RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
First and foremost, there's this:
P3) It destroys the balance of hard DCs in those specific skills where you can use it (e.g. diplomacy) relative to the others (e.g. knowledge).
Let's get something clear: you're talking about a Core mechanic. Something that's been in the game a good long while, is not the result of unforeseen combinations of splat books written by different authors, and was deliberately made/kept a part of the game as a conscious decision by people more capable than you or me.
The intended balance of the game includes Aid Another. As a general rule, if a Core mechanic breaks your sense of game balance, then it's your sense of game balance that is wrong, not the Core mechanic in question.
That said, you also need to make sure you're running the Aid Another rules correctly - after all, that's part of the intended balance of the game as well. Consider this:
In many cases, a character's help won't be beneficial, or only a limited number of characters can help at once.
In cases where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results, such as trying to open a lock using Disable Device, you can't aid another to grant a bonus to a task that your character couldn't achieve alone. The GM might impose further restrictions to aiding another on a case-by-case basis as well.
When Mal is talking up a deal and Jayne is just standing there behind him, he's not Aiding. If the PC actually does something that could potentially be helpful (as decided by you, the GM), then they can make an Aid Another check. "I aid", followed by rolling a d20, is not sufficient.
Even in PFS, I think you have permission to leverage circumstance bonuses and penalties.
Each player should specify how his or her character is aiding, and what they're saying if it's a Bluff/Intimidate/Diplomacy check. If they can't think of anything useful to contribute, or worse yet they're actively disruptive, you can penalize them appropriately.
The key there is appropriately. Aid Another is in the rules. They're free to use it. Doesn't mean you can't make them work for it a little.
|
The intended balance of the game includes Aid Another. As a general rule, if a Core mechanic breaks your sense of game balance, then it's your sense of game balance that is wrong, not the Core mechanic in question
Do we really need to get this personal, Jiggy? We generally don't rejigger these kinds of basic core mechanics for PFS and try to run games per the RAW; we all know that but Florian might not.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The intended balance of the game includes Aid Another. As a general rule, if a Core mechanic breaks your sense of game balance, then it's your sense of game balance that is wrong, not the Core mechanic in questionDo we really need to get this personal, Jiggy? We generally don't rejigger these kinds of basic core mechanics for PFS and try to run games per the RAW; we all know that but Florian might not.
I wasn't trying to get personal. Just stating a good rule of thumb. What part of my words that you quoted was personal (or otherwise offensive)? Help me understand.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In cases where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results, such as trying to open a lock using Disable Device, you can't aid another to grant a bonus to a task that your character couldn't achieve alone. The GM might impose further restrictions to aiding another on a case-by-case basis as well.
Bolded section - I interpret that to mean that if the DC is too high for someone to hit by taking 20 then they can't assist.
When Mal is talking up a deal and Jayne is just standing there behind him, he's not Aiding.
But Jayne could certainly Aid Mal's Intimidation by just standing there and looking intimidating.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
if a Core mechanic breaks your sense of game balance, then it's your sense of game balance that is wrong, not the Core mechanic in question
Generally, when someone else tells me who or what I am, especially that I am wrong, I consider that presumptuous and a bit rude. I wouldn't call it offensive (that's too strong a word), but definitely over the line. That may just be me, however.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bolded section - I interpret that to mean that if the DC is too high for someone to hit by taking 20 then they can't assist.In cases where the skill restricts who can achieve certain results, such as trying to open a lock using Disable Device, you can't aid another to grant a bonus to a task that your character couldn't achieve alone. The GM might impose further restrictions to aiding another on a case-by-case basis as well.
That too.
@Bearded Ben - Yeah. I was watching an episode recently where Jayne just sort of makes eye contact and shifts his weight backward a little, tilting his chin up. I immediately thought "Aid Another for intimidate!" ;)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wasn't trying to get personal. Just stating a good rule of thumb. What part of my words that you quoted was personal (or otherwise offensive)? Help me understand.The intended balance of the game includes Aid Another. As a general rule, if a Core mechanic breaks your sense of game balance, then it's your sense of game balance that is wrong, not the Core mechanic in questionDo we really need to get this personal, Jiggy? We generally don't rejigger these kinds of basic core mechanics for PFS and try to run games per the RAW; we all know that but Florian might not.
