{
"post": {
"title": "What are Passive Skills for?",
"selftext": "Passive skills are calculated as what the character's average rolls over time should be. But it's often treated as how well they do at a given skill when not really trying. So which is it?\n\nAs an example, lets use passive investigation. Lets say the party is in an empty room, within the room there is a hidden trap door.\n\nOption 1: The party knows the trapdoor is present, and will search until they find the trapdoor. Because they are searching over a long period of time, the player's passive investigation applies, and they find it after some time of searching.\n\nOption 2: The party walks in without knowing about the trapdoor. The player with a high enough passive investigation instantly notices the trapdoor without searching the room.\n\nI've seen option 2 far more often, but my issue with it is then we get strange cases where a player would have found secret if they simply walked through a room, but failed to find it when actually looking for it.\n\nI'm curious how people see and rule this\n\n[View Poll](https://www.reddit.com/poll/17gi6ab)",
"url": "https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/17gi6ab/what_are_passive_skills_for/"
},
"comments": [
{
"body": "Neither of your options exactly. I don't use them based on the amount of time a single task takes **or** as a universal floor. I use them when I don't want to reveal meta-knowledge by asking for a roll, or when making the same check over and over(e.g. searching each room for trapdoors) would become tedious."
},
{
"body": "I voted #2 but to expand on why it's not #1: The first option is quite literally the opposite. Spending time searching intentionally would explicitly be an active check, not passive.\n\nPassive checks are for when the character is not actively spending time or attention performing the skill in question. For example, during a conversation the player's passive Insight would be used unless the player specifies they want to roll it. A good player won't just say they want to roll it constantly during every conversation, they'll do it when they get suspicious for some reason or when they don't trust someone.\n\nThis gets a bit muddled when considering things like long distance travel since it may seem like the party is actively \"keeping an eye out\", but really they're actively traveling and keeping an eye out is just a normal part of traveling. If they stop to investigate something specific that would then be an active check.",
"replies": [
{
"body": "I think this is the option that makes the most sense to me. But yeah the last scenario is the murky area that made me want to ask the question. So maybe it would be more accurate to say that in those scenarios, passives can be used if the action is a part of another broader action? (In this case travelling cautiously, but keeping an eye out is a part of that)\n\nThough I'm getting the sense that like most things, this ultimately comes down to DM discretion",
"replies": [
{
"body": "If the action is explicitly a use of the skill, it's active. In other words the *primary* action the character is taking is \"searching an area\" or whatnot. If it's happening during another action, such as traveling, it's passive. That's the general baseline, but of course there are many tricky situations and the DM will need to make a judgement call."
}
]
}
]
},
{
"body": "It's skills being applied over time. Your examples are a bit poor though. Is the room with the trap door just a regular room where players are not likely to be searching at all times? In that case, that warrants an active roll.\n\nIf the room is in a dungeon (or other hostile area) - the players are usually assumed to carefully look around each room and moving slowly watching out for traps. This is where passive skill checks really come in handy, as otherwise you'd be rolling a perception check pretty much anytime players can see more of the dungeon.\n\nWhen creatures are standing watch or are just aware of their surroundings (as in, not sleeping or busy with something), they use their passive perception. When players interrogate all 80 guests present at a ball room after a crime took place, they are gonna use passive insight and persuassion for that (because it's assumed they do it for all of them).\n\n​\n\nSo, in your example, passive investigation would apply if players were investigating many rooms at once, and if that is the only room they are trying to investigate, you roll for it. (Though, ideally you'd use passive perception instead and if they meet it, give them some hint to prompt them to do active investigation only in this room).\n\n​\n\nEDIT: I will also add that using passive skills can also applicable when trying to figure out if player can do something when there's no real downside of failing and nothing is stopping a player from just trying again."
