Let's Settle the D&D 5E “Help Action” Debate

[@plixeon]

I have helped many other work on vehicles, house projects, electronics repairs, and much more. While I am not proficient in these things myself, I was absolutely helpful. Anything that keeps players working together in character is a good thing.

[@randomusernameCallin]

Ever seen a non programmer try to debug code?

[@plixeon]

@@randomusernameCallin yes. I helped a friend debug a java script by play testing and feedback, and it was helpful. I didn't debug, but I helped. Thank you for supporting the point.

[@randomusernameCallin]

@@plixeon I was thinking all the time a person that is not proficient is programming try to help and just got in the way.

[@plixeon]

@@randomusernameCallin Sometimes, just knowing someone is watching your back can take the pressure off, allowing you to focus, giving the advantage you need in a clutch moment. Ultimately, it's a game with a 3 second hack of a drone while a dragon breaths fire, a minotaur wizard casts fireball, and a beholder shoots eye rays.

[@mcsnaga]

As a DM, I have ruled sometimes that only those proficient in the relevant skill can perform certain tasks. This is almost always because it relies on recalling VERY specialist knowledge about a historical or magical fact (for example). That said, in a library I would allow others to help (to look for any references to key words etc).

[@artistpoet5253]

Out of combat, it's purely contextual. Forcing open a door? Yeah, the more the merrier. Foraging for supplies? You bet. But then it becomes a task challenge so there's that.

[@AMRosa10]

I think some DMs will use proficiencies in Arcana, Religion, History, or Nature to gauge whether or not the Character has a chance of knowing something. It is also often used to prevent dogpiling on a skill check if someone fails. They may also adjust the DC. So, whereas someone with a proficiency in History may be able to recall all of the Open Lords of Waterdeep on a DC15, another will maybe need a 20 or 25 to recall the name of the last one from the 14th Century DR.

[@mrmastaofdesasta6994]

A DM I once played with used the proficiency rule and I found that extremely annoying and restricting. My rogue had a very good wisdom, yet was not able to help someone else with an animal handling check, even though our modifiers were the exact same. So I implement the rule as "You have to be reasonably able to help". In my eyes that means either being able to justify it roleplay wise, or having a +3 modifier on the check themselves. Usually my players come up with roleplay justifications anyway, so everyone's happy!

[@trappedcosmos]

This is such a skibidi video! I'd want to thank you for the enjoyable and interesting upload, its quite poggers. Looking forward to more.

[@wizardsling]

and a skibidi rizz fannum tax to you, good sir

[@edwardkopp1116]

I rule that since there is Passive Perception (that is just a skill plus attribute modifier) then there is also Passive XXX skill. Proficiency makes you better, and tools should make you even better than that. So if the is a History check to be made and it's under the Passive History score than the PC knows that information without rolling, just some prompting from the DM. If someone wants to use the Help Action then I assume they know some little piece of trivia that gives the primary skill user the prompt they needed to succeed.

[@randomusernameCallin]

I just assumed the other players are already doing what the can to help. For example, the players already have the lantern in the best place for the rouge to see. There is a difference from from a person looking for typeoes in your code than a person going through the logic with you.

[@benito_music]

just kinda elaborating on the rogue sneak attack help, i played an arcane trickster, and i had an owl familar, so every single bonus action i would have the owl give me help and with flyby they dont get opportunity attack. so i had sneak attack every turn. this was my first campaign i ever played in.

[@jonsaucy8440]

