Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 9831808" data-attributes="member: 1465">This is not a "rule", it's just an idea which can become part of the DM's "arsenal" of ways to grant or not grant checks. Whenever you don't see why someone should get a shot, they won't get it  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> And of course, the "open the stuck door" is just an example used to explain the idea. I don't even usually call for checks at all for opening stuck doors, but the premise for considering using this idea is that the DM actually wants a random resolution.For instance, [USER=6779196]@Charlaquin[/USER] just mentioned using this idea for Knowledge checks. I am usually quite picky on those, and grant checks only to characters with proficiency. But for a DM who normally allows everyone to roll Knowledge checks, I think group checks are a good idea to smooth the probabilities out. One thing I want, is to keep a sensible narrative throughout. With group checks, I can typically use the "too many cooks spoil the soup" concept to explain why increasing the number of people working together doesn't increase the chance of success indefinitely.</blockquote>