Where did the concept of Passive Insight come from?












8














Recently-ish, Critical Role has introduced a concept that I had never heard of before: passive Insight. Now, it makes sense to me conceptually, as well as being useful for that table and their trigger-happy Insight checks, but I had never heard of it.



Where did this concept originate? Is it from a previous edition, or is it one of Matthew Mercer's homebrew rules?










share|improve this question




















  • 2




    We've even got a question on this from the 4E days: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57628/…
    – Jadasc
    Jan 3 at 21:57
















8














Recently-ish, Critical Role has introduced a concept that I had never heard of before: passive Insight. Now, it makes sense to me conceptually, as well as being useful for that table and their trigger-happy Insight checks, but I had never heard of it.



Where did this concept originate? Is it from a previous edition, or is it one of Matthew Mercer's homebrew rules?










share|improve this question




















  • 2




    We've even got a question on this from the 4E days: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57628/…
    – Jadasc
    Jan 3 at 21:57














8












8








8







Recently-ish, Critical Role has introduced a concept that I had never heard of before: passive Insight. Now, it makes sense to me conceptually, as well as being useful for that table and their trigger-happy Insight checks, but I had never heard of it.



Where did this concept originate? Is it from a previous edition, or is it one of Matthew Mercer's homebrew rules?










share|improve this question















Recently-ish, Critical Role has introduced a concept that I had never heard of before: passive Insight. Now, it makes sense to me conceptually, as well as being useful for that table and their trigger-happy Insight checks, but I had never heard of it.



Where did this concept originate? Is it from a previous edition, or is it one of Matthew Mercer's homebrew rules?







dnd-5e skills podcast






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jan 3 at 22:19









V2Blast

19.8k356121




19.8k356121










asked Jan 3 at 21:03









L.S. Cooper

2,6031021




2,6031021








  • 2




    We've even got a question on this from the 4E days: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57628/…
    – Jadasc
    Jan 3 at 21:57














  • 2




    We've even got a question on this from the 4E days: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57628/…
    – Jadasc
    Jan 3 at 21:57








2




2




We've even got a question on this from the 4E days: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57628/…
– Jadasc
Jan 3 at 21:57




We've even got a question on this from the 4E days: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/57628/…
– Jadasc
Jan 3 at 21:57










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















21














The Player's Handbook has a section for "Passive Checks" for all ability scores



These rules are found on page 175, entitled "Passive Checks":




Passive Checks



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.



Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:



10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check



If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.



For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.



The rules on hiding in the "Dexterity" section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules in chapter 8.




In the player's handbook itself, the only explicit use of passive checks is on Perception checks, to handle whether characters who are not actively searching for something will notice a hidden object or creature. But in theory, this can be applied to any check.



So in this context, a passive Insight check allows a creature who is very bad at being deceptive (in general or in this specific circumstance) to immediately be called out by the DM. This can simplify play in more mundane settings, and while still allowing players to take actions if they have prior reasons to suspect the behavior of the character they are interacting with.






share|improve this answer

















  • 7




    This is a generally sound answer, but the last paragraph is too prescriptive. A passive Insight check won't just detect a creature that is very bad at being deceptive: if it's high enough, it can detect a creature that is actually quite good at being deceptive. How do mundane settings come into it? Also, you refer to a creature at the start of the paragraph, but end by referring to a character; it would be easier to understand if you used one term consistently. Finally, a minor niggle: Insight detects not a creature, but its deception.
    – Clearly Toughpick
    2 days ago





















10














There are general rules for "passive checks" in 5e's skills chapter (Player's Handbook p.175), which "passive insight" is really just a specific implementation of. That didn't start with 5e, though. In 4th Edition, they had a general 'passive skills' concept ("Checks without rolls") that was along the lines of "you're always taking 10 with some skills". Insight was one of those. But the idea may predate even that, since there's long been an issue of knowing that you rolled a 2 on your perception or insight (or equivalent skills by other names) rolls and being aware that the information you got isn't trustworthy.



