🎉 CLARIFICATION 🎉 I don't tell my players to roll checks they can't succeed (I assumed that was so obviously a bad idea that I didn't need to state it outright but judging by recent comments more clarification is needed 😅) In this video, I'm referring to situations where PLAYERS ask to make a check (if you run games where players aren't allowed to initiate checks, more power to you, this just won't be relevant to your table). If my players ask to make a persuasion check, I let them make it, because they would rather find out for themselves what is possible and what is not. If a failure would result in dire consequences, I will advise against it, but otherwise I'll let it happen - it'll take literally a few seconds, result in a moment of fun roleplay, and avoids me breaking player immersion.

Thank You, finally someone said it Nat20 didn't mean you can do anything you want and Nat1 didn't always means instant death.

My rule is that a nat 20 always benefits the party even if it doesn’t succeed. So with the pirate captain, he’d laugh it off and say” you got ambition, that’s an admirable quality, I think we’ll get along quite well” this way they have improved there relations with the pirate rather then just not dying

For the last one I always use the social interactions system in the DMG. It categorizes npcs into three different types. Friendly, neutral and hostile. Based on that the players can achieve things like "the npc gets into a great risk to help the party", to "the npc helps them if it does not involve any risk for him" for friendly npcs. Or from "The npc helps the group as long no risk is involved" to "the npc opposes the group, even if it involves risks." This way a Nat 20 won't get you very far, depending on the npc you are talking to

In my first campaign I was very guilty of the 'nat 20 means you can do whatever' problem, so once a player rolled jokingly asked the shopkeep they had met twice in marriage as a joke and rolled a 20 and she said yes! Funny enough it was one of the most wholesome and nice romantic relationships in our games to this day, and their daughter became a PC in a later game!

My first time as a GM is next week. (11 year veteran player) This was really helpful. Wish me luck.

KZfaq Shorts has a wonderful habit of cutting off the last second of videos, even if they're well below 60 seconds 😅 The last word was "overboard", for anyone who missed it!

Multiple paths to everything is always a great idea, even though it’s extremely hard to write for. A perfect example would be the original deus ex or system shock games, because the immersive sim was mastered in the 90’s

The third one is important - couse there are a LOTS of DMs that handle social encounters (or social rolls more) very poorly.

When I absolutely want to make sure the players know something, I let multiple players get a check against two DCs ~ a low DC that most would pass, and a high DC that one would pass. I'd tell the entire party the basics of what they needed to know with the low DC, then add useful info to the high DC, so that the player who got the high roll decides what to do with that info.

One thing you can also do for the first one is give out a small portion of the information for free and have a check give out an extra tip or hint so that the players can still progress if they fail, but can earn an edge of they succeed.

What my dm does is give us the necessary info no matter what but the higher the skill check the more extra info we get

For number 2, that's literally what the help action is.

This is all super solid advice, some of which I specifically could have used 30 minutes ago. Added to my mental notes! Thank you!

I’m gonna try DMing myself for the first time this year and this is greatly needed. I’m working out the campaign and don’t even have session 0 full planes out yet. All I know is what year it is, what’s going on, and what the people look like. But this will definitely help for later on.

For once I already know these ones. Very common mistakes. I love this DM professor.

Sounds like someone’s been at it with the super hexafluoride again

That last one can be fun. If you're a dm you should def ask your players if they want it as an option...but also make sure to tell them that makes their nat 1's just as ridiculus ;)

When having multiple players do skill checks, one thing you can do is try to narrate the skill check as a group effort. One very common misconception is that nat 20's are a guaranteed success. This only applies in combat and nowhere else. Rolling a nat 20 is you gave your absolute best but sometimes, even your absolute best isn't enough. You aren't going to convince a devout religious person, who has been that way their entire life to give up their religion on a nat 20. Much less the guiding principles of their entire life. That boulder is literally 40 tons, you may have rolled a 25 but it isn't going to move. Impossible skill checks are a good thing to have. If your players have a problem with them, you need to explain this to them. Just try your best to not use them as a selfish DM.

