Advantage and Passive Checks | Nerd Immersion

It was recently brought to my attention in my last video that a lot of folks were unaware of how advantage interacts with Passive Checks. While I did my best to comment responses, it just made sense to make a quick video about it. Did you know about this rule already or was this your first time hearing about it?
Thanks for watching!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📧 For marketing/business/sponsorship inquiries, email [e-mail]
📬 Shipping: P.O. Box 416 Salisbury Mills, NY 12577
💻 Discord Server: / discord
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
🔥 Support 🔥
📈 Patreon: / nerdimmersion
💵 Direct Donation: paypal.me/nerdi...
👕 Merchandise: teespring.com/...
🎁 Amazon Wishlist: www.amazon.com...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
🎤 Social Media 🎤
🎮 D&D Actual Play Channel: / nerdimmersionplays
🐦 Twitter: / nerdimmersion
🕒 TikTok: / nerdimmersion
📷 Instagram: / nerdimmersion
🎭 Facebook: / nerdimmersion
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
🎵 End Credit Music: benbriggs.net/...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nerd Immersion is an entertainment network focused on Dungeons & Dragons. Our KZbin Channel currently has over 900 D&D videos covering everything from D&D advice, D&D product reviews/unboxings, Top 10 videos, DM's Guild Module reviews, and play throughs of over 13 different D&D campaigns, and more.
Any links to products or services may be affiliate links that give me a small kickback at no cost to you, with no influence on the content. #dnd #dnd5e #nerdimmersion

[@angustulloch4560]

Hot take: The only thing that every single person who plays the game more than once Really Should Read is the short middle section of the PHB between the admittedly much shinier more exciting Part 1 Creating a Character and the tantalizing alphabetized list of reality-bending magics that tantalize every new player’s imagination is the short middle part of the book titled Part 2 Playing the Game. It’s not long. It’s only 27 pages. It’s not even a magazine. It will answer about 98% of all the questions that will come up at your table that aren’t about specific spells. If you read this, even if you’re as green as a shambling mound you will be more knowledgeable than a large percentage of the people playing the game right now.

[@Zertryx]

yeah i once told my friend "i feel like the internet doesnt read Chapter 8 of the PHB" and he was like "i doubt that, wait what is chapter 8" and then told me that he infact never really read it. but it gives all sorts of rules and examples for TRAVEL mechanics, which is somthing a lot of people always complain that there isnt anything for it. but there is. Also the Entire DMG other than magic items gets neglected a lot as well, there are several rules in there for a DM to use for many many different types of situations and mechanics that players complain arnt in 5E but actually hare, they are just in the DMG which no one reads.

[@FrozenFinder]

Please do a Passive vs. Active checks! I've had similar issues with players in my campaigns and would love to hear your wisdom on the subject!

[@genghisgalahad8465]

NOBODY reads the PHB! This is true! Especially since it does not have a detailed table of contents and a more precise index. Tried reading it as a chapter book and it’s nigh undoable. Hot take.

[@nikdual]

Oh yeah. Looking for some niche rules can be really annoying, because you’ll likely end up with three places to look and the one you’re looking for is likely on the second page of one of sections,

[@Lurklen]

Dude, I've yet to find a RPG book that's actually well laid out. Some adventures are good, but most source books and rule books and the like are all over the shop.

[@pillarsofadventure]

Oh man, the number of times I've had to explain how Thunderwave works to both players AND DMs because nobody reads the PHB to learn how cubes work GRRRR

[@evilbeardedman]

It's a room temperature take. I believe you'll struggle to find anyone who disagrees.

[@syd4890]

Yeah I dont get how the plus/minus five always get overlooked. The rules section isn't even that big ffs

[@SetzerGabbiani]

A video on passive checks is probably a solid idea. From experience with various players or game discussions on reddit, a good portion of the D&D community under utilizes passive skills.

[@spellister]

I've done a few small dm one shot-ish things so not much experience here. I'm getting ready for my first full module as DM and I'm down for any and all perspectives and advice and even just general chat. So a video on how to properly use passive anything would be welcome.

[@Lycaon1765]

My 19 passive perception cleric when the DM asks me for a perception check to notice something I'm not actively looking for: 😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡

[@Lycaon1765]

@@spellister !WARNING! Personal opinion you didn't ask for: Passive perception is for your general awareness of your surroundings when you aren't paying active attention. If someone walks up behind you and says hi and you flinch because you didn't notice them walk up behind you, low passive perception. Passive Investigation is basically your mind palace shit. Going all sherlock and trying to piece something together with logic and such. You may have noticed that something was behind the bookcase because you percieved it's shadow or the rotting stench, but your investigation helps you put together why that might be there in the first place, what it might be that's behind it, or what it means in the grand scheme of the dungeon riddle. imo, using passive investigation in the sense that the PC is always actively digging around for clues at all times isn't that sensible. (This is for when you're doing something other than the situation stated in the book of doing an investigation check multiple times so instead using the passive.)

