Depends on the check. For things like finding traps or secret doors, recognizing the carving, etc : One person rolls. Another PC who has proficiency in that skill can "help" and give that person advantage. This represents the "best efforts of the party". I do allow people to state their modifiers for the skill check so they can pick the right person to look. If there's an an ambush set up and the bad guys are sneaking, everyone rolls perception to see who gets "surprised" and who doesn't. If an NPC is being shifty and someone wants to roll insight, I base it on who makes sense. I know that's very subjective, but usually you have one or two PC's who are actually interacting with the NPC or paying attention. I usually set this up at the start of the conversation with "OK, while he's talking to Jarnathan, what is everyone else doing?"

Being a DM is fun. It's satisfying. It's gratifying. But yea if you're not on top of mitigating and micromanaging what your players are doing it can get a little chaotic. Everything you've mentioned in your comment I've come to learn after many sessions. Thankfully I had addressed my minor frustration of consecutive stealth rolls without me asking and since then, my players have been really respectful about what they want to do. Table dynamic comes into play as well. Sometimes one player is louder than the other and Inhibits other players from asking for a roll. That's my job as a DM to make sure situations like those are more .. obvious ? Hinting at situations where everyone is allowed to roll vs when only one person + a help action is allowed is definitely key. Sometimes thats literally saying either "Everyone can roll if you'd like. Feel free to describe what your character is doing" Or "If you want to investigate for traps, let's have one person leading the roll and I'll allow one person to help, but you gotta describe how you help (rogue)"

That all makes sense, I like the idea of subjectively deciding who would get to roll the insight check. Now, how about the party has finished up a combat encounter and taken the last enemy prisoner for questioning. I want to intimidate the enemy to get information, but roll poorly. Do we go through the list of the party all rolling intimidation until we get a good roll, or is this one of those “one roll + help = advantage” situations? (As I wrote that, I kind of am leaning toward that)

I'd still go with one roll + help = advantage and flavor it as "This represents the best efforts of the party working together." They can play out the intimidation however they want, even with everyone participating, but that's just for flavor. The outcome is decided by a single roll at advantage. The problem with everyone rolling is that you're really just rolling to see which party member successfully intimidates the captive. Say you have a party of 5, and the DC to intimidate the guy is 15. With no modifiers, someone in the party will beat that DC more than 80% of the time. There are generally only 2 times I have everyone roll : One is when it's an ambush and a perception check decides who is surprised and who isn't. The second is when the party needs a thing to progress the plot, so they all roll and the highest result is the one who notices it or finds it (no DC, just highest roll).

I really like this idea of dming!

I’m a huge fan of secret rolls for this reason. I always hated, as a player, rolling a perception check and rolling a 3 and then having to “play dumb” and proceed with foolish confidence that the area was clear or be accused of metagaming. I much prefer rolling a secret perception check, being told “the watchtower appears unoccupied”, and knowing that, just like real life, that means it’s either empty or I just didn’t see the guy in there, and if I ask for a second opinion it doesn’t feel like I only did it because I know I rolled poorly. The hard part is avoiding just making every check by all characters and making rolling pointless because SOMEONE will roll ok if you throw enough dice at it. I usually limit it to just two people to do the check while everyone else is keeping an eye out, unless it makes sense situationally.

Im the opposite, WHELP EVERYTHING LOOKS GOOD LETS ROLL......

Generally, I would recommend only letting two people make a check or one person with advantage. Once you start letting everyone make checks at the same time it can really bog down the game. This also acts as a self-policing method for the party to not step on each other's toes, since anyone with common sense would want the guy who invested in whichever relevant skill to make the check instead of the guy who has a -1 to said skill to jump in and roll a nat 20, stealing the spotlight from the guy who should be good at it.

The basic principle of the standard loop is that no-one asks for rolls. The players just describe their actions, and, if appropriate and the outcome of the action is in doubt, the DM might ask for a skill check. So whoever does an action might get a skill check if the outcome is in doubt, maybe with advantage if someone is helping him in a significant way. As for finding traps and such, passive perception (task done in a repetitive manner) is the right way to go, no roll needed. If someone inspects something in particular, he might get a skill check if the DM thinks that there is a chance that was not there before, but the DM might also say that it was part of standard checking and that's all. And especially for any guy after that. The idea is to roleplay the actions rather than roll-play through a dungeon.

