Skill checks and Aid Another

[KarinsDad]

There's the root of your problem (or, rather, our problem with your proposed rule).

Under the current Aid Another rule, having someone help you can end up with a result better than either of you could do alone.

Under your Aid Another rule, having someone help you will never end up with a result better than either of you could do alone.

That's a flaw. Or a bug. Or a feature. You pick. I pick flaw.

Yes, I pointed out that this was an advantage of my rule.

You think it is a disadvantage. That's fine. I understand your position.


I think the problem I have with the current rule is that (almost) ANYBODY can help you and they can do it cheaply.

With a mere +0 (or less) in a skill due to stats and often no ranks whatsoever, anybody can help anybody else.

For example: Knowledge Check. The street urchin who has 1 rank in Knowledge Dungeoneering (since this one is trained only) and knows a little bit about some things that crawl in the sewer with her, can help the Sage figure out that the creature they are seeing is a GoogleBob. The DC was 45, but that doesn't matter. The Sage has a +23, not enough to get to 45 on his own, but that doesn't matter.

The fact that the urchin can say "Err, maybe it is a rat" is enough to give the Sage an epiphany.

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's the mechanic that falls apart in Aid Another. For me. Especially for mental skills.

The other thing that doesn't make sense is that with a +9, you are always Helpful Joe. It matters not that it is in Epic DC 60, you can add in your +2 every single time. Huh? What does Helpful Joe know about the inner workings of Celestial Beings? Nothing, but he can help out because he has a mere speck of knowledge in the skill.


Let's take a physcial skill: Climbing.

If there is a slippery overhang and you cannot climb it by yourself and neither can your partner, chances are you will still fall if you try it together.

The odds of his +2 helping you enough to get you to that DC 30 slippery overhang even once, let alone several times, up the mountain are pretty darn slim.

 

[KarinsDad]

I think it would be salient to point out what the Aid Another action really adds to the game: it lets players with lesser skilled characters feel as though they are contributing to an effort. Thus, it helps keep players "in the game" and keeps their attention focused on the action on the table. This is a good thing. Making mechanics that make players feel their characters are left out of situations is not a good thing.

That doesn't change with my rule.

PC1 has +9 and rolls a 3.

PC2 has +3 and rolls an 17.

The result is 16. Better than the 14 Aid Another would have resulted in and it is obvious to the player of the second PC that HIS is the roll that pushed it over DC 15 or higher, not the 12 of the first player.

This too is a good thing.

Another specious point you made.

 

[Storm Raven]

Yes, I pointed out that this was an advantage of my rule.

You think it is a disadvantage. That's fine. I understand your position.

It is an advantage that two people working together will always get a result worse than they could do alone? Explain why anyone would ever work together using your rule.

I think the problem I have with the current rule is that (almost) ANYBODY can help you and they can do it cheaply.

With a mere +0 (or less) in a skill due to stats and often no ranks whatsoever, anybody can help anybody else.

For example: Knowledge Check. The street urchin who has 1 rank in Knowledge Dungeoneering (since this one is trained only) and knows a little bit about some things that crawl in the sewer with her, can help the Sage figure out that the creature they are seeing is a GoogleBob. The DC was 45, but that doesn't matter. The Sage has a +23, not enough to get to 45 on his own, but that doesn't matter.

The fact that the urchin can say "Err, maybe it is a rat" is enough to give the Sage an epiphany.

That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That's the mechanic that falls apart in Aid Another. For me. Especially for mental skills.

Wrong. You cannot grant a bonus to a task your character could not achive alone. The street urchin could not give a bonus to a DC 45 Knowledge check, because he could not achive that task alone, under any circumstances.

Even if he could, is it that big of a problem? How many stories have some relative newcomer give the genius character the one little tidbit of information that sparks his "eureka" moment?

The other thing that doesn't make sense is that with a +9, you are always Helpful Joe. It matters not that it is in Epic DC 60, you can add in your +2 every single time. Huh? What does Helpful Joe know about the inner workings of Celestial Beings? Nothing, but he can help out because he has a mere speck of knowledge in the skill.

He could only help with checks up to DC 29.

Let's take a physcial skill: Climbing.

If there is a slippery overhang and you cannot climb it by yourself and neither can your partner, chances are you will still fall if you try it together.

The odds of his +2 helping you enough to get you to that DC 30 slippery overhang even once, let alone several times, up the mountain are pretty darn slim.

Let's look at the rules:

From the SRD

In many cases, a character’s help won’t be beneficial, or only a limited number of characters can help at once.

Look at that. Your objections are actually handled by the rules. Your assistance might not be beneficial. Of course, if, by the terms of your hypothetical, neither of you could climb the overhang by yourselves, you can't Aid Another anyway.

Once again, your arguments blow away in a puff of smoke like the hot air that they are.

 

[Storm Raven]

That doesn't change with my rule.

PC1 has +9 and rolls a 3.

PC2 has +3 and rolls an 17.

The result is 16. Better than the 14 Aid Another would have resulted in and it is obvious to the player of the second PC that HIS is the roll that pushed it over DC 15 or higher, not the 12 of the first player.

But far worse than the 20 that PC2 would have gotten had he just made a seperate skill check. And if PC2 actually helps PC1 as a result of his roll, the combined roll is always worse than if PC1 and PC2 had made individual checks. That you don't understand that this is a huge flaw in your proposed rule variant is getting to be quite humorous.