[@videogamingaddict]

Please make a video about passive vs active checks. I've heard many different arguments on it and would love a deep dive.

[@danidas]

Fun fact, Dark vision only turns natural darkness into dim light and not bright light as most assume. As a result relying on it in the dark imposes disadvantage on all perception checks and a minus five to passive perception. Which is on top of not being able to see color at all as everything is in black and white or red if your a fire Genasi. Naturally as a result your very susceptible to traps, ambushes, ninjas, and will have little to no luck finding anything remotely hidden along with being at a massive disadvantage for anything color related. Basically most players and DMs just use dark vision as a crutch to ignore light levels the same way as handing your players a bag of holding ignores carry weight limits. It just makes things easier, combined with the terrible way dark vision is worded and how spread out the light rules are in the books. Edit - Forgot to mention that the only way with in rules as written to ignore the disadvantage in darkness with dark vision is to use the under rated Skulker feat. As it allows you to ignore the disadvantage from dim light along with making it easier to hide and when hidden protects your position if you miss a ranged weapon attack. Naturally allowing you to really mess with anything that relies on dark vision to see with out a light source.

[@oOPPHOo]

This is often a great way for a DM to set up traps. You know everyone's passive scores, so you know whether or not they need or don't need the equivalent of bright light to spot the trap. You can thus just ignore any with a DC to spot 5 below any player's passive score and let them spot the rest IF they brought a light source and assuming they are not poisoned or exhausted. People often object to passive checks because they feel that makes everything predetermined, but it's not predetermined whether or not the PCs bring a light source or rely solely on darkvision. That's a decision the PCs have to make. Do they wanna risk their light revealing their position? Or would they rather risk the traps? That's their call. And as alluded to earlier, they might have encountered difficulties earlier that left them poisoned or with levels of exhaustion.

[@AnaseSkyrider]

Of note also: RAW, two creatures fighting in total darkness end up making normal attack rolls instead of both having disadvantage. The reason why is that when you attack a creature you can't see, you have disadvantage; and when attack a creature that can't see you, you have advantage. They cancel out, and now two completely blind fighters experience no difference in the light and in complete darkness.

[@oOPPHOo]

@@AnaseSkyrider I mean, true, and it's something I remind people of a lot, but I'm not sure exactly what it's relevant to when it comes to passive checks. It's relevant to sight, sure, but this discussion has a bigger focus on resolving passive checks in relation to spotting hidden things or people :)

[@AnaseSkyrider]

@@oOPPHOo Attack rolls are a type of ability check :)

[@Lord_zeel]

@@AnaseSkyrider Technically not, Attack rolls are one of the other two kinds of d20 rolls (Ability check, attack roll, saving throw).

[@kaleria608]

On the passive vs active checks and how your active could be lower, sometimes when we're looking for things we look in the wrong area. Like when the thief bumped him, instead of looking down for his coin purse, he locked eyes with the guy instead. His focus was shifted and locked somewhere else, therefore his broad focus reduced.

[@Lord_zeel]

This is true, but it does often seem silly that you can completely flub one of your primary skills. The "reliable talent" feature has the right idea here imo: at some point, you're good enough that you can't outright fail. For someone with a skill like that, the only "failure" condition should come from very high difficulty checks, or contests against someone even more impressive.

[@johnh9661]

I like the follow up. It sheds a new light on the usefulness of the Sentinel Shield and increase to passive checks. Kind of interesting once the explanation hit

[@Cynndora]

Part of the reason why taking the Lycanthrope bite is a great idea, keen senses. Well so long as you maintain control of your character, that's certainly a worry. Edit: Also worth noting, officially you cannot roll lower than your passive, just because you make an active check doesn't mean your passive is suddenly disabled, its always on while your conscious.

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@mcckastle Well, at my table there is a difference between checks made as actions in combat (no minimum) and checks made out of combat when a character can take as much time as they want (passive becomes minimum). In the second circumstance I don't allow rerolls.

[@benpuffer7891]

In the pick pocket situation you described, Jeremy Crawford has said that your passive perception should be used as your baseline/minimum. Crawford basically said if you roll below your passive, just use your passive.

[@slothmoth2389]

This seems like a major ruling that should be in print in a book... because I've never been at a table that used a rule like that and it would create vastly different outcomes than the games I've played in. That's not to say it's a bad idea, I think it could potentially eliminate a bunch of really dumb stuff that happens. A written rule about this would be important tho for knowing when the rule applies and when it does not.

