D&D 5E High Passive Perception
- Thread starter randrak
- Start date
Helldritch
Hero
That player specialized in perception, so why not let him do his stuff and see everything? In fact, you should consider that a huge bonus for you. He did not choose some wacky combo that lets him do crazy amount of dmg. He took a defense skill and raise it above the norm. Kuddo on him for that. But maybe your problem comes from some missunderstanding of the skill...
Perception is great to spot obvious (and not so obvious) ennemy. Be it an ennemy in hiding (or invisible), listening/evesdropping a conversation or just spotting the incongruous thing once in a while (an orc breathing and lying in ambush behind a secret door...) But it won't let you find a trap, or a secret door. You might know that something is amiss, but you'll have to get an other skill for that.
Investigation is the key to your problem. You will find that this skill is even more important. It lets you find the traps, the secret doors and all the other yaddi yadda related from searching a room up to perusing old books for clues about an astrological event.
IF you feel generous, you might let perception help you find the position of the secret door once in a while, especialy if it helps your player make some progress in the story (hey guys, our torch flickered for no reason, there must be a secret door nearby) or (the secret door must be behind that bookshelf, see the marks on the floor...) but the perception skill won't let you open it. You have to use investigation to find the way to open it nor will it let you disable a trap (Hey guys! These holes in these walls are strangely suspicious, must be a trap. But how is this trap triggered... I really don't know.)
Yes, with such a high perception, your dreams of ambushing them are, for all intent and purpose, over. In fact, as soon as someone gets 16 or above in passive perception, you're toast on that. In a sense, the observant feat is somewhat of an overkill in that area. The real question is if the player has both perception and investigation above 20.This would mean 18 in both intelligence and wisdom...(or a rogue with both skills in expertise and a 14 in both stats). Now your in a bit of a trouble but remember that the observant feat does not increase the skill as whole but only the passive part. In fact, the observant feat raise only your passive skill, not your active skill use. The said rogue mentionned above would still make an active roll at +6, not +11.
With such a character you'll have to use other tactics like reinforcements, waves of monsters, boss fights and whatever means are necessary to further your adventures. Seeing reinforcement in the middle of fight might be done with disadvantage (negating the passive bonus). Allowing some assassins to creep on your group and achieve some minor surprise effects.
In resumé, remember this. Knowing about something does nothing to counter it. You still have to do something with the information gained.
Perception is great to spot obvious (and not so obvious) ennemy. Be it an ennemy in hiding (or invisible), listening/evesdropping a conversation or just spotting the incongruous thing once in a while (an orc breathing and lying in ambush behind a secret door...) But it won't let you find a trap, or a secret door. You might know that something is amiss, but you'll have to get an other skill for that.
Investigation is the key to your problem. You will find that this skill is even more important. It lets you find the traps, the secret doors and all the other yaddi yadda related from searching a room up to perusing old books for clues about an astrological event.
IF you feel generous, you might let perception help you find the position of the secret door once in a while, especialy if it helps your player make some progress in the story (hey guys, our torch flickered for no reason, there must be a secret door nearby) or (the secret door must be behind that bookshelf, see the marks on the floor...) but the perception skill won't let you open it. You have to use investigation to find the way to open it nor will it let you disable a trap (Hey guys! These holes in these walls are strangely suspicious, must be a trap. But how is this trap triggered... I really don't know.)
Yes, with such a high perception, your dreams of ambushing them are, for all intent and purpose, over. In fact, as soon as someone gets 16 or above in passive perception, you're toast on that. In a sense, the observant feat is somewhat of an overkill in that area. The real question is if the player has both perception and investigation above 20.This would mean 18 in both intelligence and wisdom...(or a rogue with both skills in expertise and a 14 in both stats). Now your in a bit of a trouble but remember that the observant feat does not increase the skill as whole but only the passive part. In fact, the observant feat raise only your passive skill, not your active skill use. The said rogue mentionned above would still make an active roll at +6, not +11.
With such a character you'll have to use other tactics like reinforcements, waves of monsters, boss fights and whatever means are necessary to further your adventures. Seeing reinforcement in the middle of fight might be done with disadvantage (negating the passive bonus). Allowing some assassins to creep on your group and achieve some minor surprise effects.
