Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7161341" data-attributes="member: 97077">I mean, it says that in the rules. You don't have to take my word for it. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Consistency is a counterbalance to "DM Empowerment," haha.There's actually no DC until a goal and approach is stated and the DM has determined uncertainty. Modules or the DMG obviously have to give a DC to communicate how easy or hard something is to the reader, but most actually say the specific goal and approach that applies to that DC or it's implied. So it might say "If the character searches the north wall, he or she has a chance to spot the secret door with a DC 15 Wisdom (Perception) check." The uncertainty here is presumably that someone has taken steps to conceal the door from prying eyes and a standard search requires a check. If the character doesn't search the north wall, then some other DC may apply or the character never had a chance to notice it. If the character exhaustively searches the north wall (spending 10x the usual time on it, maybe), then there's also no DC - the character automatically succeeds.I think a lot of people think about it like the modules present it without seeing that the DC is for a specific goal and approach. Some other goal and approach might be automatically successful or fail outright.There's no pixel-bitching at all though. There's just reasonable specificity as I mentioned in another thread. The rules in the Adventuring section plus the rules for locating hidden objects and on how to use ability scores tell us that position matters, that checks resolve actions, and players describe actions. So the players do have to establish what the characters are doing while exploring. It's a safe bet to say that they Keeping Watch unless otherwise stated of course, but I think it's worth checking with the players on that score to avoid the DM making faulty assumptions.In practice, this means that when the characters enter the adventure location and being exploring, I'm asking them what they are generally doing while they explore. This boils down to about a half-dozen overarching tasks that they choose. The whole matter is dispensed with in seconds. I make a note of it and we carry on. If I think there's uncertainty, I check their passive score against an appropriate DC and narrate a result. Their tasks change when they say so or when circumstances force a change, such as in combat when the only ongoing task a character can undertake is Keep Watch (because the rules assume characters in combat are aware of their surroundings at all times).Of course, folks can run this however they want. It's just that a lot of other methods for handling passive Perception and the like dissatisfy a lot of people and that's typically because of how they handle it at the table. Frequently that's because they're doing it like a previous edition of the game did it and the outcomes are having a negative impact on their 5e game. Or they've never used such a mechanic before and have it be a catch-all with no player input into the matter, leading to bad outcomes. Like every player taking the Perception skill and/or Observant feat. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification