YT deleted my pinned comment! Grr. Here it is again. ADDITIONS/ERRATA: -The "main DC" is just the "typical" DC. The GM can also choose to use a different DC (e.g., if trying to use Deception to help an ally's attack roll by distracting an enemy, using the enemy's Perception DC), a Level-Based DC, or Simple DC from CRB p. 503. -At 3:22, a caption says you automatically "critically" succeed at Level 6, but that's actually true at Level 14 with master proficiency in a skill. -I've seen the idea that Aid as written simulates the party jelling together as a team. First, I think the gameplay effect on low levels is too important to ignore. Second, Aid as written doesn't care how long the PCs have been adventuring together. Third, why should +4 be walled off for lower-level characters? In Lord of the Rings, Samwise was low-level but we all know the Aid he offered was LEGENDARY. -I see the idea popping up in the comments, of having tiers of DCs that have greater effect, like Treat Wounds does: +2/+3/+4 on a crit depending on doing a DC 20, 30, or 40 check. That is certainly something to try; I had discarded the idea because I wanted to keep it gameplay simple and avoid a probability problem every time someone wants to Aid. Also, "I want to try to Aid a lot unlike last time" I found hard to justify in the narrative. -There is a good argument for getting rid of the roll altogether! A roll to Aid slows down play. Some tables might want to adapt what Derik of Knights of Last Call does: without a roll, you provide a +1 circumstance bonus if you are Trained in the check you would otherwise roll, and this goes up to +2 if you're Expert, +3 if Master, or +4 if you're Legendary. -I forgot to include that on our Discord we also discussed nerfing some numerical bonuses to Aid that come from Feats. The human feat Cooperative Nature, for example, goes from a +4 circumstance bonus to a +2 -"Let's Fix Aid" thread on the Rules Lawyer Discord: discord.com/channels/870925179570753616/1122390638307057724
I personally like having seek and recall knowledge activate aid just like prepare does. These two ways to help the party don't need to compete with one another.
This is brilliant! It is thematically accurate in the sense that you are analyzing the situation so you could either notice things that you wouldn't have otherwise, or remember more detailed things about a subject than you would if you hadn't taken a second to. But, since your senses are heightened and you are not distracted by attempting to do anything else, you are also prepared to help someone if the opportunity arises. Plus it helps a bunch of actions that just don't feel worth it on their own a lot of the time.
Recall the teachings still only allows you to aid one ally at a time since you only have one reaction per round. The "prepare to aid all allies" text means instead of choosing which ally or action specifically, you can state a blanket trigger for aid, and react to whichever ally does it first(or at the most opportune time).
It's also got the Psyche trait, so you have to Unleash Psyche before you can do it. Meaning unless you go longer than five rounds in a combat, you can only use it for two (not the first round), and the tradeoff for *that* is you're stupefied 1 for two rounds afterward.
Great video, you aren't the only one who has had problems with the Aid action. I will say that I came up with a similar rule for my homegames, but I kept the -1/0/1/2 for crit failure/failure/success/crit success but I also made the DC the Main DC-5. The reason for that is that . . . helping should be easier than doing the main thing. If medic is doing surgery to save someone, it shouldn't be JUST as hard to hand someone the tools they ask for and make sure they are remembering the basics. If someone is trying to bust down a door, any amount of force is going to be helpful to that. The other reason for reducing the DC to aid is that . . . likely you have your best person trying the skill check .. . . so the chances that someone else will succeed on the skill check are less. If I only have a +3 to medicine because my wisdom is 10, but I'm the only other guy in the party, then I'm probably not going to succeed on that surgery check, especially next to the cleric with +7. But I'd have a decent shot if the DC was reduced. Something to think about.
We have used the same rule as well and it works quite well. It also is a smaller change, since it just changes the default DC instead of the results of the different degrees of success.
I went with that for a while. What I propose is actually more generous, with a +1 circumstance bonus achievable at DC -10, and a +2 at DC+0, with the possibility of getting a +4 even starting at Level 1. But this is more of a compromise I suppose for people who want to not buff it too much.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG True, but also bigger chance of getting a crit fail . . . just depends on how you want to run it. I tend towards my thing just because I've seen some truly redonculus DCs out there in published adventures. One trap I saw had the DC set at 9 above what was a typical DC for that level.
