Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sharp shooter/Great Weapon Mastery
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FitzTheRuke" data-source="post: 8796922" data-attributes="member: 59816"><p>Yes, these are my feelings as well - I'd rather (as a DM and a player) have the rule be strict, with the DM encouraged to allow for clever (usually player-driven) exceptions, than the rule be player-exploitable, and the DM have to deny players when they go overboard. </p><p></p><p>I like to be a "yes you can" DM.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Right! That clarifies for me why I posted earlier that in the original scenario I would probably have just had both PCs roll strength checks (if I made them roll at all) and let the higher one "do the heavy lifting" (ie get the praise). </p><p></p><p>I think it was suggested that it was "homebrewing" which irked me a bit, but I couldn't articulate why it wasn't. It's because my ruling would be using a Group Check (for a group of two) instead of the Help action. (After all, both participants are working equally).</p><p></p><p>The playtest wording for the Help Action just makes Help more "expert advice" than an "extra pair of hands". The reason it works for Attacking is presumably anyone standing in melee with your opponent is 'expert' enough to pose a threat, and therefore good enough to distract them. (Or to look at it another way, the "chosen skill" is your weapon proficiency.)</p><p></p><p>I've gone back and forth a little in my own head on this while discussing it, but I find that I'm still fine with the playtest version replacing the 2014 version.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FitzTheRuke, post: 8796922, member: 59816"] Yes, these are my feelings as well - I'd rather (as a DM and a player) have the rule be strict, with the DM encouraged to allow for clever (usually player-driven) exceptions, than the rule be player-exploitable, and the DM have to deny players when they go overboard. I like to be a "yes you can" DM. Right! That clarifies for me why I posted earlier that in the original scenario I would probably have just had both PCs roll strength checks (if I made them roll at all) and let the higher one "do the heavy lifting" (ie get the praise). I think it was suggested that it was "homebrewing" which irked me a bit, but I couldn't articulate why it wasn't. It's because my ruling would be using a Group Check (for a group of two) instead of the Help action. (After all, both participants are working equally). The playtest wording for the Help Action just makes Help more "expert advice" than an "extra pair of hands". The reason it works for Attacking is presumably anyone standing in melee with your opponent is 'expert' enough to pose a threat, and therefore good enough to distract them. (Or to look at it another way, the "chosen skill" is your weapon proficiency.) I've gone back and forth a little in my own head on this while discussing it, but I find that I'm still fine with the playtest version replacing the 2014 version. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sharp shooter/Great Weapon Mastery
Top