D&D 5E What DM flaw has caused you to actually leave a game?

[Kobold Boots]

Hi Saelorn -

Yes, that's the previously-stated alternative. Passive Perception is either "always on"; or it's "only on when you're perceiving passively", and turns off when you're perceiving actively. Both methods seem equally supported under the definition of Passive Perception, so it's down to the individual DM for which method works best for them.

I'm down with DM making the call. I just have the preference that passive perception is always on and I think that's the correct interpretation of the rules per everything I've ever read on every thread prior to this one, everywhere I've ever seen one.

That could be where you're losing me, is that I've never been comfortable with thinking in terms of "scenes". Likewise, if something is usable "once per encounter" then that's equally meaningless to me. Surely, what constitutes a "scene" or "encounter" is simply a matter of the observer's perspective. (Fortunately, 4E defined encounters sufficiently through the use of five-minute rests.)

Don't get caught up in semantics. I only use "scene" to mean "when a character could reasonably be assumed to be able to sense something. I was initially thinking something basic like "going over the crest of a hill" or "opening the door to a room" but it can mean whatever is appropriate to the game.

For me, I think in terms of objective metrics, like feet and minutes. If the third pillar on the left has a notable feature that would require a DC 17 Perception check to find, then I wouldn't consult anyone's Passive Perception score until they got close enough to actually see it (probably around ten feet); if they started actively surveying the room before they got over there, then they would only get the result of their active check, which could well be lower than their passive score.
If a high-level rogue is surveying the room, then they're guaranteed a minimum result on their Perception roll (and coincidentally, that minimum result is equal to their Passive Perception score). That's a benefit of being a high-level rogue, under my interpretation of Passive Perception, is that actively looking is never worse than passively looking. Under your interpretation of Passive Perception, everyone gets that benefit.

So there's a couple of problems with your interpretation of the Rogue ability as it compares to passive perception.

1. The rogue ability only guarantees that your skill roll will never be lower than a 10 and does so across all of your trained skills.

2. Passive perception can be and often is higher than 10. Using your example, if passive is higher than an active roll, with a DC of say 15 and a passive of 15, you should see the object you're looking for when it's in range of your senses before you'd ever have to make an active perception roll. If you roll lower than 15 on the active, you still see the thing you saw before you rolled.

Be well
KB

 

[Maxperson]

That's one interpretation of the rules. Another interpretation is that your passive score is used when you aren't actively looking for something, but you have to roll whenever you want to actively look. (It does mean that you might sometimes be better off choosing to not actively look, but it's far from the only weird thing in the ruleset, and handing out the rogue's level 11 ability for every Perception check would also be weird.)

Do you really think it makes sense to be worse at something when you are trying, than when you aren't? I'm with KB on this one. If I'm going to ask for a roll AND I'm using passive checks(not sure I am yet), then the passive score will be the lowest your check can be. You can be better when trying than when you aren't, but you will almost never be worse.

 

[Maxperson]

1. The rogue ability only guarantees that your skill roll will never be lower than a 10 and does so across all of your trained skills.

2. Passive perception can be and often is higher than 10. Using your example, if passive is higher than an active roll, with a DC of say 15 and a passive of 15, you should see the object you're looking for when it's in range of your senses before you'd ever have to make an active perception roll. If you roll lower than 15 on the active, you still see the thing you saw before you rolled.

Be well
KB

A rogue with that ability cannot end up with a rolled score that is lower than the passive score. The rogue ability specifically changes the d20 roll to a 10, not the result of the check to 10. That means that the lowest rolled perception roll for a rogue with that ability, proficiency at 11th level, and a wisdom of 14 will be 16, the same as his passive perception.

Edit: This supports what I said. https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/05/1...-of-the-rogues-reliable-talent-and-expertise/

 

[Kobold Boots]

A rogue with that ability cannot end up with a rolled score that is lower than the passive score. The rogue ability specifically changes the d20 roll to a 10, not the result of the check to 10. That means that the lowest rolled perception roll for a rogue with that ability, proficiency at 11th level, and a wisdom of 14 will be 16, the same as his passive perception.

Yes. That’s spot on. Provided that passive perception is in play the specific optional rule regarding perception overrides the more general specific class ability that might be used on it.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Do you really think it makes sense to be worse at something when you are trying, than when you aren't?

