Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 9545408" data-attributes="member: 6779196">That’s kind of fun, though I’m always hesitant with giving players false information on a knowledge check. I think there’s a lot of value in being able to maintain a clear line that you can always trust information given directly by the DM to be accurate, whereas information given via NPCs may or may not be.I disagree. I definitely think because it’s so much more useful than other skills it probably shouldn’t compete with them for character building resources, but I do think the game benefits from having something you can roll when the outcome of an attempt to discern sensory information is uncertain, and the game also benefits from the consistency of the “roll a d20, and an ability modifier, and potentially add proficiency bonus” universal resolution mechanic.One useful way to think about it is to essentially treat all ability checks as saving throws. What you’re “saving” against is the consequences of your action failing.Well, it depends. If the attempt requires a certain buy-in, such as the knowledge check requiring a declaration of where you might have learned this information you’re trying to recall, some players just won’t think of any. Moreover though, if you go with the “a knowledge check two or more characters attempt is a group check,” then the answer is that more characters contributing actually makes success less likely.Mathematically, the ideal number of characters to have working on a group check is exactly two. Two characters making the same check and collectively succeeding if either of them succeeds is very similar to the character with the higher bonus rolling with advantage - slightly worse, but pretty similar. Once you add a third character, you now need at least two of them to succeed, which is always going to be less likely, regardless of the DC and the characters’ bonuses. Adding a fourth character makes your chances slightly better, but it’s always still worse than two characters, and that pattern repeats: an even number of contributors is always better than an odd number of contributors, and a smaller even number of contributors will always have a better chance than a bigger even number.Fair enough, I suppose. I prefer a possibility of failure on types 1 and 2, and I’m a bit skeptical that type 3 really exists independently of type 4.</blockquote>

Verification