D&D 5E Passive Perception

[iserith]

This seems a bit harsh. The adventure designer is doing the best he can for many thousands of DMs, not just you. If you do not like the DC, change it. No harm, no foul.

But an adventure without DCs would be a poorly designed adventure IMO.

I wouldn't say it's harsh. I think listing DCs sends the wrong signal about how the game is intended to be adjudicated. A trap listed with a DC 15 to detect it is essentially saying "Regardless of approach, finding this trap is always uncertain." Not all DMs are going to know to ignore or change that as needed.

I'll settle for a statement in the module that says "Because the authors of this module are not sitting at your table, the DCs listed in the text cannot possibly take into account the actions the players describe and should be changed or ignored depending on the DM's judgment of the efficacy of the player's goal and approach for his or her character." Or words to that effect.

 

[Astrosicebear]

This seems a bit harsh. The adventure designer is doing the best he can for many thousands of DMs, not just you. If you do not like the DC, change it. No harm, no foul.

But an adventure without DCs would be a poorly designed adventure IMO.

Actually.... Im kinda curious about that. Im not saying no DCs for checks... but specifically perception checks.

Example time... tell me which adventure you would prefer:

Option A

This large, roughly 40 x 40 stone chamber has high vaulted ceilings. Six massive 5' stone pillars hold up the ceiling, and each pillar is intricately carved with strange symbols. Each pillar has two torches, lit and glowing, providing adequate light. The smell of incense fills the air as a cistern of oils burns on the 5 foot blood stained altar slab on a dais to the north.

DM notes: Players can make a Perception Check DC 10 to determine the torches are magical. A DC 15 perception check, or investigation check reveals a hidden compartment under the alter containing 150pp. A DC 16 perception check is needed to determine this compartment is trapped. A successful Dexterity Check DC 18 opens the compartment and bypasses the trap. On failure the player opening the compartment plunges 15' into a pit trap and takes 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage.

Option B

This large, roughly 40 x 40 stone chamber has high vaulted ceilings. Six massive 5' stone pillars hold up the ceiling, and each pillar is intricately carved with strange symbols. Each pillar has two torches, lit and glowing, providing adequate light. The smell of incense fills the air as a cistern of oils burns on the 5 foot blood stained altar slab on a dais to the north.

DM notes: The torches are magical and upon inspection give off no heat. They can be removed safely. The altar has a hidden compartment on its underside where cultists stored offerings from their sacrificial rituals. The compartment currently holds 150pp and is trapped. The trap is linked upon opening the compartment without first pressing a button on the side of the compartment. Anyone who attempts to open the drawer without pushing the button triggers the floor in front of the altar to the north to open into a 5 foot wide by 15 foot deep pit trap.


Option A is the more mechanical, where B is the more descriptive. Good writers blend... but what if they didnt have to. With 5e putting all the power in the DMs hands... is it inconceivable to allow a DM to fully adjudicate option B?

 

[KarinsDad]

Actually.... Im kinda curious about that. Im not saying no DCs for checks... but specifically perception checks.

Example time... tell me which adventure you would prefer:

Option A

This large, roughly 40 x 40 stone chamber has high vaulted ceilings. Six massive 5' stone pillars hold up the ceiling, and each pillar is intricately carved with strange symbols. Each pillar has two torches, lit and glowing, providing adequate light. The smell of incense fills the air as a cistern of oils burns on the 5 foot blood stained altar slab on a dais to the north.

DM notes: Players can make a Perception Check DC 10 to determine the torches are magical. A DC 15 perception check, or investigation check reveals a hidden compartment under the alter containing 150pp. A DC 16 perception check is needed to determine this compartment is trapped. A successful Dexterity Check DC 18 opens the compartment and bypasses the trap. On failure the player opening the compartment plunges 15' into a pit trap and takes 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage.

Option B

This large, roughly 40 x 40 stone chamber has high vaulted ceilings. Six massive 5' stone pillars hold up the ceiling, and each pillar is intricately carved with strange symbols. Each pillar has two torches, lit and glowing, providing adequate light. The smell of incense fills the air as a cistern of oils burns on the 5 foot blood stained altar slab on a dais to the north.

DM notes: The torches are magical and upon inspection give off no heat. They can be removed safely. The altar has a hidden compartment on its underside where cultists stored offerings from their sacrificial rituals. The compartment currently holds 150pp and is trapped. The trap is linked upon opening the compartment without first pressing a button on the side of the compartment. Anyone who attempts to open the drawer without pushing the button triggers the floor in front of the altar to the north to open into a 5 foot wide by 15 foot deep pit trap.


