When do you use passive skills?

[Witty Username]

So, I was thinking of using passive stealth for when characters are abruptly hidden from view like say when someone casts a fog cloud or a darkness spell. but it got me thinking, when have you used passive skills and why? I have only heard of passive perception and insight being used and wondering if that is actually the extent that people use.

[Tanarii]

I use passive investigation in parallel with passive investigation for scouts. Otoh I tend to design my traps as needing investigation to discover. If you use perception, investigation might be a rolled check if it's needed after basic discovery ("something is wrong here") to figure out the details. Provided the result of that check doesn't need to be a secret of course.

I also allow players to use passive (all Lore skills) in place of paying attention for threats (passive perception and investigation). That represents closely looking at and thinking about / trying to figure out things in the environment from a study/knowledge perspective, instead of watching for threats. Similar to Tracking, I feel that merits losing the ability to watch for threats. Note that I'm careful not to gate basic information that is necessary to proceed with the adventure behind lore checks though.

I also have used passive Acrobatics to maintain balance while moving for an extended period over unstable terrain in a non-time critical situation. Although as time has gone on I tend not to put things like that in the game, or if I do they're intended to have the players make a decision if they want to instead take extra time (and wandering monster checks) under the automatic success rule. See DMG if you're not familiar with it.

Technically any check can be passive if it meets one of two criteria:
- activity being done repeatedly. As you go, so to speak, ie a different 'activity' each time. If it's the same activity done until you get it right, that's automatic success.
- the player can't know the result of the check.

Even so, I find the second consideration comes up more often. The first is meant to be a time-saver, but as I said the automatic success often comes into play as well, since it's often the same activity been done right until you succeed, not a different instance each time.

The problem with using passive stealth against passive perception is the same as using passive perception against static DCs (usually traps or secret doors). You're using a fixed value vs a fixed value.

[stoutstien]

So, I was thinking of using passive stealth for when characters are abruptly hidden from view like say when someone casts a fog cloud or a darkness spell. but it got me thinking, when have you used passive skills and why? I have only heard of passive perception and insight being used and wondering if that is actually the extent that people use.

FOg cloud and the like provide concealment but not automatically provides the hidden condition so no stealth check is needed. As for passive checks I turned all the knowledge based skills into a passive state unless there is a particular case of using that knowledge activity. So correctly diagnosing a certain disease would be passive while administrating The cure might be an active check if it fairly complex.

" Yep, you got them ghosts in your blood so I need to remove the bad blood with precision cuts along your leg. Hold still! you don't have alot of spare blood."

[Tanarii]

As for passive checks I turned all the knowledge based skills into a passive state unless there is a particular case of using that knowledge activity. So correctly diagnosing a certain disease would be passive while administrating The cure might be an active check if it fairly complex.
BtB passive state vs using activity isn't what defines when you should use a Passive check (game term) vs rolling a check.

Similarly, rereading the OP, if the rationale behind using passive stealth checks when concealed by a Fog Cloud or Darkness is the character is stealthing without 'actively' doing so, that's a bad rationale. Since 'actively' or 'passively' trying to hide isn't what would define if it should be a Passive Check (game term).

It's called a Passive Check because the player is passive and does not roll a die. Not because the character is being passive or not. Says so in the first sentence of the rule. Poor choice of naming of the Devs part, it's so often mistaken.

[stoutstien]

BtB passive state vs using activity isn't what defines when you should use a Passive check (game term) vs rolling a check.

Similarly, rereading the OP, if the rationale behind using passive stealth checks when concealed by a Fog Cloud or Darkness is the character is stealthing without 'actively' doing so, that's a bad rationale. Since 'actively' or 'passively' trying to hide isn't what would define if it should be a Passive Check (game term).

It's called a Passive Check because the player is passive and does not roll a die. Not because the character is being passive or not. Says so in the first sentence of the rule. Poor choice of naming of the Devs part, it's so often mistaken.
I realize how the game defines passive checks and choose to disregard it like a lot of things that the developers can't figure out what they want them to do.
they already have the system in place to bypass rolls when they're not necessary so it seems completely redundant to have a secondary system to avoid rolling if it's not necessary. 🤔

[Tanarii]

I realize how the game defines passive checks and choose to disregard it like a lot of things that the developers can't figure out what they want them to do.
they already have the system in place to bypass rolls when they're not necessary so it seems completely redundant to have a secondary system to avoid rolling if it's not necessary. 🤔
What system would that be?
(Other than DM fiat, which always applied. Or always doesn't, depending on the DM)

As far as I can see, the Passive Check rule covers two situations that are otherwise uncovered, resulting in reducing rolling constantly. For example every 5 ft while exploring and 'actively' searching corridor.

