STOP Using Passive Perception Wrong! D&D Passive Scores

The more I listen to passive skill check discussions the more I hear different values. Firstly, I fundamentally disagree with the argument of invalidating a rogues “Reliable Talent”. The people who argue this often are the same people who want to restrict passive skills so much is invalidates things like the “Observant” feat. The game has a fundamental contradiction but the best thing about it is using passive checks is an optional rule so you can choose what you invalidate. Just make it clear how you are using passive checks at the start of the game. If you only use them for stealth checks then you completely remove most of the value. If a player has invested in having a high passive perception that means they have probably given up having something else useful. If we are complaining that a level 20 has a high passive perception, I hate to tell you that there are far more broken things to worry about balancing for at that level of play, like a wizard teleporting the party passed all the traps.
I dislike going to the high passive perception player for all the info as, from my experience, when a DM wants to give you info, they do. They don’t think, man, I want to tell people this but this person’s passive perception is only 12 so I’ll keep it to myself. No, the DM often gives the same level of flavour in those situation no matter what. It’s a very lame prize to say, you gave up other cool features so you can be the information relayer to the party (which a lot of parties would skip anyway).
If I run passive perception I’d run it similar to the spidy sense one. Firstly, people would struggle to sneak up on you so long as you have your best senses, you may even notice doors opening. On the flip side I’d give the player info on all the traps etc but in a fluff manner, “you notice string across the door frame” or for entering a room “You notice drag marks by the book case”. Some of these might be dead ends, the party may move the book case only to realise after an ACTIVE investigation check that it was just set up in the room poorly. Similarly people forget that just because you have a high passive perception that you still make perception checks. The old Jeremy Crawford line is because, if you went into a room and the DM used passive perception then you would have noticed anything lower than it by default but you may still want to look around to see if you can do better.
Passive perception is such a mucky passive skill due to its intrinsic value, people who decry it say they still like passive skills often but not passive perception due to its power. That’s fair. It’s powerful. I find it hard to argue that having a high passive acrobatics allows you to skip rolls but passive perception doesn’t let you do the equivalent a bias against it. I do think a lot of the people who hate it often conflate it with the passive investigation. Just because you notice every trap in the room does not mean you know how to avoid it or disarm it. You may not even understand what it does! You just notice it.
Similarly I use passives over long time stretches where there is no risk of failure, picking a lock over an hour, busking all day, using the medicine skill to heal a hospital of people, or traveling for a day.

😅 And NBA has to watch out with these goblins stabbing people on the court.

Uf bro sorry but you are wrong. Passive perception is always on and if your passive perception is higher than a trap DC you spot it automatically. Active perception is an effort you do and takes time and passive perception is your floor (minimum roll). This was confirmed by lead rule designer of DnD. Same applies to passive investigation and insight. You can as a DM overrule/bend it but it will be not in line with official rules.

While watching, a really good solution struck me. Instead of treating passive perception as a skill floor, treat it as a skill cap! A very observant person has a high passive perception which means they should have a chance at noticing something difficult to see, but they might still roll low and not see it because they aren't looking for it. However, a not very observant person might not even have a chance to notice something.

For example, a creature is stealthing by and rolled a 13 for stealth. The party members weren't alert or watching for danger, so the all roll perception. A ranger with a passive perception of 17 rolled an 11 total, so he didn't see it. A different character with a passive perception of 12 rolled an 18, but he wasn't looking and typically isn't very observant, so it doesn't make sense he would notice it. Instead he is considered to have a roll of 12, his passive perception being the maximum he can roll while not alert.