Option A is the more mechanical, where B is the more descriptive. Good writers blend... but what if they didnt have to. With 5e putting all the power in the DMs hands... is it inconceivable to allow a DM to fully adjudicate option B?

I think a combination of both A and B might be best, but given a choice between the two for a mass market product that has to cater to everyone, option A is understandable and easily useable by everyone. Option B might have many DMs shaking their heads saying "Well, that's clear as mud. What type of DC am I supposed to assign to that?".

The mechanics are important. It's easier for DMs to adjudicate the game (at least for some of us) if the mechanics are spelled out, or at least IMO. I get it that some DMs might prefer option B and might be comfortable adjudicating it, but I know I wouldn't. Maybe I got spoiled by 3E and 4E. It's just easier for me if I have a good idea of the difficulty of something mechanically and do not have to try to figure it out on the fly.

 

[keterys]

I think listing DCs sends the wrong signal about how the game is intended to be adjudicated. A trap listed with a DC 15 to detect it is essentially saying "Regardless of approach, finding this trap is always uncertain."

Fwiw, a DC 15 trap would be autodetected in every D&D 5e group I've been in, even the randomly thrown together ones. And never by me, so that's not the common element.

So I think it says something else. More like "This trap is noticed by any group that has any sort of scout or perceptive character."

 

[The Crimson Binome]

A trap listed with a DC 15 to detect it is essentially saying "Regardless of approach, finding this trap is always uncertain." Not all DMs are going to know to ignore or change that as needed.

I've only read a couple of old modules, and not necessarily for D&D, but I recall phrasing in the vein of, "A Perception (15) check will alert anyone walking into the room that the floor is trapped, while anyone examining the base of the pillar will discover the mechanism, which can be disabled with a Whatever (20) check or blocked with a large enough rock."

You list the DC for the most likely scenario, along with most likely avenues for bypassing that roll, and you do it in a paragraph format rather than bullet points so you have to read the whole thing.

 

[iserith]

Fwiw, a DC 15 trap would be autodetected in every D&D 5e group I've been in, even the randomly thrown together ones. And never by me, so that's not the common element.

So I think it says something else. More like "This trap is noticed by any group that has any sort of scout or perceptive character."

I just threw that number out there to make a larger point about the author mandating uncertainty without hearing a player's approach to the situation. Even a perceptive character might not notice the trap if he's not in the position to do so (e.g. in the back of the marching order and the trap is in front of the party). That's where the DM comes in to decide, right? The author simply cannot know the circumstances that are going on at the time the game is played.

I'm fine with it being used as a shorthand by the author as a way to communicate his vision of how difficult a thing should be, but some effort should be made either in the intro to the adventure (if not in the relevant description itself) about how DCs cannot possibly take into account a player's approach to a challenge and the DM should judge accordingly.

 

[iserith]

I've only read a couple of old modules, and not necessarily for D&D, but I recall phrasing in the vein of, "A Perception (15) check will alert anyone walking into the room that the floor is trapped, while anyone examining the base of the pillar will discover the mechanism, which can be disabled with a Whatever (20) check or blocked with a large enough rock."

You list the DC for the most likely scenario, along with most likely avenues for bypassing that roll, and you do it in a paragraph format rather than bullet points so you have to read the whole thing.

I'd be cool with that. In LMoP, for example, there is a part where the PCs can find a hidden treasure in the ruins of Thundertree. There's a DC listed to find it amid the ruins. However, if the PCs have spoken to an NPC who can tell them where to find it (usually the PCs have talked to this person before going to Thundertree), then they automatically find it, no roll. I'd still like the blanket statement about DCs though to be included in all modules to remind DMs of their role.

 

[DaveDash]

I like the character to be perceptive independently on the player. I think you're doing the player a disservice if he has invested in perception for his character, but don't allow him to find things that he as a player specifically may not mention. Just because the player may not think to notice the hidden trap door under the rug, the super perceptive character may still notice it.

You don't ask players to tell you how they attack a monster and then determine the outcome based on that, why gimp your PCs in the same way? Now if you like to DM like that, fine, but not all of us do, and I personally would not like to play under that style of DM.

Passive Perception doesn't work like "you always notice or do not notice set DCs". It's a way of cutting down numerous dice rolls. If the player active asks to search for something, then you make them roll (or in my case, I have macro's set up in roll20 to roll for them, I don't like them seeing their result). This way, they still have a chance of spotting things above their passive DC.

Now in terms of stuff hidden away with high DC's. It's there to give players who invest in perception/investigation/etc a sense of accomplishment. These modules are written for a mass audience and a wide range of players/characters. Not everything is designed to be found by everyone. If you create your own content for your own group, your mileage will vary.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Actually.... Im kinda curious about that. Im not saying no DCs for checks... but specifically perception checks.

