Aiding another on Gather Info / Dip / Bluff

[Paul Grogan]

Not sure if there is an official line on this, so wanted other peoples opinions.

Aiding another in combat is clear. Also, other things like opening locks, you cant really aid another, so thats clear too. However, I'm curious about what other people do with regard to aiding another with Gather Info, Diplomacy, Bluff, etc.

For Diplomacy and Bluff, I normally allow 1 character to make the roll and 1 character to aid, no more.

For gather info, The rules say 'a few gp', so I give them 2 choices.
They can gather info seperately - they each spend 3gp, they each get their own roll.
Or, I charge them 1gp each and one person makes the roll with the other aiding.

What do other people do?

 

[bestone]

Semi un-related and partially off topic.... but in my gaming group we dont even bother rolling for diplomacy bluff or gather information, we roleplay these things. And no, im not saying thats the "best" or even the right way, but its how we prefer to do it.

They can roll if they really want however... and i think im gonna steal your 1gp each and aid thingey, i like that.

Bluff i'd allow multiple aids, three people trying to convince you of something is usually more believable than one.

 

[Piratecat]

I allow multiple aid another attempts for these skills. It seems realistic to me, and hasn't been a problem in the game. I love the idea of one person lying and everyone else just sort of nodding and making affirmative noises.

Hey, welcome to the boards!

 

[hong]

I don't have a problem with multiple Diplomacy or Bluff aid-another rolls either. You could think of it as browbeating the other guy into submission. Even Gather Information seems fine; one guy just asks the others to keep their eyes and ears open on that particular topic.

 

[jasin]

For diplomacy and bluff, I think it's ideal to have the person making
the primary check do most of the talking, with everyone who wants to aid
chiming in with at least something.

That prevents people from just saying "I aid him! <roll>" and also
prevents too many people from aiding, since everyone talking at the same
time or repeating things already said just weakens the argument. Mind
you, we don't use any explicit penalties for that; people just seem to
intuitively get this, and leave the talking to a couple of characters
with good social skills.

For gather info, you spend "a few gp" (DM's discretion) and gather info. You
get to choose whether you roll your own check or aid someone else's.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I'm going to have to disagree with Piratecat--I wouldn't allow an arbitrary number of aid checks on these skills. If we have a legendary negotiator and seducer who can whisper honeyed poisonous words into someone's ear and overwhelm a person's reason and judgment, transforming her into a raving fanatic who will do anything for her master (+60 Diplomacy), you shouldn't be able to outnegotiate him simply because you have a room full of 60 dull and uninspiring peasants who have never negotiated in their life (60 peasants with +0 Diplomacy aiding, 33 will succeed on average for a +66 to your check result).

 

[Anthraxus]

Aiding another in combat is clear. Also, other things like opening locks, you cant really aid another, so thats clear too.

Actually, I'm pretty sure you could aid another in skills like opening locks, as long as the aiding PC has the same skill(if "trained only"- open lock in this case) and makes the DC10 aid roll.

 

[billd91]

I'm going to have to disagree with Piratecat--I wouldn't allow an arbitrary number of aid checks on these skills. If we have a legendary negotiator and seducer who can whisper honeyed poisonous words into someone's ear and overwhelm a person's reason and judgment, transforming her into a raving fanatic who will do anything for her master (+60 Diplomacy), you shouldn't be able to outnegotiate him simply because you have a room full of 60 dull and uninspiring peasants who have never negotiated in their life (60 peasants with +0 Diplomacy aiding, 33 will succeed on average for a +66 to your check result).

Perhaps not for diplomacy, but 60 peasants out digging up information should produce a fairly impressive result. The beggar network, so to speak.
This is, ultimately, why D&D works best as a refereed game rather than one with too many absolute rules that are just administered. The DM can adjudicate where the point of diminishing returns comes into effect.

 

[frankthedm]

It might work, but with two folks in on the bluff, there is a slight problem. Having folks help you lie makes it all the more likely the NPC rolls that DC20 sence motive check. Once someone realizes you are untrustwothy {either you or by the company you keep], bluffing becomes a lot harder.

Hunch
This use of the skill involves making a gut assessment of the social situation. You can get the feeling from another’s behavior that something is wrong, such as when you’re talking to an impostor. Alternatively, you can get the feeling that someone is trustworthy.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Perhaps not for diplomacy, but 60 peasants out digging up information should produce a fairly impressive result. The beggar network, so to speak.
This is, ultimately, why D&D works best as a refereed game rather than one with too many absolute rules that are just administered. The DM can adjudicate where the point of diminishing returns comes into effect.

I would definitely allow large networks of people to aid in Gather Information for most purposes of the check--you would get a penalty to avoiding being noticed, of course, but I would say that lots of helpers would always apply the full bonus to any info where you just have to find the right guy who knows it (which is the vast majority of these checks). I would not apply the bonus from 60 peasants in the specific instance of trying to gather secret or classified knowledge--that requires personal skill on the part of the investigator. I might make an exception if the PC was creative and explained a plan to have their peasants sign up as servants or the like to spy on the right people, as servants are often ignored, and perhaps classified information may be spoken too freely in front of them.