Hot take: Only use passive checks out of combat and it will 100% improve the roleplay!
Passive checks can be used with any skill and the situation gives them advantage/disadvantage.
That means if you only use passive checks there will be nothing like a wizard (athletics -2) with 1 hand (disadvantage) lifts the huge boulder (DC15), but the barbarian (athletics +5) was unable to. Using passive checks consistantly means that a character who is good in certain things will consistently be good at that and who is bad at things will be consistently bad at that. That happens when because the system makes it absolutely clear how much more luck (d20 with a scale of 20) matters than character building choice (skills at beginner levels have a range of -2+0 to +3+2, which has a scale of 7). Luck is almost 3 times more important for anything the character wants to succed at than actually be good at what they want to do. That's just the game system saying that to your face. And rolling against each other, meaning two high range dice rolls and two low range modifiers means that luck becomes even more important, that's why you should almost always use passive scores as DCs for the opponents.

And what do I mean by improving roleplay? The characters can influence the check by things that they do, meaning they can give themselves and their opponents advantage/disadvantage depending how they are doing things. For example if they take the time, resources and get camouflage they will get advantage with stealth checks when staying put, but after sneaking in somewhere they will definitely look suspicious, that's a concious choice that the players can make and not the luck (dice roll) determines. And the opponents will also use their passive perception against them, and they will also get situational modifiers on their checks, for example the guards' perception will have auto-fail, advantage, normal and disadvantage, autosuccess distance ranges for their perception. That means since the world functions like this the characters will know this beforehand and the DM will be able to ask the party about what they are going to do if they feel the guards come dangerously close. And since the players are situationally aware they can make a distraction and determined by what that is will trigger some "consequences", like trigger some sounds in the distance will lure them away, but make them more alert. That is what roleplaying your character is. What DnD advocates in roleplay's place is rollplay: asking the dice to determine things instead of the players and DnD by default uses rollplay over roleplay, which is not bad. It just creates a lighthearted shallow party game atmosphere. But anyone who want something deeper and/or more consistent experience I highly advice to abandon active checks outside of high drama/pressure situations which can be fun in itself.

in my early days of dnd, i had a player roll without my asking for a roll, i asked "what are you rolling for?" deer in headlights. "nat one perception." "looking for?" "a branch." they were in the woods, so he did go blind to trees and branches for the session.

The only time passive perception comes up in my game is when I need to determine which player is surprised in an ambush, or if a creature/npc is trying to sneak past or pick their pockets, etc. Ultimately, it's there to give the creature/npc something to roll their stealth against if the PCs are not looking for danger. We all know you can't just randomly ask player for a perception check, because now they know that something is up. That being said, you can subtract 5 or 10 (passive disadvantage) from the players passive perception if the player is distracted in some way. With a really clever npc, I'll have them create a diversion and then attempt the stealth check.

As for other passive scores, I do use them based on the character's background. So, in a group, I have a ranger who was a bounty hunter. So, I use passive survival tracking when tracking humanoids. He's done it for so long, that he has become skilled at it. I have one who is a rogue with a criminal background specializing in pickpocketing, so when pickpocketing normal folks with little to no distraction, I use his passive.

I use passive perception, but it does not replace active perception rolls I need my players to make. I had a player roll when I asked for a perception check and then say "I rolled a 12, but my floor is 16." My partner who was in the game as a player said, "Oh, he doesn't use passive perception as a floor." Then I heard the other player say, "Oh, so you ignore rules as written, I see," I then said, "No, it doesn't say that as a rule." He then quoted Jeremy Crawford and I reminded him that is Rules as Intended, not rules as written. Also, the part where Jeremy never said it was an actual floor. The best way I can explain passive vs. active perception is seeing the forest for the trees. If you are actively looking for something, your passive will miss it because you have switched your focus.

nat 1 perception check : you looked around you and you have noticed that the sun looks bright, you adored looking at it and thinking of it's beauty you notice that their is some smoke coming out of your eyes, you see nothing else ... for a while

I had 20 passive perception on a character once, we never used it even once the whole oneshot.

