Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I don't use Passive Perception
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ro" data-source="post: 7255627" data-attributes="member: 6890747"><p>The Passive Perception calculation is 10 + perception modifier. This is way too good. Why should the average PC with Perception proficiency and +1 Wisdom be automatically noticing everything DC 13 or better at level one?</p><p></p><p>With Observant, this jumps up to DC 18 at level one for a variant human. If the PC actually cares about wisdom, it can easily be DC 20.</p><p></p><p>But DCs are supposed to mean:</p><p>DC 5 : Very Easy</p><p>DC 10 : Easy</p><p>DC 15 : Medium</p><p>DC 20 : Hard</p><p>DC 25 : Very Hard</p><p></p><p>So a level one PC, without trying, sees everything that is "Hard" to see? No way. And a normal one sees nearly everything Medium.</p><p></p><p>A Normal, everyday non-perceptive fellow should probably notice very easy. Someone with Perception maybe Easy. Someone with Observant, Medium.</p><p></p><p>Normal PC, +0 Wisdom : Very Easy DC 5</p><p>Perceptive PC, +3 Wisdom +2 Proficiency : Easy DC 10</p><p>Observant PC. +3 Wisdom, +5 Observant +2 Proficiency : Medium DC 15</p><p></p><p>A <strong>regular passive</strong> skill check is then <strong>5 + prof + mod</strong> rather than 10.</p><p>If there would be <strong>disadvantage</strong> on the active check, subtract 5 from the passive. <strong>prof + mod</strong></p><p>If there would be <strong>advantage</strong> on the active check, add 5 to the passive. <strong>10 + prof + mod</strong></p><p></p><p>If a PC should succeed 50% of the time on a non-modified DC 10 active check, a passive check shouldn't start at auto-success!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ro, post: 7255627, member: 6890747"] The Passive Perception calculation is 10 + perception modifier. This is way too good. Why should the average PC with Perception proficiency and +1 Wisdom be automatically noticing everything DC 13 or better at level one? With Observant, this jumps up to DC 18 at level one for a variant human. If the PC actually cares about wisdom, it can easily be DC 20. But DCs are supposed to mean: DC 5 : Very Easy DC 10 : Easy DC 15 : Medium DC 20 : Hard DC 25 : Very Hard So a level one PC, without trying, sees everything that is "Hard" to see? No way. And a normal one sees nearly everything Medium. A Normal, everyday non-perceptive fellow should probably notice very easy. Someone with Perception maybe Easy. Someone with Observant, Medium. Normal PC, +0 Wisdom : Very Easy DC 5 Perceptive PC, +3 Wisdom +2 Proficiency : Easy DC 10 Observant PC. +3 Wisdom, +5 Observant +2 Proficiency : Medium DC 15 A [B]regular passive[/B] skill check is then [B]5 + prof + mod[/B] rather than 10. If there would be [B]disadvantage[/B] on the active check, subtract 5 from the passive. [B]prof + mod[/B] If there would be [B]advantage[/B] on the active check, add 5 to the passive. [B]10 + prof + mod[/B] If a PC should succeed 50% of the time on a non-modified DC 10 active check, a passive check shouldn't start at auto-success! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
I don't use Passive Perception
Top