[stoutstien]

What system would that be?
(Other than DM fiat, which always applied. Or always doesn't, depending on the DM)

As far as I can see, the Passive Check rule covers two situations that are otherwise uncovered, resulting in reducing rolling constantly. For example every 5 ft while exploring and 'actively' searching corridor.

The first is the idea of auto pass unless there is chance of failure and a consequence for failing. You don't need a passive climbing score because the only time you will every role is when the circumstances dictate.

The idea that one can only be considered stealthy after declaring that is intended goal but then doing a passive check makes no sense to me. stealth should always be considered a contest based on whose trying to counter said stealth.

Which come to perception and to a lesser extent investigation. PP is logical from a in-game view. Keeping a sharp look out for threats and whatnot.
PP should have been a stand alone mechanic. Call it awareness and disconnect it from the skills. This would prevent all the weird cases where a players PP can be way above their standard perception due to feats or class features.

Passive investigation seems like it was tact on after they realized that the did nothing to support intelligence other than as a caster stat so they stuck it on. Like stealth, investigation is an active choice that is dependent on any given encounter or scene. Even the example of Sherlock Holmes is more a case of active checks combined with high awareness.

[Tanarii]

The first is the idea of auto pass unless there is chance of failure and a consequence for failing. You don't need a passive climbing score because the only time you will every role is when the circumstances dictate.That rule doesn't cover situations in which consequences have failure. And it requires doing the same thing over until you succeed but taking ten times as long. And it requires doing one activity against a single target result, not an activity against multiple target results, and taking a typical value at any instant the results actually matter.

Climbing at 1/10th speed isn't always what players want their PC to do. Sometimes it's just an activity being done repeatedly, using the average result. (Of course, climbing is also automatic unless unusual circumstances apply, but that's another specific rule.)


The idea that one can only be considered stealthy after declaring that is intended goal but then doing a passive check makes no sense to me. stealth should always be considered a contest based on whose trying to counter said stealth.I happen to agree, but mainly because a static value vs a static value is problematic in many ways.


Which come to perception and to a lesser extent investigation. PP is logical from a in-game view. Keeping a sharp look out for threats and whatnot.
PP should have been a stand alone mechanic. Call it awareness and disconnect it from the skills. This would prevent all the weird cases where a players PP can be way above their standard perception due to feats or class features.Passive Perception and Passive Investigation and Passive Insight typically all qualify under both clauses of the Passive check rule. They're usually something the PC is actively doing, Keeping a sharp lookout for threats, trying to figure something out, or trying to get a read on social undercurrents. They're also often a check the player can't know the result of what they rolled. Making a general rule of "if you're doing the same thing repeatedly against different targets, or the result of the roll should be secret" was a good design decision. Calling it 'Passive' and causing confusion when people mistakenly assume it means the PC is being passive wasn't.

It does have the potential issue of static 'roll' value vs static TN. But the concept of "don't waste time rolling repeatedly when the players are doing the same thing vs different targets" is sound.


Passive investigation seems like it was tact on after they realized that the did nothing to support intelligence other than as a caster stat so they stuck it on. Like stealth, investigation is an active choice that is dependent on any given encounter or scene. Even the example of Sherlock Holmes is more a case of active checks combined with high awareness.Can't disagree. The base rules strongly imply using Perception far more often than Investigation. I tend to default to Spot vs Search instead, but the idea seems to be to use them as 'notice' vs 'figure out'.

But that comes down to Intelligence vs Wisdom being two different scores from olden days, and the designers and players struggling (through multiple editions) to distinguish them. Sometimes Str vs Dex have the same issue.

[stoutstien]

That rule doesn't cover situations in which consequences have failure. And it requires doing the same thing over until you succeed but taking ten times as long. And it requires doing one activity against a single target result, not an activity against multiple target results, and taking a typical value at any instant the results actually matter.

Climbing at 1/10th speed isn't always what players want their PC to do. Sometimes it's just an activity being done repeatedly, using the average result. (Of course, climbing is also automatic unless unusual circumstances apply, but that's another specific rule.)

I happen to agree, but mainly because a static value vs a static value is problematic in many ways.

