D&D 5E Beast master wants to use pet to get +5 to passive perception

[Maxperson]

The rules never say to deprive characters of checks, never say that when you notice a threat, you are already in combat anyway, never say anything about being automatically surprised or anything of the kind, and you have been consistently unable to prove anything of the kind.

I'm responding to the bold, because that was not my argument. I said that once you are comparing passive perception vs. stealth for surprise, you are in combat already. This is a fact, because initiative is rolled. At that point the groups are on top of each other to the point where combat is happening.

You can notice a threat farther away, but it's not going to be with passive perception vs. stealth. It will be because either the other group isn't being stealthy and you see them far away, or because you actively looked farther to the forest line and saw them hiding there with an active perception roll.

 

[Lyxen]

I'm responding to the bold, because that was not my argument. I said that once you are comparing passive perception vs. stealth for surprise, you are in combat already.

That is simply a lie, here is what you said, in this post: "By the time the sentries/lookouts are using their passive perception to notice the threat, that threat is close enough for initiative to be rolled."

You can notice a threat farther away, but it's not going to be with passive perception vs. stealth.

Again, not only do you have no proof of this in the rules, but they actively contradict you. The travel rules are very clear, and so are the rules about stealth, but I'll quote the former since you seem to be fond of them: "Noticing Threats - Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores of the characters to determine whether anyone in the group notices a hidden threat."

It will be because either the other group isn't being stealthy and you see them far away, or because you actively looked farther to the forest line and saw them hiding there with an active perception roll.

Nope, this is not the way either the travel rules or the stealth rules work. Proof is given above for the travel rules, as for the stealth rules: "Passive Perception. When you hide, there’s a chance someone will notice you even if they aren’t searching. To determine whether such a creature notices you, the DM compares your Dexterity (Stealth) check with that creature’s passive Wisdom (Perception) score, which equals 10 + the creature’s Wisdom modifier, as well as any other bonuses or penalties."

So if the orcs have seen the party approaching on the road and are trying to hide, they will need to match their stealth roll against the party's PASSIVE perception, as indicated.

Note that this is where the travel rules kick in, so if the DM decides that only the characters in front have a chance to see the orcs, or if some characters are mapping, or foraging or whatever and therefore "don’t contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group’s chance of noticing hidden threats", some characters will not be taken into account for the check above, and that's fair.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I'm responding to the bold, because that was not my argument. I said that once you are comparing passive perception vs. stealth for surprise, you are in combat already. This is a fact, because initiative is rolled. At that point the groups are on top of each other to the point where combat is happening.

You can notice a threat farther away, but it's not going to be with passive perception vs. stealth. It will be because either the other group isn't being stealthy and you see them far away, or because you actively looked farther to the forest line and saw them hiding there with an active perception roll.

Slight quibble here: the Passive Check rules (pg 175) indicate that the passive mechanic "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." We just need a way to compare the passive perception of party members with the stealth of the hidden monster. What happens next in the situation does not have to be combat - said hidden monster might not even be hostile. Initiative need not apply.

EDIT TO ADD: Although, now that I'm re-reading, I think I now see where you were going in your first sentence. Your point was very specific to surprise. So, actually, yes - if the DM is "comparing passive perception vs. stealth for surprise", you are right - combat is beginning.

 

[Lyxen]

Slight quibble here: the Passive Check rules (pg 175) indicate that the passive mechanic "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." We just need a way to compare the passive perception of party members with the stealth of the hidden monster. What happens next in the situation does not have to be combat - said hidden monster might not even be hostile. Initiative need not apply.

Indeed, and when combined with the explicit instructions in the stealth rules, which match exactly those in the travel rules as well as all the advice given on the podcast, it paints an extremely clear picture.

After that, as mentioned in said podcast, that area of the game is, more than any other, firmly in the hands of the DM. He is the one that determines at which distance and under which conditions the detection chance applies, in particular, as well as any circumstantial modifiers, including adv/dis bus also autofailure/success, so in the end, the scenario can play in all sorts of different ways.