So passive perception is essentially the stealth DC for a creature to hide from you

Passive perception is a tough one. Typically I try and keep my players scores noted somewhere. Because you can't even ask for them without everyone getting on edge and then perception rolling every few feet. So I've gotten in the habit of asking everyone at the table what their PP is prior to leaving town or confirming what they are before the need arises. I also play online so technically I have access to their sheet it just takes time if I don't already have it open with the myriad of other sheets I have to keep up for reference. But anyway. I'm not a big fan of passive perception. A definite overhaul of this system needs to be figured out. Either make it something that can apply advantage (or disadvantage if low) to self or others (sort of like being able to HELP without actually taking the HELP action) or make DCs like double (or maybe 50% higher. Just throwing out example numbers. Havent worked it all out in my head yet obviously. Lol) and add PP and perception roll together. Idk. But I do agree with PP being dumb. The point of the game is to roll. And I've had players use every version of how they think passive stuff should work. The skill floor has been tried. The distinction of I was looking or not looking so this is when it should or shouldn't be considered. I'm very interested in hearing ideas for a new version of making passive perception more balanced. Because again. If you ask for a roll or what the PP is. Then metagaming kicks in and everyone starts rolling wildly at every step. It gets old too

I like the idea of the perception check to be determining how the trap works, and not whether the PCs find the trap.

So, the PHB calls out Passive Perception ONLY, right? Nowhere does it say anything about Passive Athletics or Passive Attack Rolls - that is just you being hyperbolic.

Surprised to not mention that it makes a great DC for hidden enemies. If you walk into a room and the enemy is hiding, they can make a stealth check against the characters, passive perception, and anybody he beats a surprise during the first round you could potentially beat everybody and surprise everybody or he could be beaten by everybody and lose to everybody in the surprise round

Ok. In real life, I can be pretty perceptive. Passively I can be like:”something is off”. That’s how I use it… like passive is high enough to prog the active check.

If a monster is trying to sneak… that’s vs passive for you, no?

We used to call it "gut instinct"

extremely sad to invest in some skill, and not roll more than 3 on the dice. TT-TT

When I run my games:

When the party enters a room I’ll probably ask for a perception check. I note their perception rolls and let the players know what they see/hear/smell/feel according to their rolls. I’ll then turn to my “passive perception 20 at level 1” player and let them know the details other players who didn’t roll high enough did not perceive. This includes non-magical traps and ambushes.

Also remember, just because they see something doesn’t mean they know what it is.

I'm new to DMing so I'm trying to figure out how I want to use it. Right now I'm using PP to give the character s little more information. Something like, "You notice some marks on the wall/floor." Then if they say they want to investigate those marks, I'll check their Passive Investigation. If it's not high enough (which it usually isn't), I'll ask for a roll.

The idea being that one may perceive indications of a trap but investigation is the skill that let's them figure out what it actually is.

The direct quote from the book is: "Passive perception is a character's ability to notice what's happening around them without actively examining their surroundings." It doesnt say you find secrets, traps or find hidden things. It specifically states that you notice what is happening. Secrets and traps dont happen, they exist in their state and a trap springs then the saving throws to avoid them HAPPEN. A secret entrance simply exists, if found opening the door is what HAPPENS, if a stealthing or invisible individual is sneaking about that is whats HAPPENING. Its pretty cut and dry and as with most things in the DMG and PHB is worded fairly specifically.

Passive Scores aren't the floor ... Passive Scores with -5 for Disadvantage, are the Floor.
And that's assuming the Character is relatively Passive, going about their business in a normal, relatively controlled manner (even if they may be suffering Disadvantage for lighting, or moving fast, or whatever). If they are in a super intense, dangerous, or chaotic situation, then they're going to have to roll (with Disadvantage), or if they're trying to accomplish something above what they are ordinarily capable of (i.e: something above Average Difficulty for them ), then they Roll a straight roll (or with Advantage, if someone is helping them, etc.).

