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
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
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="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8546142" data-attributes="member: 7032025"><p>No, sorry, the rule in question does not support your interpretation, for three simple reasons that you have never been able to disprove:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You have never been able to explain the part in red: These characters <strong><span style="color: rgb(209, 72, 65)">don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores</span></strong> <strong><span style="color: rgb(209, 72, 65)">to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats</span></strong>.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You continue to say that such characters don't have a passive wisdom (perception) score despite the fact that the sentence explicitly says they have one (just that it does not count for the group).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">And you continue to say that, despite all the evidence above that you are ignoring the ACTUAL rule, they support your intent of passive perception being shut off despite having no support for said position and being disproved by the lead developer who tells you that passive perception is always.</li> </ul><p>Try again, this time with some actual rule or dev support, because so far, you have absolutely nothing. And repeating again and again that that rule supports your view just shows this time after time.</p><p></p><p>And the reason for you being wrong in this from the start is that your "solution" is unfair to the players, and not conducive to fun. Basically, you are forcing them to choose between survivability and helping out during the travel phase. The REAL intent behind the rules is way better, it does not put the characters in mortal danger by removing their PP and making them automatically surprised, it just prevents them from helping spot threats in advance with the rest of the group. It's way more balanced, less fatal to characters, and way more conducive to fun. At least characters can try and do something useful without having a death sentence hanging over their head.</p><p></p><p>If perception really bothers you so much, start by not handing out advantage to it when inappropriate. We don't have a problem with perception at our tables, and all the characters don't have it. So maybe the problem is elsewhere at your tables.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lyxen, post: 8546142, member: 7032025"] No, sorry, the rule in question does not support your interpretation, for three simple reasons that you have never been able to disprove: [LIST] [*]You have never been able to explain the part in red: These characters [B][COLOR=rgb(209, 72, 65)]don't contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores[/COLOR][/B][COLOR=rgb(209, 72, 65)] [/COLOR][B][COLOR=rgb(209, 72, 65)]to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats[/COLOR][/B]. [*]You continue to say that such characters don't have a passive wisdom (perception) score despite the fact that the sentence explicitly says they have one (just that it does not count for the group). [*]And you continue to say that, despite all the evidence above that you are ignoring the ACTUAL rule, they support your intent of passive perception being shut off despite having no support for said position and being disproved by the lead developer who tells you that passive perception is always. [/LIST] Try again, this time with some actual rule or dev support, because so far, you have absolutely nothing. And repeating again and again that that rule supports your view just shows this time after time. And the reason for you being wrong in this from the start is that your "solution" is unfair to the players, and not conducive to fun. Basically, you are forcing them to choose between survivability and helping out during the travel phase. The REAL intent behind the rules is way better, it does not put the characters in mortal danger by removing their PP and making them automatically surprised, it just prevents them from helping spot threats in advance with the rest of the group. It's way more balanced, less fatal to characters, and way more conducive to fun. At least characters can try and do something useful without having a death sentence hanging over their head. If perception really bothers you so much, start by not handing out advantage to it when inappropriate. We don't have a problem with perception at our tables, and all the characters don't have it. So maybe the problem is elsewhere at your tables. [/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