Not to speak for Alex, but the bolded portion struck me as being accusatory.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
if a Core mechanic breaks your sense of game balance, then it's your sense of game balance that is wrong, not the Core mechanic in questionGenerally, when someone else tells me who or what I am, especially that I am wrong, I consider that presumptuous and a bit rude. I wouldn't call it offensive (that's too strong a word), but definitely over the line. That may just be me, however.
Why is telling someone they're wrong rude? Is it just because I used the word "wrong"? Would it have been less rude to replace "is wrong" with "needs adjusting"?
I certainly hope that's all it is. Nobody ever gets better at anything if we can't tell each other when we're wrong.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here is a help another incident that had a fellow GM nearly exploding.
Player A rolls faction mission - rolls low
Player B - I assist, I assist
Problem: Player B had NO clue what she was assisting. Only out of character she noticed a dice roll that seemed not good enough.
The (nearly) failed skill check was for a secret faction mission. The same player did this now more than once. I know the next time it happens that the GM will be unable to control himself having told off the player every single time not to assist just any skill check.
There are times you should assist - thre are also times you better don't. The secret faction mission of another player falls into the latter.
|
|
@brock and Mortika
I interpret that to mean that if the DC is too high for someone to hit by taking 20 then they can't assist.That would work indeed, but alas it has already been clarified as NOT being the actual RAW in another thread.
Wrong again :) Do you have the thread title or a link so that I can go and read up? Thanks.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that's a good strategy to ask the Aider for a description of their actual aid attempt, but it's often just too hard to adjudicate and also time-consuming. You might end up, as a GM, making a judgment call that could frustrate players.
Adjudication will get easier with practice, as will the timing (it doesn't need to be a drawn-out performance). And generally (in my experience), once asked, the player knows whether their answer makes sense or not and won't get upset (in fact, if they can't think of a legitimate assistance, they usually just withdraw their attempt to AA).
This taps into the old "player actions vs. PC actions" touchy subject... I don't want to require of the *player* to have great idea for his great PC to make great things (including aiding...)
You are wise to be cautious, but I think you should be safe here. As long as the skill check decides whether they get the bonus or not, you're not really letting/making the player perform in place of their character. Besides, it doesn't even need to be verbatim what the character says. It can be "I'll try to help Bob's Get Date check by being his wingman" without detailing exactly what words he uses (this also helps with your concern about time).
|
|
I'd apply a -2 or -4 to the check in a heartbeat if someone aiding made a total faux pas or specified an action that would hinder, not help.
I'd also demand to know what they're doing/saying to assist. If they can't be bothered thinking up what they're doing, I wouldn't apply their +2, no matter what they rolled.
I love this game because of GM discretion.
Thanks for your arguments, but what's your experience? Never felt annoyed?
@brock and Mortika
I interpret that to mean that if the DC is too high for someone to hit by taking 20 then they can't assist.That would work indeed, but alas it has already been clarified as NOT being the actual RAW in another thread.
@Jiggy
That it's been written by Cook and Williams twelve years ago doesn't mean it's perfect and *I* should try to make it work. And I don't believe the DC balance is so good you can hang your head on it. E.g. why is it as hard to know all of a Bebilith's powers and weakness than... kowing the price of a backpack?@redward & others
I think that's a good strategy to ask the Aider for a description of their actual aid attempt, but it's often just too hard to adjudicate and also time-consuming. You might end up, as a GM, making a judgment call that could frustrate players.
This taps into the old "player actions vs. PC actions" touchy subject... I don't want to require of the *player* to have great idea for his great PC to make great things (including aiding...)
+1
let me give you a scenario---player 1 has a fighter with 7 cha and great fight stats---the player himself is very charasmatic and smart unlike his character
player 2 is playing a sorcerer with great charisma but the player himself is not good at "roleplaying" and thinking how he uses that charisma.
now if you make the "player" instead of the character give descriptions of how they help--the fighter will be a better diplomat--that is not right
would you do the same for physical things--ie strength based? what if the person playing the sorcerer was a weightlifter and the person playing the fighter was a 90lb weakling. would you ask both of them to lift 150 lbs as players to support what their character was doing?
a better solution is to limit how many people can help. trying diplomacy and the whole party is talking at the merchant? the merchant may feel threatened or overwhelmed. Maybe say two people max can help without alienating the merchant.
trying to intimidate someone in a dark alley? are 6 people "really" that much more scary than 3? when they already had you outnumbered?
|
|
In my games, if someone wants to aid another they actually have to do something that helps, not just say "I aid him!". I also do the same for diplomacy and bluff, using what they say to judge the DC of bluff or if they are very compelling, lowering the DC for diplomacy. In fact the same goes for all skills. The thing that really started this for me was stealth. I got tired of players saying "I use stealth" when they should be saying "I creep alongside the wall staying in the shadows trying to remain unseen."
