Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8548470" data-attributes="member: 7032025">No, an actually this reinforces my position very strongly, I had forgotten that sentence about the ranger. Why ?<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Even though characters always keep their PP, this PP (and I've been very clear about this) does NOT contribute to the group's chance of noticing the hidden threat if they are conducting another activity (although it remains for surprise, if the hidden threat is combat that is not avoided).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">However, the sentence for the ranger above exactly show that my interpretation is correct, as the ranger's advantage is that, contrary to the other characters in the paragraph above, is still alert to danger when engaging in other activities, so his PP DOES contribute to the groups' chance to notice the hidden threat.</li> </ul>Logical, consistent and in line with my interpretation/I think you did not read the part where I said that although it's a check that determines success for the group, it's NOT a group check as per the rules on those in general because the characters are NOT active. The characters are actually providing the DC for the threat's stealth check, and this (for example if there are many orcs) might be a group check for them. See in particular <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/beast-master-wants-to-use-pet-to-get-5-to-passive-perception.685957/post-8548184" target="_blank">this post</a>.As it's not a "group check" in the way you mention it, the strange things above will not occur. But note that this is a side effect of the group check mechanic, people who would have succeeded on their own get a raw deal if they are outnumbered by the failures. It has nothing to do with the travel rules.And I would not call it gaming, it's a realistic situation in real life, where when you have someone who is good at something, they usually end up doing it for the group. As for the others, being generally inefficient, they might as well perform other tasks.However, what happened in the rare cases where we played this RAW during the Hexcrawl in Tomb of Annihilation, was that the barbarian of the group was always torn between keeping alert for danger, foraging and tracking. And therefore, depending on the urgency of the tasks, and what help he could get from the others, roles switched depending on the circumstances. Overall, it worked well.Note that it's way worse with the other proposed implementation, by the way, first because it removes any choice from the party (if you are not alert, basically, you will always be surprised), so everyone should just be alert and forego the other activities, the risk would be way too great.Again, this is not what the RAW says, the words are very specific and match exactly the description of the travel: "These characters don’t contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group’s chance of noticing hidden threats." to be compared to "Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores of the characters to determine whether anyone in the group notices a hidden threat.".Yes, they will not spot well-hidden traps, but no, again, nothing in the RAW says that they completely lose their PP for the purpose of surprise. This has been the weakness all the time for the counter argument, which has failed to provide any evidence that this is in the rules. Again, the rules only do what they say they do. Stealth Rules and Surprise Rules are complete and clearly written and there are no exceptions written in the rules.</blockquote>

Verification