D&D 5E Passive perception Yay or Nay?

[dream66_]

I think, by the rules in the PHB, only the one who failed his stealth check doesn't get the surprise round. Don't the others still get it?

I think you have it backwards, 5e doesn't have surprise rounds

It has the surprised condition, if you are surprised you can't act in the first round of combat. So PC's would be aware of the fact there are badguys, those no PC would be surprised, and all would act in first round.




EDIT: Overall I wish my DM running Adventures League would pay attention to passive perception, he's constantly, "Ok, you said you walk into the room but no one said they are rolling perception so I'm rulling that you walked in with your eyes closed."

 

[CapnZapp]

If you absolutely must have randomness and can't appreciate the standard rules for their simplicity and speed, I recommend that each character rolls 3d6 after each rest (long or short) to generate their passive perception for that part of the adventure. That is:

Passive perception score = Wisdom modifier + 3d6.
(If you have advantage, you don't add +5, you roll twice just as usual)

Why 3d6? Well, this greatly favors an average result to mimic the "take 10" of the default rule. It still offers enough randomness (or variability) to make the same rolls as a d20 possible, only with significantly less chance of an extreme roll.

I would trust my players with open rolls, or you can have them roll the dice behind your DM screen (or roll yourself).

 

[KarinsDad]

I think, by the rules in the PHB, only the one who failed his stealth check doesn't get the surprise round. Don't the others still get it?

Actually, the PHB is fairly vague on all of this. Some DMs come up with the concept of Group Stealth Checks via the Group Checks section and other DMs are clueless about it (or would not even allow it) because the PHB does not have good examples for this. But it wouldn't be someone who fails a stealth check who doesn't get the surprise round, it would be someone who fails a passive perception check (PHB page 189).

 

[KarinsDad]

EDIT: Overall I wish my DM running Adventures League would pay attention to passive perception, he's constantly, "Ok, you said you walk into the room but no one said they are rolling perception so I'm rulling that you walked in with your eyes closed."

Squirt him with water (or threaten him with it) every time he says that and explain your reasoning and sooner or later, he'll get the hint.

 

[Eric V]

I think you have it backwards, 5e doesn't have surprise rounds

Sorry, I used the wrong term, but what I meant was, wouldn't the enemies who had successfully beaten the PP of the opponents be the only ones to act in the first round?

 

[KarinsDad]

If you absolutely must have randomness and can't appreciate the standard rules for their simplicity and speed,

The problem with the "simple rules" in the PHB are that they have holes big enough to drive a truck through. It has nothing to do with the randomness factor.

"The DM compares the Stealth checks of anyone hiding with the passive perception score of each creature on the opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter."

First off, the word "hiding". Stealth is not just used for hiding, so PCs or NPCs not hiding cannot surprise anyone (according to this rule). PCs or NPCs just sneaking down a corridor, for example, cannot surprise anyone. Let's assume for a moment that this is just bad writing and that we can replace the word "hiding" with the phrase "using that skill" and move on.

Let's take the example of 5 monsters hiding in the room vs. 5 PCs sneaking down a corridor.

The DM has to roll 5 stealth checks for the monsters. Each player has to roll a stealth check for his PC.

Almost always, at least one of the monsters will roll so low that all of the PCs will notice him. Almost always, at least one of the PCs will roll so low that all of the monsters will notice him.

Almost always, there will be no surprise.

What good is having the rules if following them means that those dice rolls will be in vain the majority of the time and almost never work. Surprise will almost never occur. In this example, 10 dice are rolled and the results of those rolls is that nobody is surprised 95+% of the time. Talk about wasting time rolling dice.


This is why both sides have to roll group stealth checks. That way, typically some PCs will notice and some will not and be surprised. Typically, some monsters will notice and some will not and be surprised.

Unfortunately, the PHB does not mention group stealth checks at all. Many DMs who do not read message boards will never figure it out and will probably use some set of house rules anyway.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I challenge that assertion, actually.

Agency requires meaningful decisions, and if a tactic is always optimal in every situation, such that you'd be a fool not to, you're not making a choice by doing that tactic.

Back in 1st edition, I found thieves to be the most dull class, because you existed because the party needed someone to roll that die every 10 feet. Then if there was a lock, you picked it. You basically existed because the party's random chance of finding doors and picking locks needed to be on some character sheet somewhere, and you volunteered to be the guy with that piece of paper this time. You weren't an agent--you didn't make any choices, and you were NEVER designed to make those choices.

Eventually, clever DMs and later edition designers abandoned the idea of the non-encounter skill cruft, and moved to enabling a sense of play where real choice and agency could be enjoyed. Picking a lock on some random door is low agency. Picking a lock on the chains and muzzle that are keeping the party's captured wizard trapped in a dungeon cell that also has a triggered alarm trap that floods it with water you can possibly deactivate is high agency.

Agency requires meaningful choice and meaningful choice requires meaningful conseequence.

Well, just because you find the prospect dull as all get out doesn't mean it's true for everyone else though. Heck, you could make the same argument about the cleric way back when, that someone *had* to be one in order to have the healing spells (as that was the optimal choice for your party)... and yet we've seen many folks here on the boards say quite plainly that they enjoy being the healer. So a job that I think most people wished upon an NPC that traveled with the party so that no one else in the group had to actually play it... is one that some tables embrace. Same can be said of the searching thief. We might find the idea of describing what we're doing and looking for every 10 feet (and then rolling for results) to be the highest form of tedium... but I'm pretty sure we'd find a table and a thief player that loves it. Probably one that is a fan (and constant player) of the OSR if I had to guess.

I ain't saying there's a *lot* of them... only that odds-on they do in fact exist.

 

[CapnZapp]

The problem with the "simple rules" in the PHB are that they have holes big enough to drive a truck through. It has nothing to do with the randomness factor.

Sorry but one of us is in the wrong thread.

Don't mistake my appreciation for passive perception for a blind devotion to the entire stealth mechanism. Thank you.

 

[KarinsDad]

Sorry but one of us is in the wrong thread.

Don't mistake my appreciation for passive perception for a blind devotion to the entire stealth mechanism. Thank you.

It seems to me that you brought stealth into the conversation (along with your appreciation for passive perception with regard to stealth) with your post:

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.

The 5E stealth rules are the very reason that passive perception is less worthwhile in 5E than it was in previous editions.

 

[Psikerlord#]

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 just plain wrong. The passive check simulates rolling a 10, nothing more. Hiding from lots of enemies should be hard.