Passive Perception and Passive Investigation and Passive Insight typically all qualify under both clauses of the Passive check rule. They're usually something the PC is actively doing, Keeping a sharp lookout for threats, trying to figure something out, or trying to get a read on social undercurrents. They're also often a check the player can't know the result of what they rolled. Making a general rule of "if you're doing the same thing repeatedly against different targets, or the result of the roll should be secret" was a good design decision. Calling it 'Passive' and causing confusion when people mistakenly assume it means the PC is being passive wasn't.

It does have the potential issue of static 'roll' value vs static TN. But the concept of "don't waste time rolling repeatedly when the players are doing the same thing vs different targets" is sound.

Can't disagree. The base rules strongly imply using Perception far more often than Investigation. I tend to default to Spot vs Search instead, but the idea seems to be to use them as 'notice' vs 'figure out'.

But that comes down to Intelligence vs Wisdom being two different scores from olden days, and the designers and players struggling (through multiple editions) to distinguish them. Sometimes Str vs Dex have the same issue.

If only they will finally ditch the mental abilities once and for all. Would make room for some distinctions like aglity vs reflex and power vs strength.

[Aimeryan]

Passive skills checks are passive on the player side, not the character side. Some examples:

~

You are standing guard for an hour while the party sleeps. Your character is being perceptive and making perception checks all the time, however, you as the player are not going to roleplay out rolling perception every six seconds for an hour. Passive Perception checks are used.

While travelling, the DM describes a piece of scenery that you as the player thinks is odd (cave in nearby cliff up ahead, etc.). You have your character make a Perception check specifically against that piece of scenery; roll for a Perception check. The disadvantage of this is that it takes extra time both for the character and the player - its an action to make a non-Passive check and you have to request the check from the DM. You could potentially roll low many times and fail - on paper it may seem fine that you as a player would keep asking to roll until you got a 20, however, when actually played out you quickly realise how tiring and boring this is, so its self-limiting.

~

Your character understands the environment they encounter with respect to their intelligence and general investigative abilities; you as a player are not going to roll for every single object and phenomenon that the character encounters. Passive Investigation checks are used.