For the multiple players rolling for the same check, though this mainly goes for observation based checks, have the one who threw the lowest roll point something out to the rest who rolled and they simply see more than the lowest roll as they had something pointed out to them instead of looking for it on their own

The Pirate captain might find you amusing and could be willing to take you aboard his crew if you do some tasks for him instead of just giving you the ship.

Underrated guidance

All great advice as always! Looking forward for the next vid!

I got some background npc's they players can interact with after each adventure, and they will tell them what they missed, and helps them out in lots of other ways. However they have no bearing on the party during adventures. Thus creating a library esque research hub so they can find things they missed.

#1 can also be fixed by writing it so you're giving info no matter what but success gives more or clearer intel.

I’ve shifted my players over from all trying to make the same check to taking the help action to give one of them advantage if it makes sense that they could. No thunder stolen, and they still get to improve their odds of success.

Its always important to keep in mind that a nat20 is not an automatic success of everything they're trying to do. A nat20 is the best possible outcome within the circumstances. As an exaggerated example, your player is falling from somewhere high and wants to roll to see if they can fly (they obviously cannot) but they roll a nat20... well, they can grab a hold of a branch and lessen the damage. Obviously tailor it to what makes sense.

Making different ways to get the same info also allows different players to be useful and make sure nobody is left doing nothing. When searching a room, the Rogue could have a lock to pick and get a note with info in it. Meanwhile the Spellcasters of the group can try different spells to get informations or detect clues, whilst the Druid can obtain (limited) information from local animals (rats or even a caged bird). That's one exemple.

I agree wholeheartedly with the 2nd one. There are so many times where as a low int character rolling high for once getting undercut by someone who is proficient because the DM asks for party rolls. Just ask the party for one roll

Excellent advice, and I agree. I only allow dice rolls determine the outcome of a “choose your adventure. IE. Slight of Hand and may get caught, and on a fail the guards come or the bartender kicks you out of his tavern.

Definitely have learned the first way to well. Now I give out the needed knowledge without checks, and give checks for additional helpful info.

The only rule I've really broke if these is the roll 20 thing. But my campaigns are generally a little less serious. Not completely ridiculous but a little absurd so I usually make some fun shit up for a good nat 20, simply for rule of cool.

Fell for #3 in my very first time running a campaign and TWICE had a player talk the enemies out of combat, lucky double 20 for them, bad luck and game for the rest of the players

A lot of it comes to play style for me. Personally I’d like to tell as good of a story as possible, and that means that nat 20s will always be a success, just maybe not in the way they intended. In that pirate scenario, I probably would have had the captain offer the pc an apprenticeship to earn the boat in a few months time when he retires. The player will likely say no, but it was still a “success”.

The way I handle multiple players rolling for a check is I give them all different info based on how high they rolled. That way if 2 characters both rolled above the DC, I can give them both different info that they can share with each other.

I mean on the pirate example, 20 means they let you steer, 30 means they're willing to sell, 40 means they get starstruck.

Had one of my Players try to convince the Necromancer they were going up against to give up his ways and not take revenge on the kingdom that ruined his family with no reason as to why and asked to roll for it. This is one of the few times I said no because it doesn't logically make sense for someone with that much rage to just stop because some random kid says he should without any sort of reason or backing too it.

This guy looks like a Habsburg monarch.

The easiest way around the first problem is using the Failing Forward tactic. If you’re locking vital information behind one skill check, make sure that they get the information no matter what. “Then why roll”? To see what the information costs them, whether it be time, tipping off their enemies to their presence, gold, or something more precious (like the life of an NPC).

Something I learned from playing Call of Cthulhu, if you do lock important story things behind a skill check. Should they fail the check, instead of just wall blocking them or allowing them to try again later, have the story info or item come to them without their efforts with unforeseen consequences tied to it. An example: The party might have missed out on getting a story item from a dungeon, they leave unaware of its existence with their loot. Instead another adventurer or thief (or something similarily appropriate) finds it after they've left the dungeon, except the story villain(s) catch them in the act. The would be thief escapes capture just long enough to pass the item off on the party hoping to keep it away from the BBEG or possibly pass blame and get away safely. Either way the party now has the item, except the villain(s) are super aware of this and start putting out wanted posters for their arrest or sending assassins and other minions to attempt to take the item from them. Where as if they had successfully found it on their own, the villain(s) might still be unaware the party's existence.

