D&D 5E How easy are skill checks?
- Thread starter Paraxis
- Start date
Psikerlord#
Explorer
I thought that at first too, but then a passive check is an action, just a repeated one, over and over, and the passive check represents the average of rolling 10. So, if you have 2 PCs helping each other keep a lookout over a few hours march.... why shouldnt one get adv, which translates into a +5 bonus for a passive check. I think it works. But I can also appreciate ruling the other way.
ExploderWizard
Hero
If a passive check is an action, then by that very definition it isn't passive, and anyone actively doing anything gets an active roll. If perception IS a constant action then per the action economy no character could ever do anything else.
No you can't attack that zombie that is eating your face. Doing so requires the attack action and you told me that you are ALWAYS perceiving. ...Well, you certainly detect that a zombie is eating your face.
Last edited:
I also find it a bit problematic that the PCs would be crossing the wilderness with two PCs being alert, one helping the other, and the Cleric is casting Guidance all of the time. Personally, I think that if the DM is going to use passive perception, that's all that the PCs should get because it really is hard to be constantly alert. And I'm not a big fan of "if two PCs do something, they are much more capable than if just one PC did it". That only makes sense in some circumstances, not all circumstances. For example, it rarely makes sense for climbing a cliff face without ropes (there typically are only a few good places to climb a cliff and PCs should not always be able to be right next to each other, helping each other every step of the way). But, it makes more sense if climbing a cliff face with ropes.
We will get more information on exploration in the DMG, but under the passive skill section it mentions this will use passive checks.
We know from reading the activities while traveling section on pages 182-183 of the PHB, the following.
Multiple people can be noticing threats, there is talk about not contributing to the perception check so I assume the default is if you have two people doing this you do use the help rules and take the highest passive perception and add 5 to it, if the party moves at a fast pace they take a -5 penalty so this seems to counteract that but only if the party needs to move at 4 miles per hour instead of 3 miles per hour.
As far as "allowing" passive checks, they are assumed default in the rules, it is the taking a 10 of this edition, it is built into the stealth and exploration sub systems. Not allowing passive checks in your game is like not allowing backgrounds, sure as a DM you can do it, but we are not talking about something with an "optional" tag here.
We know from reading the activities while traveling section on pages 182-183 of the PHB, the following.
Multiple people can be noticing threats, there is talk about not contributing to the perception check so I assume the default is if you have two people doing this you do use the help rules and take the highest passive perception and add 5 to it, if the party moves at a fast pace they take a -5 penalty so this seems to counteract that but only if the party needs to move at 4 miles per hour instead of 3 miles per hour.
As far as "allowing" passive checks, they are assumed default in the rules, it is the taking a 10 of this edition, it is built into the stealth and exploration sub systems. Not allowing passive checks in your game is like not allowing backgrounds, sure as a DM you can do it, but we are not talking about something with an "optional" tag here.
ExploderWizard
Hero
I don't think anyone was talking about disallowing passive checks (at least I wasn't), just using the passive check as is, so without the help maneuver or guidance aides. If you are active enough to help with something in particular or cast a spell to enhance something then I would be using active perception, there wouldn't be anything passive about it.
To me, your passive perception represents a natural state of alertness, when the character in question isn't hindered or distracted in any way but not hyper vigilant. For those situations where the character is especially watchful "staying frosty" as the case may be, I wouldn't make them take a passive value since they they are being the opposite of passive. Such characters would get active checks.
Sustaining such a state of hyper watchfulness for sustained long periods is EXHAUSTING, so a character spending the entire day in this state while traveling would take a level of exhaustion by the end of the day.
Klaus
First Post
The Noticing Threats section tells the DM to "use the passive Wisdom [Perception] scores of the characters to determine whether anyone in the group notices a hidden threat". In the Other Activities section it says that characters who turn their attention to other tasks "don't contribute their passive Wisdom [Perception] scores to the group's chance of noticing hidden threats".
Both of these sections indicate that the characters are all working at the same task (noticing threats), unless they choose to focus on some other acticity. And even if so, the characters use their separate Passive Perception scores, instead of pooling them up into a single score with +5 for advantage.
There is no point of just using individual passive perception checks in a group activity like that, the highest passive will always be the same and the other members in the group on look out will not contribute, so having a second person help and give the +5 bonus is the only thing that makes sense, but we will see for sure when the DMG comes out and the topic of exploration is gone into more detail.
SilverfireSage
Explorer
In the "Noticing Threats" section of the Players Handbook on page 182, it states "The DM might decide that a threat can be noticed only by characters in a particular rank." It's unlikely that you'll have more than one person with a very high passive perception, and the person with the highest will likely be leading the group to notice threats in the front, so all of the passive perceptions will matter. As others have said, allowing help during a passive check doesn't really work, since that negates the passive part of it when someone is actively doing something for you.
Stop worrying about the difficulty of the check and worry about the consequences. Let the players worry about the difficulty, let them get all the advantage and guidance, let them succeed 2/3 of the time on a hard check. That's still 1/3 of the time that they curse their treacherous dice!
Instead, you focus on what the PCs will gain from success or suffer from failure. If both outcomes are interesting, it won't matter how hard the check is. If one or both outcomes are boring, don't waste more time worrying about the DC, just get the roll over with and move on.
Instead, you focus on what the PCs will gain from success or suffer from failure. If both outcomes are interesting, it won't matter how hard the check is. If one or both outcomes are boring, don't waste more time worrying about the DC, just get the roll over with and move on.