[@Lurklen]

@@slothmoth2389 They probably assumed it was obvious given the other rules. They do that a lot. It's the opposite of Pathfinder's bloat.

[@evilbeardedman]

This doesn't make any sense though. You can never be too good to fail.

[@oOPPHOo]

Says who?

[@Zhellybelly]

Your passive score is not the floor. If it was, the rogue's 11th-level Reliable Talent feature would be useless.

[@Natsirt666]

Definitely interested in a discussion on Passive vs Active Checks.

[@konradianknight]

I'd be keen to see the follow up video on passive checks. I've thought about using them in the past, so more ideas would be good.

[@HSuper_Lee]

"Apparently no one reads the PHB" If there's one thing I've learned by being an obsessive rules geek who has read a number of D&D books cover to cover despite having only played the game 5 years, it's that no one reads any books excepts for the character creation sections and occasionally the spells. The rest they just assume their DM will know and inform them of when relevant. I still tell my friends about sections in the DMG that aren't the magic items and watch their minds get blown. That said, yes, I would appreciate a video on passive and active checks, as while I'm aware of the rules, I'm not sure the best way to implement them into my games, as much as I would like to do so.

[@Tobias-von-Swe]

Sentinel shield. Thank you for existing.

[@thebridgeninja]

Ted with cool tid bits of dnd info. Let's call them "Ted Bits"

[@NerdImmersion]

Thanks for coming to my Ted talk

[@gabebaum6527]

I personally tend to use passive checks as a baseline, such as passive perception to determine how much to describe of an area, on top of as a DC for things such as trying to lie (insight) or hide from the party. In the example with the cleric and the pickpocket, I'd say if the pickpocket failed their Sleight of Hand against the passive, they'd know that hey, they just had their pocket picked. I'd then use active perception to see where the thief stores the stolen wallet or to try to track them as they move through the crowd. And as for the general argument of "How can I do worse than my passive" (again using perception as an example), how many times in life have we all been moving through our homes and regularly seeing one particular item, only to somehow be unable to find it when actively looking for it?

[@MrReset94]

I'd add that many external elements can influence your senses at a given moment, therefore making you not perceive what you would normally do. Going with the afore mentioned Cleric, maybe he was distracted by a suspicious looking man walking in the street, or he was following with his eyes a colorful butterfly that was passing by...

[@davidmc8478]

I think passive perception makes a good DC to roll against. I think a pickpocket attempt would be an active roll, we don’t want to throw out contested roll and passive should be for a repeated activity not a one off event. I think. God, every time I read or hear about passive perception I get a bit confused!!!

[@danielcruz4960]

I think is actually quite posible to be better at perssiving things passively, for example you can be awere of a group of dancers in a show, but if you try to see all the movements that they do you lose sight of the enviroment. To make it simple you can just be trying to see the wrong thing, that's what magicians make you do in real live

[@austinkirk3472]

I've always thought of passive checks as being 5e's take on 3.5e's "taking 10" feature. They both essentially work the same way in that you take an average value instead of rolling for mundane or often completed tasks.

[@abcrasshadow9341]

But taking 10 or 20 is still a feature in 5e?

[@ormmannen]

@@abcrasshadow9341 Did a fast scan of the PHB and the DMG and did not find anything about taking 10 or 20. I may have missed it but i have never used it in 5e

[@HuseyinCinar]

@@abcrasshadow9341 not in 5e

[@elbruces]

The thing with passive checks is that the DM can check against them without your knowledge instead of asking you to roll something and then saying "never mind" when you fail. Thus alerting al the players that there's something there they might find.

[@wverms]

Oh, yeah. It's why Pallid Elf Observant Inquisitive Rogue can be so fun.

[@CavvieKat]

Oh my gosh, someone else finally brought this up. My character was gifted a Sentinel Shield fairly early on in my first campaign, and I had to point out to my DM that it would grant me that +5 passive bonus too. (I was a newbie at the time and had been reading the PHB recently. Was surprised no one else in the group knew about this rule.)

[@TheDragonshunter]

Well of course I don't read the PHB that's why I'm subscribed z_z

[@solarisdevorak]

I try to utilize passive checks way more often than actual rolling if it's not a dire situation. I think too many people are too quick to roll dice. Yes it's fun but a lot of the times highly unnecessary. If there's no chance of failure or a very marginal chance of failure don't use dice just use a passive check or just let them succeed. This is just my personal opinion but I think passive checks are highly underutilized.

[@jeremylee4790]

If this was mentioned I apologize. I don't think having advantage to a skill gives you a passive to skills automatically. The sentinel shield says it gives you advantage to perception checks. If it had said gives advantage to hearing then it wouldn't give you a flat 5 to your base passive perception since it's conditional. Same goes for stealth. If you have an ability that gives advantage to stealth then you would get a 5 bonus to your passive stealth. I also think they said somewhere that your can't roll lower than your passive but I might be remembering that wrong.