I only lock some information allowing alternate endings or sooner endings

Two rolls at the same time can be pretty funny. Like one friend rolled for perception to see if the beggar was lying and the other rolled as well. One was successful and the other one wasn't. Fortunately the one who wasn't had better convincing skills, so after all everyone thought the beggar said the truth. Another possible way is to let them roll blind.

thanks. this will be a lot of help

Had the info thing happened to my group once. DM was running a small pre-made campaign. Out party ended up completely missing one of the most important pieces of information by just by just not succeeding in getting it. That caused a chain reaction of us missing every other consecutive piece of information, because without the initial knowledge we simply didnt know we were even looking for them. Ended up getting the worst ending by just not getting that first piece.

You just showed up mate, keep it up, I really enjoy your perspective.

Depending on the circumstances of course, Ill allow players to 'help' the expert, by also rolling but halving the helpers check and adding it to the primary check.

I feel that you can lock info behind skill checks. Just give them a differing amount of info. Such as Low roll: You find a badly damaged letter you can make out the words contact, lieutenant, and next. Mid roll: You find a note, it says. We have gotten in contact with Lieutenant Bob. High roll: You find a document that shows that lieutenant Bob has been helping the cult.

I made it a ac check to cut open a beholder to get a piece of a magical sword

My own DM with checks usually gives us multiple opportunities depending on the time between them, he won't let us perform the check again until after a day or 2 worths of in-game time, even then that would need us to travel back to that area, deal with encounters, yadda,yadda

Homie got that 1600's jaw

My DM used to give characters advantage on checks when another character tried to help. This gave us the advantage without stealing the thunder. 😎

When it comes to multiple people rolling for a skill check, my DM mostly only allows 2 people to make the check cuz it's basically the other person giving the help action, but he let's us choose to have 1 of the players roll with advantage or both can roll normally. That is unless it makes sense for everybody to roll for something, like for searching for someone actively hiding from us, or climbing a cliff, or something like that. Tho I know he does do a special thing where very niche information can only be rolled for by people with proficiency in a certain skill, like History or Arcana checks on very specific things

I love how u pointed out how a nat 20 doesn't automatically mean u succeed, it still has alot to do with the situation, alot of ppl seem to have that misconception.

It would be cool if the pirate says “if one of you can beat me in a fist fight I’ll take you where you need to go” on a nat 20 lol

When multiple people roll for the same check, it's basically rolling without being asked to roll, so just give the same answer

Regarding number 3, I often see on DnD stories people are like "I'm so mad my players killed my bbeg in one roll because they rolled a 23 in persuasion when they told him to jump off the cliff! D:". Ok, but like, why did you make that succeed? The high roll should have a positive outcome for them, sure, but why not, as you said, let the villain be amused by it and instead of attempting to execute them, offer them a deal instead, like "hmhm, I won't be jumping off that cliff, but I do have other places to be, that is true. I'm off for now, but if you change your mind and want to work for me, you know where to call."

I would make it a rule that a group can only have 1 player check in a conversation, but I will allow a different check by the other players. For example if a player fails an insight check, someone else can roll intimidation.

My system to roll for information is pretty complicated. I'll have multiple ways to get information and different information for different skill checks and different DCs for each. I use a Pass/Fail DC Range for skill checks especially for information with no crits. I also have the PC Background and Class influence the DC and award situational advantage on info checks. This generally means the players have 2-4 ways of getting pieces of a puzzle that they come back together in RP to build a plan.

You can lock a peice of information behind a check if it isn't absolutely necessary.

Great advice

Pirate captain will absolutely give his ship on a nat 20. The players might find out later that his crew aren't loyal at all and the position is more of a curse.

For those that want their players to know something but want to add challenge, make it where the research or task is for how long will it take. Then add a threat to the time.