As a newer PF2 GM running the Abomination Vaults, I really appreciate how this makes teamwork feel better mechanically. I hate that the opportunity cost for using Recall Knowledge or Aid is so high compared to how underwhelming they feel mechanically. I've been exceptionally generous with my answers whenever anyone tries to Recall Knowledge as a way to reward them for "burning" one of their precious actions. I think that learning the exact AC of the creature they're fighting, or maybe the exact Fort/Ref/Will defense they need to overcome, isn't too out of line. Now I have a really juicy carrot to encourage use of the Aid action, too! Thanks, Ronald!
ADDITIONS/ERRATA: -I would add that the "main DC" is just the default/"typical"(!) DC. The GM can also choose to use a different DC (e.g., if trying to distract the enemy, using the enemy's Perception DC), a Level-Based DC, or Simple DC from CRB p. 503. -At 3:22, a caption says you automatically "critically" succeed at Level 6, but that's actually true at Level 14 with master proficiency in a skill. -I've seen the idea that Aid as written simulates the party gelling together as a team. First, I think the gameplay effect on low levels is too important to ignore. Second, Aid as written doesn't care how long the PCs have been adventuring together. -I see the idea popping up in the comments, of having tiers of DCs that have greater effect, like Treat Wounds does: +2/+3/+4 on a crit depending on doing a DC 20, 30, or 40 check. That is certainly something to try; I had discarded the idea because I wanted to keep it gameplay simple and avoid a probability problem every time someone wants to Aid. Also, "I want to try to Aid a lot unlike last time" I found hard to justify in the narrative. -I forgot to include that on our Discord we also discussed nerfing some numerical bonuses to Aid that come from Feats. The human feat Cooperative Nature, for example, goes from a +4 circumstance bonus to a +2 -There IS an argument for Aid to not require a roll at all: it slows down play! If a table feels this way, I personally would propose a +1 circumstance bonus with no roll required, and if the assisting check is Master or higher, it goes up to a +2. (EDIT: Derik of Knights of Last Call requires no roll, and the circumstance bonus is equal to the proficiency level of the Aiding check, +1 for trained, +2 for expert, etc.) -"Let's Fix Aid" thread on the Rules Lawyer Discord: discord.com/channels/870925179570753616/1122390638307057724
I find this remedied by using Simple DCs but the DCs are just thresholds. Same Aid check: if they beat a 20, they provide a +2. If they only beat a 15, they provide a +1. Even without being legendary, if anyone can hit a DC 40, they give a +4. Yes, even if it somehow happens at level 1. Nat 1s and 20s change the category result one step, as normal. Only hurts an ally on a 5- total, only fails to provide any bonus on a 14-, but the roll still matters to determine what bonus is given.
Love your content Ronald, you're my favorite PF2E RUclipsr. It's really funny that you made this video because I actually have a homebrew rule that is extremely similar! The DC for Aid was based on the levels by DC chart. Players could spend multiple actions to lower the DC though. 1 action was the unaltered DC but 2 actions used to aid applied the easy modifier (-2 to the DC) and 3 actions applied the very easy modifier (-5 to the DC). Finally I did expand the bonus to also affect DCs. So you could aid your sorcerer companion and increase the reflex DC to avoid the incoming fireball from 22 to 23 (or higher if you critically succeeded or had better proficiencies).
@@malkyn9998 that seems like a reasonable way of adjusting it too. It sounds like it would accomplish the same goal: making it more useful and low levels, while keeping it useful but not guaranteed, at higher levels.
