Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ashrym" data-source="post: 7789437" data-attributes="member: 6750235">Note the &quot;even if they aren't searching&quot;.&nbsp; Not searching is the lack of action to demonstrate what I have been stating.&nbsp; The other arguments in this thread so far are rationalizations to push forth opinions that are not part of the rules.What was described earlier relates to active checks.&nbsp; Passive checks also exist for characters based on &quot;general awareness&quot; and &quot;even if they aren't searching&quot;.A party can be giving even less attention while moving at a fast pace and all that does is give a penalty of 5 to the passive ability score.&nbsp; There is no action required to notice the threats.Unless a character is actually engaged in a list of activities while traveling that precludes passive perception they are given a passive perception check.&nbsp; The list given is: navigate, map, track, forage.&nbsp; The DM can create more but this is an example of a specific rule beating the general rule.There is no action required to make perception checks as part of surprise.&nbsp; The default is characters are behaving in a way that they are paying attention.&nbsp; I can keep pulling up examples but I think I've demonstrated my point.The passive score isn't the relevant part, to be clear.&nbsp; Passive checks are used when the DM doesn't want the player to know something is being resolved by rolling the dice and giving it away.&nbsp; That's exactly the type of situation that applies to checks like insight.&nbsp; If the players know the DM is using passive insight checks then they know they don't need to ask.What's important is there is no specific action required of characters to make passive checks.&nbsp; They are done because the DM doesn't want the players to know that they are making checks at all, and therefore are not predicated on specific player actions.I'm not going to keep arguing it.&nbsp; It seems clear to me.&nbsp; Other players can play the game the way they want, OC, but the rules don't require what's been described.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ashrym, post: 7789437, member: 6750235"] Note the "even if they aren't searching". Not searching is the lack of action to demonstrate what I have been stating. The other arguments in this thread so far are rationalizations to push forth opinions that are not part of the rules. What was described earlier relates to active checks. Passive checks also exist for characters based on "general awareness" and "even if they aren't searching". A party can be giving even less attention while moving at a fast pace and all that does is give a penalty of 5 to the passive ability score. There is no action required to notice the threats. Unless a character is actually engaged in a list of activities while traveling that precludes passive perception they are given a passive perception check. The list given is: navigate, map, track, forage. The DM can create more but this is an example of a specific rule beating the general rule. There is no action required to make perception checks as part of surprise. The default is characters are behaving in a way that they are paying attention. I can keep pulling up examples but I think I've demonstrated my point. The passive score isn't the relevant part, to be clear. Passive checks are used when the DM doesn't want the player to know something is being resolved by rolling the dice and giving it away. That's exactly the type of situation that applies to checks like insight. If the players know the DM is using passive insight checks then they know they don't need to ask. What's important is there is no specific action required of characters to make passive checks. They are done because the DM doesn't want the players to know that they are making checks at all, and therefore are not predicated on specific player actions. I'm not going to keep arguing it. It seems clear to me. Other players can play the game the way they want, OC, but the rules don't require what's been described. [/QUOTE]

Verification