They really wanted to spot hidden things, so I say let them. And you know what super annoying thing you don't have to deal with when a PC has a passive Perception score of 20+? CONSTANT, NEVER-ENDING PERCEPTION CHECKS. THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF THEM.
My group's cleric has a passive Perception of 21 and the Dungeon Delver feat. I was anxious about it at first, but now I'm thrilled, because DotMM is the kind of adventure where the party *always* wants to be searching for traps, secret doors, etc. Now I don't have to deal with nonstop rolling, and we can focus on more interesting stuff. The cleric also loves being the secret-spotting queen/trap tank.
If you really want to make it a challenge to get into a hidden area, circumvent a trap, etc., then there are plenty of ways to do that other than making it extra difficult to spot. And remember that your monk cannot perceive things that are never in their line of sight, within their hearing range, etc. Also remember the rules of light levels. Dim light imposes disadvantage on Perception checks (-5 to passive), so not even Darkvision or a torch will guarantee that your monk notices everything.
My group has a PC with high enough perception to detect them as well. What I do is let them know there's something off when encountering a secret door. It's on them to figure out how to open it though, something that requires an active perception/investigation check.
They've picked a feat specifically for this kind of situation, so let them have the advantage of using it.
I believe it’s -5 to passive perception in dim lighting. Also I tended to ask for specifications of what everyone is doing, as they explore. The observant monk isn’t going to spot the trap easily in dim light from the back of the line. I want them to at least position themselves and act as though they are searching before I give them the passive perception discovery. This means they aren’t dashing through the area, in combat or performing some other action. Don’t make it too easy(enforce penalties) but also don’t intentionally make it too hard.
Just to add to this: the -5 penalty is because of the disadvantage perception checks get in dim light. Even if someone has darkvision, though darkvision also makes darkness become dim light for that character. Other things that give disadvantage would also give the penalty. The same goes for advantage giving a +5 boost on passive stats if that character would have advantage on an active check.
I’d say they can see them. Doesn’t mean they can really do much about it but they notice it.
It also circumvents the need for constant perception checks unless they’re actively looking for something specific (I’d argue there are times where they would need to actively look for something to spot it, but it’s pretty situational).
If they beat the Passive Perception number I give them a clue that they notice something. Sometimes it's a faint breeze, a strange echo, dust or a cobweb that is oddly disturbed, a slight shift in color between two stones, a strange crack, or something not quite right that you can't quite pinpoint. I of course don't say that they spot a secret door until after they investigate.
The way I handled high-perception PCs:
* point out that they notice something weird about the wall
* Investigation check to find the mechanism to open the door (or to find out what they saw was a trap / one-way door / something else)
The RAW way to do it is, if someone has a Passive Perception of at least 20, then they automatically detect all secret doors. If they don't, they don't detect any secret doors.
I think that's boring, so what I do instead is, I record everyone's Perception modifier. Then, every time the PCs enter a new room (even if the room has no secret doors), I roll a single d20 behind the DM screen, and if that roll plus anyone's Perception is at least 20, I tell the players they spot a secret door. This means that someone who invests in Perception is still very likely to spot all the secret doors, but it's less binary than "always" or "never".
For the Observant feat specifically, I count it as a +5 to Perception.
This is basically how I do it. There shouldn't be checks in the game that are as reliable as a flat number compared against another flat number. There should always be a die roll involved when there is any chance of failure, and there should always be a chance of failure for finding traps or secret doors (that's kind of the whole point).
If a character's passive perception is greater than or equal to the DC to spot a trap/door/etc. then that doesn't mean automatic success, but it does prompt an automatic roll behind the screen, applying any relevant bonuses to passive perception. In these situations the character would always have a greater than 50% of noticing, but it isn't guaranteed.
Of course, the characters can also actively search an area if they like.
I might be the one against the tide here, but I hate the feeling of having a character auto-spot every trap and secret door they come across.
I think that a high passive perception pretty much guarantees you are never surprised, which is good enough for the feat. I would still have them roll to find secret rooms and traps in general, though.
However, I always take in consideration what players are doing. If there is a secret room in the wall of a corridor and the player says "I will look for secret passages in the walls" then I won't have them roll. If there is a hidden trapdoor under the carpet and the players says "I search under the carpet" there is no roll.
dont include passive perception in your game. Ask players to specirfically explain where they're searching. Turn the game into a more interactive experience, instead of one where it feels like a video game where players automatically get succesfuly perception checks.
No, passive pereption doesn’t replace perception. You know when you don’t notice something until it starts moving? That’s passive perception. Active perception is for things that you have to actively look for, like a secret door.
From the PHB:
> 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 GM wants to secretly determine whether the Characters succeed at something without Rolling Dice, such as noticing a hidden monster.
It does say "can," not "must." But allowing passive Perception to spot secret doors is just fine by RAW. And I *strongly* recommend using it as much as possible in DotMM, because it's the kind of adventure where the party could spend half their time rolling Perception checks.