[@abcrasshadow9341]

A lot of people are talking about passive checks becoming the minimum and I would just like to remind people that that is a rogue feature called reliable talent so no in RAW you cannot just use passive as minimum.

[@Deathmvp1]

passive could be better becouse on the active you looked at the wrong spot. in you cleric he may have checked his necklace instead of wallet

[@HSuper_Lee]

This is why misdirection and sleight of hands is a thing. If someone can distract you and get you looking elsewhere, they can then get away with something else that you should have seen coming.

[@Lord_zeel]

I generally use passive checks as the DC for "active" checks taken against another creature if I don't want to do a contest. This is typical for perception vs. stealth - if the PCs are sneaking up on the goblin camp, they roll stealth with a DC set to the passive perception of the goblin on watch. But if the players enter a room with a hiding monster, the DC for their perception roll to notice it is the creature's passive stealth. Another example, a pickpocket might roll sleight of hand against a DC of the PCs passive perception. One thing that always bothered me about the way perception in particular is handled, is that guards are always laughably easy to sneak around. A typical guard won't have a crazy high Wisdom, and even if they are proficient in perception a low CR npc like that won't have a big bonus. But this rule gives a nice way to make things harder: the guard, because watching is the entire job they do, and they are placed in a position with an optimal view of whatever they are guarding... should get advantage on their perception. So they get a nice fat +5, which for even an average guard could pump the DC up to something the party could fail.

[@brandongalvan6603]

Join a campaign starting at Level 1. Ask your DM if you can have a single uncommon magic item instead of getting any gear. Choose the Eyes of the Eagle and play as a Variant Human Rogue with Observant and Expertise in Perception for a Passive Perception of 27 right off the bat. Level 2: go into Twilight Domain Cleric for 300 feet of darkvision - maybe start looking for a Sentinel Shield so that you regain an attunement slot. Troll.

[@LittleFugueFlute]

It bothers me that people don't know this, but honestly I think it's a failing of the way 5e is presented. They tried to go so hard on the simplification and making everything approachable and in naturalized language that there are a lot of things tucked away where you're not expecting to find rules. With highly technical rulesets, it's easy to find the thing you don't know because you run into jargon you don't recognize. For 5e, they want you to be able to make up your own rulings so badly they don't promote the official rules enough.

[@TheClericCorner]

Used this feature to get a character to 38 passive perception. It was unreal

[@matthewormond7356]

Question for discussion, how does this affect the usefulness of a rogues reliable talent feature? If we treat 10 as a floor for certain skills are we taking that away from the rogue?

[@brettmajeske3525]

Not at all. Passive checks is mathematically the average of (20 + 1) divided by two rounded down. 20 + 10 divided by two is fifteen, which is how I rule passive reliable talent.

[@patricks2645]

I feel like passive check scores should follow spell save DC's. 8 + ability mod + proficiency bonus (if proficient). Slightly worse than average when not actively trying to do something. I feel like when you roll lower than 8, there could be other reasons that distract a character from a check in some way, flavor is free.

[@Mattluke23]

I’d say even lower that base number to 5. Rolling dice is fun!

[@demonzero677]

so here's my DM's thought process on passive perception and perception checks. So her uses passive perception as a floor for the most part. this changed on tense or stressful situations, namely combat. if your character is just walking through town, or walking through the woods, the lowest you can roll is your passive perception. But say you're in a trap room that's flooding. Well now your passive isn't going to be used, as your character is likely stressed from the situation or tense, or what have you, and their attention is likely being drawn elsewhere (in the given case the rising water) and so whatever you roll is what you get. the most common situation that would be stressful or tense is combat. My DM DOES NOT use passive perceptions in combat, or at least if he does, he's definitely not using them at full effectiveness. That said, this also applies to monsters and NPCs in combat. if you're trying to duck into cover and hide to sneak away from something, it's your stealth roll VS their perception roll, meaning they can absolutely roll like shit. and generally it makes perfect sense. if you're in the middle of a fight, you're attention is focused on the things trying to kill you, not the things sneaking around in the outskirts of the fight.

[@WelvereinYT]

I litteraly use the same process: outside combat/stressful situation: PP is your minimum.

[@Mattocon757]

Genuinely helpful video. I think my own way of mitigating the difference between an OP passive score and a potentially worse active roll is by hiding certain things behind the active requirement. Passive insight will only let you know so much about a person. Passive intimidation may tell most people you are a scary looking person, but they aren't going to come and give you quest important info just because of your muscles, until you tower over them yourself, actively intimidating them. Passive, no matter how high the score, should have a ceiling. Active should have a much much much higher ceiling for good results.

