D&D 5E Group skill checks

[Joshy]

I now use the base group check but I used to use:
Apply the highest stealth bonus from anyone in the group.
Roll with disadvantage if anyone in the group would have disadvantage with the check.
If no one has disadvantage then the roll could have advantage as long as the one with the highest stealth bonus has it.

 

[Ovinomancer]

It’s more of a game balance issue. Coming up with a post hoc situation where your ruling might apply doesn’t help the discussion from my end. As I said up thread, if you want to discuss a particular situation, describe it, and I’ll let you know how I would adjudicate.

I can come up with a pre-hoc one, if that helps -- the GM describes a situation where it's clear that some teamwork will absolutely be better than going it alone, so the PCs do a touch of coordination and go at it as a team. There, pre-hoc. As for how you would adjudicate it, I don't see how that's helpful as you're not going to use a group move, or only use one in a case where the difficulty matches the probability. So, a specific example of this isn't terribly illuminating. If you're not using a group move, what's the point of the discussion about group moves -- there's plenty of other places where discussion of how you'd adjudicate otherwise might be on topic!

Largely, I recognize that you're not going to move. I'm arguing against your points for others that might read but not post to have a different view available.

 

[jasper]

At least half to me is a majority.

 

[Joshy]

For every person that passing, count it as two passing.
So if half or more pass then the group passes.

 

[Blue]

I don’t know. None of those situations are part of what we were originally discussing. It’s all post hoc rationalization of your preferred method of resolution.

No. You claimed that two people are always harder to sneak than one. I gave examples that's not true. It's easy to have the narrative support that is is easier with teamwork.

Sorry, your attempt to handwave away counterexamples when you didn't even provide that level of support is dismissed.

If you want to continue to claim it's harder with more, please provide why, and hold yourself to the same bar that you are attempting to hold me, were you can not use any examples or narrative.

 

[Blue]

No, I’m sure what you’re describing could be not fun for a lot of people.

Please provide ANY reasoning why a group planning to all be sneaky actually being able to be sneaky is less fun than if they can not meet their goal.

Really, at this point you are just making things up and trying to handwave things away without any explanation or even common sense.

 

[Hriston]

I can come up with a pre-hoc one, if that helps -- the GM describes a situation where it's clear that some teamwork will absolutely be better than going it alone, so the PCs do a touch of coordination and go at it as a team. There, pre-hoc. As for how you would adjudicate it, I don't see how that's helpful as you're not going to use a group move, or only use one in a case where the difficulty matches the probability. So, a specific example of this isn't terribly illuminating. If you're not using a group move, what's the point of the discussion about group moves -- there's plenty of other places where discussion of how you'd adjudicate otherwise might be on topic!

Largely, I recognize that you're not going to move. I'm arguing against your points for others that might read but not post to have a different view available.

If I could add a few details to your example, (a) the DM tells the players about some circumstances that will make sneaking easier if they work together, so (b) the players declare actions to coordinate their attempts at sneaking, resulting in (c) the DM calling for a group Stealth check to see if they all succeed or fail as a group. Honestly, I still feel like I would need more details to understand what about (b) leads to (c) rather than to separate checks to determine whether each party member is noticed individually.

Since it doesn’t matter how I would adjudicate in the above example, allow me to explain the typical circumstances in which a Stealth check is called for in one of my games to shed some light on why I rule the way I’ve stated. (1) The DM describes the environment and any available options for interacting with it. (2) The players declare that their characters are traveling slowly in a certain direction, sneaking in order to avoid the notice of any creatures they might encounter. (3) The DM calls for a Dex (Stealth) check from each player to individually determine whether each PC remains unnoticed in case of an encounter.

 

[Joshy]

Not how I do it but you could say that those with proficiency with stealth have the training to work together.

 

[CleverNickName]

So since in DnD you always round down, if you had say 5 PCs, do they need only 2 successes? It feels a bit too easy. I'm not asking RAW. I'm asking what people think.

Since you're asking my opinion, I'll share it.

For group skill checks where one person could sway the attempt for the whole group, we use a house-rule: everyone makes the same check, and then I take the highest or lowest result depending on the circumstance.

For example, let's say that the whole party is trying to lift a heavy portcullis at the same time (DC 15). Since one character's excellent roll could move the whole portcullis, I'll ask everyone to make a Strength (Athletics) roll, and take the highest result.

Or let's say that the entire party is disguised as merchants, and trying to sneak into the castle. Since one bad actor could blow the whole party's cover, I'll ask everyone in the party to make a Disguise check and take the lowest result.

Everyone searching the room at once, frantically trying to find a lever or switch to disable the crushing-ceiling trap? Since one person's good roll would offset all other failures, I ask everyone to roll an Intelligence (Investigation), and I take the highest result.

And so on.

 

[the Jester]

Stealth is the place the group check is needed most for the flow of the game and the broadening of potential adventures/situations without having to resort to split parties and players sitting out of the action for too long.

This is very much a matter of taste. I think clattering, metal-clad, five-weapons-totin', blood-splatter-stinking fighter type ought to easily mess up an attempt to be stealthy by the group. I'm generally a "don't split the party" kind of guy philosophically, but I just can't get past the "John rolled a 2 on Stealth and the bad guys have a passive Perception of 18, but I guess they didn't notice him" part of a group Stealth check.