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: 8548895" data-attributes="member: 7032025">Of course, there is rule 0, which I'm a great fan off, but which people tend to leave aside for discussion of the RAW, otherwise there is even less common ground to discuss, the circumstances (which are rarely properly explained over an internet post) becoming preponderent for the DM's choice.That being said, as I've mentioned many times in this thread, this is why I don't believe that there's any reason to call the travel rules flawed with the way I explain them. Indeed, if the DM does not want someone who is not specifically looking for threats top have his PP if an ambush occurs (after no-one in the group detected it in advance), the DM can very well do that with the RAW, saying "you were very much distracted, you have disadvantage on your PP" or even "autofail on the PP because of heavy distraction".As explained before, I would tend not to do this, because I don't want to have parties consisting of paranoid characters who never do other activities while travelling, but also because for me it's not the spirit of the rules, in particular as explained by JC. Doing it would be too much of a "gotch'a" moment for the DM, and the game is not about DM/Player conflict.And on this, I would also agree. For me, there is a difference between looking for the danger of an ambush and looking for a secret door or hidden object. I've noticed that many times in particular in LARPs, exploring caverns with very little light, and being so focussed on listening that we could miss items which where more or less in plain sight. Another anecdote is about playing a monster in a group, catching a party of 6 players at night in a short and nasty fight, and after mopping up the floor with them, finding only 5 bodies on the ground. We were sure that he had not ran away, and we beat the bushes for a good 5 minutes to try and find him, and we did not. What he had done was simply to embrace a tree, and not move at all. We were so focussed on looking for movement and listening that we did not see him and he was right there in front of us, immobile and silent...Which is why maybe it would be interesting to add another type of "activity while travelling", especially in dungeons, looking for secret doors or hidden things, which might actually be more linked to investigation then perception, and saying that whoever does this has its full passive, but is considered otherwise distracted for the purpose of noticing ambushes.</blockquote>

Verification