Two points of constructive criticism:
1) You are talking very fast. It makes listening difficult.
2) The videos should be shorter and more concise

I didn't know how to use passive perception correctly until I ran Mines of Phandelver. Between that campaign were I regularly used psasive and my previous campain where I used active, I noticed that rangers and druids seem to generally have the highest passive perception. Which is great for those classes and makes a lot of sense. Using passive you can regularly have your Ranger notice things and it makes them feel special especially given how weak the class was designed.

I like passives but they'd be better as like a skill floor...that prevents super low rolls...like the way passive perception works but not with the 10...because it would be crazy if a super strong character can't make a easy DC...like 5-10...now normally that doesn't happen because of proficiency and ability...I think just using the concept of natural 1 is not a failure(which I think is core rules, accounts for this, but lots of groups like to have natural 1 always be failures)...because a person with expertise and a good ability score will then unlikely miss a medium ability check (10)...but I also agree you can't take it from the rogue...as it is a class feature...and when players get to use it...they are happy....because it was a choice to be a rogue

Needing to justify the base existance of a score for this long shows there is a baseline problem with it existing at all.

I just think Passive Perception shouldn't exist. Most of what you say can be done by also just look at the person with the highest perception score.

The way I've viewed passive perception is a bubble of your senses around you that trigger when you aren't actively focused on it. But once you call out that you are searching, a low roll would be you hyper focusing on certain areas to the point that you miss the detail. What could have been you noticing a stalker through passive, becomes you passively being aware something is off, but you got too focused to actually pinpoint the issue.

The same would apply to other passive skills. Passive dex lets the monk cross the narrow ledge in their sleep, but if they ask to make a check, they could roll low and over-analyze or get too psyched out that they slip. But due to their passive dex, they could push back reflexively and end up back with the party on solid ground instead of falling like a less dexterous character would in that situation. Basically a redo for something they should not have feasibly failed at.

So, here is the thing. You mention to ask for the check early in the video. In doing so, you have just alerted the players that there is something fishy. Passive scores is a genius game mechanic that gives the DM the opportunity to tell the players in a more theatrical way that there may be something. If no one has a high enough passive perception that meets the DC, then they pass right by it - unless they actively look at each and every nook and cranny. Plus, parties that do so drag the game out to make it super boring. That's what JC is talking about.

if something is within your carrying capacity you should be able top lift it

i think i would use passive perception like pathfinder 2e, as a dc when other people or monsters roll their stealth to hide from the pc, this rule would also apply to the pc themselves. for traps i would rule that they need a passive perception equal to double the dc of traps to automatically notice them (this could change i'll have to see it in play)

so many of these videos basically boil down to: remember it's supposed to be role-playing first game second.

Without using the passive stuff you'd have to keep swamping the game with talking about what you are looking for all the time. You should only need to ask for checks (explicitly or hopefully by rping) when you do something your character would not be doing all the time anyways. Yes, there are Inquisitive Rogue and Observant. You should not be forced to keep talking about looking around taking away time from players who could actually do something interesting with the time. And yes, pretty much independently of it, I like to deal with passives as floors as well. If that requires adjusting DC, succeed by passive if that beats the high DC, roll if not, or whatever -- I like having skill experts. Everybody seems to understand that being strong in combat is important at least by default while half the player base seems to be anoyed by playing with skills (or want them to be for comedic relieve failures mainly). I don't get it.

Just don't make it all Perception. Other skills should give you stuff automatically, too. Yes, I do think somebody with expertise in Animal Handling and a decent WIS score should succeed in most stuff with animals automatically -- and the DM should make it clear that it happens because of their great expertise. Let out of combat stuff that is not calling out the utility spell be important, too. I hate that there is so much encounter focus and RNG slapstick.

And (almost? you still probably need Stealth Checks to make the heavy armor matter) never do group checks. Let the group's expert do it if it is something the characters should notice without the players asking, have the group chose one if they actively try, allow a second char to assist granting Advantage only if there is good grounds for it.