[@theodoubleto]

Ted coming out here with slaps about who reads the PHB. This video may make me pump the breaks on FToD and make my second complete read of the PHB and DMG… it’s been a while.

[@OrbitalBliss]

It's not a "Skill Check vs a Passive Check" either. Skill Check is ALSO not a 5e term. It is a Wisdom(Perception) Ability Check. You will not find the term Skill Check anywhere in the books, anywhere. It's a colloquialism.

[@ChristopherLaHaise]

Yep. Sister also had a servant of the Raven Queen, and her passive perception and investigation were just incredible. At Level 1. Which pissed off one player, because he couldn't steal treasure from the party - she'd notice. At Level 6: Passive Investigation (19), Passive Perception (21 / 25)

[@Mattluke23]

Passive skills are important and necessary, but having a character’s passive score equal the average roll of an active check makes very little sense, mostly for the reason Ted cites in this video. My solution as a DM is the following houserule: your passive score equals 5 + your skill modifier (as opposed to 10), and your active checks can never be a result that’s lower than your passive score. For example, if your passive Perception would be 14 RAW, it would instead be 9 using this rule, BUT, even if you roll a natural 1 when making a Perception check, your result is always a 9 or higher. It’s too easy for players to get 18+ passive Perception scores in 5e, and rarely is the DC 20 or higher. I played with a party that basically moonwalked our way through Tomb of Horrors because the rogue had a passive Perception of 21. Using my houserule, extremely high passives are still possible but require significant investment and sacrifice to attain. Sorry, Ted, I know this video wasn’t meant to address this issue

[@wesleyjudson599]

Its also worth noting that Jeremy Crawford has a made a call on what happens when you roll lower than your passive skill score. "If a DM decides (a) to use a passive check and (b) it's always active, it can function as a skill check minimum. Entirely up to the DM." In other words, passive checks don't always apply to every roll you make. But if they do, then they act as a minimum roll. Which interacts weirdly with Reliable Talent, since they basically also act as a minimum for certain Rogue skills. As such, I often allow disadvantage and advantage to stack when it comes to a passive skill score: 2 sources of advantage: +10 to passive. 1 source of advantage and 4 sources of disadvantage: -15 to passive. It encourages players to make active rolls when they are in a risky location(only flat disadvantage, rather than -15), or it encourages them to purposefully remove the sources of these penalties when trying to rely on their passive skill scores.

[@displeasedsociopath5939]

It's been my experience that most players DON'T read the players handbook.

[@Cheeseit99]

Passive checks should be 5 + modifier, while they should add average checks that are 10 + modifier that when you're doing monotonous tasks.

[@TookyG]

Passive checks and passive aggressive behavior. "Nobody apparently reads the players handbook." Nice.

[@MegaCombatGamers]

I wonder why WoTC chose +5 for advantage on passive checks, since when you brute force find the average roll done with advantage, you'll find it to be about 13.7, as opposed to ~15.

[@Grygus_Triss]

In my opinion, Passive checks are explained poorly in the rules, and seldom used in game, and seldom correctly. It’s a mechanic which, in many games, is dependent on the DM. Some DMs just prefer players to roll for everything, they see it as more involvement and more fun… and gives people a chance of failing…. My take is that passive perception is how observant you are about the world around you. Every item in that world… in theory, has a passive perception check for you to notice it. Most things are obvious. The road, the people, the shops, that signpost, that chair, they’re probably PPDC 5 or less. Things like a secret door will be higher, 15 or higher. If the DM is aware of your passive perception, they should be telling you what your character notices. Of course, it too much for the DM to just tell everything at once, so they will probably not mention specifics until you ask, that’s when they have a choice to give you a more detailed description based on your passive… or just get you to roll. Ideally, they should give you what information your passive would yield, but give you more if you roll higher than your passive. There are also cases where the DC for a roll may be less than the passive. Because you are more likely to find something if you are actively looking. That secret door may require a DC 25 passive to see, but just a DC 20 roll if you are specifically looking for hidden doors. Small cracks in the wall may be hard to notice if you are walking by, but easier to notice if you are looking carefully, this reflects that. Then, when it comes to noticing thing like hidden enemies… that’s when THEY should be rolling their stealth to beat YOUR passive perception. Not you rolling unless you specify you’re looking for enemies.

[@Jeromy1986]

My dumb ass would have just thought you'd pulled "Taking 10" from 3.5e.