 

[Artoomis]

But then why don't both characters just make independent rolls? They would be better off doing so every time.

Adam (+10 ranks in Search) rolls, he rolls a 3, for a total Search check of 13.

Bob (+2 ranks in Search) rolls to aid Adam, he rolls a 17, for a total of 19.

Because of the variant version of Aid Another, the total result is a (13 + 19)/2 = 16.

If they had just rolled independently to Search, then Bob would have gotten a 19.

True - Bob would have gotten a 19.

With "aid another", Adam get a 15.

With modified "aid another," Adam gets a 16

In EITHER case, if they each searched on their own the result is 19 from Bob. No difference for either form of "aid another."

The point is that this happens INSTEAD of "aid another" - not instead of both characters rolling and choosing the highest roll.

I did not say I liked it, I'm only trying to be sure it's not misunderstood. I prefer the rule as written, myself, but I understand how this one could be used and it would not break anything or be any sort of a penalty.

 

[Storm Raven]

True - Bob would have gotten a 19.

With "aid another", Adam get a 15.

With modified "aid another," Adam gets a 16

In EITHER case, if they each searched on their own the result is 19 from Bob. No difference for either form of "aid another."

The point is that this happens INSTEAD of "aid another" - not instead of both characters rolling and choosing the highest roll.

I did not say I liked it, I'm only trying to be sure it's not misunderstood. I prefer the rule as written, myself, but I understand how this one could be used and it would not break anything or be any sort of a penalty.

No, the problem is that, using the rule variant, under any circumstance in which Bob's roll helps, they would have just been better off rolling seperately. The variant rule simply means that the Aid Another action is always useless. Any time Bob's result would help, his result is actually better than Adam's, meaning that there is never a reason to use Aid Another.

Adam (Search check +9) is going to Search a 5 x 5 area.

Bob (Search check +3) is going to roll. Should he Aid, or just check for himself? He needs to roll higher than Adam does to actually give him any assistance, and if he does, the total combined score will be reduced by averaging his (higher) result with Adam's (lower) result. If he does not roll higher than Adam, his Aid has no impact at all.

Why would Bob ever choose to Aid Another? Look at it this way, using the rule variant, can you give me a circumstance in which Bob and Adam are better off working together?

 

[KarinsDad]

And your mechanics suggestion has the end result that characters are always better off using their skills in separate checks. The end result of making seperate checks is always equal to or higher than working cooperateively using your proposed rule variant. The end result of working cooperatively is at best, equal to working alone, and possibly worse.

Your result can never be worse than working alone. It's simple math SR.

If x > y, then (x+y)/2, else y

You never get worse than y.

Working separately has the advantage of a higher result, but only when you can work separately. For many tasks (like Disarming a Trap without setting it off), you cannot.

But what you are conveniently dropping on the floor in your argument is that working separately is already often better than Aid Another using the core current RAW.


PC1 has +12 and rolls a 15
PC2 has +8 and rolls a 5

Separate 27, Aid Another 29.

PC1 has +12 and rolls a 5
PC2 has +8 and rolls a 15

Separate 23, Aid Another 19.


It totally depends on how close the skills are and who rolls better.

If the skills are fairly close, making separate rolls is often better.

If the skills are fairly far apart, rolling Aid Another is often better.


Aid Another is most useful in RAW for skills where you only get one chance at it. Rolling separately is most useful in RAW for skills where you get many chances at it.

 

[KarinsDad]

Wrong. You cannot grant a bonus to a task your character could not achive alone. The street urchin could not give a bonus to a DC 45 Knowledge check, because he could not achive that task alone, under any circumstances.

I like it when you post SR because even when you are convinced you are right, you are often wrong according to RAW. I just find that amusing.


"In cases where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results you can’t aid another to grant a bonus to a task that your character couldn’t achieve alone."


This ONLY applies "where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results", it does not apply to all skills.

An example of this is a Complex Trap. The skill restricts this to Rogues only, so a Fighter with the Search skill cannot Aid Another the Rogue to search for a complex trap, regardless of how high or low the Search skill of the Fighter may be.

If the sentence read:

"You can’t aid another to grant a bonus to a task that your character couldn’t achieve alone."

then you would be correct. But, the sentence does not state that. There is a caveat in the sentence that you ignored.

 

[Storm Raven]

Your result can never be worse than working alone. It's simple math SR.

If x > y, then (x+y)/2, else y

You never get worse than y.

Wrong.

Adam (Search +9) rolls a 4. His result is a 13.

Bob (Search +2) rolls a 17. His result is a 19.

If they were working together (Adam primary, Bob aiding), the result would be a 16.

If they were working seperately, the result would be a 19.

Now, where I come from a 16 is a worse result than a 19. Maybe math works different in your reality.

There is never a circumstance under which they would be better off working together.

But what you are conveniently dropping on the floor in your argument is that working separately is already often better than Aid Another using the core current RAW.

But not always. In your rule variant your are always better off working seperately rather than together.

If the skills are fairly close, making separate rolls is often better.

If the skills are fairly far apart, rolling Aid Another is often better.

Under the standard rules, yes. Under your rules, Aid Another is never better.

 

[Storm Raven]

then you would be correct. But, the sentence does not state that. There is a caveat in the sentence that you ignored.

Of course, none of this matters, because of the second quote I provided. Or did you ignore that because it doesn't fit your version of the rules?