About the "giving the party advantage" thing: With 4 dice, it's more likely than not that one of them will roll at least 17. With 5 it's 18, with 7 it's 19, and with 14 it's 20.

Good stuff!

Actually they have advantage on that check by having more than one person with the needed skill. Let them work together.

For group skill checks I often let my players roll a d6 each. Then, depending on the situation, the summary has to beat the DC. Or like in a random event deception check: 1, something bad happens 2-5, nothing happens 6, something good happens 1 and 6, mostly a fight or puzzle happens but with a good reward, like items, information, mini quest triggers.

Failing forward also can alleviate the first one. So, they fail the check to get the info, but they need the info to progress the plot? Give them the information they need, but at a cost. It takes longer if they're on a timeline, or an NPC demands a massive bribe, or they only get part of the info they need (like they find a burned scrap of paper with a keyword, but that has none of the context).

Great tips! One thing i do- In cases of letting multiple ppl roll for the same check, i then make it a group check requiring a minimum number of success. It doesnt help with the under cutting anothers roll but i find it helps to prevent players rolling till they get it

Don't let your players roll if there's no chance of success period. If they are asking for something unreasonable, tell them so. Have them rephrase it or work with them to change their interaction.

Great advice! ❤️

I use skill checks all the time, my players know that a nat 20 doesn't mean what they want will always happen but will give them the best possible outcome. A nat 20 on the pirate he tells you let go to my cabin and talk, from there who knows but you at least got him to consider talking about it instead of just walking the plank. One of my players about 6 years ago was playing a wizard and during what I thought was going to end as a tpk that wizard was the only one to live now it's a npc who comes by in every campaign we play as a ghost but will only talk to 1 PC during the campaign and help nudge things in a way so the information needed of missed out on is found, he typically talks to whoever is the meat shield. so the meat shield will ask the party "umm can someone help me read this book I like the how this word looks it's funny" actual quote from our barbarian. I have made the mistakes and had to tweak things to make it work and after 6 years seldomly do I need to fix things now like this and my 8 players know and laugh when I say " I need a tobacco break" right after a question or action it means take 5 I need fresh air and a few minutes to figure this out. 6 years 12 campaigns 1 world and 12 time periods in this world. they have built kingdoms in it just to visit it later to see what happened to it in the next.

One thing I’ve seen a DM due for when two characters roll high on the same check is giving them different information that makes sense for their character to know.

Yes - I like to have the skill check providing a short cut to knowledge. Also a high int player should be able to maybe use a mind palace and go back to a room from childhood where a tiny bit of info is available - eg a pattern or old language was in a book studied many years back but the player knows just the empires name - this provides bonuses to investigation and time spent with intelegence and research can break through the problem

I think if u get a nat 20 you should always get what u want so maybe you meet a pirate and ask for his ship he laughes and laughs till he falls over the ship and drowns because his peg leg got stuck

Tying the first one and last one together, keep in mind that success and failure can come in varying degrees. Failing a skill check to open a heavy door doesn't need to mean the door doesn't open. It can mean that it opens at an otherwise avoidable cost, such as whomever opened it pulling a muscle in the process and sustaining a minor injury, either resulting in minor damage or disadvantage on certain throws in the future. It could also be something more roleplay specific, such as making themselves look like an idiot or something in the process. "You open the heavy door, but the straining from the attempt resulted in your pants ripping, exposing your bottom to everyone." Obviously in ways befitting your playgroup. Or instead of a minor punishment for failing, a minor reward for succeeding. Easier if done for roleplay purposes, such as getting to show off. "As you lift the door, your muscles ripple slightly, then the door raises. To everyone watching, despite the door looking to weigh several tons, you seem capable of lifting it as though it were no heavier than a pebble." Even if its not a roleplay heavy group, such a thing could even give the party member a bonus like an inspiration die. As for tasks with impossible goals the party is aiming for, I love the idea of success meaning "you don't get punished for being stupid" instead of "impossible thing happens." The bard asked the king to just hand over the kingdom and rolled a nat 20? Have the king jokingly play along. "Sure, you can have the crown, the responsibility of finding ways to keep this kingdom safe, and even take my wife. I'll go out there, earning money by having fun playing instruments, wooing women, sleeping around with whomever I want, and having the freedom to do as I please." Or something like that. Or maybe give them a bonus for making the NPC laugh at their ridiculous suggestion, like they reward them with a little more gold after a quest or something. Just make them a little more agreeable in general. And failure doesn't have to mean death either. It can mean a minor punishment like missing out on some quest rewards for pissing the NPC off, or banishment from an area (if it isn't needed for your story, of course), or just making a new, minor enemy (more someone that will annoy and hinder them than actually be a threat). Or if your players are good sports about it, then they just made themselves a new BBEG for a bit, because that king took the bard's demand as a threat to himself and the kingdom and now sees the bard, and by extent the party, as potential usurpers. Only if there's a believable reason and your players won't hate you. In either case, failure doesn't always need to be complete and success doesn't always grant the impossible.