},
{
"body": "[https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/using-ability-scores#PassiveChecks](https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/basic-rules/using-ability-scores#PassiveChecks)\n\n>*A passive check is a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any die rolls. Such a check can represent the average result for a task done repeatedly, such as searching for secret doors over and over again, or can be used when the DM wants to secretly determine whether the characters succeed at something without rolling dice, such as noticing a hidden monster.*\n\nYes.\n\nBut also no.\n\nI have a tendency to have a passive score give the player an opportunity to make an active roll.\n\nSo in Option 2, they come in and the player with the highest Passive Investigation gets to make an active roll because \"they notice something out of the corner of their eye\". They don't know what it is, but they do get a chance to look for it.\n\nFor Option 1, I'm mostly going to ask \"how long are you searching for?\" and go from there."
},
{
"body": "I think pretty definitionally option 2 can never make sense or how would they do worse 50% of the time when trying?\n\nBoth your definitions are a bit off."
},
{
"body": "I pretty much don't use passive perception at all. Either it's something that is important enough to roll for, or its narrative only and doesn't matter. So, Option 1 above, they are guaranteed to succeed, so narrate the search and don't roll because its trivial. Option 2 they either search and find it, or it's obvious enough to not roll."
},
{
"body": "Honestly I would say both and neither, there are good times to count as either of them but equally they are not always true as you could argue if something can be done over time then given enough time you would get a result of 20 while also sometimes you just won't succeed if you don't try regardless of what the result of 10+ skill is. \n\n\nI would also say passive skills are also used as a guiding tool for the DM to make some quick decisions without it influencing the players decisions in the situation"
},
{
"body": "A passive check is for someone to just casually notice something when just walking around. Or to casually pick up on some personality quirk when talking to someone, and so on.\n\nThe PC is walking through a house and there is a secret door. The PC os not looking for any secret doors. But might just spot this one due to just noticing something.\n\nIf you are applying a skill over time then that is not a passive skill use."
},
{
"body": "Here is what I do and how I use them in my games:\r \n\r \nFirst, whenever a player or the party takes an action, an active check is called for. If players already know about something, as in your example, that may affect the difficulty class (DC), and if they have enough time to search the room for hours, they will simply find it after X hours without needing a check.\r \n\r \nSo, what is passive perception used for then?\r \nFor example: The party is talking to a shady gangster type in a dimly lit tunnel crossing. The proceedings are going poorly because the Fighter tends to be overly aggressive and fails his active intimidation checks. Goons of the bad guy lurk in the shadows of these corridors (unbeknownst to the party), and I roll a Stealth check behind my screen.\r \nNow, this is compared with the passive perceptions of the PCs to determine who is and isn't surprised if combat starts, and a group of sneaky goons flanks them from behind or something like that.\r \n\r \nI also use other passive skill checks to create atmosphere or provide more detail in specific situations. For instance, if a player with a good passive investigation describes how they dreamily explore the shelves in a library, touching old tomes and brushing their fingers against their spines while admiring the amassed knowledge, I might inform them that they've noticed a weird wobble and a faint click from the last book. \n\n\nThose are just a few examples, but I hope they clear things a bit and help some other DM's :)"
},
{
"body": "I like to think of passive perception in the main light of: Something is hiding just out of sight but with your passive 16 you see it.\n\nOr in the case of a few other passive skills if you apply them(like investigation): There's time to do things and you don't need to stress, you can easily do the task without difficulty.\n\nAnd now, a mini-rant: I've not yet had a DM actually use passive perception(or any passive) at all yet, when I specifically choose most often to be the spotter/scout of the group, even using my familiar(when applicable) to scout ahead or spy on a chosen area so we can keep safe. I feel it's super dumb when you're asked for a \\*perception check\\* and then end up rolling below your passive and end up failing for no reason, sometimes forcing an excuse that the Rogue with a passive 16 perception didn't see the random dude in a bush with a 13 Stealth. I'm not talking about an \\*active check\\* though when you're actually taking time, like an action, to look for something, that \\*sometimes\\* makes sense when it's a time limited thing."
}
]
}