I wouldn't really call this Mercer's homebrew, both because it's kind of in the book, and because it's hardly Mercer's in specific, as (based on googling) there were discussions of Passive Insight in 5e going back as far as when the game was still being called "DnD NEXT".






share|improve this answer























  • Interesting, thanks! I figured it had to be from somewhere, but I wanted to get to the root of it before trying to adapt it for my party.
    – L.S. Cooper
    Jan 3 at 21:25










  • I used passive take-10 approach on passive perception skills back in 3.5 (spot/listen, etc) and i found it was a good way for characters that weren't actively looking or listening for something. Would they hear it anyways? it's a great mechanic and I'm glad it's gotten more visibility now ^_^
    – Thomas Mundane
    Jan 3 at 21:40





















1














You could say that passive skills are descended from the concept of "taking 10 or 20" in Third Edition. It's not entirely a clean match for either one, though.



The basic idea behind "taking 10" was that if you weren't in danger or being distracted, you could act more slowly and carefully. In situations like these, in lieu of rolling the die you could simply accept the same result as if the die had come up 10: it takes longer in game time, but it's more reliable than a die roll would be.



There was also a related concept of "taking 20", which you could use if there was also no time pressure and no penalty for failure. The character just tries over and over again until they get it right, and the result is the same as if the die had come up 20 (but this isn't considered a natural 20, in cases where that matters). This takes much longer in game time, and it can't be used in as many situations as taking 10, but it's as reliable as you can get.



Passive checks and skills don't quite line up with this: there is no equivalent to "taking 20", and the situations in which you can "take 10" are different. But the general idea of taking a reliable but not necessarily optimal result, in lieu of rolling the die, is the same.






share|improve this answer





























    0














    Passive ability checks are explained in chapter 7 of the 5e Player's Handbook. While passive perception is the most commonly used passive check, any ability check can be made passive that the DM desires.






    share|improve this answer





















      Your Answer





      StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
      return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
      StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
      StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
      });
      });
      }, "mathjax-editing");

      StackExchange.ready(function() {
      var channelOptions = {
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "122"
      };
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
      createEditor();
      });
      }
      else {
      createEditor();
      }
      });

      function createEditor() {
      StackExchange.prepareEditor({
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: false,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: null,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader: {
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      },
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      });


      }
      });














      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function () {
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138406%2fwhere-did-the-concept-of-passive-insight-come-from%23new-answer', 'question_page');
      }
      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      21














      The Player's Handbook has a section for "Passive Checks" for all ability scores



      These rules are found on page 175, entitled "Passive Checks":




      Passive Checks



      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.



      Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:



      10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check



      If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.



      For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.



      The rules on hiding in the "Dexterity" section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules in chapter 8.




      In the player's handbook itself, the only explicit use of passive checks is on Perception checks, to handle whether characters who are not actively searching for something will notice a hidden object or creature. But in theory, this can be applied to any check.



      So in this context, a passive Insight check allows a creature who is very bad at being deceptive (in general or in this specific circumstance) to immediately be called out by the DM. This can simplify play in more mundane settings, and while still allowing players to take actions if they have prior reasons to suspect the behavior of the character they are interacting with.






      share|improve this answer

















      • 7




        This is a generally sound answer, but the last paragraph is too prescriptive. A passive Insight check won't just detect a creature that is very bad at being deceptive: if it's high enough, it can detect a creature that is actually quite good at being deceptive. How do mundane settings come into it? Also, you refer to a creature at the start of the paragraph, but end by referring to a character; it would be easier to understand if you used one term consistently. Finally, a minor niggle: Insight detects not a creature, but its deception.
        – Clearly Toughpick
        2 days ago


















      21














      The Player's Handbook has a section for "Passive Checks" for all ability scores



      These rules are found on page 175, entitled "Passive Checks":




      Passive Checks



      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.



      Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:



      10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check



      If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.



      For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.



      The rules on hiding in the "Dexterity" section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules in chapter 8.