In resumé, remember this. Knowing about something does nothing to counter it. You still have to do something with the information gained.
ExploderWizard
Hero
It isn't really that big a deal. I have found that overall, perception bonuses for the most part fail miserably to keep up with stealth bonuses. In practical terms this makes most competent perceptive adventurers on par with a blind man when attempting to spot hidden creatures. A 21 passive is REALLY good but once mid levels are reached its a fair bet that this character won't be able to find the party rogue even half the time, and you can change that to never if the rogue ever gets a cloak of elvenkind.
So don't worry too much.
FrogReaver
As long as i get to be the frog
Something that can help, while still giving the player the benefit of his resources, is to ignore the "official" method of using Passive Perception. Rather than using the passive score against a passive DC, which creates a ton of problems in it's own right, turn the DC into an active check with a bonus equal to the DC -9 against the player's passive perception. The player will still notice just about everything (as they should), but occasionally you'll roll high enough to cause them to miss something. This will keep a bit of spice in the game, while still granting the player their properly earned benefit.
Oh, and for those that consider this a houserule (because RAW!), this is how Mike Mearls suggested using Passive checks long before Perkins "clarified" the use of Passive Perception.
Oh, and for those that consider this a houserule (because RAW!), this is how Mike Mearls suggested using Passive checks long before Perkins "clarified" the use of Passive Perception.
If their passive is higher than the DC, they see it. Same as always. They just Don't miss much.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using EN World mobile app
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using EN World mobile app
I don't like comparing passive DCs. I like one side to roll. Although I convert the DCs to bonuses by subtracting 10.
ExploderWizard
Hero
A little to pvp focused
Nothing to do with PVP. Our games feature a lot of classed NPCs. The comparison to the party rogue was for an ability gauge at roughly equal levels.
Stealth & hiding generally outstrips the ability to perceive it rather quickly as the levels go up was the point. A rogue gets a special extra action just to hide, then someone trying to find them has to spend their actual action to search, and if they happen to beat the stealth check by some miracle then they can't do much about it because it took their action just to locate the rogue. Meanwhile the rogue gets regular actions then gets an extra action to hide in a new spot starting the whole process over again.
So in effect, dumping all of your resources into perception is a very steep price to pay for a benefit with a fairly short payoff period. At the very least, the DM should let the character enjoy the limited benefits while they last.
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
Easy - every task is a trade-off.
While adventuring, the players choose ONE general task they are undertaking as they do their thing. That might include Keeping Watch (for monsters and traps), Drawing a Map, Foraging, Tracking, Navigating, Searching for Secret Doors, etc. When you attempt one of these tasks, you can't do another at the same time (unless you're a ranger in favored terrain). Because this is a task that is performed repeatedly, the DM can use a passive check to resolve the outcome, when that outcome is uncertain.
So if your Observant PC wants to focus on avoiding being surprised by monsters, then he or she must Keep Watch. That means no drawing of maps or foraging or finding secret doors or whatever other task that might reasonably distract from Keeping Watch. If instead the Observant PC wants to Search for Secret Doors in the dungeon, then that means if lurking monsters come calling, he or she is automatically surprised since the character is not Keeping Watch. (Again, assuming the character is not a ranger in favored terrain.)
Further, you have to be in the position to notice things. If the party is approaching a hidden trap, for example, the Observant PC can only have a chance of spotting it IF the PC is both Keeping Watch and in the front rank. This means you not only have a trade-off, but you have to put yourself at some risk, too, by being in the front of the party.
In all likelihood, this will still mean the Observant PC will notice all the things he or she is focusing on. But the character can't focus on everything. There's a meaningful choice for him or her to make here that exists in the context of the setting rather than just when building the character.
Warmaster Horus
Explorer
Remember that Disadvantage subtracts 5 from PP.
By all means know the rules, but I'm constantly annoyed at suggestions that basically amount to "nerf your player's chosen one thing they are really good at", that's a bad road to head down for everyone at the table.
Take it as a DM's challenge, to create encounters that are interesting and fun even if someone can usually always see everything. I mean, so what if they can see mostly everything, what's the big deal? It's not like they are going to solo your encounters just because they might not be surprised, and might well act early in the initiative. Let that player have their fun, and mix it up to make sure the other players also get their chances to be good at stuff that's not just the first round of combat, or noticing details when they first enter a room, etc.
