Lending a helping hand

[Nils_Lindeberg]

As far as I know there are no official rules for helping someone else or group actions.

We use this system:

Any action, where one more person could be beneficial, could be done with help. The helper can do anything from distracting your foe in combat, to hold the light and tools for the lockpicker or stand back and play the bad cop in an interrogation.

The helper gives the main character a +1 if he succeeds on his own roll (same amount of dice as the main attempt), a +2 if he has a relevant talent and +3 if he has an expert talent? A failed help attempt gives a -1. You don't have to help if your don't want to.

A bonus with this system is that two Thieves will work together and not feel that they overlap. And a group is normally a little bit better than its best member, especially if the others in the group have some relevant talents.

And it opens up a new combat option in battle as a bonus. :-)

Do you guys have other systems?

[zot]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

As far as I know there are no official rules for helping someone else or group actions.

We use this system:

Any action, where one more person could be beneficial, could be done with help. The helper can do anything from distracting your foe in combat, to hold the light and tools for the lockpicker or stand back and play the bad cop in an interrogation.

The helper gives the main character a +1 if he succeeds on his own roll (same amount of dice as the main attempt), a +2 if he has a relevant talent and +3 if he has an expert talent? A failed help attempt gives a -1. You don't have to help if your don't want to.

A bonus with this system is that two Thieves will work together and not feel that they overlap. And a group is normally a little bit better than its best member, especially if the others in the group have some relevant talents.

And it opens up a new combat option in battle as a bonus. :-)

Do you guys have other systems?

This looks good to me.

I was going to object to the +1 for tasks which require expertise but after thinking about it, it does seem appropriate -- like in movies/TV when a doctor or a demolitionist instructs someone in how to help them with an operation or defusing a bomb. I like it.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

Some times with group actions, a perception test for example. You as a GM always have to chose between two bad things:

Either everyone in the group get to roll for themselves and statistical variation means that one player will almost always have a lucky roll. Or you only let the best character roll, and then making everyone else's skills irrelevant.

Now you can have the best (player's choice) or most appropriate person (like the sentry) roll and everyone else can chose to help or not. Every one is engaged and the 2nd and 3rd best or talented characters will probably give some needed help.


But there are many ways to do this. So anyone else doing it differently?

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

Some times with group actions, a perception test for example. You as a GM always have to chose between two bad things: ...

But there are many ways to do this. So anyone else doing it differently?

Hi Nils,
I like your system for the reason you gave above. As for how I handled this, I was done by GM fiat. If it made sense to me to allow helpers, I did so. I set the bonus, and the players could try to figure out a way to help better thus improving the bonus if they wanted to.

Warm regards, Rick

[Anomylous]

This forum needs an "upvote" button, but since there isn't one: Nils, that's a great idea. As implemented, it seems like it would produce slightly counterintuitive results - easy tasks are more likely to benefit from helpers, whereas difficult ones are more likely to be hindered. But, thinking about it, that actually seems fairly realistic.

On perception tests: I thought it was standard to make those rolls behind the GM screen – that's why I keep a reference list of characters' IQ's and relevant perception-y talents. Do any of y'all let players make their own rolls? How do you avoid giving them too much information on what they're trying to spot? The standard d20 "make a Perception check" is sufficiently vague, but telling a party walking through some tunnels to "roll 4 vs. IQ, one less if you're a Naturalist," seems basically tantamount to saying "there's a Green Slime on the ceiling somewhere"...

[Tolenkar]

A very good point! We have done something like this but usually require people that are helping to either make their die roll separately to give a +1 bonus to the one doing the main operation, or require everyone to succeed in their roll for the task to work. It the case of moving or lifting something using strength this works quite well. If anyone misses their roll then everyone gets fatigued and must try again. If I am feeling very cruel, characters have to use their diminishing ST, due to fatigue, each time they roll.

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

Some times with group actions, a perception test for example. You as a GM always have to chose between two bad things:

Either everyone in the group get to roll for themselves and statistical variation means that one player will almost always have a lucky roll. Or you only let the best character roll, and then making everyone else's skills irrelevant.

