Simple skill check question

[muppetmuppet]

A common situation. The players encounter something that requires a skill check to gain more knowledge of. Lets take the simplest example I can think of they find a holy symbol and want to know if they recognise it. Assuming it is an uncommon evil symbol which they may have come across and may not have how do you rule if the group pass it round and see if they recognise it or can work out what god it is.

Do you make a roll for each PC and any succeeding know?
Do you take the best bonus and have a single dice for the party?


Do things change if the group is being ambushed and an active perception check is needed?

Or if the whole group is stealthing, presumably now a group check is more sensible as the bad at stealth people shd make a difference.


I tend to try to just have one die roll when possible should I change my DC's as this presumably makes it harder than the rules intend assuming people think each character should get to roll in most situations.

 

[Shiroiken]

Assuming it is an uncommon evil symbol which they may have come across and may not have how do you rule if the group pass it round and see if they recognise it or can work out what god it is.

Do you make a roll for each PC and any succeeding know?
Do you take the best bonus and have a single dice for the party?

This can be somewhat contentious, but whenever everyone considers it, I would use the Working Together rules. Basically the group decides one person to roll with Advantage, assuming that at least 1 person could reasonably help. In your example, they could be talking about it among themselves, with the combined little bits of knowledge totaling the result.

Do things change if the group is being ambushed and an active perception check is needed?

IIRC, being ambushed uses Passive Perception, rather than a roll, but in either case it's an individual check, since there are consiquences for each failure (the character being surprised).

Or if the whole group is stealthing, presumably now a group check is more sensible as the bad at stealth people shd make a difference.

RAW, everyone is supposed to roll, with the lowest roll mattering. I use Group Checks myself, because otherwise stealth is pointless with a single person in heavy armor.

I tend to try to just have one die roll when possible should I change my DC's as this presumably makes it harder than the rules intend assuming people think each character should get to roll in most situations.

I agree that a single roll is better when possible, but you shouldn't adjust the DC. It's actually harder to succeed with a single roll with advantage that it is to get a single success among several rolls (even with lower modifiers), because the d20 is generally more important to the roll.

 

[robus]

RAW, everyone is supposed to roll, with the lowest roll mattering. I use Group Checks myself, because otherwise stealth is pointless with a single person in heavy armor.

I do like the players to earn the group check as it otherwise just seems cheap, so they should at least describe what efforts they're taking to work as a group (muffling the sound of the armor with some bits of cloth to improve stealth, tying themselves together for a difficult climb etc).

Show some teamwork and earn a group check

 

[Volund]

I still use a DM screen which allows me to hang player initiative cards on the screen. On the back of each card card I have a space for skill, tool, and language proficiencies and their bonus. This lets me use a passive check for proficient skills. If the player built their PC to be good at a particular skill, I try to weave that into the narrative instead of calling for checks, which slow the game down. A proficient skill always yields some sort of base information without a roll. After finding a religious symbol, if a PC had the religion skill and had a bonus of +3, I might say something like, "Momar, this symbol reminds you of other symbols associated with demonic cults you have seen before and been warned about. Would you like to spend more time studying it to see if you can remember anything else about it?" Unless it's obviously important to the player's goals at the moment, most of the time they say they'll just pocket it and study it later.

If it is an important check, the group will throw their resources into succeeding. We generally let people work together for advantage on the check if it makes sense. Anyone can help push something, even without the athletics skill. For knowledge checks we have agreed that the PC's need to be proficient (or be a Jack of All Trades) in order to work together to gain advantage on a skill check. So for example, trying to figure out the meaning of a magic glyph, two PC's proficient in Arcana can work together, often with assistance from someone's guidance cantrip. The player with the best bonus usually rolls and then that's it. Nobody else gets to roll. I always give them some information regardless of the roll. "You can't identify exactly what it does, but you think it's powerful and dangerous, meant to do grave harm to whoever triggers it."

I occasionally use group checks when the collective effort of the group contributes to an overall effect, e.g. a group deception check to pass themselves off as a group of cultists, or a group intimidation check to get a quell an angry crowd, and of course group stealth checks. Since these take more time, I save these for when the outcome is significant and involves a heightened sense of tension.

 

[S'mon]

For knowledge checks I have everyone roll-to-succeed as I want to tell them stuff whenever possible!

For group working together I use a group check - everyone rolls, succeed if half of group succeeds.

I'd use a group stealth check for setting an ambush, or creeping up on known enemy camp. For scouting where the enemy is unknown I'd typically use everyone-rolls-to-fail (one fail = spotted) so the one clanky guy ruins it for everyone.

A group check I usually make 5 points harder than an everyone-rolls-to-fail check.

 

[iserith]

A common situation. The players encounter something that requires a skill check to gain more knowledge of. Lets take the simplest example I can think of they find a holy symbol and want to know if they recognise it. Assuming it is an uncommon evil symbol which they may have come across and may not have how do you rule if the group pass it round and see if they recognise it or can work out what god it is.

Do you make a roll for each PC and any succeeding know?
Do you take the best bonus and have a single dice for the party?

For anything the players describe wanting to do, the DM has to decide if the outcome is uncertain (definitely not outright success, definitely not outright failure) and if there's a meaningful consequence of failure. If both of those conditions are present, then the DM may ask for an ability check to resolve the action and narrates accordingly.

For each character that wants to identify the holy symbol, he or she offers a goal (e.g. "I want to identify the holy symbol...") and an approach ("...by examining it closely and drawing upon my knowledge attained as an acolyte with the Church of Ioun.") to the DM. The DM can then make a judgment accordingly. This may mean no rolls, one roll, or multiple rolls. It depends on what the players say and do and how the DM judges what they say.