In short, try and avoid too many "surprise, monsters attack!" moments. And don't try and hide away clues that an observant PC should spot - let the clues lead to interesting situations still.
Take it as a DM's challenge, to create encounters that are interesting and fun even if someone can usually always see everything. I mean, so what if they can see mostly everything, what's the big deal? It's not like they are going to solo your encounters just because they might not be surprised, and might well act early in the initiative. Let that player have their fun, and mix it up to make sure the other players also get their chances to be good at stuff that's not just the first round of combat, or noticing details when they first enter a room, etc.
In short, try and avoid too many "surprise, monsters attack!" moments. And don't try and hide away clues that an observant PC should spot - let the clues lead to interesting situations still.
MNblockhead
A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
I just has this same issue. A rogue in the party I'm DMing for has 21 passive perception. I don't care about him not being able to be surprised. My problem was with how traps and secret doors we becoming pointless. In many published adventures, he'll just notice every trap and secret door. This was really bugging me in my latest sessions, but I realize that this is more about me not handling the passive perception to investigation flow very well. My thoughts of handling this are:
1. Don't punish the player for his build by ignoring RAW
2. You could just increase the DC, but don't.
Increasing the DC of traps to make things more difficult doesn't sit well with me. This is just punishing your player. He can never benefit from his character's increasing skills because you are just increasing the DC to thwart him. For a trap or secret door to have a DC above 20, it needs to have a special story behind it. It would need to have been designed by Grimtooth on his best day in his prime. If all the secret doors and traps in all your dungeons are 22 and above in higher-tier play...that's just dumb.
3. Perception means you notices something amiss, not that you solve the trap and find the door. There is no passive investigation.
Perception simply means that you see something worth investigating. Granted, many characters with high passive perception are going to have great investigation skills as well, but the thing is they have to roll. They could get a 1. There is still some chance of failure, even if they will breeze through most traps and doors. I realize that any skill check could be passive, but I don't do passive investigation and I've never had a player complain. Investigation by definition seems to have to be active. Ignoring passive perception, on the other hand, would be unfair for your players unless you make this home-brew rule clear from the very beginning.
4. You can throw in false leads
Not everything that is suspicious is a trap or secret door. Sometimes the designers or builders made a mistake, made an unusual design choice, or age and movement of earth or seeping water creates discolorations and cracks. Have your rogue investigate these so they are never sure if when they rolled low on investigation that they missed a trap. If you have enough instances of them noticing something strange and after rolling a high investigation score discovering it was just a trick of the light or an unusual erosion pattern, well, when they roll low on investigation they might not automatically assume it is a trap.
5. Not all traps can be perceived passively
Say you have a door. A regular door. But on the other size, a string is tied to the door handle, the other end pulls a release that sends a huge log swinging down and out the door smashing anyone in its way. Walking by that door will not tell you anything. The character still needs to be in the habit of investigating every door maybe opening ever so slightly to see if it feels like there is more resistance than there should peaking through the crack, whatever. Bottom line is that a roll is still needed.
I don't think, therefore, that there is an issue with the rules, but for newer DMs, I do think they could have made it easier to understand the interplay of perception and investigation.
1. Don't punish the player for his build by ignoring RAW
2. You could just increase the DC, but don't.
Increasing the DC of traps to make things more difficult doesn't sit well with me. This is just punishing your player. He can never benefit from his character's increasing skills because you are just increasing the DC to thwart him. For a trap or secret door to have a DC above 20, it needs to have a special story behind it. It would need to have been designed by Grimtooth on his best day in his prime. If all the secret doors and traps in all your dungeons are 22 and above in higher-tier play...that's just dumb.
3. Perception means you notices something amiss, not that you solve the trap and find the door. There is no passive investigation.
Perception simply means that you see something worth investigating. Granted, many characters with high passive perception are going to have great investigation skills as well, but the thing is they have to roll. They could get a 1. There is still some chance of failure, even if they will breeze through most traps and doors. I realize that any skill check could be passive, but I don't do passive investigation and I've never had a player complain. Investigation by definition seems to have to be active. Ignoring passive perception, on the other hand, would be unfair for your players unless you make this home-brew rule clear from the very beginning.