While travelling through a dungeon the DM describes a lever with a symbol carved into it, but offers no extra information. You as a player think this may be important and request that your character spend some time studying the symbol; roll for a Investigation check. Again, you may roll low and get nothing. You may roll very high and get nothing; it may just be a random meaningless symbol - a doodle made while crafting, perhaps. You may roll high and the DM tells you that your character recalls seeing this symbol on a previous trap they encountered a few years ago; its a warning symbol for those who are aware of it. The limiting factor here may again be mostly time and patience; you could keep rolling until you got a high roll - your character was able to recall the information. However, the DM may instead rule that you can make only one non-Passive check; the roll may be to check if you ever had the information in the first place rather than for recalling it. DM's call.

~~~

As for situations like Fog Cloud, Darkness, Mazes, etc., the DM should determine whether the character's Passive Perception is high enough to perceive the target in the situation at play. The DC for the check can be different based on the environment at play; a suspect in a crowd of people casts a Fog Cloud in the middle of a busy mechanical forgeworks? Hope your character has the perception of a demi-god to track the specific target in question - no Hide action needed! You may ask for your character to spend an action making a non-Passive check; possibly they could roll high and if the DC is possible to beat then the DM describes how you managed it.

What the Hide action does is let you set the DC for the opponent's Perception check (Passive or not) based on your rolled Stealth check, rather than the environment at play. Without using the Hide action you could say that your Passive Stealth check result is the environment's DC.

[RickAllison]

The thing I use for passive checks the most is to establish DCs. If someone is trying to spread rumors about how X is a cheat, the base difficulty for it might be the victim's passive Persuasion, representing how fair and amicable said person appears to most people. Getting a flunky to turn on their crime boss might be decided by the boss's passive Intimidation. Finding a loophole in a contract might be against passive History, catching some law from the past that the contract writer does not know of or forgot.

This is very influenced by the DCs to escape grappling as part of attacks in the Monster Manual, which usually are set by the passive Athletics of the monster rather than by a saving throw-type calculation. It also combines the uses of it being something the target is doing repeatedly as well as using it to avoid letting the player know a roll was made.

[stoutstien]

The thing I use for passive checks the most is to establish DCs. If someone is trying to spread rumors about how X is a cheat, the base difficulty for it might be the victim's passive Persuasion, representing how fair and amicable said person appears to most people. Getting a flunky to turn on their crime boss might be decided by the boss's passive Intimidation. Finding a loophole in a contract might be against passive History, catching some law from the past that the contract writer does not know of or forgot.

This is very influenced by the DCs to escape grappling as part of attacks in the Monster Manual, which usually are set by the passive Athletics of the monster rather than by a saving throw-type calculation. It also combines the uses of it being something the target is doing repeatedly as well as using it to avoid letting the player know a roll was made.

The DC to avoid or escape a NPC attempting at grappling is the same as the players it just hidden. If you look up expected Prof bonus per cr and plug it into 8+proficiency bonus+str mod its mostly consistent. Some time they have a hidden expertise like the stealth of the panther but it's a solid pattern.

[RickAllison]

The DC to avoid or escape a NPC attempting at grappling is the same as the players it just hidden. If you look up expected Prof bonus per cr and plug it into 8+proficiency bonus+str mod its mostly consistent. Some time they have a hidden expertise like the stealth of the panther but it's a solid pattern.

I did a tally of the numbers a while back, and there are quite a few that don't fit 8+proficiency bonus+Str. Plus there is page 1...


If no escape DC is given, assume the DC is 10 + the monster's Strength (Athletics) modifier.

When 8+Str+Prof actually fits, it's usually because they actually have the skill.

Both: Rug of Smothering, Ankheg, Vine Blight, Chuul, Ettercap, Lizardfolk Shaman, Mimic, Water Weird, Yuan-Ti Malison, Crocodile, Giant Crab, Giant Frog, Giant Scorpion
8+Str+prof: Roper, Giant Crocodile
10+Athletics: Behir, Glabrezu, Bone Devil, Chain Devil, T-Rex, Water Elemental, Otyugh, Remorhaz, Revenant, Roc, Salamander, Shambling Mound, Tarrasque, Vampire Spawn, Yuan-Ti Abomination
Neither: Couatl, Marilith, Grell, Kraken, Kuo-Toa Whip, Mind Flayer, Constrictor Snake, Giant Constrictor Snake, Giant Octopus, Giant Toad, Octopus

So the count is 13 that fit either and so don't really factor in, 2 that work for the 8+prof, 15 that work for 10+Athletics, and 11 that work neither. However the Couatl, Marilith, Kuo-Toa Whip, Constrictor Snake, and Giant Constrictor Snake all have numbers that fit with 10+Athletics if they were given proficiency, so I chalk that up to the woeful lack of skills for NPCs in general. Kraken and Mind Flayer... I feel like those are more gut reaction stats rather than based off something. And if we open up the possibility for special modifiers, most of the ones that don't fit passive Athletics DO fit it with a +1, including both of the exclusively 8+prof formula monsters.

All things considered, the evidence is really strong that passive Athletics is the DC.

[stoutstien]

I did a tally of the numbers a while back, and there are quite a few that don't fit 8+proficiency bonus+Str. Plus there is page 1...



When 8+Str+Prof actually fits, it's usually because they actually have the skill.

Both: Rug of Smothering, Ankheg, Vine Blight, Chuul, Ettercap, Lizardfolk Shaman, Mimic, Water Weird, Yuan-Ti Malison, Crocodile, Giant Crab, Giant Frog, Giant Scorpion
8+Str+prof: Roper, Giant Crocodile
10+Athletics: Behir, Glabrezu, Bone Devil, Chain Devil, T-Rex, Water Elemental, Otyugh, Remorhaz, Revenant, Roc, Salamander, Shambling Mound, Tarrasque, Vampire Spawn, Yuan-Ti Abomination
Neither: Couatl, Marilith, Grell, Kraken, Kuo-Toa Whip, Mind Flayer, Constrictor Snake, Giant Constrictor Snake, Giant Octopus, Giant Toad, Octopus

So the count is 13 that fit either and so don't really factor in, 2 that work for the 8+prof, 15 that work for 10+Athletics, and 11 that work neither. However the Couatl, Marilith, Kuo-Toa Whip, Constrictor Snake, and Giant Constrictor Snake all have numbers that fit with 10+Athletics if they were given proficiency, so I chalk that up to the woeful lack of skills for NPCs in general. Kraken and Mind Flayer... I feel like those are more gut reaction stats rather than based off something. And if we open up the possibility for special modifiers, most of the ones that don't fit passive Athletics DO fit it with a +1, including both of the exclusively 8+prof formula monsters.

All things considered, the evidence is really strong that passive Athletics is the DC.

If you factor the shove effect on attack then it favors the formula. I think most of the inconsistencies come from multiple writers coming from different directions and poor editorial skills. The AC system is the same. It's like 4/5 of the writers agreed on a system and the 5th was just tossing stuff at it to see what stuck.