      In the player's handbook itself, the only explicit use of passive checks is on Perception checks, to handle whether characters who are not actively searching for something will notice a hidden object or creature. But in theory, this can be applied to any check.



      So in this context, a passive Insight check allows a creature who is very bad at being deceptive (in general or in this specific circumstance) to immediately be called out by the DM. This can simplify play in more mundane settings, and while still allowing players to take actions if they have prior reasons to suspect the behavior of the character they are interacting with.






      share|improve this answer

















      • 7




        This is a generally sound answer, but the last paragraph is too prescriptive. A passive Insight check won't just detect a creature that is very bad at being deceptive: if it's high enough, it can detect a creature that is actually quite good at being deceptive. How do mundane settings come into it? Also, you refer to a creature at the start of the paragraph, but end by referring to a character; it would be easier to understand if you used one term consistently. Finally, a minor niggle: Insight detects not a creature, but its deception.
        – Clearly Toughpick
        2 days ago
















      21












      21








      21






      The Player's Handbook has a section for "Passive Checks" for all ability scores



      These rules are found on page 175, entitled "Passive Checks":




      Passive Checks



      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.



      Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:



      10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check



      If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.



      For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.



      The rules on hiding in the "Dexterity" section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules in chapter 8.




      In the player's handbook itself, the only explicit use of passive checks is on Perception checks, to handle whether characters who are not actively searching for something will notice a hidden object or creature. But in theory, this can be applied to any check.



      So in this context, a passive Insight check allows a creature who is very bad at being deceptive (in general or in this specific circumstance) to immediately be called out by the DM. This can simplify play in more mundane settings, and while still allowing players to take actions if they have prior reasons to suspect the behavior of the character they are interacting with.






      share|improve this answer












      The Player's Handbook has a section for "Passive Checks" for all ability scores



      These rules are found on page 175, entitled "Passive Checks":




      Passive Checks



      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.



      Here's how to determine a character's total for a passive check:



      10 + all modifiers that normally apply to the check



      If the character has advantage on the check, add 5. For disadvantage, subtract 5. The game refers to a passive check total as a score.



      For example, if a 1st-level character has a Wisdom of 15 and proficiency in Perception, he or she has a passive Wisdom (Perception) score of 14.



      The rules on hiding in the "Dexterity" section below rely on passive checks, as do the exploration rules in chapter 8.




      In the player's handbook itself, the only explicit use of passive checks is on Perception checks, to handle whether characters who are not actively searching for something will notice a hidden object or creature. But in theory, this can be applied to any check.



      So in this context, a passive Insight check allows a creature who is very bad at being deceptive (in general or in this specific circumstance) to immediately be called out by the DM. This can simplify play in more mundane settings, and while still allowing players to take actions if they have prior reasons to suspect the behavior of the character they are interacting with.







      share|improve this answer












      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer










      answered Jan 3 at 21:29









      Xirema

      16.2k247100




      16.2k247100








      • 7




        This is a generally sound answer, but the last paragraph is too prescriptive. A passive Insight check won't just detect a creature that is very bad at being deceptive: if it's high enough, it can detect a creature that is actually quite good at being deceptive. How do mundane settings come into it? Also, you refer to a creature at the start of the paragraph, but end by referring to a character; it would be easier to understand if you used one term consistently. Finally, a minor niggle: Insight detects not a creature, but its deception.
        – Clearly Toughpick
        2 days ago
















      • 7




        This is a generally sound answer, but the last paragraph is too prescriptive. A passive Insight check won't just detect a creature that is very bad at being deceptive: if it's high enough, it can detect a creature that is actually quite good at being deceptive. How do mundane settings come into it? Also, you refer to a creature at the start of the paragraph, but end by referring to a character; it would be easier to understand if you used one term consistently. Finally, a minor niggle: Insight detects not a creature, but its deception.
        – Clearly Toughpick
        2 days ago










