Why doesn't the help action have more limits and down sides?
MrHotter
First Post
As far as I can tell, we are agreeing on everything. I just wanted to clarify my thoughts in case another DM who may be following this thread was wondering how other DMs view the Work Together action and how it different from the in combat Help action.
I'm one of the DMs that did not understand the distinctions before this thread brought it to my attention. I was house ruling Help outside of combat rather than just using the guidlines in the Player's Handbook.
Many of us will run into players who interpret the rules as written to mean they should have advantage on every roll outside of combat, so the DMs knowing the guidlines for the Work Together and group checks may save some of us some greif at the table.
Nutation
Explorer
Indeed; I missed that. The DC in 4E for Aid Another was just a bit easier than the "Moderate" DC for a task. By that philosophy, I amend my suggestion. Task DC-10 is probably too easy. -8 or -5 would be closer in style.
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
Yes, I don't recommend an ability check or set DC for Working Together in D&D 5e all the time, but when it makes sense to have the helper roll, a reduced DC for just helping out sounds reasonable.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Ideally, it should circle around to the central mechanic, again. That is, the helping character declares an action he intends to be helpful, and the DM either narrates success (grants advantage, or just narrates the two characters' success), failure (no advantage, or the whole attempt fails), or calls for a roll from the helper, which, if successful grants advantage...
...and, really, with enough applied judgement/rulings, that process is already there!
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
Ideally, it should circle around to the central mechanic, again. That is, the helping character declares an action he intends to be helpful, and the DM either narrates success (grants advantage, or just narrates the two characters' success), failure (no advantage, or the whole attempt fails), or calls for a roll from the helper, which, if successful grants advantage...
...and, really, with enough applied judgement/rulings, that process is already there!
Yep, which circles right back to my very first post in this thread.
Tony Vargas
Legend
Retroactive XP granted.Yep, which circles right back to my very first post in this thread.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
Just had a thought. What if when helping, both (all) roll. Any success on the rules passes the task, but any failures suffer a setback. By helping, you're increasing the odds of success, but also adding risk.
Mulling this over....
Mulling this over....
ClaytonCross
Kinder reader Inflection wanted
Isn't this the same as a group check instead of the help action? On a group check you have to get a majority so if a bunch of un-proficient players help their failures increase the chance of failure. Like a group stealth check where you have on person without stealth proficiency in heavy plate so they have disadvantage. Individually that person would likely just fail but as part of a group check they are basically expected to fail and the rest of them try to bring them up however with a group of 4 to 6 is pretty easy to have half your group "tanks" or "casters" that might fall under this and would cause the stealthy rogue to be spotted when the group fails.
So added risk to those who are skilled but added benefit to the group for those who would likely fail. This means its worth trying but at the same time there is an extra risk to some characters. Not a new rule though, it just a group test instead of a help action.
Similar Threads