[@emessar]

The problem I have with passive checks is that you're basically deciding whether or not they're going to find a secret door or trap when you make an environment. If I write down DC 20 on a secret door, and no one in the party has a passive score of 20 or higher, it might as well be a wall ... no one is going to find it. If I write down DC 15 and three people have a 15 or higher, they're always going to find it without fail and the "secretness" of the door is just flavor text at that point. Of course, calling for a check has it's own problems. You're basically signalling to the players "Hey there's something to find here!", which can be frustrating if no one finds it. That discontinuity between player and character perception degrades immersion. Secret DM checks aren't necessarily a bad way to go, but with a large group that could lead to a lot of checks and math. Also, with a large group someone will probably luck out and get a high roll, so I don't know that it scales well. Also, some might feel like you're removing agency by making checks for them. The idea that I've come up with that I think I'm going to try going forward is variable DC's vs static perception (or other static scores). So instead of having a door with a DC of 15, it might have a bonus of +5 on a d20 roll. Make one check for when the party passes it initially and that is the DC for the whole group. Mathematically, it's similar to a hidden check, but you're putting it on the DC side. It has the benefit of being a single roll for each, which streamlines play. And you can argue that since it's not a player skill check, you're not removing agency. In addition, you can modify the roll based on the conditions. If the players are just moving through quickly and not really searching, the door could have advantage on its roll. If they are moving slowly and examining their environment, it could be a normal check. If they really have a reason to check an area ... like they were told that there is a secret door in a certain room, or tracks led to a "dead end" hallway, the door might have disadvantage. Also, if the characters take a short or long rest, I think the DC of the doors should reset (though found doors remain found) ... it's not that the door has changed, but representing that the characters are coming to it with fresh eyes.

[@Lurklen]

I use the passive on perception as the baseline, but if you only get something from your passive, and it's hidden or otherwise difficult to notice passively (but not impossible) I'll just let you know you notice "something" but not give it to you without further examination. I do this to simulate that sense of looking at something and knowing there's something off about it, or feeling like you saw something, but not knowing what. That advantage/disadvantage granting different passives has gotten a lot of push back when I bring it up, but it seems pretty clear by the rules. Some passive skills make less sense than others, but really it just means your baseline, without luck being in the balance. I've found people do this anyways, but usually use ability scores. So if there's a person with high dex, and they need to balance or whatever, often DM's will just say, "You do it." without even taking the skills into account. Same thing with athletics and pushing lifting, a lot of times the task is assumed to be easy enough (like a passive athletics) even without checking if that matches the push/drag/lift rules. Passive knowledge checks seem weird. It kind of feels like something that should always be used, or never.

[@acehole131]

I had a Rogue Cleric. Expertise is Perception, with max wisdom and sentinel sheild. At lvl 11 I had a passive of 28

[@GURGLEGUY12345]

Passive checks are kind of odd to me. It's weird how you have a not-insignificant chance of getting a worse result when actually trying to succeed at something versus just doing it by accident. Like, sure, could argue you "tried too hard" or something, but still.

[@Negeta]

I don’t use passive checks too often. I really only use passive Perception and Investigation, and that’s when players are doing the task for a long period of time or haven’t told me they want to “look around.” My thought is no one can actively search for hours when there’s nothing to see, such as being on watch on a quiet night. You eventually get bored, and just default to your passive score. I’ll use active scores when people want to do things like peek around a corner or search a room. Passive scores are handy, but I like to let my players roll dice. Players love rolling dice. I will often still prompt players with high passive Perception checks about things they weren’t looking for, though.

[@dagello]

Passive perception can be used in times of low stress, and takes place over the course of 10+ minutes. Active checks are you trying to do something directly in that moment, ie 6 second turn.

[@davidgolfspro]

For my games for a situation similar to the pick pocketing ill have a group roll, framed as "in the moment". For example, the party is investigating a room for an object of interest, I ask for a group investigation roll, at which the +4 int wizard fails the active check, but their passive is higher/makes the dc. Ill read the results to the players and after do a double back to the wizard saying something along the lines of "after a moment of searching around you think back to the bookshelf and notice the oddity, it seems you didn't see it in the moment".[conveying for that active roll they didn't notice, but when returning to the passive they see it] In the end I have the group make the group check regardless of if a single person would have passed passively, cause the who party would have engaged in an active roll, and to not spoil the moment ill do the active first and then check passive after and proceed accordingly.

[@Logan-zx3zq]

One way I use passive scores is for general knowledge. For example, I have a Druid player who has a passive religion of 11. That tells me how well he understands the religious dogma of his faith, versus what actually exists.

[@trixus4768]

Lol, Pallid elves for the win 😂 Edit: also, good video, thanks for explaining 👌

[@Zertryx]

I use Passive checks as a DC sometimes for things going against a PC unless the PC specifically wants to do something. Like Insight when a character bluffs vs a PC i tend to use the passive insight as a DC for them to beat. this also works the other way too. Also the whole "passive better than the roll" the best example of this actually happening IRL is when you lose your keys. Sometimes when we are actively looking for something we actually hinder ourselves because we are so focused on a particular spot rather than just a general area. then when you sit down and give up and just kinda relax and your see out of the corner of your eye its been on the table the whole time. This is where the Active looking was actually worse than the passive looking.