Example time... tell me which adventure you would prefer:

Option A

This large, roughly 40 x 40 stone chamber has high vaulted ceilings. Six massive 5' stone pillars hold up the ceiling, and each pillar is intricately carved with strange symbols. Each pillar has two torches, lit and glowing, providing adequate light. The smell of incense fills the air as a cistern of oils burns on the 5 foot blood stained altar slab on a dais to the north.

DM notes: Players can make a Perception Check DC 10 to determine the torches are magical. A DC 15 perception check, or investigation check reveals a hidden compartment under the alter containing 150pp. A DC 16 perception check is needed to determine this compartment is trapped. A successful Dexterity Check DC 18 opens the compartment and bypasses the trap. On failure the player opening the compartment plunges 15' into a pit trap and takes 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage.

Option B

This large, roughly 40 x 40 stone chamber has high vaulted ceilings. Six massive 5' stone pillars hold up the ceiling, and each pillar is intricately carved with strange symbols. Each pillar has two torches, lit and glowing, providing adequate light. The smell of incense fills the air as a cistern of oils burns on the 5 foot blood stained altar slab on a dais to the north.

DM notes: The torches are magical and upon inspection give off no heat. They can be removed safely. The altar has a hidden compartment on its underside where cultists stored offerings from their sacrificial rituals. The compartment currently holds 150pp and is trapped. The trap is linked upon opening the compartment without first pressing a button on the side of the compartment. Anyone who attempts to open the drawer without pushing the button triggers the floor in front of the altar to the north to open into a 5 foot wide by 15 foot deep pit trap.


Option A is the more mechanical, where B is the more descriptive. Good writers blend... but what if they didnt have to. With 5e putting all the power in the DMs hands... is it inconceivable to allow a DM to fully adjudicate option B?

I prefer option B. Setting DCs according to your party/scenario is very easy. It's the rest of the info I want.

 

[iserith]

I like the character to be perceptive independently on the player. I think you're doing the player a disservice if he has invested in perception for his character, but don't allow him to find things that he as a player specifically may not mention. Just because the player may not think to notice the hidden trap door under the rug, the super perceptive character may still notice it.

All the player need do is describe what he or she wants to do e.g. "I search the room from top to bottom." The DM then narrates the outcome. In this case, I think a reasonable call for a DM would be to at least give the character a chance to notice the hidden trap door under the rug, drawing upon the passive check or an active check to determine a result. I'd probably take it a step further and ask the player if they want to spend 10x the amount of time on searching for an automatic success. (But then my games generally have a countdown timer to Bad Things happening, so it actually matters.)

The point is, I think the player needs to at least make some effort to state his or her goal and approach clearly. Not only does this add vital context to build the scene, it makes it easier for the DM to adjudicate fairly.

You don't ask players to tell you how they attack a monster and then determine the outcome based on that, why gimp your PCs in the same way? Now if you like to DM like that, fine, but not all of us do, and I personally would not like to play under that style of DM.

Yes, I do ask players how they attack a monster (again, that context is vital for scene-building and fair adjudication) and then determine an outcome based on that. Generally, if a monster is defending itself, the outcome is uncertain and I call for an attack roll or ability check. If a monster is not defending itself or is unassailable, then the outcome is probably certain and I don't ask for a roll. I simply narrate a result.

Passive Perception doesn't work like "you always notice or do not notice set DCs". It's a way of cutting down numerous dice rolls. If the player active asks to search for something, then you make them roll (or in my case, I have macro's set up in roll20 to roll for them, I don't like them seeing their result). This way, they still have a chance of spotting things above their passive DC.

As I see it, if a player asks to search for something, I narrate the results if they are certain and ask them to roll when it's uncertain. If you use "progress combined with a setback," you won't have to hide the die rolls from the players. They'll always find the thing that's hidden - only at a cost or with a complication happening. On a failed check, the character might find that trap door hidden under the rug, but it draws unwanted attention or takes up more time than they planned.

Now in terms of stuff hidden away with high DC's. It's there to give players who invest in perception/investigation/etc a sense of accomplishment. These modules are written for a mass audience and a wide range of players/characters. Not everything is designed to be found by everyone. If you create your own content for your own group, your mileage will vary.

I think it's there to reward engaging with the exploration pillar. It's just that authors are listing DCs as a shorthand for difficulty - if the result of the search is uncertain. If a character spends 10x the amount of time needed to search a room, they don't roll against that DC 40 safe tucked in the corner. They just succeed (DMG, page 237).