Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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="Wyvern" data-source="post: 7447749" data-attributes="member: 2374"><p>That sounds a lot like a group check to me. It may not be the same as how the PHB defines a group check, but it's still a group, making a check. Now, I can see how Clayton may have read something into your suggestion that wasn't there, but if that's the case it would behoove you to clear up the misunderstanding instead of getting pissy with him because he failed to understand you.</p><p></p><p>Clayton: I *think* (and Ovinomancer can correct me if I've also got the wrong end of the stick) that your mistake was assuming that Ovinomancer applies critical failures to skill checks, because he used the word "setback". On rereading <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?645445&p=7445561" target="_blank">this post</a>, it seems to me that he's suggesting that *any* failure would result in a "setback", not just failure by a certain margin. He also never said anything about "punishing group effort", so I'm not really sure where you got that from.</p><p></p><p>As to your comment that "Even a single character running the test could have the same consequences," I think you're missing the point of what he suggested. Again, as I understand it, <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?645445&p=7445561" target="_blank">this post</a> is saying that additional people making a skill check increases the chance of success while *also* increasing the chance of a setback, because it's not binary -- if one character succeeds at the check while another fails, the goal has been achieved but at a cost. (That's *not* possible if a single character is making the check, because they can either succeed or fail, but not both.)</p><p></p><p>Wyvern</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Wyvern, post: 7447749, member: 2374"] That sounds a lot like a group check to me. It may not be the same as how the PHB defines a group check, but it's still a group, making a check. Now, I can see how Clayton may have read something into your suggestion that wasn't there, but if that's the case it would behoove you to clear up the misunderstanding instead of getting pissy with him because he failed to understand you. Clayton: I *think* (and Ovinomancer can correct me if I've also got the wrong end of the stick) that your mistake was assuming that Ovinomancer applies critical failures to skill checks, because he used the word "setback". On rereading [URL=http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?645445&p=7445561]this post[/URL], it seems to me that he's suggesting that *any* failure would result in a "setback", not just failure by a certain margin. He also never said anything about "punishing group effort", so I'm not really sure where you got that from. As to your comment that "Even a single character running the test could have the same consequences," I think you're missing the point of what he suggested. Again, as I understand it, [URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?645445&p=7445561"]this post[/URL] is saying that additional people making a skill check increases the chance of success while *also* increasing the chance of a setback, because it's not binary -- if one character succeeds at the check while another fails, the goal has been achieved but at a cost. (That's *not* possible if a single character is making the check, because they can either succeed or fail, but not both.) Wyvern [/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