That's pretty sad. Many won't use passive checks without realizing the game's balance would be upset. You take the time to roll because someone might get lucky, and to take that away doesn't sound as fun.
D&D 5E Passive perception Yay or Nay?
- Thread starter miniaturehoarder
- Start date
That's pretty sad. Many won't use passive checks without realizing the game's balance would be upset. You take the time to roll because someone might get lucky, and to take that away doesn't sound as fun.
dd.stevenson
Super KY
I only use Perception in free-flowing scenes (e.g., the Duke's ball), during combat (at the cost of an action), and to oppose invisibility. For the latter it's useful; for the first two it ain't.
EDIT: It's also useful for monsters, but I suppose that's a given.
EDIT: It's also useful for monsters, but I suppose that's a given.
Psikerlord#
Explorer
Imo passive perception is a mistake. It didnt exist pre 3e when take 10 first reared its ugly head. Static trap dc vs static passive perception is just plain broken. As a dm, you know the highest passive in your party... so you know when you set the dc whether the party will see it or not.
The only legit reason for passive is to not tip players off to something by rolling (although this is easily avoided using the time honored DM trick of occasionally rolling dice behind your screen for no reason other than keeping the players guessing). In my view you are better off getting players to roll 10 perception checks at the start of a session, and randomly drawing on those if required. Players get to roll, no static check vs static DC problem, and no tip offs.
Honestly though, you can play using active perception checks nearly all the time. If the party is about to be ambushed, or spring a trap, does it really matter if you ask them to roll on the spot? Theyre about to find out whats coming in a moment anyway! And in combat, spotting lurkers can be resolved as a contest per DMG, ie perception roll vs stealth roll.
The only legit reason for passive is to not tip players off to something by rolling (although this is easily avoided using the time honored DM trick of occasionally rolling dice behind your screen for no reason other than keeping the players guessing). In my view you are better off getting players to roll 10 perception checks at the start of a session, and randomly drawing on those if required. Players get to roll, no static check vs static DC problem, and no tip offs.
Honestly though, you can play using active perception checks nearly all the time. If the party is about to be ambushed, or spring a trap, does it really matter if you ask them to roll on the spot? Theyre about to find out whats coming in a moment anyway! And in combat, spotting lurkers can be resolved as a contest per DMG, ie perception roll vs stealth roll.
Last edited:
CapnZapp
Legend
No, the thing is that if you roll active perception, stealth becomes 
.
This is simple math, and has nothing to do with drama, suspense or good role playing.
If you allow the party to roll, somebody is bound to roll high. This means your stealth check becomes worthless.
So passive perception is good practice. If you roll, you should probably add +5 to all stealth checks.
. This is simple math, and has nothing to do with drama, suspense or good role playing.
If you allow the party to roll, somebody is bound to roll high. This means your stealth check becomes worthless.
So passive perception is good practice. If you roll, you should probably add +5 to all stealth checks.
I like the idea of passive perception.
1.) It makes the game faster
2.) If your DM asked you to role füór perception, every player knows, that there is propably something to notice. The player will now act differently, even though he will not succeed on the check. That problem ist solved with a passive persception score.
3.) It makes stealth fair. It is not fair If the SC/NSC/Monster has to stealth vs. X SC/NSC/Monster who all have an active perception check. There will always be a good D20-role...so in this scenario a passive perception check is fair! (this also applies to noticing an illusion or similiar stuff).
1.) It makes the game faster
2.) If your DM asked you to role füór perception, every player knows, that there is propably something to notice. The player will now act differently, even though he will not succeed on the check. That problem ist solved with a passive persception score.
3.) It makes stealth fair. It is not fair If the SC/NSC/Monster has to stealth vs. X SC/NSC/Monster who all have an active perception check. There will always be a good D20-role...so in this scenario a passive perception check is fair! (this also applies to noticing an illusion or similiar stuff).
No. Just have the players roll perception every time they enter a room, or different encounter area. They will assume something can be about or hidden, and they'll appreciate being able to get lucky so they don't get ambushed or have to search. If the roll should be secret, the DM can roll for the players, but as Psikerlord# said, most of the time the monster will just attack in a moment.
Cannyjiggit
First Post
Surely this works both ways though. If the party rogue is trying to hide and ovserve a meeting of bad guys to discover their plans, one of them is bound to roll high and discover him/her. Passive perception works here because the rogue has to roll stealth and beat the passive perception of the group. The same works the other way round if a monster is trying to spy on the party. If everyone on both sides rolls then stealth (both as an individual action and a group tactic) is discarded.
If the mechanics are broken, fix them. Someone suggested +5 on stealth. I am not familiar enough to make a recommendation, but it will probably vary from party to party. Take a look at the PC's and carefully judge it. The rolls are too much fun to just take out of the game like that.
I don't like it. For a couple of reasons.
1. I don't like the idea of the DM setting a high DC for noticing a trap or secret door, and then nobody noticing because no one in the group has a high passive; if the DM makes all secret doors DC 15, and the highest perception is 13, then nothing gets discovered, while some one in the group might have a chance if rolls were made normally.
2. Passive and Active seems weird in general. I thought the point of rolling perception was so you could notice something; actively looking for something would be investigation. In my mind, the process of perceiving would be an automatic thing anyway.
3. I don't like the idea of not being able to roll for something when my character is doing something; if there is a theif lurking in the shadows, I want to roll to notice. I don't want the DM to automatically have the theif slip past me because I only have a passive perception of 12.
1. I don't like the idea of the DM setting a high DC for noticing a trap or secret door, and then nobody noticing because no one in the group has a high passive; if the DM makes all secret doors DC 15, and the highest perception is 13, then nothing gets discovered, while some one in the group might have a chance if rolls were made normally.
2. Passive and Active seems weird in general. I thought the point of rolling perception was so you could notice something; actively looking for something would be investigation. In my mind, the process of perceiving would be an automatic thing anyway.
3. I don't like the idea of not being able to roll for something when my character is doing something; if there is a theif lurking in the shadows, I want to roll to notice. I don't want the DM to automatically have the theif slip past me because I only have a passive perception of 12.
[MENTION=57909]EroGaki[/MENTION] to your points.
1. That is what active rolls are for, if the characters don't investigate the room or area more closely and just rely on passive perception than yes they will miss things. Don't see an issue here.
2. Don't get caught up in the name of the two skills, there is a ton of overlap and both can be used passively or actively.
3. It is not automatic, the thief still needs to roll. But I do agree with you that it is more fun for the players to roll the dice, so in cases like this as long as it is only one person on watch I let them roll perception vs passive stealth of the thief.
1. That is what active rolls are for, if the characters don't investigate the room or area more closely and just rely on passive perception than yes they will miss things. Don't see an issue here.
2. Don't get caught up in the name of the two skills, there is a ton of overlap and both can be used passively or actively.
3. It is not automatic, the thief still needs to roll. But I do agree with you that it is more fun for the players to roll the dice, so in cases like this as long as it is only one person on watch I let them roll perception vs passive stealth of the thief.
Similar Threads