And yes, the "I aid him" thing bugs the crap out of me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my games, if someone wants to aid another they actually have to do something that helps, not just say "I aid him!". I also do the same for diplomacy and bluff, using what they say to judge the DC of bluff or if they are very compelling, lowering the DC for diplomacy. In fact the same goes for all skills. The thing that really started this for me was stealth. I got tired of players saying "I use stealth" when they should be saying "I creep alongside the wall staying in the shadows trying to remain unseen."
And yes, the "I aid him" thing bugs the crap out of me.
so to use their character skills--their player has to do something? how do you have your fighters use their combat skills? wrestling match on the floor? Kind of unfairly punishes people who have skills instead of combat.
a fighter with 7cha, 7int and 7 wis could downplay those weaknesses by using "player" knowledge and talking. Could actually be better at diplomacy than a bard or sorcerer played by a "player" who is socially more reserved.
so if the sorcerer player at the table is athletic and strong but the fighter "player" at the table is weak---do you let the "players" do athletic things to give the sorcerer get extra bonuses on their physical skills?
players and characters should be kept separate
at it this way
jay has a sorcerer with 3 skill in diplomacy and a 16 charisma for +3
John has a fighter with 3 skill in diplomacy and a 10 charisma for +0
they both try to assist a different charcter and both roll a 10, you ask them to say what thier character would do. John is very eloquent and has good ideas. Jay has a hard time exmplaining.
So you would let John assist and not Jay?
so what would you do later in combat. John is trying to hit with a dagger and Jay is trying to hit with a dagger. both are at +1 BAB and have the same to hit number except for strength.
John has a 16 str for +3 and Jay has a 10 str for +0. do you have them do pushups? and if jay can do 30 pushups and john only 10--jay the sorcerer gets the bonus?
you are punishing people who put points into skills or charisma by making them justify their rolls with their toons. Why put any points into skills, int, cha or wis at your table--I will shove them all into physical traits and just play a fighter and have my "player" do all the stuff requiring skills or charisma. Why not put my cha, int and wis to 7?--I can just "describe" the ideas that I as a player came up with and succeed anyhow.
I understand the frustration of the "me too" assist thing. But making someone have "real world" things to back up their character is not the answer. How many of us could do the physical things our characters can or have to physically ourselves justify them? Now you take a player who may be awkward or not as good at explaining social things and make him as a player "justify" his character, who he rolled up as socially skilled?
|
If the game mechanics say a player can Aid Another, then I'm not going to make that aid dependent on how well the player role-plays or describes the action. I don't make my fighters act out their swordstrokes, the bards make inspiring speeches, or the rogues spell out in detail how their acrobatics enable them to get behind their opponent.
Of course it's more dramatic if Bjorn the fighter says "I turn and face the largest of the gnolls, raise my axe above my head, and take advantage of his being distracted by Nils to drive my axe deep into gnoll flesh" rather than "I attack gnoll #1. With 15 on the die, plus 2 for Nils flanking, my strength bonus of +3, and my +2 greataxe, that's 22 to hit" (or even just "does a 22 hit gnoll #1?"). But I'm not going to impose an in-game penalty such as disallowing the attack or adjusting the gnoll's AC for out-of-game actions.
Remember, this is the PFS forum. If you adjusted the DC on my Diplomacy or Bluff check purely based on my playing style (rather than on my character offering a genuinely creative alternative to the direct check) you're treading on dangerous ground.
|
thread title or a link so that I can go and read up? Thanks.Here: Fixed Link.
But you'll see I'm wrong in that there's no actual clearcut clarification and opinions vary on the interpretation of the rules. So I might be using your interpretation, as I think it would indeed help.
So a few things about that particular linked thread since I am the one that started it.
So although there are strong arguments in that thread to support how I now think that line in Aid another means, You can't Aid another in a trained only skill if you don't have the skill, it is still just an opinion.
It still can be read either way, it has never been clarified by a developer.
That is an example of an unclear rule that I am good with a GM ruling it either way.
