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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7099197" data-attributes="member: 97077">"Characters who turn their attention to other tasks as the group travels are not focused on watching for danger. These characters don’t contribute their passive Wisdom (Perception) scores to the group’s chance of noticing hidden threats." Basic Rules, page 65.So, you could say "the rules have it always on," except when it's not.(The rest of this post is really for everybody else. No offense, but I've learned not to engage with you too much this deep in a thread as it tends to turn into debates about the definitions of things. I'm not interested in that. I'm interested instead in showing how one can use what Crawford says in the podcast without it causing disruption sufficient for some to want to toss the mechanic entirely.)Which is not to say I agree it's "always on" either in the manner some are lamenting in this thread. In the context of a combat situation, which is what the podcast was chiefly focused on as I recall, it's generally safe in my view to say it's "always on" in the sense that if there's any uncertainty as to whether a creature can hide from another creature, the DM can use the passive check to resolve it. If there's no uncertainty, then there's no need to use the passive check. After all, a passive check is just a special kind of ability check, and an ability check is a mechanic used to get a result when a creature undertakes a task with an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence of failure. The task here being "keeping watch for hidden dangers."In an exploration situation, we can't in my view assume what task the players want their characters to pursue, though I bet at most tables it's safe to say they're "keeping watch for hidden dangers" if nothing else. But if the players want to perform some other task instead, something at least as reasonably distracting as the options listed in the rules, then as above, the passive check does not apply. There is no uncertainty as to the outcome of keeping watch for danger while performing a task like tracking - you just fail outright (unless you're a ranger in favored terrain) because you're doing this other thing.What this means, in a practical sense, is that players have to make a meaningful choice with regard to their exploration tasks. Everything's a trade-off. You can't capture all the info with your high passive Perception score - just the stuff you're focused on in your task, if the task has an uncertain outcome. So if you want to be the ambush-spoiler and trap-finder, then you can't also find all the secret doors. (Also, get to the front rank!) If you want to find all the secret doors, forage, track, draw a map, navigate, or undertake a task at least as distracting, you will be surprised if you're ambushed (so maybe don't stand in the front or back rank) unless, again, you're a ranger in favored terrain.Rule this way and you should in my view have no issue with passive Perception being "always on." Because it will only apply to a given task at a time. And that will have to be a choice the players make and why teamwork matters in this team-based game. And we want our players to make meaningful choices during play, right? Not just at character creation or advancement?</blockquote>

Verification