Now you can have the best (player's choice) or most appropriate person (like the sentry) roll and everyone else can chose to help or not. Every one is engaged and the 2nd and 3rd best or talented characters will probably give some needed help.


But there are many ways to do this. So anyone else doing it differently?

[Nils_Lindeberg]

Originally Posted by Anomylous

This forum needs an "upvote" button, but since there isn't one: Nils, that's a great idea. As implemented, it seems like it would produce slightly counterintuitive results - easy tasks are more likely to benefit from helpers, whereas difficult ones are more likely to be hindered. But, thinking about it, that actually seems fairly realistic.

On perception tests: I thought it was standard to make those rolls behind the GM screen – that's why I keep a reference list of characters' IQ's and relevant perception-y talents. Do any of y'all let players make their own rolls? How do you avoid giving them too much information on what they're trying to spot? The standard d20 "make a Perception check" is sufficiently vague, but telling a party walking through some tunnels to "roll 4 vs. IQ, one less if you're a Naturalist," seems basically tantamount to saying "there's a Green Slime on the ceiling somewhere"...

As a GM I let them roll a little now and then just to keep them on their toes. And often the players knows that they failed a roll, but if they don't have a great reason for changing their actions they continue as before. It is a give and take. And if they would change their behavior from normal to overly paranoid without "reason", just because of a die roll I would probably give them the eye and maybe even "let them change their minds". :-) It usually works.

If they roll great on a fake roll I give them some foreshadowing, like "This ceiling looks very clean, too clean even, almost like an ambush spot". And then they can prepare for the real ambush that might or might not come later on. :-)

The same goes for character private information. I let the other players remain in the room and I trust them to not mix character and player knowledge. It takes time, and is boring to be in another room during play when your character is not present and written notes only go so far.

More than once I have had players with great secrets that would have been great for the rest of the party to figure out or see how the player skillfully avoided detection over months or even years of play. But since the other players didn't know they never noticed it and the only two players that appreciated it all was me as GM and that player. And when we told the others afterwards they were like, "so what, we never saw it". If something doesn't come into play it might as well not exist.

So our main rule is that every player see as much as possible and then I trust them to keep it straight and separate with what their character knows. It is like a movie where you as the audience know way more than the hero. It works if done right. Open or secret rolls for perceptions or reactions are like that too. If I have a prepared NPC ready with a scheme, I might roll a reaction roll openly just to confuse them, play the NPC a little bit like that to begin with and then at the right moment show his true colors so to speak. A GM can always surprise the players.

Open rolls makes the game at least twice as tense. But as a GM i really need a back up plan if they fail a critical roll for the plot or story. And in combat I often have a plan B if the encounter seems like it is becoming too easy or too hard. Maybe there are backup for enemies or the party, on the way and they can arrive early, or late or at the speed of plot. Morale is a very useful tool. Sometimes the easy bad guys fights to the last and sometimes the too hard guys retreat in good order if they get hurt even just a little, carrying their injured comrades with them swearing to come back and finish the job another day and so on. Or the party will be taken captured instead of slaughtered like chattel.

Sometimes I even let the players roll attacks on themselves. It can speed up fights with many goons. They can see the board and all I have to do is say those two attack you, those three attack you and the rest attack the one in front. If the stats are already known the players can help roll it out. Quickens large combats a lot if it is face to face play.

In D&D which is our go to system most of the time it has gone so far that I as GM almost never rolls any dice. We turned AC and to hit around so now the players roll attacks on the monsters normally and then use their usually passive AC as an active value against a passive attack. So an AC 17 player roll d20 + 7 and compare it to a static attack of 15 if the attack was a d20+5 in order to avoid it. Feels a little like a parry or dodge that doesn't exist in D&D. It is very fast. Leaves me as a GM time to think about the big boss and special actions, spell choices etc.

It isn't for everyone but it works for my three or four regular gaming groups.