*walks into room.
*random die appears
*"Perception check failed"
Great, now I know there's a trap right there. I am getting the exact same outcome of failing the check that I would have from passing the check.
*in conversation
*npc talking
*"Perception check failed" appears on screen.
*Oh, so this npc just pulled some slight of hand on me. I now know they either pickpocketed or played some kinda trick, even though I'm not supposed to know. In this example I don't get the exact same effect as passing the check, but the main difference between passing and failing is supposed to be noticing vs not noticing that something happened, and I've noticed both ways.
Well it's a perception check, not a passive perception check. There's a key difference between the two whether the game automatically rolls for you or not.
Typically you should be able to follow up with an investigation check or another perception check. It's just odd that true passive perception isn't in the game, when Divinity: Original Sin 2 had wits acting as passive perception should.
It is absolutely passive perception.
They key, defining difference between passive and active isn't the dice roll, it's whether or not you manually request it.
If I didn't wilfully push a button to check for traps as I walked into a room, any detection I pass or fail was passive. If I didn't press a button labeled "I don't trust this npc and want to intentionally watch for them to do something or giveaways" any insight or noticed act was passive. There are dialogue moments that create active checks, and they could very well give fitting classes actions to actively check for traps. If they do give a skill like that to anyone, it will naturally be even more important to hide the passive checks.
It would be better, yes, if the passive check was merely "Is their passive perception stat at X? Yes sees it, no doesn't." but even with a roll it's still a passive check, and should therefor be hidden on failure. It's like the dm rolling for you, behind the barrier, without you even hearing the dice.
And no, you shouldn't be able to follow up with another investigation or perception check. You already failed to notice anything, so you have no reason to think there's anything to notice. Ever been in a DnD group where one person rolls poorly when making an active attempt to check for traps, says there aren't any, then another player who's metagaming by reacting to the poor roll says "I don't trust them this time, so I want to check too."? Nobody likes that player, and they get told to stop metagaming.