On the topic of mistakes ive made as a dm... Once i had a smart player who knows how to use spells for weird effects. I was running a modern game and they stumbled upon a bank robbery, only for the player to cast heat metal on the extended magazine of the gun one robber used mid-heist... needless to say, that npc no longer has hands.

I think the last on is wrong but fixed by what you said if you get a player to roll for something it should always succeed to some extent they don't have to succeed in the way they intended but there has to be a reward or else making them roll interrupts the flow with nothing to gain

Three easy fixes for a DM 1) Use passives more, insight, perception, investigation, etc Try using this before they search the room, or if they look like their having trouble, or ask them to be specific where they are searching. If they get a nat 20 while searching the cupboards, they would naturally miss things on the ground. 2) Make a group DC, or ask if the player wants to give the other player advantage as they essentially took the help action. Everybody wins, or fails. 3) Yea, no, he's right on this one. People aren't just going to hand over their possessions just because you rolled high, at least not without compensation.

Regarding the last: Id allow it IF the players can come up with a good reason (Like stressig they work for his boss....and have enough' knowlesge to Back this Up.....and succed on the following checks everytime they have to lie while interacting with the crew.

I would say for me personally (keep in mind i have sadly never finished a campaign, thee single campaign i was in was hardly like vanilla dnd and was just more a story with dice roles in think. And thirdly i have never been a dm) but i would say when it comes to gaining info a skill check and then two separate ways to bribe the npc seems like the best way to not do this. Makes sense considering the world dnd is set in (vanilla)

I allow multiple players to roll at a time.but they have to be for different skills and the information gained would be different depending kn what skill wins

I'd have the captain negotiate a lower transit price instead.

I once gave a player a kingdom for a nat 1. I regret nothing.

Idk for that pirate giving you his ship on a Nat 20 roll I would honestly only allow it if the captain rolled like a nat well only a nat 1 on deception

This why I always use the "help" action when one of my party members do anything outside of combat. Always getting advantage.

Well said!

Good idea for the multi checks issue, start out with allowing someone with the relevant skills, knowledge, or background make a check. Like a fighter with a soldier background sees a uniform different from the rest, his background makes sense as he would know the general gist of ranks and stuff. However if he fails, allow others to make multi checks and give him a vague answer. So the flow of the sorry should go something like this: The Soldier sees a trim dressed man with gold braids on his shoulder being saluted. *Rolls 8 insight* Soldier: He's a higher rank then private but I can't be sure from this angle. Maybe a lieutenant or second lieutenant? *Party Rolls to find out more, Barbarian gets a 19* Barbarian: That's person gots a star on his shoulder. Soldier: ah so it must be a general

I have a very important rule that I follow: I always, always, give my players a "Win" each session. Maybe they're fighting weaker enemies than usual, maybe they unlock a piece of information, maybe they get the upper hand on an opponent (physically, mentally or politically), but I give them the opportunity to be Heroic and Succeed at Something each session. Nobody likes to be kicked around all the time. Nobody wants to have their character feel powerless and "just there as a punching bag" all of the time. Yes, there are defeats and challenges, and some challenges are just too great to overcome (maybe forever, maybe just for now)... but... Give. Them. Something.

