Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why doesn't the help action have more limits and down sides?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ClaytonCross" data-source="post: 7443419" data-attributes="member: 6880599"><p>World of Warcraft.... Video game RPGs.... Now that Tony Vargas is gone....</p><p></p><p><strong>Why is it annoying</strong> to you that players help each other out in group that has band together to fight deadly monsters, explore trapped dungeons, and solve puzzles <strong>TOGETHER</strong>... when it actually makes since that they would help each other out as a <strong>team</strong> for their benefit and the benefit of the group?</p><p></p><p>I show up to a D&D game, the GM says he needs to move the table, I say "I'll help". He says he needs to clean the table off and setup the map, I say "I'll help". He says he needs to clear a spot on the counter, I say "I'll help". As iserith said, making a downs side to helping your party encourages them to NOT act like a party in a party based game... this seems silly to me. Sure I could pull my back helping my gm move his table but I don't any rule that is designed to convince players to play solo is a good rule. Any deficit to helping is just that. With advantage and requirement for the helping player to have the skill to help they can still role badly and narrate failure of a twitch in your back but mechanically discouraging the attempt seems against the premise of getting together with my friends to adventure both in and out of the game. I want players to help each other when ever possible because that's what people should do in or out of the game when they are working together for a common goal. <strong>Standing around watching one person do all the work you could help is jerk thing to do!</strong></p><p></p><p>I understanding the restrictions on requiring the actual skills to help, room to get in there, lack of tools etc. but it seems to me if you don't want your players to work as a team there is a fundamental flaw to you sitting together to play a group game. If you want your players wanted to play solo they would play a video game. The inability for more than one player to help is a MUCH larger issue than player helping each other "too much". As iserith said,<strong>If your just tired or your players saying "I help" then call for fewer tests</strong>. </p><p></p><p><strong>I really feel like this is GM perspective problem not a game design problem.</strong> It doesn't slow down the game, it doesn't cause issues with players, and the only people I have ever seen get mad or upset because a player got helped was the GM who wanted players to fail... oddly enough the commonly fail anyway and GM is mad about it on premise not because it actually worked out. <strong>Its the same line of arguments I hear about the Guidance spell</strong>. People band that spell because it reduces their chance of failure. The only reason that matters is if the GM WANTS players to fail. A GM … in my opinion… should not have a predetermined outcome in mind for tests but should let the chips fall where they may and have success and fail options. If the GM has a REQIREMENT that players fail, then set the test should auto Fail and their is no reason for the GM to call for role and no chance for the players to use the "help action". Don't blame players for working together to try to succeed.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ClaytonCross, post: 7443419, member: 6880599"] World of Warcraft.... Video game RPGs.... Now that Tony Vargas is gone.... [B]Why is it annoying[/B] to you that players help each other out in group that has band together to fight deadly monsters, explore trapped dungeons, and solve puzzles [B]TOGETHER[/B]... when it actually makes since that they would help each other out as a [B]team[/B] for their benefit and the benefit of the group? I show up to a D&D game, the GM says he needs to move the table, I say "I'll help". He says he needs to clean the table off and setup the map, I say "I'll help". He says he needs to clear a spot on the counter, I say "I'll help". As iserith said, making a downs side to helping your party encourages them to NOT act like a party in a party based game... this seems silly to me. Sure I could pull my back helping my gm move his table but I don't any rule that is designed to convince players to play solo is a good rule. Any deficit to helping is just that. With advantage and requirement for the helping player to have the skill to help they can still role badly and narrate failure of a twitch in your back but mechanically discouraging the attempt seems against the premise of getting together with my friends to adventure both in and out of the game. I want players to help each other when ever possible because that's what people should do in or out of the game when they are working together for a common goal. [B]Standing around watching one person do all the work you could help is jerk thing to do![/B] I understanding the restrictions on requiring the actual skills to help, room to get in there, lack of tools etc. but it seems to me if you don't want your players to work as a team there is a fundamental flaw to you sitting together to play a group game. If you want your players wanted to play solo they would play a video game. The inability for more than one player to help is a MUCH larger issue than player helping each other "too much". As iserith said,[B]If your just tired or your players saying "I help" then call for fewer tests[/B]. [B]I really feel like this is GM perspective problem not a game design problem.[/B] It doesn't slow down the game, it doesn't cause issues with players, and the only people I have ever seen get mad or upset because a player got helped was the GM who wanted players to fail... oddly enough the commonly fail anyway and GM is mad about it on premise not because it actually worked out. [B]Its the same line of arguments I hear about the Guidance spell[/B]. People band that spell because it reduces their chance of failure. The only reason that matters is if the GM WANTS players to fail. A GM … in my opinion… should not have a predetermined outcome in mind for tests but should let the chips fall where they may and have success and fail options. If the GM has a REQIREMENT that players fail, then set the test should auto Fail and their is no reason for the GM to call for role and no chance for the players to use the "help action". Don't blame players for working together to try to succeed. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Why doesn't the help action have more limits and down sides?
Top