      7




      7




      This is a generally sound answer, but the last paragraph is too prescriptive. A passive Insight check won't just detect a creature that is very bad at being deceptive: if it's high enough, it can detect a creature that is actually quite good at being deceptive. How do mundane settings come into it? Also, you refer to a creature at the start of the paragraph, but end by referring to a character; it would be easier to understand if you used one term consistently. Finally, a minor niggle: Insight detects not a creature, but its deception.
      – Clearly Toughpick
      2 days ago






      This is a generally sound answer, but the last paragraph is too prescriptive. A passive Insight check won't just detect a creature that is very bad at being deceptive: if it's high enough, it can detect a creature that is actually quite good at being deceptive. How do mundane settings come into it? Also, you refer to a creature at the start of the paragraph, but end by referring to a character; it would be easier to understand if you used one term consistently. Finally, a minor niggle: Insight detects not a creature, but its deception.
      – Clearly Toughpick
      2 days ago















      10














      There are general rules for "passive checks" in 5e's skills chapter (Player's Handbook p.175), which "passive insight" is really just a specific implementation of. That didn't start with 5e, though. In 4th Edition, they had a general 'passive skills' concept ("Checks without rolls") that was along the lines of "you're always taking 10 with some skills". Insight was one of those. But the idea may predate even that, since there's long been an issue of knowing that you rolled a 2 on your perception or insight (or equivalent skills by other names) rolls and being aware that the information you got isn't trustworthy.



      I wouldn't really call this Mercer's homebrew, both because it's kind of in the book, and because it's hardly Mercer's in specific, as (based on googling) there were discussions of Passive Insight in 5e going back as far as when the game was still being called "DnD NEXT".






      share|improve this answer























      • Interesting, thanks! I figured it had to be from somewhere, but I wanted to get to the root of it before trying to adapt it for my party.
        – L.S. Cooper
        Jan 3 at 21:25










      • I used passive take-10 approach on passive perception skills back in 3.5 (spot/listen, etc) and i found it was a good way for characters that weren't actively looking or listening for something. Would they hear it anyways? it's a great mechanic and I'm glad it's gotten more visibility now ^_^
        – Thomas Mundane
        Jan 3 at 21:40


















      10














      There are general rules for "passive checks" in 5e's skills chapter (Player's Handbook p.175), which "passive insight" is really just a specific implementation of. That didn't start with 5e, though. In 4th Edition, they had a general 'passive skills' concept ("Checks without rolls") that was along the lines of "you're always taking 10 with some skills". Insight was one of those. But the idea may predate even that, since there's long been an issue of knowing that you rolled a 2 on your perception or insight (or equivalent skills by other names) rolls and being aware that the information you got isn't trustworthy.



      I wouldn't really call this Mercer's homebrew, both because it's kind of in the book, and because it's hardly Mercer's in specific, as (based on googling) there were discussions of Passive Insight in 5e going back as far as when the game was still being called "DnD NEXT".






      share|improve this answer























      • Interesting, thanks! I figured it had to be from somewhere, but I wanted to get to the root of it before trying to adapt it for my party.
        – L.S. Cooper
        Jan 3 at 21:25










      • I used passive take-10 approach on passive perception skills back in 3.5 (spot/listen, etc) and i found it was a good way for characters that weren't actively looking or listening for something. Would they hear it anyways? it's a great mechanic and I'm glad it's gotten more visibility now ^_^
        – Thomas Mundane
        Jan 3 at 21:40
















      10












      10








      10






      There are general rules for "passive checks" in 5e's skills chapter (Player's Handbook p.175), which "passive insight" is really just a specific implementation of. That didn't start with 5e, though. In 4th Edition, they had a general 'passive skills' concept ("Checks without rolls") that was along the lines of "you're always taking 10 with some skills". Insight was one of those. But the idea may predate even that, since there's long been an issue of knowing that you rolled a 2 on your perception or insight (or equivalent skills by other names) rolls and being aware that the information you got isn't trustworthy.