I actually like your version of aid. I have a group of people new to pathfinder and they have pointed out a few things they dislike. Aid is one of those things so i will be giving your version of aid a test in my next campaign
Another very ability to consider when changing the Aid action, is the human ancestry feat "cooperative nature", that flat +4 can mean a lot of aid crits at low level, expecislly when targetting AC
Great video. Another alternative that may work could be doing something similar to how Treat Wounds or the advanced crafting system works where if you're a certain proficiency level, you can increase the DC of the check to get the better result. Maybe have Aids' default DC be 15 (to help lower levels), and provide a +1 bonus on both success and crit success. But if you're expert in attacks or the skill in question, you have the option to make the check at DC 20, and if you crit succeed, provide a +2 bonus (still +1 on success). Master would be DC 30 and give a +3 bonus on crit. Legendary would be DC 40 and give a +4 on crit. So at level 15, when you get access to legendary skills, you'll have a tough time getting that 50 you need for the legendary crit success. But getting the 40 for the Master crit success is very doable. And as you approach level 20, getting that 50 for a legendary crit success becomes that much easier. As for letting Aid be used on saving throws, I don't think that makes much sense, as saving throws tend to represent split-second near-subconscious actions done by the character to withstand or avoid an attack. How do you Aid a character's Fortitude save against poison or a Will save to fight off some illusion or charm effect? I could see spending an action to prepare to push an ally out of an AOE effect that would call for a Reflex save. But I think for simplicity's sake, don't make exceptions.
Nurses assist in brain surgery. Handing the right tool and mopping the doctor's brow are incredibly useful. Assistance isn't automatically doing the job yourself.
I don't love rolling to see how much of a bonus I give to another roll. I'd prefer to just say you give your ally a +x. At our table aid gives +1 at trained, +2 at expert and so on. Ends up being a huge buff at low levels, very small buff at higher levels. +4 might be too much, and +1 might be too little, but eh... Still better than it was, and it speeds things up. Also, catfolk can already aid reflex throws. Graceful Guidance I think? Pretty sure there's a ancestry that can do the same for wil saves. Not super clear how that works when you normally need to prepare to Aid. But that's why I took Bellflower Tiller so I don't need to prepare.
I think this makes a lot of sense. The big point for me is the fact that aid never works at low levels and always works at high levels. I think regardless of how people feel about your proposed solution, it's hard to argue how weird it is that a system that's all about strategy and teamwork made the "aid" action a trap for new players and a boring freebie for experienced players.
Aid is fine. Aid becoming easier as you level isn't a bug, it's a feature. It's not supposed to reflect you and your party becoming more unified, it's meant to show YOUR progression from a lowly adventurer to someone who can not only begin to handle themselves, but also help others due to their expertise.
While I agree with your take in the abstract, I just don’t embrace it upon application. Aid-the very name of which implies beneficial help-is simply too hard to pull off at lower levels as a mechanic. I’ve been running multiple games since the 2019 PF2 inception, and I found out quickly that if I don’t house rule it to make it a bit easier at earlier levels, people simply don’t use it. You can justify the difficulty as much as you want, but after a year’s worth of data at my table, it literally conditioned players to avoid it. And that learned behavior carried on into the later levels when it becomes much easier to use. Again, this is anecdotal, but I’m willing to bet my experiences reflect most other experiences. The only players using Aid were Bards, Human characters with the Cooperative Nature feat, and Halflings, with their Ancestry feat. With the arrival of Swashbuckler, and the ‘All For One’ feat, I realized I could add them to the list, but the root issue wouldn’t change. In the years since making the change to Aid, players at my table have adapted it into their schema of common combat options, keeping it viable from levels 1-20. This has helped make better players at my table, as even Fighters will, at later levels, recognize when it’s more advantageous to give up their precious AoO in favor of securing a fellow member’s own attack or other option. While that’s always been an option at mid/late levels, in practice it was missing because the players had been conditioned at the very start to ignore Aid.