We’ve done everything we can to remove various forms of Advantage from our table. Abilities that grant advantage and those that rely on advantage already have those baked in. Our major issue at hand really comes from PCs being skill monkeys with positive modifiers to oftentimes 4/5’s of the spectrum of ability checks. When everyone shines, no one really shines uniquely. We want our rogue to be stealthy and dexterously pick locks. We want our ranger to be a survival expert (so we don’t skip exploration like many do). We want our wizards to be bookworms, or our clerics to be wise about the numerous religions. And at the end of the day, we’re all ok with failures at times. There’s benefits for success and consequences with failures; two major components to great story telling. As such, at our table you must be proficient in whatever is being attempted in order to aid someone; half your bonus is added to the other players roll and bonus. Yes, holding a light so a mechanic can work on the engine is great! Skillfull? No. And thus there is no equivalence to dnd because the ability scores demonstrate SKILL in something. Mundane tasks such as holding a light up can lower the DC a little bit (perhaps by 1 or 2 depending on how the assistance impacts the situation narratively), but you gain no roll bonus because holding a light isn’t a skill. Example: Rogue with no dark vision (haha, who doesn’t have dark vision these days?) is trying to pick a lock in a dark room. Another player holding up a light means that the roll goes from disadvantaged to straight roll. No need to lower the DC. That same scenario but occurring in a lit room, if the assisting player offered to help and they verbalized an appropriate method to help, but was otherwise unskilled, I’d drop the DC from say 18 to 17. It helped, but it was a mundane assistance and could’ve been done without them there at all (dancing lights etc). As always, make dnd what you want it to be at your table. I just caution players out there that DMs have a great uphill battle to present the players with meaningful challenges that the rules rarely support past x level. It’s great your character rolled well and had so many proficiencies. But just think before you throw out the Help Action or say your character does x; is the DM trying to shine the light on one of the players that don’t often step into the light by themselves? Am I beholden to roll on something simply because I’m good at it; like some inevitable destiny? Or should I find ways to make my character unique while also allowing those around me to shine as well? Perhaps celebrate some of their victories and share a bit in their failures; while letting a story unravel where the players, the DM, and the dice all had a say. I get that 5e (and apparently the 2024 version as well) was designed for newer players in mind; a simpler system easily understood. But I often think fondly back on grittier games where failures just meant ya had to find unique and creative solutions to problems. Not always having a designed route to success (which kind of subverts the reason to play). Flawed characters are interesting characters, and they don’t have to be good at everything; nor be mechanically capable of piling on advantage and more rolls to circumvent a failed die roll. It’s just made a lot of recent DnD design very bland to me. I love many things about 5e. The only true risk is either PC was disintegrated or their spirit didn’t want to come back. That’s it’s, those are the consequences lol. Everything else is a simple spell away from being fixed!

[@jonathanmurphy2400]

I know we're not going for ultimate realism here but, in my mind, there is a pretty significant difference between "being helpful" and doubling somone's chances at succeeding at something. Holding the flashlight might make the task less frustrating or accomplished somewhat faster but twice as likely to succeed? Magical Guidance only adds a d4. Utimately, it should be determined by the task and situation and decided by the DM. I think if anyone can do anything and anyone else can help, we should do away with all skills and let everyone roll at advantage to try anything. That's probably how it works in the new version anyway, lol.

[@ryanbeckett2313]

Both me as a DM and the DM I play my games with already use the way you use the help action. I just thought that was the base rules since I first learned it from my DM as a player lol.

[@donaldcrankshaw1627]

I might require proficiency to get advantage from someone helping, but not to cancel out disadvantage. Holding a flashlight would cancel a disadvantage (such as it being dark), but wouldn't actually make it easier to fix an engine under normal circumstances.

[@HansenPJ]

I agree with your take. The more collaboration the better

[@mikeyHustle]

People reverse-engineered their issues with the Help action into house rules. There's nothing anywhere to indicate that you can't Help, except that the DM wishes they couldn't. RAW, it's very generous and can be spammed. Realistically, the designers probably didn't mind, because the DM is also explicitly empowered to add Advantage (if they want) in all the same situations. The only real issue with the Help action is that a player might argue for Advantage when the DM doesn't want to give it, and a vague mechanic that constantly conflicts with how the DM sees the game is probably bad design.

[@charlesbarthalmuelmortimer1445]

Great Job GM Jim!

[@sleepinggiant4062]

We nipped this in the bud as soon as people started trying to abuse the help action. It became silly fast, and now it is rarely used (which is the way I like it). You just have to say no a lot, and set the tone for it.

[@chadliampolley6991]

I was wondering how long you were going to pet that teeny dragon.

[@darcyw156]

That teeny CHOINKY dragon! So great!

