Perception vs Passive Perception

[Lindorie]

I may be missing some fundamental concept with Passive vs non-Passive Perception and Insight checks. Passive checks are 10+modifiers, where active checks are d20+modifiers? If true, this leads to the odd scenario where active checks can score lower than passive checks.

I'm currently going with the rule that Passive checks establish a lower-bounds to your roll. For example, if your passive perception is 14, you can roll an active perception check, but ignore anything that results in under 14.

Thoughts?

 

[hong]

Passive Perception is for when an NPC is sneaking past you. Having you roll the dice for a Perception check could be a clue that something is amiss, so instead, the DM rolls the dice against a DC set by your passive Perception.

 

[Kzach]

You walk into a room and without thinking about it, glance around. It's a natural response. You notice a pen on the floor and pick it up. Neat. Free pen.

Passive Perception.

You're in a room and need a pen. You scrounge around and yet for the life of you, you just can't find one. Bummer. Now you've forgotten the phone number.

Active Perception.

Really not seeing the problem here.

Passive is for the DM, not the player. In fact, it shouldn't even be on the character sheet, IMO. It's a simple mechanic that allows for the DM to quickly and secretly check against encounter DC's, trap DC's, etc.

Active is for players.

So what if the player rolls lower?

 

[D'karr]

You've lost your car keys and need to find them desperately. You have searched all over the house, living room, kitchen, room, bathroom, etc. You can't seem to find them. You give up and call a friend for a ride.

You head into the kitchen to grab yourself some orange juice before your ride arrives. As you pour yourself some OJ, you notice, out of the corner of your eye, the keys. They have been laying on top of the kitchen counter all along.

In that scenario your active Perception roll was lower than your passive Perception roll.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

You're right, that is odd. D'karr, your scenario makes sense but I don't think that warrants a 45% chance of the active check being lower than the passive check. I think I'll wait until the full rules come out before passing judgment though.

hong and Kzach, I don't think you understood the OP's point.

 

[ObsidianCrane]

Gee so you think its bad there is a 50% chance its higher than your passive check and a 45% chance its worse? Looks like the odds are in favor of it being better to me.

In DMing I've done this;
I've used Passive Perception as the DC of the Stealth Rolls of opponents. Similarly for Social Rolls and Passive Insight.

I have also compared static DCs to the Passive Perception/Insight, if their Passive Perception/Insight didn't beat the DC then I didn't tell them anything, if it did they got the relevant info. If they then choose to actively use the skills, they get a roll after the Passive check.

This latter use is very similar to the OP's "minimum value" but works slightly differently, particularly for characters with low Passive totals in a party with high Passive values characters. The high characters become a source of information, it becomes an RP tool to develop around, because information flows in without the PCs needing to roll.

So when a low Passive character is alone, they need to start thinking "Do I roll?", which means they are making a choice to do something, that may take time, or give the opponent clues about them etc.

Now even if the rules don't allow Passive skills to be used in the second way I'll probably house rule that anyway - because I like the way it plays out.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Gee so you think its bad there is a 50% chance its higher than your passive check and a 45% chance its worse? Looks like the odds are in favor of it being better to me.

Of course it's bad. If the OP's interpretation is correct, if something is easy to find (i.e. its DC to be found is 10 + modifier), you are much better off not actively attempting to look for it: Passive: 100% chance of success Active: 55% chance of success.

 

[small pumpkin man]

Of course it's bad. If the OP's interpretation is correct, if something is easy to find (i.e. its DC to be found is 10 + modifier), you are much better off not actively attempting to look for it: Passive: 100% chance of success Active: 55% chance of success.

No. Passive is generally for when someone else is rolling, it's there because opposed rolls are much more swingy and random than a single roll vs a DC, only using passive perception in those situations means that your example will never come up.

It's all part of the project to unify the rules.

 

[Gargazon]

Of course it's bad. If the OP's interpretation is correct, if something is easy to find (i.e. its DC to be found is 10 + modifier), you are much better off not actively attempting to look for it: Passive: 100% chance of success Active: 55% chance of success.

Why would you be trying to actively look for it? If it's that easy to spot, your player has seen it. If it's actively trying to hide, say through a Stealth check, and it rolls higher than your Passive Perception then you'd have to make an active check to find it. If not, he has seen it. Your players don't just switch passive perception on or off.

For example, the players enter a room. There are three party members - one has a PP (passive perception) of 9, one has a PP of 16 and one has a PP of 13. There are four kobolds hiding in the room, and they all make seperate stealth checks. They get 4, 12, 14 and 20 on their rolls. When the players enter the room, the one with a PP of 9 spots one kobold, the player with a PP of 13 spots two, and the player with a PP of 16 spots three kobolds. They won't know there's a fourth kobold until they make an active perception check, or that kobold attacks them.

Noone is going to use active perception before passive perception, as it there is no need. The player's character is perceptive enough to notice things that are obvious to them without needing to make a check. It's when they still suspect things are hidden that they will reach of the dice.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Why would you be trying to actively look for it? If it's that easy to spot, your player has seen it. If it's actively trying to hide, say through a Stealth check, and it rolls higher than your Passive Perception then you'd have to make an active check to find it. If not, he has seen it. Your players don't just switch passive perception on or off.

For example, the players enter a room. There are three party members - one has a PP (passive perception) of 9, one has a PP of 16 and one has a PP of 13. There are four kobolds hiding in the room, and they all make seperate stealth checks. They get 4, 12, 14 and 20 on their rolls. When the players enter the room, the one with a PP of 9 spots one kobold, the player with a PP of 13 spots two, and the player with a PP of 16 spots three kobolds. They won't know there's a fourth kobold until they make an active perception check, or that kobold attacks them.

Noone is going to use active perception before passive perception, as it there is no need. The player's character is perceptive enough to notice things that are obvious to them without needing to make a check. It's when they still suspect things are hidden that they will reach of the dice.

I hope that's the way it works... makes a lot of sense.