NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8543772" data-attributes="member: 7032025">And I've already told you at least three times that you are reading this rule wrong, because:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">It does not say that people turning their attention to other tasks don't get their passive checks for noticing hidden creatures or for surprise, just that they don't contribute to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats, which is completely different.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Moreover, it assumes that adventurers are idiots who, walking down a dungeon corridor, will actually be doing tasks other than keeping alive by watching their surroundings for danger. Obviously, the characters will NOT be doing such things unless they are in a safe place, preferably not moving, so it should not even apply to most of the cases.</li> </ol>As for searching, it's a completely different subject, again unless in very specific cases, you will do this in an area that you have secured. This is why I'm telling you that your method actually provides no benefit.I'm not wondering, I'm acknowledging that, by the RAW and by the RAI that I've shown you, it's indeed very strong. Despite that, in the hundreds of characters played in our 5e campaigns, only ONE has taken the observant feat, first because it's a feat and it's an OPTION already and therefore not allowed in all campaigns, and second because it had to fit to the character's profile.After that, there are multiple ways of dealing with this. As mentioned, I don't like yours because it basically frustrates the players for no good verisimilitude reasons (it's absurd to think that two people waking 5 feet apart in front of you seriously obscure your view, for example), just because you are afraid that passive perception is strong. Or that you say "because you are mapping, or taking notes" (useful things for the group and for the players), you will always be surprised. It's a really bad way to discourage contributions.But still you would allow combinations of a feat and a dubious interpretation of a combat rule on helping to get passive perception through the roof of bounding accuracy, therefore removing a serious part of the excitement of exploration, since that guy, for sure, will never be doing other useful tasks ?On the other hand, I prefer to control properly such dubious uses (through limitations on OPTIONAL feats, and not allowing helping to apply outside of combat unless justified), making sure that bounded accuracy is kept properly intact, and therefore allowing everyone to have fun, since the gap between characters remains manageable in terms of DC.The only thing I'm saying, along with the rules and the RAI, is that adventurers are seasoned professional, and will therefore not be doing stupid things like strolling down a dungeon corridor, whistling a tune and reading a book to make sure that they don't notice threats. And that was echoed by even non-professional adventurers in pseudo-dangerous situations. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

Verification