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="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 8548351" data-attributes="member: 6921763"><p>Now that it is very clear to me how you'd run it, I really do think you are misinterpreting the intersection of the rules for traveling, noticing hidden threats, and surprise.</p><p> </p><p>A few issues in particular come up when run this way, including:</p><p></p><p>1. This style nerfs the Ranger's ability that states:</p><p><em>"Even when you are engaged in another activity while traveling (such as foraging, navigating, or tracking), you remain alert to danger."</em></p><p>The way you have it, everyone in the group has passive perception that is "always on" - in other words, everyone is individually alert to danger.</p><p></p><p>2. You could have a situation where the "watching for danger" subgroup has a one or two successes but more failures. Those PCs whose passive perception on their own would have succeeded kinda get a raw deal here (but not RAW <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />) and are lumped in with the subgroup fail. Meanwhile, some in the "watching out for danger" subgroup might actually have the same or lower passive perception yet somehow succeed in the fiction because the group fail didn't apply to them. That is a very wonky outcome for the party as a whole.</p><p></p><p>3. The group can start "gaming" this methodology. It would likely benefit every party to only have the one or two PCs with the highest passive perception scores do the "watching for danger" while the rest of the PCs do "other activities" to then be excluded from the "group check". Now we just need the one, or one of the two, high perception PCs to succeed and, voila!, no surprise for anyone. That makes high Perception extra powerful as has been mentioned before - one PC with very high perception can keep everyone in a party from virtually ever being surprised.</p><p></p><p></p><p>A plain reading of all the rules indicates that the PCs who are involved in other activities are specifically not watching for danger (with certain specific exceptions such as: Rangers and PCs with the Alert Feat). Their passive perception does not apply. Those characters will not spot well-hidden traps and will be surprised by stealthy monsters looking to attack.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 8548351, member: 6921763"] Now that it is very clear to me how you'd run it, I really do think you are misinterpreting the intersection of the rules for traveling, noticing hidden threats, and surprise. A few issues in particular come up when run this way, including: 1. This style nerfs the Ranger's ability that states: [I]"Even when you are engaged in another activity while traveling (such as foraging, navigating, or tracking), you remain alert to danger."[/I] The way you have it, everyone in the group has passive perception that is "always on" - in other words, everyone is individually alert to danger. 2. You could have a situation where the "watching for danger" subgroup has a one or two successes but more failures. Those PCs whose passive perception on their own would have succeeded kinda get a raw deal here (but not RAW :)) and are lumped in with the subgroup fail. Meanwhile, some in the "watching out for danger" subgroup might actually have the same or lower passive perception yet somehow succeed in the fiction because the group fail didn't apply to them. That is a very wonky outcome for the party as a whole. 3. The group can start "gaming" this methodology. It would likely benefit every party to only have the one or two PCs with the highest passive perception scores do the "watching for danger" while the rest of the PCs do "other activities" to then be excluded from the "group check". Now we just need the one, or one of the two, high perception PCs to succeed and, voila!, no surprise for anyone. That makes high Perception extra powerful as has been mentioned before - one PC with very high perception can keep everyone in a party from virtually ever being surprised. A plain reading of all the rules indicates that the PCs who are involved in other activities are specifically not watching for danger (with certain specific exceptions such as: Rangers and PCs with the Alert Feat). Their passive perception does not apply. Those characters will not spot well-hidden traps and will be surprised by stealthy monsters looking to attack. [/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