Passive perception and when to roll?

[Typewriter]

So, from what I've read it looks like the book essentially has passive perception constantly firing off for the party while they get to 'roll' when actively searching for something specific. The problem with this seems to be to me that this means I spend every 'perception' result with me telling one of my players, "OK, so you see/hear X" while the others get nothing, or at least a lot less. And that one player who has high perception has it very high - 21 passive at level one thanks to the feat that grants +5, proficiency, and a +4 WIS modifier. Does this just mean that stealth will never work against him? Does he automatically see every sneaky action a party member takes, every single goblin scout that sneaks up on the party?

What I've been doing is having the party roll whenever it's an opposed check or when searching, so that someone rolling to accomplish something isn't automatically defeated by somebody else's perception. Everything else this guy sense automatically. My concern is that by doing this I'm now negating his choice of feat, which definitely isn't what I wanted to do.

How are others handling passive perception? Is my usage too much of a nerf? Thanks for the input guys.

[7heprofessor]

So, from what I've read it looks like the book essentially has passive perception constantly firing off for the party while they get to 'roll' when actively searching for something specific. The problem with this seems to be to me that this means I spend every 'perception' result with me telling one of my players, "OK, so you see/hear X" while the others get nothing, or at least a lot less. And that one player who has high perception has it very high - 21 passive at level one thanks to the feat that grants +5, proficiency, and a +4 WIS modifier. Does this just mean that stealth will never work against him? Does he automatically see every sneaky action a party member takes, every single goblin scout that sneaks up on the party?

What I've been doing is having the party roll whenever it's an opposed check or when searching, so that someone rolling to accomplish something isn't automatically defeated by somebody else's perception. Everything else this guy sense automatically. My concern is that by doing this I'm now negating his choice of feat, which definitely isn't what I wanted to do.

How are others handling passive perception? Is my usage too much of a nerf? Thanks for the input guys.


The only time I have my players roll is when they state that they are looking for something/someone specific, are actively scouting, or are specifically searching a room/hall.

I don't really care too much about the group seeing everything all the time. I WANT them to find all the cool stuff I've put in the world after all ;)

[Typewriter]

The only time I have my players roll is when they state that they are looking for something/someone specific, are actively scouting, or are specifically searching a room/hall.

I don't really care too much about the group seeing everything all the time. I WANT them to find all the cool stuff I've put in the world after all ;)

I don't really mind them finding everything, I think what bothers me more is that it feels like it's turning a portion of the game into more DM storytelling time. OK, you guys walk into the house. P1 notices nothing, P2 and P3 notice that the windows are broken, food that was left out is rotted, a sour smell, and a strange looking book on the table. P4 - you see everything I just mentioned, plus you see a thief hiding behind the curtains.

It makes the whole thing feel less interactive.

My other complaint is just the fact that it means stealth against the party is essentially useless unless I custom build a character with the specific intent of having a high enough stealth to get past that one character. The random factor of rolling would have kept his +11 good, but it would have left a chance, at least, of someone sneaking successfully. Now it's very unlikely for any stealth to work.

[hawklost]

I don't really mind them finding everything, I think what bothers me more is that it feels like it's turning a portion of the game into more DM storytelling time. OK, you guys walk into the house. P1 notices nothing, P2 and P3 notice that the windows are broken, food that was left out is rotted, a sour smell, and a strange looking book on the table. P4 - you see everything I just mentioned, plus you see a thief hiding behind the curtains.

It makes the whole thing feel less interactive.

My other complaint is just the fact that it means stealth against the party is essentially useless unless I custom build a character with the specific intent of having a high enough stealth to get past that one character. The random factor of rolling would have kept his +11 good, but it would have left a chance, at least, of someone sneaking successfully. Now it's very unlikely for any stealth to work.

A decent way to deal with someone like that is to give them too much information. Start saying things like, P4, you hear a creaking sound from the boards upstairs. You hear some skittering sounds under the board. You see the broken chair leg is splintered at the end. You can see what looks like a shadow moving in the other room.

Only one of those pieces of information being somewhat relevant and the others just trash data the pc notices. Now he has to decide which of those things are worthwhile and which is completely useless.

[Person_Man]

I very rarely use Passive Perception for players (though I do sometimes use it for enemies), because it basically turns the hidden trap/door/etc into a non-factor or a fait accompli. I as DM decide what the DC is to notice something. I know what the player's Passive Perception is. So if I set the DC above their Passive Perception, I know they will miss it. If I set it below, I know they will fail. That's not really a game. That's just a tax on their hit points.

Instead, I use the old school method of finding hidden stuff. Players describe hot they want to explore. I set the DC to find whatever is there based on the natural consequences of how they choose to explore. If they carefully work their way through a corridor while tapping on the floor with a 10 foot pole in front of them, then the DC to find a hidden pit-fall is going to be very low, because that method will virtually always succeed in finding a hidden pit-fall. If they do the same method and there's a pressure plate that sets off poison darts, the DC is going to be very high, because just hitting a pressure plate with a pole is likely to set it off. This method requires that I take a greater amount of time to describe the visual cues and other details in each part of the dungeon, and it requires that the players pay attention to the game. But that's the type of game I prefer to play and DM.

[pibby]

I think the idea for passives is for those checks you don't want your players to know about. Like if something is clearly behind cover it wouldn't mean someone who is very perceptive would automatically assume it's something to check out. At best, the player with high passive perception would feel that something is off or that they have a sense that something of note is in the room. And don't just have them roll the check for success. If they just roll a general perception check for the room, give the players clues as to what kind of things they perceive other than the thing that is hiding from them and let their curiosity guide what they do.

[Flickerdart]

Passive perception is there so that you don't get either players stumbling into traps when they forget to say "I search for traps" or players constantly saying "I roll to search, I roll to search, I roll to search." If a character is perceptive, then yes, he notices goblins who don't hide well. The goblin doesn't get a pass just because the player didn't say "I look for goblins." He invested in the skill, and his party members didn't, so he gets to spot things more reliably than them, just how a character who pumps Stealth will be hard to spot while other party members are discovered.

Just because he spots the goblin doesn't mean that he does so in time to warn the others, though.

[Mandragola]

Just because he spots the goblin doesn't mean that he does so in time to warn the others, though.

This. So have combat kick off at the moment he sees them, and they realise he's seen them. Anyone who the monsters beat on their sneak roll is surprised.

As a DM you kind of have to let players be really good at things sometimes. It's not really your job to beat them. Obviously you do want to challenge them, but you have to let the feat be worth something.

I actually had a cleric with observant myself and it was never used. The DM literally never used passive perception (I think because she didn't really understand it, since it was her first go at DMing 5th). That was frustrating! Then she had Cyanwrath breathe on us and Frulam cast spirit guardians, and we made new characters. It was an educational experience all round!

[Typewriter]

I very rarely use Passive Perception for players (though I do sometimes use it for enemies), because it basically turns the hidden trap/door/etc into a non-factor or a fait accompli. I as DM decide what the DC is to notice something. I know what the player's Passive Perception is. So if I set the DC above their Passive Perception, I know they will miss it. If I set it below, I know they will fail. That's not really a game.


This is basically what I was trying to say - passives change it from a game to (even more) DM storytelling. Don't get me wrong - my biggest draw to D&D is the storytelling aspect of it, but I know that what I get out of it and what my players do is vastly different and that giving me even more direct control over things like this - things that are tied to their character - just feels wrong.