D&D General "I make a perception check."

[Reynard]

I know that. The rolls happen off screen(because they don't matter) every 10 seconds in a range of 1-20 and at the spot of the secret door, the roll at that moment is assumed to be the average of 10. If on the other hand a player says, "I'm searching this wall for secret doors," you do not use passive perception for the result.

I don't actually think it says Passive checks work like taking 20.

 

[Cruentus]

I honestly don't understand how you come to this conclusion. The rules are clear anthe repeated action part, and in the exploration chapter it talks about how PCs are assumed to be moving carefully, paying attention and keeping eyes, ears and noses open for trouble. The passive check rule is a tool the GM uses to keep from having to call for rolls every 10 seconds. In the fiction the skills are used exactly the same way as an active check.

Yes, and its also confused due to its naming, as being something that characters don't actually have to do... which is wrong...

PHB p183 "Characters who turn their attention to other tasks as the group travels are not focused on watching for danger. These characters don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats."

PHB 175 "A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the DM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster."

So a passive check still needs to be actively conducted. If the character is mapping the dungeon, they don't have a passive perception score. If they're searching for traps throughout the hallway, for example, they do.

The Player is passive, not the character... at least, that's how its been in our groups/my table...

 

[Maxperson]

Crawford does love to directly contradict the RAW!

There is no contradiction here, though.

"The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results."

"I'm looking around" and "I search the wall for secret doors." are actions that have a chance for failure and if the outcome is uncertain and consequences of failure are meaningful, require a perception check by the player.

The passive rolls just represent the average attempt by the PC when the player is not actively doing something that would require an active roll. That applies to every skill, perception included.

I don't mean to come off as arguing that it's bad to do it that way, but it is messy as hell in play IME.

"The assassin strikes from the shadows!"
"Wait, why didn't I get a chance to see him?"
"You did but your passive perception didn't beat his stealth."
"Crawford said I get a check anyway!"

That's a misinterpretation of what he said.

He's saying that if your passive score fails to see the assassin, but it's dark and the player says, "I peer deeply into the shadows to see if anything is there." you get an active roll and that active roll is because the passive check failed to detect the assassin. He isn't saying you get an automatic roll if the passive check has failed.

 

[Reynard]

Yes, and its also confused due to its naming, as being something that characters don't actually have to do... which is wrong...

PHB p183 "Characters who turn their attention to other tasks as the group travels are not focused on watching for danger. These characters don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats."

PHB 175 "A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the DM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster."

So a passive check still needs to be actively conducted. If the character is mapping the dungeon, they don't have a passive perception score. If they're searching for traps throughout the hallway, for example, they do.

The Player is passive, not the character... at least, that's how its been in our groups/my table...

But that Crawford quote above seems to contradict that. Or, at least, guarantee a "second chance" for no apparent reason.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't actually think it says Passive checks work like taking 20.

What are you talking about? Nothing I said can be construed as "taking 20."

 

[Demetrios1453]

Sure. You can do whatever you want to your game. However, while RAW lets you make those changes, those changes don't become RAW or RAI.

The game intends for the DM to be the one to call for checks in response to what the players describe their PCs as doing.

That's fine. But a good amount of this thread seems to be putting down players and DMs who choose to not follow RAW in this instance. If the player just wants to declare a check, roll the dice, and the DM is fine with this, then go for it. I guess I'm just surprised by so many posts here by DM who don't simply shrug their shoulders and go "sure" if a player wants to do so. The game is minimally impacted, and the player is happy. Even though I'm usually a fairly RAW DM, I guess I'm a bit unusual with not minding this at all...

 

[Reynard]

The passive rolls just represent the average attempt by the PC when the player is not actively doing something that would require an active roll.

It literally doesn't say that. It is just a tool to reduce die rolling. It isn't an average of a bunch of attempts, it just uses the die average for expediency.