Another thing about that thread, it is a perfect example of one of the things I hate about how people interpret rules. There was a poster in that one that was taking an example from one place and using it to confuse a rule where it does not belong. In this example taking how skills worked in 3.5 and applying it to their opinion on how it works in Pathfinder.. grrrr...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my games, if someone wants to aid another they actually have to do something that helps, not just say "I aid him!". I also do the same for diplomacy and bluff, using what they say to judge the DC of bluff or if they are very compelling, lowering the DC for diplomacy. In fact the same goes for all skills. The thing that really started this for me was stealth. I got tired of players saying "I use stealth" when they should be saying "I creep alongside the wall staying in the shadows trying to remain unseen."
And yes, the "I aid him" thing bugs the crap out of me.
so to use their character skills--their player has to do something? how do you have your fighters use their combat skills? wrestling match on the floor? Kind of unfairly punishes people who have skills instead of combat.
a fighter with 7cha, 7int and 7 wis could downplay those weaknesses by using "player" knowledge and talking. Could actually be better at diplomacy than a bard or sorcerer played by a "player" who is socially more reserved.
so if the sorcerer player at the table is athletic and strong but the fighter "player" at the table is weak---do you let the "players" do athletic things to give the sorcerer get extra bonuses on their physical skills?
players and characters should be kept separate
The player decides to have their character move into a flank or take the high ground? The character gets bonuses. The player gives an explanation of how they are helping in an Aid Another? The character gets bonuses. I don't think anyone is saying they were looking for inspired roleplaying or real-life charisma to convince the GM that they should be able to aid, just a simple explanation of how they are helping:
"Uhh...I don't know...uhh...I guess I would back up his Diplomacy by showing my Wayfinder and saying we're Pathfinders or something" is more than fine--it doesn't have to be a masterpiece.
Giving a reason to assist being compared with doing push-ups or actually sneaking up on the GM for a surprise round are false analogies. The analogue would be things like thinking of taking the high ground for +1 to hit in combat or thinking to take cover for +2 or +4 AC or maybe dropping prone against ranged fire.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry, should have been more specific. My usual style is to ask them how they aid someone. I don't do this for combat, but for social skills, I'll ask them what they say. This doesn't determine success or failure, but if the answer is "I don't know, I just use the skill" I have a problem with that.
Hakken: I don't ignore character stats, for example there's no way people with low scores are having an easier time of it by roleplaying their way out of a scenario, the roll still reflects that, I just require my players to accompany their bluff roll with a little bit of roleplaying. However, sometimes no matter how hard you push, some people just don't want to do it.
I've only adjusted the DC for a society scenario once, in fact I gave him a bonus instead, and that was because it was an ingenious solution to a very tough problem.
|
|
As GM I have experienced two extremes:
a) Someone tries a check - fails by 1 - everyone around the table just ignores it.
As GM - who has the advantage to know the DC - this is often the time where I encourage aid another.
b) Someone tries a skill check and across the table a player rolls a dice - shouts - I assist - I rolled a 15 - not even knowing what skill, what the circumstance, etc.
It is the latter that is annoying to a GM. Someone who isn't paying enough attention to realize what he/she is supporting shouldn't be able to support.
I gave the example with the secret faction mission for a reason as in this case aid another becomes PvP. A player who insists on assisting someone else in his secret mission just blew the mission for that player.
To make it even more interesting - in this case the Taldoren player wanted to help the Chelexian to undermine the Taldorens ...
Aid another is useful and powerful. But both extremes - an always help another as well as a never help another do in my view deter from the roleplay.
Help another should not become a reflex to do whenever someone rolls a skill check. This devalues the overall experience.
A player should look at the situation, look at his character - and then should decide is it sensible for him to support and is it in character.
There is nothing rules can do here - this is educating players about roleplay.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Keep in mind that Aid Another is still a standard action and that you must also perform the same action (meaning at least 1 skill point for trained-only skills and some danger involved when aiding trap disabling). Any number of people can usually aid because they're consuming their standard action - out of combat you just need to make sure they can all still normally perform that action.
