Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sir Brennen" data-source="post: 6943166" data-attributes="member: 553">See, that is pretty much how I play it, even I haven't stated that clearly. Obviously if you're doing something else, you're probably going to be too distracted to notice something sneaking up on you. However, if a player hasn't stated they're "watching for danger", but aren't doing something else, beyond walking and a little bit of talking, I still take Passive Perception into account for potential dangers. "Search for secret doors" would be something they would have to declare, and be considered a distraction.And we're talking about you're "UNLESS" sentence there, based on what robus proposed earlier for "bouldering". By setting a DC, the DM has automatically said "Fail" for anyone who's passive score doesn't exceed that. Your getting bludgeoned by boulders. Sorry. You had zero chance. Players would rather roll (or at least, know the DM had to roll) than just be told "you fail". That's exactly my point. So you're really working back in the 3E "Take 10" concept, just as a DM call, not a player's. I don't get your reasoning of "if there is uncertainty as to the outcome", though. Swinging a sword has an uncertainty of the outcome. Should it be a passive check? It'd definitely make fights go faster.I still disagree with library research for Int (Investigation) as a passive check. Sure the player effectively will never "roll" less than a 10. He will also never roll over a 10. Again, if the PC's passive score isn't high enough, they will never, ever find the thing they're looking for. An automatic fail.With a roll, the skilled Investigator will still usually be the one to find the info, likely in less time. There's sufficient niche protection. The fighter may fail bashing the door down on a roll (my players use crowbars to get Advantage), but if the wizard then comes up and does it, the fighter can claim to have loosen it for him. Niche protection can come from narrative and role-playing too. Plus, if something requires a particular skill to accomplish, the party will generally have the person with the best score attempt it, which also re-enforces niches. Wait, what? Are you suggesting even things like bashing a door down, which is not a repetitive actions, be handled with passive checks? So the DM could just look at players stats and skills, set a DC, and know whether each character will succeed or fail at most tasks ahead of time? That's not action resolution, that's predetermination. Really, is that what you're suggesting?</blockquote>

Verification