D&D 5E I don't use Passive Perception

[robus]

I really think the designers messed up by using the word "passive" because it implies that no effort is expended with the activity. I.e. the PCs automatically just notice anything and everything that is at or below their "passive perception".

From the text though the "passive" score is used in replacement of continuous rolls implying that there is active perception happening repetitively. Perhaps "constant" would have been a better term?

 

[iserith]

I really think the designers messed up by using the word "passive" because it implies that no effort is expended with the activity. I.e. the PCs automatically just notice anything and everything that is at or below their "passive perception".

From the text though the "passive" score is used in replacement of continuous rolls implying that there is active perception happening repetitively. Perhaps "constant" would have been a better term?

Maybe. I think some of the problem is that there is conflation between "task" or "action" and "check." A check is not a task or an action. It is a mechanic the DM uses to determine success or failure. So "passive" cannot be referring to someone doing a task or action passively. I blame the last two editions for this conflation since it was common in those games, even instantiated in its rules, for players to ask to make a check often in place of describing a task or action.

 

[robus]

Maybe. I think some of the problem is that there is conflation between "task" or "action" and "check." A check is not a task or an action. It is a mechanic the DM uses to determine success or failure. So "passive" cannot be referring to someone doing a task or action passively. I blame the last two editions for this conflation since it was common in those games, even instantiated in its rules, for players to ask to make a check often in place of describing a task or action.

Excellent point.

 

[Stalker0]

The main issue with passive perception is generally only the highest perception matters. A secondary player raising their perception simply doesn't help.

But on the other hand it does simplify things greatly. I'm always torn about it

 

[iserith]

It's a great example of how much is buried in the rulebooks under mountains of words.

Yes, it's a little all over the place. Some of it is based on how a feat interacts with something which implies there's a rule there that isn't otherwise found but makes sense. If I remember correctly, Dungeon Delver is like that. So while some of the stuff (like map value and whatnot) are going to be campaign specific, what I posted has a very firm foundation in the rules, both rules for exploration and general adjudication.

 

[iserith]

s

I use passive Perception in a way similar to that which [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION] does, which I think is strongly in-line with what a straight reading of the section, Activity While Travelling, on pages 182-83 of the PHB, would suggest. With reference to hidden threats (i.e. traps and creatures), you are assumed to be actively searching for them (i.e. "watching for danger") at all times, unless you have turned your attention to some other task instead. That doesn't mean the DM needs to call for a roll. A passive score is used instead of a roll whenever the attempted task is done repeatedly, or the DM wants to keep the ability check secret from the players. I think both criteria potentially apply in the case of keeping watch for hidden threats while travelling. Also, which rank you are marching in can affect whether or not it is possible to notice a hidden threat. Taken all together, if the DM determines whether a character is fictionally positioned to notice a particular threat, both by the player's action declaration and by declared marching order, before resorting to a resolution method, then determining success or failure hinges more on the choices the players are making and less on what scores they have and what resolution method you use.

Right, I think the main thing to keep in mind is that you don't just make a choice during your character build and then expect everything to pop up on your radar. You have to do that AND make choices during play that put you in the position to notice things. And usually you can't have it all. Making meaningful choices like that really improves the play experience in my opinion.

 

[robus]

The main issue with passive perception is generally only the highest perception matters. A secondary player raising their perception simply doesn't help.

But on the other hand it does simplify things greatly. I'm always torn about it

Only if you assume that everyone is doing everything simultaneously. If the workload is distributed as Iserith suggests then suddenly everyones scores have an impact and everyone can feel valuable.

 

[LordEntrails]

If you read the rules about passive perception, you will find that it does NOT tell you there is a trap.

Instead, a successful passive perception result tells the players that something is amiss. As a DM, you do NOT say; "You see a spear trap in the hallway ahead." You DO say, "You can hear the gentle whistle of a breeze blowing through small holes" or you say "You notice that the walls ahead seem to have numerous small dots of a different color" (i.e. the holes have been plastered over).

Here are some of the resources you should read about traps;
- DM Sage
- Hack & Slash
- ENWorld
- Alexandrian

 

[Satyrn]

I'm annoyed that someone rated this thread 1 star. It's a DM looking to see if he can improve his game by asking other DMs how they run a part of their game.

Anyway, I don't use Passive checks of any sort. Or if I do, it's so rarely that I don't remember doing it. I just find that I don't need to use them.

I've eithet already ruled success or failure based on the action declaration (without looking at any numbers or mechanics) or I'm uncertain and decided to use a check.

It's at the point of asking for a check that I'd be choosing to either roll or make it a passive check. I'd rather just ask for a roll.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

A few fundamental issues to clarify.

1) It's good to have players engaged and involved in having their characters observing & interacting with their environments.
2) #1 takes a lot of time and effort on the behalf of the DM and players. And not all players are into that and these days many players will dip their heads to read their phones while this is going on..
3) The DM is the focal lens of EVERY element of the game world. It is their responsibility to clearly present the world to the players. They also need to establish how the PCs can interact with the world.
4) Human communication is tricky, making #3 a challenging task for DMs and players to be on the same page for important game decisions.

Old D&D depended a lot on the players thoroughly pinching and prodding everything with the environment presented to them, mapping every corridor and puzzling out every obscure clue they came across. It was the player, not the PC, who's intellect was being challenged because there wasn't a concept of PCs having anything beyond very rudimentary skills (bend bars, lift gates, disarm trap).

Today modern D&D acknowledges that the characters have abilities and characteristics the players don't have. More is laid out to a group pro forma because it is assumed their characters are experienced, competent adventurers, dependent on their skills and abilities. This tends to lead to a more narrative style which emphasizes action over repetitive interaction with the environment.

I remember having to open a chest by actually getting a full description of it. That meant the party had to tell the DM they were looking at it from different angles, using a magnet to see if the clasp was magnetic, examine the rosemaling on the lid for anything that slid or pushed in, etc. Then using Augury (weal or woe) to determine if any of our theories were correct. That took an hour or so.

These days in many cases the DM sets a DC and one roll later the chest pops open. Or explodes. Two minutes, tops.

Finding a good balance between the two approaches is going to be dependent on the players, DM and game being run.