Personally I like allowing anyone who wishes to roll for certain pieces of information; specifically those that are important so that they have a reasonable chance of getting it and then I get to tie how they learned that into their backstory If they all fail, I can introduce the information otherwise

I played a level 20 short campaign where the DM believed in the DMG reccomendation that 30+ be the DC for something nearly impossible. I played a totally busted bard/fighter/ranger/paladin halfling, whose minimum roll for persuasion was 37(which I could bump up to 42 as a bonus action for 10 minutes)+1d4. He hated me by the end. He gave me a curse from a beyond godlike entity that makes everyone hate me, so al the DCs were much higher. Which I got rid off by convincing another godlike entity to take the curse for me by rolling a Nat20 hitting a total of 55. I like to think I taught him a good lesson. I ended up convincing 4 god's to worship me...

Or letting the caricature that DM is playing kill a man blamed it on someone else then allowed him to die by basically never telling use what his name or what he looks like and he still changed what he looks like and picked a caricature that looks the same

One thing I heard that I kinda agree with more, specifically relating to the last one, if theres like no chance of success just don't have your players role at all. If its a no even on a nat 20, that's just disappointing for the players cause the answer is gonna be no regardless, so just don't have them role.

The second one I wouldn’t say is ironclad. In fact I would generally disagree. If it’s information relevant to the party as a whole, and the party as a whole is present, it makes more sense for everyone to roll. Only have the relevant player roll when they’re alone, only they are investigating that particular thing, or it is only strictly being given to them. I also had something in the last where they party found some very important documents that showed a different language and text to every person watching depending on their languages known, for them to find a way to dispel that on it eventually and be able to actually read it. It was great the amount of rp mileage I got out of it though as the party started talking about what was actually written on it :D

“The Captain finds your words amusing and doesn’t immediately throw you overboard” is success. You should never ask your player to roll if success of no king is on the table. That’s a forgone conclusion at best & vindictive DMing at worst. Instead, expand your idea of what success means. Do the same for failure. Be willing to let the results of the roll be something different from the obvious ones the players expect

Nah the captain lets you keep your stuff as your thrown overboard. By the way he's still laughing.

Sometimes I say skill check just too see if a nat 1 happens.

What i have done with two players doing the same skill check is that if one rolls higher (and makes the DC) and the other is the primary . The primary gains a small bonus. I want to note that I dont do this on ALL skills just some of them. An example of this is a Use Computer check (Star Wars Saga Edition) or a strength check but these are pretty rare in my games

Nice. Thanks.

Don't lock outcomes behind a rolled skill check. Use passive skill checks where possible when a character's stats would logically allow it. For example, an inherently strong character should not need to roll a skill check when lifting something heavy such as a barrel full of mead. A weaker character lifting the same object on the other hand, would obviously have a harder time doing so, so they'll need to roll a skill check. A highly perceptive character would easy notice a strange smell in the air, this could be sweet perfume, freshly baked pastries, dung, or a decaying corpse. Roll a skill check for them to find the actual source, not for noticing it in the first place. And most importantly 1) do not have them roll to see if that special someone or something that they must interactive with is actually there. Keep all randomised events/outcomes to non essential interactions only. 2) for all random events rolled, be it enemy encounters, today's weather, or traveling NPCs, keep the results grounded. Don't have a power creature such as a black dragon suddenly appear and attack your players if it's not related to the story. Don't have a beautiful summers day turn into a heavy blizzard unless it's actually being caused by something that relates to the story. And don't have them meet some random refugee fleeing a war torn nation on the open road, especially if there's no wars or raids taking place in nearby regions. Any and all of these "random" events could either result in players losing interest in the story itself, cause needless PC deaths, or force the players to deviate from your intended adventure in response to these unscripted random encounters. Random flash floods can occur during a draught, hail and thunder storms can be experienced during a summer. If an area is known to be plagued by a specific creature type, then show them this in your random encounters. If a road is traveled by merchants, have your players meet some on the open road or come across a gang of highway bandits. These are all examples of things that could add to your story's side plots, and not take away from the main story itself.

I usually let my players do whatever and then I improvise.