D&D 5E HELP action automatic? Clarification and thoughts...

[Charlaquin]

I would not play with a "gotcha" gm that told me that i wasted an action and it did nothing without any discussion beforehand. Gms are there to interpret the rules or give rulings. Players aren't there to be psychics to the GMs mind.

Right, which is why I say it would be poor DM etiquette.

 

[CubicsRube]

Right, which is why I say it would be poor DM etiquette.

Just agreeing with you

 

[5ekyu]

Why do i have flashbacks to Blue Collar Comedy...

Blue Collar Gm Tour!

"Your GM might Be a Jerk if..."

 

[happyhermit]

...
I bring this up because of considerations like the following. Ok, I Help him with his sneaking {dex (Stealth) check}. Possible DM response: Yeah how, exactly, do you do that? Ok, I move my invisible familiar here (within 5 feet of the attacked creature) and Help Goosh (the Fighter). Possible DM response: Yeah how, exactly, does your invisible familiar do that?
....

It's funny how differently people see things, I had to re-read this part to realize that you were putting forth those questions from the GM as a sort of shutting down of the actions. To me "So how do you do that?" in whatever form is just a natural part of my favorite RPGs where there is a lot of detailed description of what is happening (usually much more than any mechanical terms) as a player I take it as an invitation from the GM to explain some stuff and possibly get a better idea of how things will work. As a GM I often use questions like that as a way to flesh out the scene, and particularly how certain characters are behaving to make them living things rather than bits of rules. They tend to get directed more often (by myself and other PCs) at players who tend to neglect those sorts of things because it makes the game more fun for the group when we can really imagine the whole scene and not just focus on the mechanics of the game (we have plenty of boardgames for that).

No idea if you really meant those questions in the way I thought, but just found it interesting.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

I am wondering if the Help action, taken as an action in combat, is automatic?

To clarify, if a PC or player controlled entity, like a familiar for example, can take the Help action then there is no DM ruling or consideration required on whether you can in fact "help" in these particular circumstances?

I bring this up because of considerations like the following. Ok, I Help him with his sneaking {dex (Stealth) check}. Possible DM response: Yeah how, exactly, do you do that? Ok, I move my invisible familiar here (within 5 feet of the attacked creature) and Help Goosh (the Fighter). Possible DM response: Yeah how, exactly, does your invisible familiar do that?

The PHB RAW are on p. 192:

Help is in fact presented and detailed in the rules so I would assume that even if it sounds odd or implausible that my expenditure of an action can in some way help, the fact that I can mechanically expend the Help action is enough to grant advantage.

If you could please educate me with your thoughts and experiences of using/adjudicating Help in game so I understand better or more fully I would be grateful. Thanks.

Here's how it would play out in my game:

Player: Ok, I Help him with his sneaking {dex (Stealth) check}.

DM: Yeah how, exactly, do you do that?

Player: Ok, I move my invisible familiar here (within 5 feet of the attacked creature) and Help Goosh (the Fighter).

DM: Ok, your familiar suddenly pops into existence right in front of the creature, screaming "BOO!!!". The creature is taken aback at the sudden appearance of a crow in front of him. Go ahead, Goosh, do your thing with +2.

This does two things: Lets the player get his 'Help' action off, and also teaches the player to be more specific. When I DM, if my players don't give me specific info, when it should be obvious that I'm asking for it, then I get to 'fill in the blanks'.

If a player just says "I open the door", then I make the assumption that the character is opening the door....duh. But if the party thief just heard talking on the other side, and still says "I open the door", without any specifics, I'll assume they are opening the door...normally. If the player wanted his thief to try and open the door slowly and quietly so he could peek in, he should have said so. He's playing the thief. I don't know what the player is thinking; maybe he was thinking of throwing the door open quickly to startle the people on the other side, maybe he was thinking of opening it nonchalantly so as too make it look like he is supposed to be here, or...who knows? The player should know. If he doesn't, well, I just kinda make something up.

So, yeah. There's my 2 coppers.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Li Shenron]

Also the part about requiring that the creature helping can do it on its own is in conflict with Jeremy Crawford's ruling on it:

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/12/21/can-a-familiar-use-the-help-action/

Daniel Cherry [MENTION=51037]cher[/MENTION]idanTGS

[MENTION=4036]Jeremy[/MENTION]ECrawford Can a familiar use the Help action to grant advantage on an attack?

Jeremy Crawford [MENTION=4036]Jeremy[/MENTION]ECrawford

[MENTION=51037]cher[/MENTION]idanTGS It can!
2:17 PM - Nov 12, 2015


I think that is rubbish so I don't allow it (unless it is the Warlock's improved familiar).

