D&D 5E Is "Passive" (for Passive Perception) really the right term??

[James Gasik]

Back in the day, we had Elves to find those. : )

 

[DND_Reborn]

Right. And after the DM has done that to me twice I’m going to start declaring that I’m on high alert ALL THE TIME. And I suspect I’m not the only one. That’s what I’m trying to explain.

Then you're PC would develop paranoia as an Insanity and I could work with that.

Well, aren’t you trying to convince the rest of us that 10+ is wrong and it should be 5+?

No, I am trying to convince people that "Passive Checks" is a bad term for what it is actually there for: "Routine and Secret Checks".

The "passive" perception at 5+mod is a spin-off which I think makes sense for a passive use of perception (always on, background use). Others have suggested the DM simply not have that form of "passive" perception in non-danger times. In combat/danger, the 10+ works fine and makes sense (I agree with that). Another suggestion was make "passive" perception 10+Wis mod (no proficiency) because you aren't engaged in actively looking for threats, hidden things, etc. I said that was a good suggestion and something that might work.

Those are helpful suggestions to the discussion. Simply repeating over and over that you disagree isn't. You don't like the idea of terminology change or feel it is necessary? Good. I've noted that for you. I am not trying to convince you that is wrong if you feel it isn't.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Then you're PC would develop paranoia as an Insanity and I could work with that.

Yeah, more taking over PCs when you don’t like what the player chooses. No thanks.

I suppose it’s not surprising that we end up with different conclusions about game design, given how different our beginning assumptions are.

No, I am trying to convince people that "Passive Checks" is a bad term for what it is actually there for: "Routine and Secret Checks".

The "passive" perception at 5+mod is a spin-off which I think makes sense for a passive use of perception (always on, background use). Others have suggested the DM simply not have that form of "passive" perception in non-danger times. In combat/danger, the 10+ works fine and makes sense (I agree with that). Another suggestion was make "passive" perception 10+Wis mod (no proficiency) because you aren't engaged in actively looking for threats, hidden things, etc. I said that was a good suggestion and something that might work.

Those are helpful suggestions to the discussion. Simply repeating over and over that you disagree isn't. You don't like the idea of terminology change or feel it is necessary? Good. I've noted that for you. I am not trying to convince you that is wrong if you feel it isn't.

I’m not even talking about the terminology anymore, rather the 5+ thing…that you keep repeating. But clearly there’s no point so I’ll bow out. Happy gaming.

 

[DND_Reborn]

rather the 5+ thing…that you keep repeating.

Which I have covered.

Happy gaming.

You, too!

 

[Hriston]

I'm going to fail any check that happens while I'm making coffee.

LOL, me too.

See the snip on page 1: a passive check is for doing something repeatedly, like searching for a secret door. Aside: I don't know about you, but when I fail to find a secret door, I stop looking!

To me, "retry" would imply searching the same space for a secret door after having failed as you again seem to suggest here, whereas the passive check rules are intended for actions like continually searching for secret doors as you travel through multiple places. At least that's how I use them.

Probably not. It would be an interesting tactical move, though! I hear Dark Souls used a lot of confusion...

Do you mean the video game or the 5E adaptation?