Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Beast master wants to use pet to get +5 to passive perception
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 8545954" data-attributes="member: 23751"><p>The travel rules are irrelevant and don't say what you think they say in any case. The specific initiative rules control the situation. All the passive perception not counting means is that the PC in question is automatically surprised. Here's the travel rules quotes. Note how they are individual.</p><p></p><p>Noticing Threats.</p><p></p><p>"Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores of the characters to determine whether <strong>anyone</strong> in the group notices a hidden threat." - Anyone, singular.</p><p></p><p>"Surprising Foes. If the adventurers encounter a hostile creature or group, the DM determines whether the adventurers or their foes might be surprised when combat erupts. See chapter 9 for more about surprise." - Use the combat surprise rules with individual checks.</p><p></p><p>The travel rules support me here, not you. You keep trying to pull out one sentence that you think contradicts multiple clear rules as if that will prove you right and the multiple clear rules wrong. It doesn't work that way. </p><p></p><p>When you have a sentence like, "These characters don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats." that can be interpreted two ways. The first as a sentence that just means that group's (all individuals separately in the group) chances of noticing a threat go down if people are distracted, and the second as a group check that contradicts multiple other rules, the one that contradicts is flat out wrong.</p><p></p><p>You're correct. They still have passive perception. They just can't use it in certain situations. </p><p></p><p>"These characters <strong>don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores</strong> to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats."</p><p></p><p>There are restrictions. Sometimes you auto fail because of distraction. RAW is crystal clear on that.</p><p></p><p>No. You are wrong. The noticing threats subsection in travel is to help guide you into the combat section. I mean, it literally tells you that. I'll quote it a second time in this same post. From the travel rules, noticing threats subsection.</p><p></p><p>"Surprising Foes. If the adventurers encounter a hostile creature or group, <strong>the DM determines whether the adventurers or their foes might be surprised when combat erupts. See chapter 9 for more about surprise</strong>." - Use the combat surprise rules with individual checks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 8545954, member: 23751"] The travel rules are irrelevant and don't say what you think they say in any case. The specific initiative rules control the situation. All the passive perception not counting means is that the PC in question is automatically surprised. Here's the travel rules quotes. Note how they are individual. Noticing Threats. "Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores of the characters to determine whether [B]anyone[/B] in the group notices a hidden threat." - Anyone, singular. "Surprising Foes. If the adventurers encounter a hostile creature or group, the DM determines whether the adventurers or their foes might be surprised when combat erupts. See chapter 9 for more about surprise." - Use the combat surprise rules with individual checks. The travel rules support me here, not you. You keep trying to pull out one sentence that you think contradicts multiple clear rules as if that will prove you right and the multiple clear rules wrong. It doesn't work that way. When you have a sentence like, "These characters don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats." that can be interpreted two ways. The first as a sentence that just means that group's (all individuals separately in the group) chances of noticing a threat go down if people are distracted, and the second as a group check that contradicts multiple other rules, the one that contradicts is flat out wrong. You're correct. They still have passive perception. They just can't use it in certain situations. "These characters [B]don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores[/B] to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats." There are restrictions. Sometimes you auto fail because of distraction. RAW is crystal clear on that. No. You are wrong. The noticing threats subsection in travel is to help guide you into the combat section. I mean, it literally tells you that. I'll quote it a second time in this same post. From the travel rules, noticing threats subsection. "Surprising Foes. If the adventurers encounter a hostile creature or group, [B]the DM determines whether the adventurers or their foes might be surprised when combat erupts. See chapter 9 for more about surprise[/B]." - Use the combat surprise rules with individual checks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Beast master wants to use pet to get +5 to passive perception
Top