Sometimes people over-think things, and can't see the forest for the trees.

I'm with KB on this one. If I'm going to ask for a roll AND I'm using passive checks(not sure I am yet), then the passive score will be the lowest your check can be. You can be better when trying than when you aren't, but you will almost never be worse.

In practice, I would probably not use Passive Perception at all for the purposes of what you see when you're walking around. I would probably say that spotting the weird pillar at all would require a DC 17 active Perception check, which you make whenever you get close enough that you might see it.

Passive Perception makes more sense when you're standing around camp for hours at a time, rather than for the one minute you're walking down a hallway. The real point of the passive mechanic (as I understand it) is to give ambushers a fighting chance at surprising a group, where giving every character a chance to roll Perception would make it statistically improbable.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes. That’s spot on. Provided that passive perception is in play the specific optional rule regarding perception overrides the more general specific class ability that might be used on it.

Where does it say that passive checks like perception are optional rules? Yes, I know that technically all rules are optional, but 5e has several that are labelled as optional.

 

[Maxperson]

Sometimes people over-think things, and can't see the forest for the trees.

That's not nearly as common as rolling would make it, though. Let's say that you have a passive score of 16. If the target DC is 16, you succeed 100% of the time. If you roll, you fail 45% percent of the time. Thinking about what you are doing and making an effort isn't going to make you 45% more likely to fail. Maybe if you roll a 1 on the check you could justify that as overthinking and messing yourself up, but even a 5% increased rare is much too high.

In practice, I would probably not use Passive Perception at all for the purposes of what you see when you're walking around. I would probably say that spotting the weird pillar at all would require a DC 17 active Perception check, which you make whenever you get close enough that you might see it.

I'm about to run my first 5e campaign and I told the guys I would be going by the book until we learned what we like and don't like through game play. Personally, I dislike passive scores and will likely axe them, but for the first several sessions I'm going to play it out and see if I like the rule more in game play than it seems like I will through just reading.

Passive Perception makes more sense when you're standing around camp for hours at a time, rather than for the one minute you're walking down a hallway. The real point of the passive mechanic (as I understand it) is to give ambushers a fighting chance at surprising a group, where giving every character a chance to roll Perception would make it statistically improbable.

It specifically says that yes, you can use it for things happening in secret. It also specifically says it's for tasks that you do repeatedly, and keeping an eye out for unusual things like secret doors and interesting objects is something adventurers do repeatedly.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

It specifically says that yes, you can use it for things happening in secret. It also specifically says it's for tasks that you do repeatedly, and keeping an eye out for unusual things like secret doors and interesting objects is something adventurers do repeatedly.

There's some room for interpretation there. Checking for anything hidden in a particular pillar that you pass by is something that you would only do once. Checking for anything hidden on the outskirts of camp, while you're on watch, is something that you do repeatedly.

Honestly, I'm not confident in my own ability to find one consistent interpretation for the rules. They really are written more like guidelines than anything else. I also tried to stick as closely to the rules as possible, for the first campaign I ran, and I never did settle on what the book was trying to say there. (I did eventually figure out a fairly-consistent interpretation that didn't conflict too strongly with any of the Perception rules, but I'll freely admit that other interpretations would be possible.)

 

[robus]

The definition of passive is "not necessarily paying direct attention".
The definition of active is "looking for something"

If a player has a high passive perception, he or she is very observant. If I have a DC of 11 for something noticeable, and I have a player with a passive perception of 12, I'm going to give them what they'd notice.

Except that’s not what passive means in 5e. Instead it means that there is no roll for the declared repetitive action. It’s not an always on radar for everything, it is what is used when your character is doing a repeated action for a period of time: keeping watch, exploring a dungeon, whatever. Instead of asking players to continuously roll for their declared action, DMs can simply consult the passive score.

So when a character has high passive perception we can assume that they are very attentive to keeping watch for danger, if their players chooses to perform that role.

 

[Maxperson]

There's some room for interpretation there. Checking for anything hidden in a particular pillar that you pass by is something that you would only do once. Checking for anything hidden on the outskirts of camp, while you're on watch, is something that you do repeatedly.

The example given is searching for a secret door over and over and over. I don't think they meant one secret door at one section of wall. It seems like they are talking about adventurers who do a task many times over their career. I can see what you are getting at, though.