Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9356746" data-attributes="member: 7045806">The game without passive checks would become a slog where player agency is trampled on repeatedly.A hypothetical for a moment. A PC is riding on a wagon in a caravan. That PC is polishing their weapon, as the player said. The DM asks that player, or all players, for a perception check due to an upcoming encounter, let's say an ambush.Here we stop for a moment. This is forcing player action by DM fiat. The DM is forcing the player's character to &quot;look&quot; for something. The player was clear where the PC's attention was. The PC was not trying to sense anything, and should not roll here. Calling for a roll from this player is stepping on the player's agency.Passive checks simply avoid the above. They allow a seamless, quick way to reference a &quot;baseline&quot; skill. They allow us to shortcut around the tediousness of everyone finding, rolling, and reading off the results everytime anything could possibly come up. Secret door? Group skill check. Inscription on a vase? Group skill check.In a world without passives, everytime there is a possibility of something, we'd be finding, rolling, and reading the results. Every room a new group roll. Every whim a new group roll. And player choice would be limited in consequence, as they'd always roll for everything.It is not the DM's job, nor should it be, to decide when a player actively does something, and passives allow us to avoid that. The game runs much smoother when you presume passive scores, and only ask for rolls in response to a player actively doing something.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DinoInDisguise, post: 9356746, member: 7045806"] The game without passive checks would become a slog where player agency is trampled on repeatedly. A hypothetical for a moment. A PC is riding on a wagon in a caravan. That PC is polishing their weapon, as the player said. The DM asks that player, or all players, for a perception check due to an upcoming encounter, let's say an ambush. Here we stop for a moment. This is forcing player action by DM fiat. The DM is forcing the player's character to "look" for something. The player was clear where the PC's attention was. The PC was not trying to sense anything, and should not roll here. Calling for a roll from this player is stepping on the player's agency. Passive checks simply avoid the above. They allow a seamless, quick way to reference a "baseline" skill. They allow us to shortcut around the tediousness of everyone finding, rolling, and reading off the results everytime anything could possibly come up. Secret door? Group skill check. Inscription on a vase? Group skill check. In a world without passives, everytime there is a possibility of something, we'd be finding, rolling, and reading the results. Every room a new group roll. Every whim a new group roll. And player choice would be limited in consequence, as they'd always roll for everything. It is not the DM's job, nor should it be, to decide when a player actively does something, and passives allow us to avoid that. The game runs much smoother when you presume passive scores, and only ask for rolls in response to a player actively doing something. [/QUOTE]

Verification