[@kiilgore806]

fun interaction about passive perception and investigation. you can get it so that if you use the passive perception and investigation as floors, you never roll for those stats unless using the nat20 auto-success rule. Observant increases those passives by 5. Because it doesn't say it's advantage, this can stack with the 5 from advantage. So if you have observant and advantage, your passive is 20+ modifier.

[@alexbalthazor839]

I’m in a game where the other players didn’t trust the DM. In the first dungeon they would move one square and ask to perceive the hallway again. None of us knew about passive perception until after this. The DM was annoyed so they ruled that the next roll was the permanent roll for the dungeon. After all of this we implemented passives and I obtained an owlbear cub familiar that would help me and give my character a high passive.

[@stormbreaker3027]

Im gonna be this guy, but after watching this channels an many others an I noticed so many ppl watch these videos. However it seem very very few actually hit the like/dislike button, and my point is it take not even a second to smash it or dislike it to show some love/needs improvements. So hope this reaches a few of you all and have a wonderful day 👍. Also @nerdemersion good video an keep up the good work 👌

[@karenorgan6203]

Low light (darkvision in darkness) and disadvantage and perception checks are always interesting to remember

[@frankieramos1748]

"how am I better at passively seeing him take something than actively searching" This is a man who's never spent 30 mins trying to find an object only to give up sit down to do something else and then immediately find said object. Specifically for perception there are just moments when you can glance over something when you're trying to find it but without pressure or expectations it comes easier so I run passive vs active checks exactly like that if it turns out the cleric with a +16 in perception rolls a 2 to search for a creature with a stealth score of 20 he won't find it however if the same creature was just walking past the cleric he would for sure be spotted

[@greenhawk3796]

Ive had this convo with a friend/dm multiple times and he still doesnt think passive investigation or anything but perception is a thing. Also, Rune Knights just be walking around with a +5 to a ton of passives lol

[@32Loveless50]

interesting. so my Loxodon have a really high passive perception when smelling :) he always know what direction the closest bakery is :D

[@AndyReichert0]

i know this would be a house rule, but i agree that it is logical that the lowest you could possibly roll on perception would be your passive perception. the least perceptive you can be when perceiving is when you're only perceiving things you're not trying to perceive. i'm glad that's how my DM rules it. If you roll perception lower than passive, you can just use your passive.

[@joshuahendershot196]

I knew about this rule because our parties Cleric has a Sentinel Shield and I know he's mentioned a few times that having advantage on perception gives a +5 to passive perception, so I did know about this rule, though I am also one of the people that hasn't read the PHB at least not in full.

[@quietmastermind2680]

I always found passive perception too OP, e.g. i have 22 PP, i can see everything.

[@Eladdan]

I've always looked at failing rolled checks past passive values as you getting in your own way. Like you're trying to listen but you're instead making more nose than if you were just standing there, or in rooting through the room you're tossing things around inadvertently covering over what you were looking for to begin with.

[@LucasMONeill]

5:18 The answer to that question for me is something distracted your attention. In the pickpocket example, he might have not "actively" noticed because a commotion on the other side of the market distracted him from the pickpocket, for instance. The dice rolls allow for that interpretation.

[@krelraz5486]

So in your specific "pickpocketing the cleric" example, that should have been handled by a passive check. To my knowledge, he wasn't specifically on the lookout for thieves or that particular pickpocket. Active checks should definitely be able to be lower than passive. I've seen several people set their coffee/glasses/phone down to go find said item. I've been searching for something, then my lady asks what I'm searching for and points to it in an obvious place. This type of situation is why the phrase "if it was a snake it would have bit me" exists. A failed active check doesn't mean you all of a sudden see/sense things poorly. It just means that you are looking in the wrong place or the wrong way. As a hypothetical: You are searching the bookshelf of a library for a hidden room (active check). Your character fails their roll. That can easily be described as them pulling out all the books looking for the hidden switch but the actual switch was a slightly discolored stone hidden underneath the carpet.

[@Lycaon1765]

I look in the fridge for the ketchup and look all over the place and can't find it, mom just goes to the fridge shelf and manifests it out of the ether and I somehow fucking missed it.

[@Kylarfi]

As a dm I use passive ability checks alot I think without my players even noticing.

[@colemcmullen3904]

I like the idea of using passive perception as a skill floor for perception checks. If you have to roll there's no guarantee that you'll get a better result, but you won't suck because of a random bad roll.

