Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 8203780" data-attributes="member: 177">This is reasonable, with one caveat.Unless you are really good at writing mysteries, as a GM, you are probably not actively and explicitly describing the world in enough detail to distinguish between the cases much of the time.I am currently running a gnomish artificer who took the Observant feat.  End result is that he's got a passive Investigation score of 23.  The character is basically Sherlock Holmes - by the stats he should be able to walk into a place, and without breaking a sweat, rattle off seven details in plain sight that add up to the fact that the killer is hidden behind the arras, and be correct.The character is smarter than either myself, or the GM.  The character lives in the world 24/7, but neither the GM or I do.  The character's abilities a putting 2 nd 2 together to get 4 exceed our abilities at creating these chains of clues.  So, the GM just generally assumes that outside of combat he can use Investigation, and only cases in which the DC is for some specific and knowable reason very high, does he not notice.</blockquote>