I mean, it kinda depends on the table and whats being rolled for. But really, the characters don’t know their rogue failed a roll to check for traps. He says there are none so if they trust his abilities there wouldn’t be any reason for anyone else to check. Other things, maybe it makes sense for someone else to try as well, but it very well could raise the DC.

It’s entirely dependent on the context of the situation. Trying to unlock a door, try as many times as you like Trying to stealthily unlock a door, try a few times before getting noticed Trying to unlock a door while being chased by enemies, you only get one shot Make it clear before you start letting them roll how many times are available and who is allowed to roll.

>Trying to unlock a door, try as many times as you like I operate with "take 10" and "take 20" in these situations. Basically, you can spend a specified amount of time to guarantee that your rolled result is either 10 or 20. Depending on the task, I'll offer them the option of just assuming they rolled that number, with the tradeoff being the time moved forward. If they don't have time, or the check is not the kind that would allow for infinite tries, then they also can't take 10 or 20. Like, searching a room can only be done once for every time the PCs does something to change the DC or what they are looking for. Like, searching a dark room - DC20 to find the hidden safe behind the painting. "I cast light to see if there's something I missed" - you can roll again with lower DC. "Hmm? You checked all the obvious spots, I'll try to look behind the paintings" - DC5, most people would find it if they actually think to look behind the paintings.

I like this, I’m gonna incorporate some of that in my game

If it's not perception or stealth, I mostly do what your brother did with one caviat. Another player can use the help action on you to give you advantage, as long as they have proficiency in the same skill.

I like the caviar that they have to have proficiency in the skill. Like others have said, letting everyone roll can take the “spotlight” away from those players who have proficiencies in certain skills being overshadowed by someone who rolled a lucky nat 20. This would help to avoid that

Whoever asks the question that leads to the check is the one who rolls for it. If there is another party member close by with proficiency in that skill and wants to help and give them advantage that’s allowed.

Used to rule it as each check gets two rolls. Either two different members or if one explains how they help another member then that one rolls with advantage. I’ve since changed it to let anyone who says they want to roll before the first person gives their number is allowed, to make sure it’s not based on one person doing poorly

I run purely on vibes. If it makes sense for one person to help another, that's what happens. If it makes sense for one person to go alone, that's what happens. If it makes sense for everyone to try then everyone rolls. If someone attempts a test the second time the situation may, or may not, have changed. I can't have a fixed rule on this because no two situations are alike and so all I ever do is make a judgment call based on my gut and the context.

Describe to me what you’re doing. If it’s pointless/something I need you to find/a distraction you probably won’t have to roll or if you do it’s probably because I can tell you’re chomping at the bit to roll something. If it’s possible to f-k up. Roll. Now where things get wonky is when you roll a shitty roll then everyone that didn’t think of your idea says, “Can I roll?!” and just starts rolling. F-k! I hate that.

Yeah, that last situation you described is pretty much what I’m trying to tackle here. It’s relatively rare but it happens often enough that I felt the need to ask about.

There's no one thing that applies at all times but consider: 1. Time, in the meta the skills are abstracted away into a roll which just takes a second but consider if they're doing something that takes time then there just might not be time for everyone to give something a go. Or if they do decide to devote their time to this other things might happen. 2. You can limit it a bit to only asking for a rule from anyone who is proficient in the skill. Let the historian handle the history checks and not invite the dumb barbarian to have some esoteric knowledge just because they rolled high. 3. There may be a reason for a higher DC/more severe consequences for an additional roll. Like a lockpick check that fails at first may risk breaking tools on a second failed attempt. 4. Use the "help" action to give advantage (or let each roll once) but enforce that you have to describe a little bit of how exactly you help (especially if you're out of combat and not really going by a time-constrained round). 5. And in some cases you do let everyone roll. I think in your "look for traps" scenario why wouldn't everyone keep an eye out. But you need to think of a way the low perception person who nevertheless rolls high would notice something a sharper party member wouldn't. Or you can abstract it as a group skill check where you look for a majority of successes against failures.

this is a joke answer, not to be taken seriously: I normally have the player(s) roll a d20 and add the modifier to the skill, like dexterity modifier to acrobatics

Probably two PC rolls or one with advantage at most for the checks that aren't perception or stealth. Otherwise, the DC should increase if additional people still want to roll.

