Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7376865" data-attributes="member: 996">Remember, with 5e they decided to lean more on natural language than jargon, so the onus is more than ever on us to read for comprehension, rather than on then to code unambiguously.Is it hard to understand that 'active perception' is being used to contrast making a check to which perception proficiency will apply vs resolution involving passive perception?&nbsp; No.&nbsp; So it's a perfectly reasonable way to put it.&nbsp; Personally, though my thoughts on the matter have nothing to do with who said what how, but more with the probabilities involved.&nbsp; A passive check - comparing a passive score to a static DC - for instance, is nonsense.&nbsp; Not because it parses as nonsense, but because the DM sets difficulties, so it's just the DM ruling success or failure rather than uncertainty.&nbsp; There's just a superfluous step of setting a DC that will mean success or failure, then 'checking' it.On the other extreme I don't care for contested checks at all, they get 'too swingy' - in&nbsp; the sense that gets used around here.So, that leaves checks.&nbsp; D20 + bonuses vs a DC. Rule success or failure or call for a check.&nbsp; There's one place a passive score fits in that mechanism: as a DC.So, if a slithering tracker sneaks up on a PC, it's stealth check vs a DC of his passive perception.&nbsp;&nbsp; If a spy leaves a purloined letter at a dead drop the PCs have access to, he makes his check vs their passive investigation, perhaps?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7376865, member: 996"] Remember, with 5e they decided to lean more on natural language than jargon, so the onus is more than ever on us to read for comprehension, rather than on then to code unambiguously. Is it hard to understand that 'active perception' is being used to contrast making a check to which perception proficiency will apply vs resolution involving passive perception? No. So it's a perfectly reasonable way to put it. Personally, though my thoughts on the matter have nothing to do with who said what how, but more with the probabilities involved. A passive check - comparing a passive score to a static DC - for instance, is nonsense. Not because it parses as nonsense, but because the DM sets difficulties, so it's just the DM ruling success or failure rather than uncertainty. There's just a superfluous step of setting a DC that will mean success or failure, then 'checking' it. On the other extreme I don't care for contested checks at all, they get 'too swingy' - in the sense that gets used around here. So, that leaves checks. D20 + bonuses vs a DC. Rule success or failure or call for a check. There's one place a passive score fits in that mechanism: as a DC. So, if a slithering tracker sneaks up on a PC, it's stealth check vs a DC of his passive perception. If a spy leaves a purloined letter at a dead drop the PCs have access to, he makes his check vs their passive investigation, perhaps? [/QUOTE]

Verification