I've run into a lot of this as a Gm and as someone whose Cavalier tends to make use of the Aid Another system:
If they want to Aid Another for Diplomacy they must talk and say something that is new and relevant to the conversation... not just say "yeah! what he said!" For Intimidate this can just be beating their fists and making menacing gestures - strength in numbers can be intimidating. But if the party all wants to make a Know (Arcana) to identify the dragon, then each aider needs to use their Standard Action to make the assist and needs at least 1 rank in the knowledge; I view this a collaboration about the monster: "Red dragons are immune to the flame" "I also heard they eat maidens and breath fire!" "And I'm certainly not gonna be able to Sleep them!" etc.
Aid Another can be used for saving throws as well (something that is forgotten), and a lot of people don't understand how that works. You know the AoE is coming, so you ready your standard to push your buddy out of the way; you make a Reflex DC 10 to give them a +2 before you both make a reactive Reflex save. For a Fort save versus a poison you could be sucking the poison from the wound, and a Will versus a Hold Person could be a slap across the face and saying "get a hold of yourself!" (And thus play out the scene from Airplane until they can act again)
My point is that Aid Another is only really broken when the GM isn't questioning what activity they are doing to Aid their ally - and we as GMs then get to say whether or not that action would logically help them. Push your players for creative and logical responses and actions.
Aid Another can be used for saving throws as well (something that is forgotten)
Can you point me to where it says that? That would be very good to know.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
you are punishing people who put points into skills or charisma by making them justify their rolls with their toons. Why put any points into skills, int, cha or wis at your table--I will shove them all into physical traits and just play a fighter and have my "player" do all the stuff requiring skills or charisma. Why not put my cha, int and wis to 7?--I can just "describe" the ideas that I as a player came up with and succeed anyhow.
I always have trouble with this aspect of the game as dice rolls for social interaction are such a new mechanism. I do see your point though.
It's not the quality of the explanation that's important, but as a GM I want at least a brief, out of character if necessary, explanation of how it is possible to help.
It's obviously absurd to expect the fighter player to do pushups before allowing him to swing a dagger in the game, but if he wants to storm a keep then I'm likewise going to ask 'how'.
Now, counterpoint: There are players of characters with high charisma scores who put no effort into roleplaying and always speak out of character and in game terms. That's fine in PFS, we have to be accepting of anyone who might turn up at the table. However for me it's as painful as fingernails on a blackboard and completely immersion breaking. How can we encourage such a person to dip a toe into roleplaying?
|
|
Someone who isn't paying enough attention to realize what he/she is supporting shouldn't be able to support.
Well, someone who isn't paying enough attention to where his miniature is on the table to spot that he's in a flanking position probably shouldn't be able to provide a flank, either. But that's not how the game works.
I gave the example with the secret faction mission for a reason as in this case aid another becomes PvP. A player who insists on assisting someone else in his secret mission just blew the mission for that player.
Not necessarily ...
I've actually seen a player who needed to make a skill check he was incapable of achieving, and to do it secretly, talk another player into making the check for him. The second player thought he was doing something completely different (related to the overall scenario objective), and had no idea what his character was actually achieving.Help another should not become a reflex to do whenever someone rolls a skill check. This devalues the overall experience.
A player should look at the situation, look at his character - and then should decide is it sensible for him to support and is it in character.
There is nothing rules can do here - this is educating players about roleplay.
All very desirable, and I'd encourage everybody to do whatever they can, out of game, to encourage more roleplaying. But, at the end of the day, in-character roleplaying is not a requirement for playing at a PFS table.
I'm not sure the rules do leave you totally powerless, though. If the mindless "Aid Another" does get to the point of devaluing the overall experience, it could well be subject to the "Don't be a jerk" directive. And if there's a good reason to inquire how the aiding character can get into a position where aid would be possible, or overcome some other obstacle, asking for an explanation provides a way to engage and encourage the player. But I'd be very cautious about exercising GM prerogative to allow or disallow the aid attempt based on whether the player answered using in-game or out-of-game terminology.
|
|
JohnF
What I resent is
Dice roll - I rolled a 12 - I assist
Can you tell me what skill it is and what I assist please
This scenario - unfortunately - is how one of my local players is doing it. Trained skill checks, secret skill checks, skill checks where the character is on the other side of the map - no matter. She ALWAYS rolls and assumes she aids.
And this really annoys other players and GMs.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Can you point me to where it says that? That would be very good to know.Aid Another can be used for saving throws as well (something that is forgotten)
You can also use this standard action to help a friend in other ways, such as when he is affected by a spell, or to assist another character's skill check.