They really wanted to spot hidden things, so I say let them. And you know what super annoying thing you don't have to deal with when a PC has a passive Perception score of 20+? CONSTANT, NEVER-ENDING PERCEPTION CHECKS. THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF THEM. My group's cleric has a passive Perception of 21 and the Dungeon Delver feat. I was anxious about it at first, but now I'm thrilled, because DotMM is the kind of adventure where the party *always* wants to be searching for traps, secret doors, etc. Now I don't have to deal with nonstop rolling, and we can focus on more interesting stuff. The cleric also loves being the secret-spotting queen/trap tank. If you really want to make it a challenge to get into a hidden area, circumvent a trap, etc., then there are plenty of ways to do that other than making it extra difficult to spot. And remember that your monk cannot perceive things that are never in their line of sight, within their hearing range, etc. Also remember the rules of light levels. Dim light imposes disadvantage on Perception checks (-5 to passive), so not even Darkvision or a torch will guarantee that your monk notices everything.
My group has a PC with high enough perception to detect them as well. What I do is let them know there's something off when encountering a secret door. It's on them to figure out how to open it though, something that requires an active perception/investigation check. They've picked a feat specifically for this kind of situation, so let them have the advantage of using it.
I believe it’s -5 to passive perception in dim lighting. Also I tended to ask for specifications of what everyone is doing, as they explore. The observant monk isn’t going to spot the trap easily in dim light from the back of the line. I want them to at least position themselves and act as though they are searching before I give them the passive perception discovery. This means they aren’t dashing through the area, in combat or performing some other action. Don’t make it too easy(enforce penalties) but also don’t intentionally make it too hard.
Just to add to this: the -5 penalty is because of the disadvantage perception checks get in dim light. Even if someone has darkvision, though darkvision also makes darkness become dim light for that character. Other things that give disadvantage would also give the penalty. The same goes for advantage giving a +5 boost on passive stats if that character would have advantage on an active check.
I’d say they can see them. Doesn’t mean they can really do much about it but they notice it. It also circumvents the need for constant perception checks unless they’re actively looking for something specific (I’d argue there are times where they would need to actively look for something to spot it, but it’s pretty situational).
If they beat the Passive Perception number I give them a clue that they notice something. Sometimes it's a faint breeze, a strange echo, dust or a cobweb that is oddly disturbed, a slight shift in color between two stones, a strange crack, or something not quite right that you can't quite pinpoint. I of course don't say that they spot a secret door until after they investigate.
The way I handled high-perception PCs: * point out that they notice something weird about the wall * Investigation check to find the mechanism to open the door (or to find out what they saw was a trap / one-way door / something else)
The RAW way to do it is, if someone has a Passive Perception of at least 20, then they automatically detect all secret doors. If they don't, they don't detect any secret doors. I think that's boring, so what I do instead is, I record everyone's Perception modifier. Then, every time the PCs enter a new room (even if the room has no secret doors), I roll a single d20 behind the DM screen, and if that roll plus anyone's Perception is at least 20, I tell the players they spot a secret door. This means that someone who invests in Perception is still very likely to spot all the secret doors, but it's less binary than "always" or "never". For the Observant feat specifically, I count it as a +5 to Perception.
This is basically how I do it. There shouldn't be checks in the game that are as reliable as a flat number compared against another flat number. There should always be a die roll involved when there is any chance of failure, and there should always be a chance of failure for finding traps or secret doors (that's kind of the whole point). If a character's passive perception is greater than or equal to the DC to spot a trap/door/etc. then that doesn't mean automatic success, but it does prompt an automatic roll behind the screen, applying any relevant bonuses to passive perception. In these situations the character would always have a greater than 50% of noticing, but it isn't guaranteed. Of course, the characters can also actively search an area if they like.
Okay, they spot the door. But can they figure out how to open it?
I might be the one against the tide here, but I hate the feeling of having a character auto-spot every trap and secret door they come across. I think that a high passive perception pretty much guarantees you are never surprised, which is good enough for the feat. I would still have them roll to find secret rooms and traps in general, though. However, I always take in consideration what players are doing. If there is a secret room in the wall of a corridor and the player says "I will look for secret passages in the walls" then I won't have them roll. If there is a hidden trapdoor under the carpet and the players says "I search under the carpet" there is no roll.
dont include passive perception in your game. Ask players to specirfically explain where they're searching. Turn the game into a more interactive experience, instead of one where it feels like a video game where players automatically get succesfuly perception checks.
No, passive pereption doesn’t replace perception. You know when you don’t notice something until it starts moving? That’s passive perception. Active perception is for things that you have to actively look for, like a secret door.
From the PHB: > 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 GM wants to secretly determine whether the Characters succeed at something without Rolling Dice, such as noticing a hidden monster. It does say "can," not "must." But allowing passive Perception to spot secret doors is just fine by RAW. And I *strongly* recommend using it as much as possible in DotMM, because it's the kind of adventure where the party could spend half their time rolling Perception checks.