[@2Odegrees]

Rolling 8 on an active check (2+6) can be like the guard doing worse than their passive of 16 because they actively scanned the bushes on the opposite side of the statue to where the rogue was hiding

[@gamemasterbob9]

And the rules on passive checks and when to use them are really vague. Even Jeremy Crawford when asked if passive can be used as a floor for checks just kinda says sure if you want

[@palexanderrice]

This is also why the observant feat is great. Having passive for rogues significantly increases their abilities, also rangers.

[@Jayvee4635]

If your character is being nosy, you use passive investigation check.

[@gamemasterbob9]

I love dnd beyond but I think a lot of rules like this get overlooked by people who never had to flip through the books. Most of my friends only look up specific things when needed

[@TheDragonOfWhi]

Sage advice has stated, an active check can't go lower than a passive check, in terms of perception.

[@Shivermist110]

This is one of the reason's why I am loving my Pallid Elf Unity Cleric. It's akin to perpetually having zone of truth up, almost no one can lie to him without his knowledge. Level 8 with 23 passive insight.

[@ObliviousNaga]

Can you cover moving through enemies please?

[@ExoticCatLitter]

Would it be overpowered to allow people to never roll below their passive check?

[@matthewbarker4109]

I'd love for you to do a how to play rules series. Love the content best dnd channel on youtube

[@agentsmith9641]

Same thing for how many times do i use thieves tools to get past a trap if a i fail first time,thats another one people get confused at.

[@devin5201]

No one reads the core rules, only the character creation resources, and even then only a small part of that.

[@ShugoAWay]

Sentinel shield Ted it's just a sentinel shield u were thinking of

[@Ryanubet35]

Why read the PHB when i can have Ted read and explain it for me 😀

[@charlesalbrecht6201]

Very much appreciated this video!

[@Kineteken]

Yeah I had to advised a DM about this last week and show this to them?

[@TheOnceandFutureJake]

Yes, please, to more rules discussions and ideas!

[@MrB_Chamberlain]

I don't get why people struggle with this. Take the wallet scenario. The player should never have rolled because he wasn't trying to DO something. That is what passive skills are for. If someone is trying to sneak pass a sleeping guard... the guard doesn't make a check, you set a DC (That emulates his passive perception) the the player is rolling an active check. To spot a trap... has a DC that emulates passive Dex, same thing.

[@NerdImmersion]

In everyone's defense, this was in 2014 and 5th edition had only been out for about a month, so no one was super familiar

[@wilhohanzo]

Yes, I want a discussion about this topic.

[@TyanFH]

Very good. A little known rule.

[@brettonalwood4173]

I am constantly using passive checks! For everything including, insight, deception, animal handling, performance, stealth, etc. It just helps to speed up my games so much.

[@mcullennz]

How do you use passive investigation? That one has always seemed weird to me. My Palid Elf Inquisitive Rogue has a 20 passive investigation (+3 int, expertise and advantage) at level 3.

[@travisterry2200]

I'm a fan of passive stealth

[@frostdragonking5336]

i don't think that was mentioned but what if you have an extra d4 from other sources such as the dragonmark races or having guidance.

[@NerdImmersion]

It seems to not apply to happen to passive checks

[@Cendream]

I think the shield you refer to is the Sentinel Shield, I could be wrong.

[@NerdImmersion]

nope you're right, I eventually got around to it by the end of the video

[@pockets8548]

do cover next

[@Mytho_Logical_100]

Hey lets go! One of the 2 people to ask. Seriously don't know how I missed this one, a real spot on my DM record, foreshame. Thanks for the video tho, and let's get that 100k subs!

[@rallozarx4215]

I knew about advantage being a +5 to passive checks, but every DM I played with told me it was an optional rule and I never bothered to confirm it. This is great to know!

[@Mando0Melkor]

This is something like an invisible character can determine if someone notice where he is by beating his passive stealth check. That is why boots of elven kind is amazing, non atunement and passive stealth on beeing silent goes up by 5.

[@adriel8498]

Really nices video I love your content, it makes a lot of things clear, but I have a question now... how a passive check interact with class feats like Silver Tongue from Eloquence bards or Reliable Talent from Rogues that doesn´t let you roll less than a 10 on the d20?. That kind of feats basically allow you to use your pasive ability score on "active checks" if your roll poorly?

[@brettmajeske3525]

I generally just add +5 for those features when using passives. Mathematically the passive base for Reliable Talent is 15 instead of 10.

[@Vegetafan1997]

Would a mixture of active and passive rolls work perhaps? The passive is essentially the floor, if you roll higher than it you take that number?

[@cameronpearce5943]

Oh wow, so at this point if my Wizard had Advantage on her Arcana checks she would have a passive Arcana of 26. That seems about right for her to be honest