4. You can throw in false leads
Not everything that is suspicious is a trap or secret door. Sometimes the designers or builders made a mistake, made an unusual design choice, or age and movement of earth or seeping water creates discolorations and cracks. Have your rogue investigate these so they are never sure if when they rolled low on investigation that they missed a trap. If you have enough instances of them noticing something strange and after rolling a high investigation score discovering it was just a trick of the light or an unusual erosion pattern, well, when they roll low on investigation they might not automatically assume it is a trap.
5. Not all traps can be perceived passively
Say you have a door. A regular door. But on the other size, a string is tied to the door handle, the other end pulls a release that sends a huge log swinging down and out the door smashing anyone in its way. Walking by that door will not tell you anything. The character still needs to be in the habit of investigating every door maybe opening ever so slightly to see if it feels like there is more resistance than there should peaking through the crack, whatever. Bottom line is that a roll is still needed.
I don't think, therefore, that there is an issue with the rules, but for newer DMs, I do think they could have made it easier to understand the interplay of perception and investigation.
Quickleaf
Legend
[MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] has some good advice upthread (as always).
My answer is a bit involved, but it amounts to craft better (i.e. clear but not give-away) clues as a DM. Actually, this advice is true regardless of high passive Perception.
A lot of D&D example – in the book and streamed on Twitch - have Perception (whether passive or active checks) revealing traps, secret doors, and other stuff like that. The DM says (or the book implies the correct response is) "you see a tripwire" or "you see the outline of a pit trap" or "yes, there's a secret door in the alcove."
Personally, I find that approach really damaging to immersion and involvement in the game. And it's a far cry from challenging the players' logical/creative thinking. As soon as you say "you see the outline of a pit trap" you've taken away the mystery. There's no threat now. Not really. Unless you're throwing in monsters that are imposing forced movement or using one of the horribly meta-gamey Grimtooth's Traps.
Instead, I want to give the player a clue that alludes to the presence of something unusual, but doesn't make it clear what that is exactly.
For example, I might say to the 21 passive Perception PC's player: "You notice signs of weathering as if from shuffling feet around the edges of the central flagstone of this passage."
A savvy player is going to wonder whether the flagstone could be a trap. Maybe they'll wonder if it's the flagstone that's trapped or the space to the side of it.
Warmaster Horus
Explorer
Good points about perception not being a catch-all for traps. Some traps may have a much more difficult DC with Perception than Investigation. Take a poison needle in a lock. It's probably housed well into the lock housing and very difficult to pick up with just a glance (Perception), but easier to discover if you Investigate the lock.
CydKnight
Explorer
As a DM, you know they have a high Passive Perception so you can plan accordingly when appropriate. I am sure there are a few ways you could even use that against them in the right situation.
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
In my experience and given the accounts of the countless DMs who take issue with Observant characters (or the equivalent) in the seemingly weekly posts on the matter, the solution that is most overlooked is the one I posted upthread. Nobody has a problem with the character being particularly observant in a given thing - it's when they're walking into a chamber and spotting the hidden monster, the trap, all the clues, AND the secret door without saying anything.
But the rules in Chapter 8 of the Adventuring rules that cover "traveling" (a word I don't think should be confused with overland travel or the like since dungeons are referenced therein and pace is broken down to feet and minutes rather than just miles) talk about how a PC can only really focus on one task at a time (for the most part) and that position matters.
DMs who employ these rules in my experience no longer take issue with Observant characters since the player is still going to be good at noticing things, but only those things the player states the character is focusing on - hidden threats OR secret doors OR other clues, not ALL of them at the same time. The player needs to pick a task and be reasonably specific as to positioning and activity. They don't get to make the choice on the character sheet and that's the end of their involvement.
Edit: Also, for those concerned this is a "nerf," it only appears that way if you haven't been taking into account all the various rules in the book that apply to resolving this mechanic including the rules references above and that of passive checks. So if a player is going to get all "RAW!" on you for some reason, ruling it this way has plenty of rules back-up if you need it.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