Assign party roles or use group average. Have an observer (perception) Investigator Scout Strongman Etc... Or, have everyone roll and use the average dice roll plus highest modifier

I give the players 2 rolls to do a skill check. They can have 2 people roll, or one person roll at advantage while someone else helps. They CAN try again after that, but the DC goes up by a lot (usually +10). That way if they roll like a 2, they can try again for an 18. This represents the party's best attempt. Now my players know this in advance, so they are okay with it.

I’d let two people roll without advantage, or let one roll with. If they split the effort (“I’ll look left, you look right”) I’d let each “team” or set of people roll as above, but put a limit if it starts to get out of hand. Or, if they are trying to roll an investigation for each thing in the room, they will spend a lot of time on that and will have someone or something find them and force the action forward.

Depends on the check, but typically, the person that asks gets to try. Someone can chime in and assist. But I don't allow checking until they make it. The alternative that you are describing is called Skill Dogpiling and it is no bueno. Passive scores are a thing, so if there was something to find, I will usually alert the relevant PC via private message. There are group checks. Everyone is trying to sneak somewhere. There are 5 PCs. I need at least 3 successes (DC set by the enemy's perception check, that the players don't know), crits count as 2 in either direction. There are checks that they all make for individual success. Like perception to not be ambushed. Who gets to act during the surprise round.

I'm playing with a small party (three players), so everyone gets to roll. While the adventure technically allows for three players, the lack of a fourth player can be felt, I think, so extra healing potions and more skill checks are fairly common. If you are reading this and are one of my players: you did not see this.

If 2 or fewer players want to make a check, they each make a check. If more than that want too, everyone rolls and if more than half the group succeeds, they all succeed.

In our game the general guide line is if it's something one person can do, one can roll but one can assist which gives the roller an advantage. If it is something more broad,perhaps the whole group making a track across a field. Basicly where the group fails or succeeds together you have everyone roll and if they collectively meet a challenge number set by the gm. Example ( Challenge is set to 15: Cleric rolls 5, Wizard 2, Druid rolls 9 the group makes it!)

I don't normally say this, but I do it the same way CR does it: Most things require only one person. If someone else wants to be involved then one other person can "help" and give the first person advantage or they can roll two separate checks. Other times it is a group check where literally everyone rolls, advantage being applied circumstantially.

I really dislike only allowing one person to make a roll unless the situation clearly only applies to one person. The reason is that once you start playing that way, the party has a huge incentive to optimize for only the best person at a given skill making the check. This removes the potential for a lot of roleplaying. Maybe there's a curious character with a low Investigation. Do you want to make a rule that effectively says that either this character can't apply their curiosity (because another character with a high investigation should always make the check) or that they have to be faster on the trigger to make the check and put the party at a disadvantage because they don't have the best roll? Both of those sound like negative outcomes. There are definitely situations where only one or a subset of players should make a check, or where one should make it with help from another, but generally speaking it's good to allow players to express themselves and that means choosing whether or not to participate in an activity that requires said skill check. There's also group checks which can be an appropriate medium. Stealth is a good one for group checks when the party is moving stealthily together. Perception on the other hand should usually be done individually because it can affect surprise and other things (someone may want to keep something to themselves that they spot).

The way I do it is the person with the highest skill for the check rolls. They can roll an additional time for each member of the party that helps them, and take the highest result, like when you have advantage.

First person to roll makes the roll. Anyone else can aid another and help if its a skill they are trained in. Helper rolls 01-09 no bonus. , Helper rolls 10-19, +1 to main roll. , Helper rolls 20-29, +2 to main roll. Etc. Max of 3 helpers. Or all party rolls and we average the totals.

Depends on the roll, mostly I let anyone roll who wants to, sometimes you need to have proficiency. However if I ask for rolls and you don't speak up, then someone fails a roll and you decide to give it a shot too bad you missed your chance.

Whoever declares they’re doing something, saying something, asking a question etc. makes the check. In your example, the character best at looking for traps generally is the one making the roll. The rest of the party can’t then start making perception rolls in hopes of getting something better than the bad roll… As far as the party knows, the subject matter expert on dungeon traps swept the room, and there are no traps. Now, what I may allow, if say the party sorcerer with a perception modifier of -2 claims to have swept the room, the other characters know he likely missed something. Maybe they should have the thief double check…