 

[Reynard]

The game is minimally impacted, and the player is happy. Even though I'm usually a fairly RAW DM, I guess I'm a bit unusual with not minding this at all...

Some of use don't think the game is "minimally impacted."

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Wait, isn't that the opposite of how PbtA games work. In those games you explicitly state what you want to have happen AND what move you are going to make. Or am I conflating PbtA and FitD?

As I understood it, everything is supposed to remain in the fiction. "You have to do it to do it." So, the player may absolutely intend to make a Discern Realities roll, but they cannot just flatly say, "I'm gong to make a Discern Realities roll," roll the dice, and then say, "I got an 8. What here is useful or valuable to me?"

Instead, it's a conversation within the fiction up until the point where the rules are triggered. So, for instance, paraphrasing from my most recent session...

Spoiler: Spoilered for length

DM (me): "Alright, you're able to get through the lock no problem. Tell me, Bard, have you ever picked a Jinnistani lock before?"
Bard: "Well, I figure I had to have done so just as an exploratory thing while I was in the Silver Thread as a kid...but wait, didn't I pick a lock while we were in Jinnistan? Getting into that glassmaker's shop?"
DM: "I...honestly don't remember, so we'll just go with that. Anything special you remember about Jinnistani locks?"
B: "They're always made with really good materials--tight tolerances, perfect fits, that sort of thing. You can't use cheap tricks to pick them."
DM: "Cool. So, you get through the door, and enter the little guest house. Things look fairly ordinary for a separate guest residence, though you notice some disarray off in the direction of the kitchen."
Fighter: "Alright, we head that way. What do we see?"
DM: "Three dead bodies. They're...really weird. They kind of look like elongated, semi-insectoid humanoids."
Spellslinger: "What's their armor like? Anything unusual?"
DM: "Yes, actually. As you examine the bodies, you realize that what you thought was their chitinous exoskeleton is actually a strange lacquer-composite material, which appears to be physically bonded to their flesh."
B: "Do they look injured? Have they damaged anything else in the house?"
DM: "You don't see any obvious injuries, and while the kitchen is a mess, you don't see signs that they went anywhere else."
B: "I want to examine the bodies more closely, see if I can figure out what killed them."
F: "I'll help. Pry off some of their armor."
DM: "Alright, that sounds like a Discern Realities roll, yeah? Please give me that Wisdom roll."
B: "Oh, 11, nice. Let's see...I always forget what these friggin' questions are...how about 'what should I be on the lookout for?'"
DM: "Good question. Well, firstly, you can tell these things were at least humanoid, but they're...really weird. As you pull the armor away, the body actually begins to almost immediately...not exactly 'decompose,' that implies rot. This is more like disintegrating, as though reality itself doesn't like these bodies."

And things went on from there.

Point being, I have had to coach my players to focus on "you have to do it to do it." Two of them were very eager to immediately leap to rolling without any in-fiction preamble, and I've been trying to show them that they have to lead in with the in-story effort before they can declare a move they wish to invoke. Much of the time, this cashes out more or less as "I want to use X" and I respond with, "Well, walk me through what you're doing first." Sometimes, they don't even need to roll anything, because their questions are answered or their goal is achieved without doing so. Usually, it does actually happen, but I want that initial step of "you have to do it to do it" to happen first.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, and its also confused due to its naming, as being something that characters don't actually have to do... which is wrong...

PHB p183 "Characters who turn their attention to other tasks as the group travels are not focused on watching for danger. These characters don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats."

PHB 175 "A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the DM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster."

So a passive check still needs to be actively conducted. If the character is mapping the dungeon, they don't have a passive perception score. If they're searching for traps throughout the hallway, for example, they do.

It's not conducted with specificity, though. Unless you're telling me that the party is taking a detailed search of every 10 feet of dungeon corridor and every room "Passively." That means that an active declaration by the player still requires a roll per the ability check RAW. Those checks are not removed just because passive skills exist.