Maybe I am reading some of these posts incorrectly, but there seems to be some consensus here that passive perception is something you have to "actively engage in" . Doesn't that pretty much ignore the word passive ?
Passive ...Definition = not participating readily or actively; not involving active participation - This is the dictionary meaning of the word passive.. Seems pretty clear you aren't required to take any action, or to state any intention you are ingaged in Perception, but that it is simply what you are aware of at any given time so long as you are conscious and aware ?
To require a character to state that they are engaged in Perception of their environment - That is an actual Action and is called the Search Action under available Actions, and allows a creature to make an active Perception skill check in combat as there action.
If a creature was required to say they are alert/engaged in Perception activity, rogues/ambushes would surprise you 99% of the time.. Makes rogue types pretty damn awesome. Also, would mean the first feat I took in your campaign would be Alert, which is an awesome feat anyway, but in that style of campaign, be pretty much mandatory!

Mike Mearls answered some questions about passive vs active perception on a Reddit AMA https://www.reddit.com/r/rpg/comments/2l69tp/ama_mike_mearls_codesigner_of_dd_5_head_of_dd_rd/

Someone asked:

A couple questions about passive skills. As I understand it, they are used when someone is passively doing something rather than actively, so passive perception is used as a baseline for how much a character notices when he's not actively looking around.

So if a character with a passive perception of 13 is actively looking around for something that can be seen on a perception DC of 10, and he rolls a 2, does he not see it? Or should passive perception be considered the minimum possible value for that character?

He replied:

Any skill can be used passively - it's up the DM to apply that as needed.

For perception checks, you passive result is always in effect. If you could see something with a DC 10 check and your passive is 11, you see it without rolling.

Keep in mind, though, that a DM might rule otherwise. Passive checks are a tool that groups can use to speed up the game or move past die results that slow things down or lead to a grind.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



iserith

Magic Wordsmith
You are correct. What you have on the forums here are a bunch of rule lawyers (myself included). So it is generally safe to ignore us when we start getting too pedantic. A passive perception check is just that, passive.

For example, say you are a peasant at home doing laundry. Are you looking for trouble? No.

But there is a goblin hiding outside. When you go out to hang up your laundry do you have a chance to spot him? Of course you do, that is your passive perception. Stating that you have to actively be looking for something to spot anything is ridiculous.

You may have a chance to spot the goblin if you're alert for danger. If laundry is at least as distracting as navigating, drawing a map, tracking, or foraging, you are not alert for danger. Being alert for danger and doing laundry might mean you don't do such a great job and will be beaten by your liege ("No...more...wire...hangers!"), but at least you won't certainly get surprised by the lurking goblin.

Of course, the typical use for passive Perception is to determine whether or not an adventurer notices something when noticing that something is uncertain and the character is engaged in that task repeatedly (such as keeping your head on a swivel when moving around the dungeon or whatever). And adventurers are typically in pretty dangerous places. Therefore, it is generally a safe assumption to assume the adventurer is always alert for danger unless the player establishes otherwise. Being alert for danger, however, is a character doing something actively in the fiction, repeatedly. You don't necessarily have to state you are alert for danger because it is assumed, but your character isn't passive.
 


spectacle

First Post
You may have a chance to spot the goblin if you're alert for danger. If laundry is at least as distracting as navigating, drawing a map, tracking, or foraging, you are not alert for danger. Being alert for danger and doing laundry might mean you don't do such a great job and will be beaten by your liege ("No...more...wire...hangers!"), but at least you won't certainly get surprised by the lurking goblin.

Of course, the typical use for passive Perception is to determine whether or not an adventurer notices something when noticing that something is uncertain and the character is engaged in that task repeatedly (such as keeping your head on a swivel when moving around the dungeon or whatever). And adventurers are typically in pretty dangerous places. Therefore, it is generally a safe assumption to assume the adventurer is always alert for danger unless the player establishes otherwise. Being alert for danger, however, is a character doing something actively in the fiction, repeatedly. You don't necessarily have to state you are alert for danger because it is assumed, but your character isn't passive.

That's just not how humans work. There is always a part of the brain that is alert for danger, no matter what you are otherwise doing. This is a survival instinct hardwired into pretty much every living creature. You may be less likely to notice a hidden danger if you're paying most of your attention to something else, but if the danger is not well hidden, represented by a low stealth roll, then your brain will let you know about it.
 

Herobizkit

Adventurer
If he wants to be a nature ninja he's got to start thinking like a nature ninja.

* Is he wearing armor that grants disadvantage to his rolls? I'd hope not, but you never know.
* While silence can't always work, distraction usually does. Get creative.
* Fog Cloud is a decent stealth assistant; worse to worst, it's great for quick escapes.
* a bird/mouse pet (not the Class feature) + Animal Friendship + Speak with Animals = never having to be spotted.

If the Rogues have better Stealth, why are they not the point man?
 

iserith

Magic Wordsmith
That's just not how humans work. There is always a part of the brain that is alert for danger, no matter what you are otherwise doing. This is a survival instinct hardwired into pretty much every living creature. You may be less likely to notice a hidden danger if you're paying most of your attention to something else, but if the danger is not well hidden, represented by a low stealth roll, then your brain will let you know about it.

"How humans work" is irrelevant when we're discussing how the rules of the game apply to a fictional situation. You're not alert for danger if you're doing something sufficiently distracting in D&D. You're free to rule that doing laundry isn't as distracting as navigating, drawing a map, foraging, or tracking, however.
 

Noctem

Explorer
"How humans work" is irrelevant when we're discussing how the rules of the game apply to a fictional situation. You're not alert for danger if you're doing something sufficiently distracting in D&D. You're free to rule that doing laundry isn't as distracting as navigating, drawing a map, foraging, or tracking, however.

Exactly. Too many people keep trying to force simulationist point of views on a game designed to be about fictional characters, monsters and situations.
 

spectacle

First Post
That kind of thinking leads to someone sitting and reading quietly in a large room with stone floors being completely oblivious to a platoon of dwarven fighters with plate mail and no stealth proficiency entering the room, because the dwarves are trying to be "sneaky".

I will continue to let common sense and reality influence how I apply the rules :)
 

Remove ads

Top