Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="iserith" data-source="post: 7495879" data-attributes="member: 97077">Nope. Help is for combat; Working Together is for all other situations. Working Together requires that the action described would actually be of help in the unfolding situation and that the person assisting could otherwise perform the action on his or her own. So without an action declaration that the DM actually thinks will help, then no advantage is granted.That's a little less egregious in my view since these are resources the players can spend. I would probably ask what those actions looked like and try to get them into the habit of offering more description. With the Guidance spell, as long as there is nothing preventing the rogue from casting it, then it's fair; however, there are situations where it might not be feasible or sometimes risky. For example, in an exploration challenge in which the PCs are trying to sneak, a guidance spells (and its Verbal component) might give them away. In a social interaction challenge, an NPC's attitude might worsen if he or she notices the rogue casting spells.Players don't get to decide that they are making ability checks! All they can do is describe what they want to do by offering an approach to a goal. YOU decide if an ability check is called for based on what they offer. They might succeed outright, fail outright, or you may ask for a roll. If someone fails a check and the next player says he or she wants to perform the same approach to the goal as the person who failed, then it's reasonable in some cases my view to just say they also fail, no roll - after all, that approach has already been shown to be ineffective. The player needs to come up with something else to achieve the goal.On ability checks used to resolve the outcome of an attempt to recall lore, I suggest doing it this way: On a success, the character recalls something useful. On a failure, the character recalls something interesting. So, either way, the player is going to get some kind of result other than "You dunno." This tends to take the edge off the desire for others to perform the same action again. As well, a player should in my view offer a justification for being able to recall lore. This might be due to race, background, class, or any number of things that reasonably explain why the character might have been exposed at some point in the past to the desired information. There's no need to be a hardass about it, but this is an opportunity for the player to shoot for auto-success anyway and also helps flesh out the character just a little bit more every time such an attempt is made.</blockquote>

Verification