      I wouldn't really call this Mercer's homebrew, both because it's kind of in the book, and because it's hardly Mercer's in specific, as (based on googling) there were discussions of Passive Insight in 5e going back as far as when the game was still being called "DnD NEXT".






      share|improve this answer














      There are general rules for "passive checks" in 5e's skills chapter (Player's Handbook p.175), which "passive insight" is really just a specific implementation of. That didn't start with 5e, though. In 4th Edition, they had a general 'passive skills' concept ("Checks without rolls") that was along the lines of "you're always taking 10 with some skills". Insight was one of those. But the idea may predate even that, since there's long been an issue of knowing that you rolled a 2 on your perception or insight (or equivalent skills by other names) rolls and being aware that the information you got isn't trustworthy.



      I wouldn't really call this Mercer's homebrew, both because it's kind of in the book, and because it's hardly Mercer's in specific, as (based on googling) there were discussions of Passive Insight in 5e going back as far as when the game was still being called "DnD NEXT".







      share|improve this answer














      share|improve this answer



      share|improve this answer








      edited Jan 3 at 21:32

























      answered Jan 3 at 21:24









      Darth Pseudonym

      12.5k23270




      12.5k23270












      • Interesting, thanks! I figured it had to be from somewhere, but I wanted to get to the root of it before trying to adapt it for my party.
        – L.S. Cooper
        Jan 3 at 21:25










      • I used passive take-10 approach on passive perception skills back in 3.5 (spot/listen, etc) and i found it was a good way for characters that weren't actively looking or listening for something. Would they hear it anyways? it's a great mechanic and I'm glad it's gotten more visibility now ^_^
        – Thomas Mundane
        Jan 3 at 21:40




















      • Interesting, thanks! I figured it had to be from somewhere, but I wanted to get to the root of it before trying to adapt it for my party.
        – L.S. Cooper
        Jan 3 at 21:25










      • I used passive take-10 approach on passive perception skills back in 3.5 (spot/listen, etc) and i found it was a good way for characters that weren't actively looking or listening for something. Would they hear it anyways? it's a great mechanic and I'm glad it's gotten more visibility now ^_^
        – Thomas Mundane
        Jan 3 at 21:40


















      Interesting, thanks! I figured it had to be from somewhere, but I wanted to get to the root of it before trying to adapt it for my party.
      – L.S. Cooper
      Jan 3 at 21:25




      Interesting, thanks! I figured it had to be from somewhere, but I wanted to get to the root of it before trying to adapt it for my party.
      – L.S. Cooper
      Jan 3 at 21:25












      I used passive take-10 approach on passive perception skills back in 3.5 (spot/listen, etc) and i found it was a good way for characters that weren't actively looking or listening for something. Would they hear it anyways? it's a great mechanic and I'm glad it's gotten more visibility now ^_^
      – Thomas Mundane
      Jan 3 at 21:40






      I used passive take-10 approach on passive perception skills back in 3.5 (spot/listen, etc) and i found it was a good way for characters that weren't actively looking or listening for something. Would they hear it anyways? it's a great mechanic and I'm glad it's gotten more visibility now ^_^
      – Thomas Mundane
      Jan 3 at 21:40













      1














      You could say that passive skills are descended from the concept of "taking 10 or 20" in Third Edition. It's not entirely a clean match for either one, though.



      The basic idea behind "taking 10" was that if you weren't in danger or being distracted, you could act more slowly and carefully. In situations like these, in lieu of rolling the die you could simply accept the same result as if the die had come up 10: it takes longer in game time, but it's more reliable than a die roll would be.



      There was also a related concept of "taking 20", which you could use if there was also no time pressure and no penalty for failure. The character just tries over and over again until they get it right, and the result is the same as if the die had come up 20 (but this isn't considered a natural 20, in cases where that matters). This takes much longer in game time, and it can't be used in as many situations as taking 10, but it's as reliable as you can get.



      Passive checks and skills don't quite line up with this: there is no equivalent to "taking 20", and the situations in which you can "take 10" are different. But the general idea of taking a reliable but not necessarily optimal result, in lieu of rolling the die, is the same.






      share|improve this answer


























        1














        You could say that passive skills are descended from the concept of "taking 10 or 20" in Third Edition. It's not entirely a clean match for either one, though.



