Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 8391196" data-attributes="member: 6677017">One thing I really dislike are checks where everyone rolls, but a single success (such as a knowledge check) means, effectively, the whole party succeeds, or a single failure (such as a Stealth check) means the whole party fails. Same goes for the 20 goblins example. Do we want Stealth to actually be possible for groups or not? Do want the party to have a reasonable chance of not knowing something or not?In situations like that (best or worse result is effectively party result), I only roll one d20 for the whole group, and everyone individually adds their modifier (not all combined) to get their personal result. This means the best or worst party member carries the day, but there isn't super Advantage/Disadvantage from a bunch of rolls.If more than one person in the group is proficient in the check (or no proficiency applies), then two people can roll (for purposes of visualizing individual results, I randomly assign each other party member to share one of the d20 rolls), or Advantage can be applied. (This only applies when it's the single success = party success scenario, since those are mutually exclusive with single failure = party failure.)I also use RAW group checks in situations where they could help each other. In Stealth situations where the group is sneaking together, I give them the choice of which system to use.I also require increasingly greater amounts of time for rechecks. So picking a lock might require 1 action for the first try, 1 minute for the next, 1 hour for the third, then a day, week, month, and then that stupid lock is your bane and you just can't figure out how it's built.If the situation substantially changes, you can also make a new check.I like the way these systems work together for skill/ability checks. It gives me results that create a consistent and believable world, and works game-wise.</blockquote>

Verification