Do things change if the group is being ambushed and an active perception check is needed?

There is no such thing as an "active check," but I gather you mean "roll the dice." If the DM is determining surprise, the rules say the monsters' Stealth checks are compared to the characters' passive Perception scores. If you mean something else by "ambushed," you'd have to spell that out for us.

Or if the whole group is stealthing, presumably now a group check is more sensible as the bad at stealth people shd make a difference.

For determining surprise, they roll individually. There may be cases where the DM calls for a group check in some other stealthy situation such as in overland travel.

I tend to try to just have one die roll when possible should I change my DC's as this presumably makes it harder than the rules intend assuming people think each character should get to roll in most situations.

The DC of a check depends on the player's stated goal and approach compared to the challenge. Two different characters may give two different approaches to the same goal and the DM may say one is easier (lower DC) and the other is more difficult (higher DC). The DM may also say that either attempt automatically succeeds or automatically fails.

 

[abirdcall]

This scenario sounds like it should be an automatic success.

It could be an automatic failure too. In your case you are going for an uncertain outcome - and it is only uncertain if the characters had an opportunity to know what it is. So some characters may automatically fail as they have no exposure to such things. If all could succeed then all should make a roll.

As for perception, it is individual. There are no surprise rounds in 5e. Individual characters can be surprised. I would use passive perception here too, that's what it is for.

A group check for stealth is entirely reasonable.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

A common situation. The players encounter something that requires a skill check to gain more knowledge of. Lets take the simplest example I can think of they find a holy symbol and want to know if they recognise it. Assuming it is an uncommon evil symbol which they may have come across and may not have how do you rule if the group pass it round and see if they recognise it or can work out what god it is.

Do you make a roll for each PC and any succeeding know?
Do you take the best bonus and have a single dice for the party?

This is what typically happens:

1. Player with the highest appropriate skill bonus attempts a single roll. Someone else may chime in to aid the character and provide advantage on their roll. Different tables handle this differently.
2. If the player succeeds, the DM spills everything he thinks the character knows based on his roll (or his role, depending on the DM style of play).
3. If the player fails, then the next character makes an attempt. Rinse, lather, repeat until somebody succeeds or everyone fails.​

Does it work? Yes. Is it good? Ask a lot of different people, you'll get a lot of different answers. That means it's a subjective question. What works for one group or table may not be the favorite or preferred method for others. And there's nothing explicitly written in the rules that says there is one true way over another. That is the beauty (and curse) of this game.

Here's my take for this scenario:

Assume everyone in the party is able to see and inspect the holy symbol. If it was something they might reasonably recognize and know a lot about, we wouldn't even need a roll. Let's assume that is not the case.

Since it is a secret, relatively unknown religion or cult that is making efforts to keep their organization or activity in the area a secret, assign a tough DC to beat: 15 or 20. Everybody makes a roll all at once to see if they know something about it. Each success reveals one detail or secret, such as the name or alignment of the deity, which region it may be commonly associated with, or what activities or goals the members are known for. Whatever is relevant to the plot or the scenario is important enough to learn.

This kind of group check has several advantages over a single pass/fail check.

1. It keeps everyone engaged and active in the game without slowing things down.
2. Introduces layers of success as opposed to all or nothing tied to the luck of a single die roll.
3. It is flexible to be as simple or complex as you want it to be.​

Just find whatever works best for you and your group, and for different situations.

 

[5ekyu]

A common situation. The players encounter something that requires a skill check to gain more knowledge of. Lets take the simplest example I can think of they find a holy symbol and want to know if they recognise it. Assuming it is an uncommon evil symbol which they may have come across and may not have how do you rule if the group pass it round and see if they recognise it or can work out what god it is.

Do you make a roll for each PC and any succeeding know?
Do you take the best bonus and have a single dice for the party?


Do things change if the group is being ambushed and an active perception check is needed?

Or if the whole group is stealthing, presumably now a group check is more sensible as the bad at stealth people shd make a difference.


I tend to try to just have one die roll when possible should I change my DC's as this presumably makes it harder than the rules intend assuming people think each character should get to roll in most situations.

For the case in question, I would first decide "is there a doubt?" In many cases the simplest answer is "they know". (In the vast majority of these in my games, that would be the case *because* if it's not common its likely I am using something tied to a PC background, not just some stray unconnected to anything element.)

If for whatever reason I decide there is doubt, I would resolve that as a check with advantage - working together.

But in broader cases, I always remember what I consider a VIP 5e rule - any failed skill check can be either no progress or some progress with setback. That tends to help folks not get too hung up on everybody tries as I start with "let's resolve this lowest to highest" or put another way "failures first."

 

[Li Shenron]

A common situation. The players encounter something that requires a skill check to gain more knowledge of. Lets take the simplest example I can think of they find a holy symbol and want to know if they recognise it. Assuming it is an uncommon evil symbol which they may have come across and may not have how do you rule if the group pass it round and see if they recognise it or can work out what god it is.

Do you make a roll for each PC and any succeeding know?
Do you take the best bonus and have a single dice for the party?

In most cases, I grant a check to each PC who has the relevant proficiency (or a semi-proficiency such as Jack of All Trades), and no one else.

If the party doesn't have anyone proficient, I might grant a group check or nothing at all.

Do things change if the group is being ambushed and an active perception check is needed?

Or if the whole group is stealthing, presumably now a group check is more sensible as the bad at stealth people shd make a difference.

No change, because I treat Knowledge checks as a way to determine what the characters already know. So in my games, they have nothing to do with "actions", and as such they are not affected by the circumstances. It also means no retries, no using the Help action, and no possibility to apply temporary bonuses such as from a Guidance spell.