        The basic idea behind "taking 10" was that if you weren't in danger or being distracted, you could act more slowly and carefully. In situations like these, in lieu of rolling the die you could simply accept the same result as if the die had come up 10: it takes longer in game time, but it's more reliable than a die roll would be.



        There was also a related concept of "taking 20", which you could use if there was also no time pressure and no penalty for failure. The character just tries over and over again until they get it right, and the result is the same as if the die had come up 20 (but this isn't considered a natural 20, in cases where that matters). This takes much longer in game time, and it can't be used in as many situations as taking 10, but it's as reliable as you can get.



        Passive checks and skills don't quite line up with this: there is no equivalent to "taking 20", and the situations in which you can "take 10" are different. But the general idea of taking a reliable but not necessarily optimal result, in lieu of rolling the die, is the same.






        share|improve this answer
























          1












          1








          1






          You could say that passive skills are descended from the concept of "taking 10 or 20" in Third Edition. It's not entirely a clean match for either one, though.



          The basic idea behind "taking 10" was that if you weren't in danger or being distracted, you could act more slowly and carefully. In situations like these, in lieu of rolling the die you could simply accept the same result as if the die had come up 10: it takes longer in game time, but it's more reliable than a die roll would be.



          There was also a related concept of "taking 20", which you could use if there was also no time pressure and no penalty for failure. The character just tries over and over again until they get it right, and the result is the same as if the die had come up 20 (but this isn't considered a natural 20, in cases where that matters). This takes much longer in game time, and it can't be used in as many situations as taking 10, but it's as reliable as you can get.



          Passive checks and skills don't quite line up with this: there is no equivalent to "taking 20", and the situations in which you can "take 10" are different. But the general idea of taking a reliable but not necessarily optimal result, in lieu of rolling the die, is the same.






          share|improve this answer












          You could say that passive skills are descended from the concept of "taking 10 or 20" in Third Edition. It's not entirely a clean match for either one, though.



          The basic idea behind "taking 10" was that if you weren't in danger or being distracted, you could act more slowly and carefully. In situations like these, in lieu of rolling the die you could simply accept the same result as if the die had come up 10: it takes longer in game time, but it's more reliable than a die roll would be.



          There was also a related concept of "taking 20", which you could use if there was also no time pressure and no penalty for failure. The character just tries over and over again until they get it right, and the result is the same as if the die had come up 20 (but this isn't considered a natural 20, in cases where that matters). This takes much longer in game time, and it can't be used in as many situations as taking 10, but it's as reliable as you can get.



          Passive checks and skills don't quite line up with this: there is no equivalent to "taking 20", and the situations in which you can "take 10" are different. But the general idea of taking a reliable but not necessarily optimal result, in lieu of rolling the die, is the same.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 2 days ago









          The Spooniest

          7,9191228




          7,9191228























              0














              Passive ability checks are explained in chapter 7 of the 5e Player's Handbook. While passive perception is the most commonly used passive check, any ability check can be made passive that the DM desires.






              share|improve this answer


























                0














                Passive ability checks are explained in chapter 7 of the 5e Player's Handbook. While passive perception is the most commonly used passive check, any ability check can be made passive that the DM desires.






                share|improve this answer
























                  0












                  0








                  0






                  Passive ability checks are explained in chapter 7 of the 5e Player's Handbook. While passive perception is the most commonly used passive check, any ability check can be made passive that the DM desires.






                  share|improve this answer












                  Passive ability checks are explained in chapter 7 of the 5e Player's Handbook. While passive perception is the most commonly used passive check, any ability check can be made passive that the DM desires.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered Jan 3 at 21:26









                  Derek Stucki

                  20.8k767108




                  20.8k767108






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded




















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                      Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                      Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid



                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function () {
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138406%2fwhere-did-the-concept-of-passive-insight-come-from%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                      }
                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      If I really need a card on my start hand, how many mulligans make sense? [duplicate]

                      Alcedinidae

                      Can an atomic nucleus contain both particles and antiparticles? [duplicate]