And if you have a player come with a Passive Perception 23 at start, about to become 32 later, character, be ready to play into it (and not remove the stuff they should get limelight defeating it from) or tell them that they should make something else as this is not how you run your game. If the Animal Handling expert is not for your game just tell them -- and probably ask them about their expectations as probably they are looking for another type of game anyways.

What I don't like about Passive scores is players and DMs sometimes think they know or do something for free: your History is +10 so you should know this, your insight is +12 so you realize they're lying to you, your Perception is off the charts so you see and hear everything around you...like no, bruh: you still have to roleplay. Is your PC trying to remember an important event? Are they trying to read the body language of the tavern keep? Are they trying to check for traps, hear or smell monsters, see clues in the wall?

Sooo what you are saying sounds like "that character might be perceptive and the player might have built it around the concept of perception, sacrificing other aspects of the game to do so but I, dungeon coach, beleive you should roll for perception so I don't approve RAW"...

Passive Perception is like 3.5 Spot and Listen!

You want it as a player but not as a DM.

WHY are you such a hater of passive perception when you created a PC with one of 32. You hypocrite.
It passive, not something your PC has to declare there using, if you want them to say they're looking up/around/behind to see something that's a perception roll.
Why do you want to punish a player who maybe gets the alertness feat or/and the observant feat and expertise in the skill and then nullify it use!!
What you should say is GET RID OF PASSIVE PERCEPTION altogether because it BROKEN.

Hey The Dungeon Coach ...a Nat 20 or a Nat 1 isn't a auto success or fail on skill checks or saves. Just att rolls. Except for death saves where a Nat 1 is two fails and a Nat 20 is you get back 1 HP.
DM advisors like you making a grandiose statement like that "....you got a Nat 20 I'll tell you everything.." is wrong and gives players the wrong idea about nat 20.
YOU SHOULD KNOW BETTER !!!.

Got some secret doors in the next few sessions. Thanks for the tips. Love the options of the middle ground between letting them walk by if they don’t say the right thing at the right time or giving it away with no prompt because of numbers.

You begun by saying that players can't just take PP as their skill floor and how this is wrong, then you say that you won't make your rogue do an active check to walk across the narrow bridge (??).

That is not how PP works.

Passive skill checks are for two scenarios:
a) where there is no immediate consequence for failure. Example: picking a lock on a non-alarned door. Here you can just "take 10" to open it if your skill is high enough.
b) where getting the player to make a roll, where they had not specifically said they were trying to use a skill, gives them information their character wouldn't have (e.g. if I know I just failed a perception check, I will act differently).

Passive perception sucks, if my players do not actively search by making perception checks in new areas, they do not find anything.

I only use Passives as the DC for Enemies to beat to hide/stealth/Lie etc when outside active combat

I like Passive scores. I use them as what the characters can do in a neutral sub-conscious state. No Pressure. No opposition. Just things their body pulls off automatically. Active skills and rolls are when you have to put thought, knowledge, and intent into the Skill.

Using real life situations. I am Passively Sneaky and many times I simply walk into a room and then scare my family or friends as they finally notice me. My passive stealth was higher than their passive perception. But if they weren't relaxed and was constantly thinking about perception, like being on guard duty, then my passive stealth is negated and I would have to actively be sneaky, thinking about line of sight and noise, to still sneak pass them.

Similar for passive insight. Say you go to the market place and asking about a ware there. The merchant tells a marked up price using a his passive deception as he off handedly says 'handmade' be they go to another customer. Your passive insight beats the deception and you get a mental bell that the price or 'handmade' wasn't 100% sincere. Weather to investigate deeper for any reason would incur Active rolls.

This is a super rad video for DMs! Straight to the point, tight elaboration, perfect reference.

Cyberpunk asks players at the beginning of a game session to roll "passive skills" at the adventure start, and give them to the game master. When the game master needs to test against a player's skill, he can instead roll on a matrix of all the player's pre-rolls to determine which to use, and never ask the players to tip them off their character just made a check.

Peace!! Love the free throw analogy and Spidey Sense flavors