"It can" is different from "it always can"

Also, granting advantage to attack rolls is reasonably explained as providing a distraction. I seriously doubt that Crawford would have said the same about a familiar providing advantage to lockpicking.

 

[acorn_stasis]

No idea if you really meant those questions in the way I thought, but just found it interesting.

Yeah I think you understood the meaning of the words but not my intention. I was specifically interested in the situation of not having any plausible backing for the Help and wondering if the mechanics of the rules still granted it anyway as a consequence of sacrificing an action to take it. On the pages before this there have been some very good clarifying explanations which have helped me understand this part of the game much more clearly.

It would be an error to assume that I am a player who does not enjoy explaining in detail his character behaviour and actions. That such players exist I can accept.

Based on what most of the replies here have said, I am going to assume that an invisible familiar could reasonably apply maybe one or two rounds of Help while remaining invisible but expect diminishing returns and with the caveat to expect my DM enjoying the chance to spring a few surprises on my poor little Imp. The outside combat help (which is not Help) is more complex, requires matching proficiency in many cases and must make concrete sense in terms of the help actually helping. The rubric of, would the character alone be able to do this, is a helpful (pun) one.

I feel I have learnt a lot and thank those who have contributed constructively to increasing my understanding.

 

[5ekyu]

Yeah I think you understood the meaning of the words but not my intention. I was specifically interested in the situation of not having any plausible backing for the Help and wondering if the mechanics of the rules still granted it anyway as a consequence of sacrificing an action to take it. On the pages before this there have been some very good clarifying explanations which have helped me understand this part of the game much more clearly.

It would be an error to assume that I am a player who does not enjoy explaining in detail his character behaviour and actions. That such players exist I can accept.

Based on what most of the replies here have said, I am going to assume that an invisible familiar could reasonably apply maybe one or two rounds of Help while remaining invisible but expect diminishing returns and with the caveat to expect my DM enjoying the chance to spring a few surprises on my poor little Imp. The outside combat help (which is not Help) is more complex, requires matching proficiency in many cases and must make concrete sense in terms of the help actually helping. The rubric of, would the character alone be able to do this, is a helpful (pun) one.

I feel I have learnt a lot and thank those who have contributed constructively to increasing my understanding.

Additionally keep in mind this... whether or not the Gm works in diminishing returns and threats and whatever his scale or threshold for PLAYER SKILL DEPICTION vs THE CHARACTER KNOWS HOW TO style play... you better know this will be used against you and yours too. On some occasion(s) some other inviso-fam is going tp pull your hood down over your eyes just as an enemy archer gets ready to fire his bow shot and that extra sneak attack damage will sting so much the more when you realize "i did this to myself!"



That is not a bad thing, its a fun bit. it should happen and that won't make it sting any less when it does bite you.

PS Safety tip: If the enemy imp jerks at a fighter's helm and your fighter gets "stung" (esp if its a crit say) it is very unwise to yelp out loud almost gleefully "Hey, thats my idea and it just bit your character!! Thats so cool!!")

 

[happyhermit]

Yeah I think you understood the meaning of the words but not my intention. I was specifically interested in the situation of not having any plausible backing for the Help and wondering if the mechanics of the rules still granted it anyway as a consequence of sacrificing an action to take it. On the pages before this there have been some very good clarifying explanations which have helped me understand this part of the game much more clearly.

It would be an error to assume that I am a player who does not enjoy explaining in detail his character behaviour and actions. That such players exist I can accept.

Based on what most of the replies here have said, I am going to assume that an invisible familiar could reasonably apply maybe one or two rounds of Help while remaining invisible but expect diminishing returns and with the caveat to expect my DM enjoying the chance to spring a few surprises on my poor little Imp. The outside combat help (which is not Help) is more complex, requires matching proficiency in many cases and must make concrete sense in terms of the help actually helping. The rubric of, would the character alone be able to do this, is a helpful (pun) one.

I feel I have learnt a lot and thank those who have contributed constructively to increasing my understanding.

Yeah, you seem like a very reasonable person, so you are probably a great player for a group to have. I guess what I was trying to say but never really did is that it's worth mentioning (IMO) how sometimes if a player can't think of a "good" way to describe what they want to do in-fiction, other players and/or the GM can help. It is very important not to step on another player's toes or "Alpha game" and if it happens too often it can detract from the game for some, but if a player is open to input it can sometimes be fun to figure things out as a group.

 

[acorn_stasis]

Safety tip: If the enemy imp jerks at a fighter's helm and your fighter gets "stung" (esp if its a crit say) it is very unwise to yelp out loud almost gleefully "Hey, thats my idea and it just bit your character!! Thats so cool!!")

Yeah, I love that! That would be some great collaborative storytelling dynamics...