I'll agree that it does not explicitly say so, but the phrase "such as" does heavily imply it - doubly so since the first example is for aiding against a spell.
|
|
I'll agree that it does not explicitly say so, but the phrase "such as" does heavily imply it - doubly so since the first example is for aiding against a spell.
You can also use this standard action to help a friend in other ways, such as when he is affected by a spell, or to assist another character's skill check.
Difficult to think of what other roll that text could be referring to modifying if it isn't a saving throw. That's a can of worms though. There is no DC for the roll that you would make. How does one go about aiding another defeat mind altering magic? Yuk!
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
Difficult to think of what other roll that text could be referring to modifying if it isn't a saving throw. That's a can of worms though. There is no DC for the roll that you would make. How does one go about aiding another defeat mind altering magic? Yuk!
It's tag-lined at the end of Aid Another, so the DC remains 10... which is the DC for all Aid Another actions
As for how... that's up to your creativity ^_~
Can you point me to where it says that? That would be very good to know.Aid Another can be used for saving throws as well (something that is forgotten)
Here's a thread on it, it's fairly complicated, and no clear resolution was reached. There are some FAQ requests there if anyone would like to see it addressed.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lest this whole topic get overanalyzed, I'll just scale back a bit and show you all how I handle Aid Another:
Player: I'll aid!
Me: How?
If the player has an answer that's not nonsense, they can make the Aid check. Simple as that.
At my table I try to clear this up before the session even starts. For "group" skill checks I ask the table to identify who is the primary participant and who is assisting. If the group doesn't identify these individuals, I may do so myself depending on the situation.
Diplomacy, for example: If none are declared when the encounter starts, the player doing the most talking is who rolls the check. Other players who have chimed in will be asked to roll aid another. I have NEVER run a diplomacy encounter without at least trying to engage one player in dialogue. If they come up with some creative ideas I reward them with a secret circumstance bonus ranging in value, but never so much to completely negate the challenge. There is a much smaller chance that I'll assign a penalty if the player says things that should make the situation worse.
I do have one nonstandard rule that I'm sure someone will blow out of proportion. If you attempt to aid another and fail by 5 or more you will impart a -2 penalty on the situation for all skills. This is most important when a 7 CHA character's player gets involved in a diplomacy situation and I require them to roll to aid another.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I do have one nonstandard rule that I'm sure someone will blow out of proportion.
Oh, oh, me! Pick me! ;)
If you attempt to aid another and fail by 5 or more you will impart a -2 penalty on the situation for all skills. This is most important when a 7 CHA character's player gets involved in a diplomacy situation and I require them to roll to aid another.
So, did you require an otherwise silent player to involve their PC, forcing a check they didn't want to make and possibly penalizing the party? Or is it that when you say you require a roll, you mean the player already voluntarily got involved verbally and you just enforced a check to represent the effects of their words?
I would have to take exception to the former, but heartily approve of the latter.
I play with large group ie 6-10 player here how fixed to help keep skill check in line.
1) To aid other you have to have a lest one rank in the skill you are aiding in.
You have to have some thing useful to add not just luck or theory of large numbers.
2) The first person that aid other is DC 10 and every person pass the first is DC 10 +2 for each person that tried. So second Person is DC 12 third is DC 14 forth is DC 16 so on and so forth.
The reasoning on this is so get same answer ie describe a fire truck and ask ten folk 9 of them all say it red.
3) If there is any type of negative out come it happens to all helped make check.
The idea is shared risk and shared reward.
4) The lead roller goes first and rest go in Initiative order.
This helps stop some of the well I auto aid. Or 9 checks when may one need 1 or none.
5) To aid You have be in the sceane to help.
If you are not there how in the hell can you help...
6) If you fail the aid other by 5 or more you then get -2 lead roller total.
Idea to many chiefs spoil the stew.
7) Some time there is just limt you have to impose on the amount of help you get.
It has to make sence to me.
8) In social encouter you have to add some thing Ie talk not just yell out "I aid other roll"
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Thanks for all the inputs. If I summarize, the #1 problem mentioned here is:
Emphasis mine. I think you misunderstand the consensus here: people just yelling "I aid!" without being involved in the action isn't "legit but unfun", it's actually NOT legit. Aiding without actually doing something, or in a situation where you couldn't feasibly be of assistance, is in fact against the rules.
Enforcing the limitations that are built into the Aid Another mechanic will eliminate abuse of said mechanic.