FNF: to passive, or not to passive, a D&D rant

 Hello and thank you for reading yet another one of my blogs part of my Friday Night Fights series, where I rant/discuss/share about fights related to Dungeons and Dragons.  This week I thought I would share my rant and breakdown about passive skills.  

Breakdown:  

I recently got in an argument with my brother, whom is one of my DMs when I'm a player, and he and I got into a very heated discussion about passive perception, which evolved into him thinking "there is no such thing as passive skills" and my counter is "so humanity has no instinctual behavior then?" and he responded "not in D&D they don't.  Passive skill checks are DM's discretion, and I say they don't exist."  This is also one of the many reasons why he won't play at my table / I don't DM for him is because I do use and incorporate passive skill checks.

So allow me to break down my reasoning behind passive abilities/checks from my point of view and how I perceive them translated to D&D.  

A passive check is broke down as followed, courtesy of page 175 of the 5e players handbook:

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.

I look at it as outlined above, but also look at it as part of instinctual behavior associated with fight or flight, and/or just raw natural talent beyond just trained skill.

Why do I see it as Instinctual Behavior?

If you firmly believe that we as humans do not have a "fight or flight response" - which elaborates to fight, flight, or freeze - then i'm sorry to say that you should go back to school a bit.

To keep it in context though, Dungeons and Dragons is a roleplaying game, but not every single character is completely immune to natural fear, natural instinctual behavior.  Monsters damn sure aren't.  This is why they include Passive Perception in the monster's stat block.

Here is how it all ties together.  You ever see one of those crazy TikTok or YouTube vids where the parent snatches the kid right before it hurts itself, and the parent is 90% focused on something else?  THAT IS PASSIVE PERCEPTION, PASSIVE INSIGHT, AND PASSIVE <insert physical skill - athletics, acrobatics, sleight of hands>!!!!!!!!

Take a few moments and think about know split-second reaction type of things you've experienced in your life.  

*  Random thoughts or recollections that you weren't actively thinking about but triggered by someone else's conversations or actions?  

*  Something catching the corner of your eye as your walking along, riding your bike, or driving your car?  Clearly a "hey WTH was that?" kind of moment?

*  Someone or something blocks your way that if you interacted with it you would cause injury, so you instinctually dodge, duck, dip, dive, leap, slide, or otherwise avoid the obstacle.  Think about Mario Kart bananas.  

The biggest point of Instinctual Reactions is it is not a saving throw.  This should not be invoked if you were to react in a damaging way.  

Why do I see it as Raw Natural Talent?

Let's face it, not one of us is a perfect specimen of a Human Being.  We all have our flaws.  Some of us have even grown into a Min/Max situation with our stats and skills.  With all of this variation, it should come to no surprise that most of us just have a raw, unbridled, no-kidding, i could do this with 100% of my attention somewhere else, type of skill.

Another way to look at it from a 3.5e / Pathfinder point of view is something called Synergy Skills.  Because you know about Arcana, you gain a bonus to your History skill.  I prefer to just make associations and call for similar checks at the same time, but with the same DC and allowing passive to apply, even without proficiency.  "Oh your proficient with Arcana, that's cool.  So your Passive History is 15, awesome.  Because your passive is 15, it beat the DC 13 to know the history of the region you are in, as learned from your arcana training"

To bring this type of mentality into the topic of conversation, this is where Passive checks come into play.  It's elaborates on the "task has been done repetitively" concept as mentioned in the page entry above.  

*You've done a thousand pushups, lifted weights for weeks, swung your sword, etc over the course of the last three years.  You are fit and strong and your arms, shoulders, and back can support your body weight and more.  Passively lifting something heavy should come easy enough, like moving furniture around a room or moving barrels out of the way.  (in this particular scenario, there would only be a check if the scenario specifically called for it, and then I would lean on passive check before calling a roll)

*  The mage has studied magic her whole life.  She has read dozens of books on the eight schools of magic.  She can recite every spell up to her casting level by heart.  She knows three different languages other than her own.  Magic has just become as natural to her as breathing and sleeping.  An enemy spellcaster begins casting a spell normally.  Using Arcana skill passively should tell her the basics of the spell being cast and whether or not it is something she has heard of or outside of her skill level.

Take a few moments to think about your life?  What are you good at beyond the shadow of a doubt?  What types of things "just click" even though you've received zero training or experience in the subject matter or skill in question?  With that said, why would you need to make an active roll for it every single time?

Another Way of Thinking...

Another way to look at it from a 3.5e / Pathfinder point of view is something called Synergy Skills.  Because you know about Arcana, you gain a bonus to your History skill.  I prefer to just make associations and call for similar checks at the same time, but with the same DC and allowing passive to apply, even without proficiency.  "Oh your proficient with Arcana, that's cool.  So your Passive History is 15, awesome.  Because your passive is 15, it beat the DC 13 to know the history of the region you are in, as learned from your arcana training"

As a personal example:  i've always been good with vehicle mechanical skills.  I've never been to a mechanical school for cars, trucks, etc.  However, I am trained in computer and electrical skills.  I can synergize my knowledge and take some/most of my engine components apart and put them back together with some proficiency and not having to make a lot of rolls, leaning on passive checks on most of the technical things I already know.

Conclusion:

Raw Talent goes hand in hand with Instincts.  Combine them together, and you get your Passive Skill Checks.  To me, this type of mentality can break down the entire list of skills.  Even more so if you are proficient (meaning you've received some form of training or practice in the skill). 

To argue that "passive skills don't exist" argues against the existence of instinct and raw talent.  However the case is, in the end, it is up to the DM to decide these things and go from there.  

To each their own I suppose, even if I don't like it and have supporting arguments.  That is the joys of Dungeons and Dragons.

Happy Gaming everyone.