But the principles are very clear, at least for this application of stealth.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Indeed, and when combined with the explicit instructions in the stealth rules, which match exactly those in the travel rules as well as all the advice given on the podcast, it paints an extremely clear picture.

After that, as mentioned in said podcast, that area of the game is, more than any other, firmly in the hands of the DM. He is the one that determines at which distance and under which conditions the detection chance applies, in particular, as well as any circumstantial modifiers, including adv/dis bus also autofailure/success, so in the end, the scenario can play in all sorts of different ways.

But the principles are very clear, at least for this application of stealth.

See my EDIT - @Maxperson's post had to do very specifically with surprise.

 

[Lyxen]

See my EDIT - @Maxperson's post had to do very specifically with surprise.

Some of his post have, but it's untrue to say that the one that I refer to was, I have given you the exact quote that causes problems: "By the time the sentries/lookouts are using their passive perception to notice the threat, that threat is close enough for initiative to be rolled."

The whole aim of having people looking for threats in advance is to be able to anticipate problems and avoid falling into an ambush or a trap. This is exactly what the travel rules mention, basically, you can have people looking out for danger so that they detect the hidden threat (whatever it is) before it snaps on you, otherwise, what's the point ?

And this is exactly what the travel rules say, with even precisions (due to marching order or performing activities) about which character have a change to notice hidden threats in advance. But this is for the specific activity of noticing hidden threats.

After that, of course, depending on the threat, whether it's noticed or not, and the way it turns out ("Either group might decide to attack, initiate a conversation, run away, or wait to see what the other group does"), combat might occur, and if it occurs, some people might get surprised.

And of course, depending on all the above, surprise might not occur, or might be almost inevitable for some party, but it's just consequences of the previous development of the situation in "noticing hidden threats before you fall victim to them".

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Some of his post have, but it's untrue to say that the one that I refer to was, I have given you the exact quote that causes problems: "By the time the sentries/lookouts are using their passive perception to notice the threat, that threat is close enough for initiative to be rolled."

In the post I quoted of his, he clarified.

 

[Lyxen]

In the post I quoted of his, he clarified.

I would not call this a clarification, more an attempt at retcon, but I'll let it slide. Yes, if you are looking at the rules for surprise, you are in combat already. But my point is that the rule for noticing hidden threats is well before that, and it's explicitly pointed out in the rules. At the end, it MIGHT lead to combat, and as part of the initiation of combat, there MIGHT be surprise, but it's clearly two different areas of the rules, dealing with distinctly different situations.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I would not call this a clarification, more an attempt at retcon, but I'll let it slide. Yes, if you are looking at the rules for surprise, you are in combat already. But my point is that the rule for noticing hidden threats is well before that, and it's explicitly pointed out in the rules. At the end, it MIGHT lead to combat, and as part of the initiation of combat, there MIGHT be surprise, but it's clearly two different areas of the rules, dealing with distinctly different situations.

You appear to be double dipping on the surprise factor, though. Assuming the threat is quite real and these hidden monsters are going to attack, you seem to advocate for giving the party a "group check" first to notice the monsters (with some PCs excluded from said check for doing other things/not being in front rank/whatever DM whim), and then you want to give an individual surprise check to every PC as combat begins. I (and it seems many others commenting on the lengthy exchange here) would not do that as a DM. What you are calling a "group check" is really not. It is each PC making a Passive Wisdom (Perception) check, as they are allowed, to avoid surprise. Some of them might be auto-failing. Combat then begins accordingly.

 

[Maxperson]

Some of his post have, but it's untrue to say that the one that I refer to was, I have given you the exact quote that causes problems: "By the time the sentries/lookouts are using their passive perception to notice the threat, that threat is close enough for initiative to be rolled."

You're missing the context of my posts, that thing you keep missing in the books.

We had been discussing the travel rules on pages 182-183 of the PHB. Specifically the noticing threats, surprising foes and other activities subsections. All of which combine to deprive distracted PCs from using passive perception to notice threats that are attempting to surprise the party.