[@drzander3378]

When I DM, whether or not you need proficiency in a skill to use it depends on who the character is, what experience/knowledge they might reasonably have and what the situation is. So, for example, a character who had spent his formative years as a servant in a college of wizardry could make an arcana check to know what low level spell has fine sand, rose petals or a cricket as material components without requiring proficiency in arcana. On the other hand, a barbarian from a culture that knew nothing of magic could not make that check unless he had had special training, i.e. proficiency. In other words, it’s down to context.

[@RIVERSRPGChannel]

I guess it’s all up to the DM and how they interpret it.

[@darcyw156]

As is the entirety of the rules.

[@patchworkdragon2588]

It’s the spamming aspect that I dislike about the Help action. I’m a Needs Proficiency school of thought because I like the fact that the PCs have invested in their skills so if they are proficient in a skill then it makes sense they can help others to gain advantage or collaborate with other experts to gain advantage. The whole holding a flash light just feels like spamming and poor storytelling to gain a mechanical advantage. However if the non expert comes up with a good role playing scene for how they are helping - playing into their lack of proficiency but drawing on their abilities or just enthusiasm - then I would allow the Help action. TLDR: if you aren’t proficient you can’t Help others with a Skill check, unless you put some role play into what you’re doing to make it an engaging moment.

[@gavinruneblade]

I rule it close to your method, but with a slight difference. In the case of the flashlight, I'd allow it to remove disadvantage for working in the dark, but holding the flashlight during the day wouldn't help, so that's not enough by itself to get advantage. I also just ask "how" and they have to be proficient with something or the thing has to be something that doesn't require proficiency. The ladder is climbing and yes athletics helps with climbing but isn't requried so anyone can help. As stated, using lock picks does require proficiency, so does a poisoner's kit and tracking in the wilderness or knowing which mushrooms are poisonous. But if I'm doing a nature check and you're helping with survival (foraging), history (story of a guy who ate the wrong mushroom), herbalism kit (growing and keeping mushrooms healthy) or gardening tools (clearing out harmful plants from helpful ones) I consider any of those valid. And I'm really flexible on using cantrips that are tangentially relevant, like druidcraft. Again, like you I don't want it spammed, but I want to encourage teamwork and creativity.

[@mrzeloswilder]

I feel like the whole rules on this are a bit of a holdout from prior editions. I have played Warhammer Fantasy, PF1E, and D&D 3.5E all here recently. In all of these systems you have what are known as 'basic' skills, these are skill checks anyone can perform without having any points in theses skills (most of these systems let you put points in skills individually rather than a flat prof/expertise system). Though there are also 'advanced' skills, these are things that typically require training in order to use, usually most knowledge skills, animal handling, performance skills, professional skills etc. These 'advanced' skills you could only give the help action to if you yourself had ranks in these skills as well as they did so to speak. That is where I think the line came from.

[@TwinSteel]

🥳🫂👍🏿 This is number 2099 on the house rules playlist

[@BMHume]

"How many house rules do you know?" - "Yes."

[@prophetroll4086]

You're awesome

[@wizardsling]

why thank you! so are you

[@takanobaierun]

Legend tells, stop to pet the dragon before it goes to sleep and it will devour the world

[@wizardsling]

dragon demands tummy scritches!

[@takanobaierun]

@@wizardsling How to Pet a Dragon (C)

[@adrianwebster6923]

Does holding a flashlight do enough to warrant giving advantage to the mechanic? I think your narrative consideration is key. Sure many actions can be done without necessarily being proficient, but how many of those actions are helpful enough to warrant the boon?

[@wizardsling]

I would say if you have a rogue trying to pick a lock in a dimly lit cave, then a barbarian holding up a lantern nearby would be a pretty clutch way to help.

[@darcyw156]

I only require proficiency in the case of knowledge checks in order to give the help action. I feel you need to know something about a subject in oreder to be of help, otherwise you are just being annoying and saying, "what about this." or "Hey maybe it's that". Which is not helpful. And no, a natural 20 does not mean that the barbarian was able to realize that the glyph on the menhir is from the ancient Ostorian scholar Skaal. A natural 20 mioght let him know that the glyph looks kind of like a wolf holding a deer in its teeth. That said, good video, I think this rule is mis used often.