The main problem I have with this is the reduction of power at higher levels and think that it could have the inverse effect of disincentivizing it's use. Early on people struggle to use it because of the height of the DC. As your toolkit expands, it's going to be competing with so many other reactions/actions that, I think, it needs to sit in this very strong place to make it stay attractive at these higher levels. It's already hard enough for people to adjust to the idea that "the teams damage is my damage" that making it less immediately powerful will probably make it less likely to be utilized, especially in combat - unless your group is already very predisposed to like the action. While I recognize that there is not a specific call out in the Aid Action, my belief is that the intent is the verisimilitude of it all. I think that it should be that powerful because, I believe, it does attempt to encompass that idea of people being "that" in tune with one another from months/years of adventuring. I've played a number of characters that use Aid consistently in our higher level encounters to increase the pay off in combat of my group and seeing that power diminish to only a +2 for a larger percentage of the time would feel bad to me when I built a character specifically around the idea of hitting that +4 as much as possible as early as possible. I recognize this, as with most houserules, would definitely be better as a Session 0 topic and so I would strongly recommend against adding it into a campaign that is already in progress at the least.
As much as I like the narrative of having a set DC and therefor have the cool moment of "You just met and cant cooperate well" and once you are high level you basically are master of teamwork. It quickly falls appart as soon as someone doesnt start their adventure at level 1, so I agree that it needs a change and I bet it will get one in the remaster. It shoudlnt give a +1 at a failure considering that compare to something like guidiance it has no limit except for costing an action and reaction. What about giving it the "treat wounds" treatment? giving a +1 at DC 15, +2 at DC 20, +3 at DC 30 and +4 at DC 40 success. The crit fail staying giving a -1 and crit success giving an aditional +1 (up to +4, so critically suceeding at DC40 wont do anything) A fail wont do anything Maybe fail could give a +1/-1 till you attempt to aid again in the next minute when aiding with the same skill.
I'm not sure where that narrative comes from about veteran heroes getting better at aiding each other. I don't think it comes from Paizo; I think it's something players have invented to justify the rule. Yeah, Bill the Replacement Character joining the party at Level 15 suddenly jelling with the party doesn't make much sense! The fact that you already have a +35 should already account for how much better you've gotten at what you're trying imo. Happily, Guidance stacks with Aid as it's a status bonus. Let's not forget how the default rule makes Guidance look trivial beyond a certain level. I had discarded the idea of making it like Treat Wounds as I wanted to avoid a probability problem every time someone wants to Aid. Also, "I want to Aid a lot unlike last time" I found hard to justify.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Its definetely a player justification with the team growing together. What probability problem? For the justification: Its rather that as you get better proficency ranks you are capeable of aiding better. Same as with the treat wounds DCs. I am not a medicine guy and have no clue so it will sound silly, but for trained you just loosely put on a bandage and just rub the ointment on someone and as you get higher you do the challenging version of it and put on the bandages tighter, but not too tight, put on more dangerous and careful ointments and whatelse. Same thing can be applied to the aid stuff. DC 15 you assist someone and do the most basic, but as you go higher you put in more work into helping someone. Putting on a more complexe guitar solo to motivate your boulder carrying barbarian, or the barbarian holding the beam balanced on which the wizard is balancing with their whole body with each muscle activated instead of just using the arms or so.
12:40 I think this is actually really cool. The power boost that this gives the psychic makes this ability a thing that they should be doing all the time. Which makes them "Feel" more like a psychic. I have a sort of house rule that with things like this, the player (or table) is required to come up with the parable, or axiom that is helpful. This keeps things flavorful and interesting, while eliminating the pattern of: PC roll CHA, says aloud to the table "I say the good shit", and then the in game effect happens.
I am GMing my first campaign. I hadn't considered the raw DC for Aid. I would have and intend to use the standard DC for the levels with adjustments as the CR recommends. So level 1 standard DC at 15 seem a good spot. I still want to have players justify the action they take as a logic path to success. Half way in I was already at the house rule before you got to it. It seems a sensible fix.
The problem with this is if you run into a hard DC, the one you'd most want and need help with, even if you increase the effects on a Success you are still spending an action and a reaction to make a check that's hard to succeed for a Success to *possibly* help. +2 is powerful, but it only has a chance of doing anything because they have to roll one of the numbers on the die that needs the bonus to succeed or crit. This is far more egreious if you use the same skill the task requires, beat the DC, and then the person you are helping fails. And as to the "Logically it would be hard to Aid brain surgery." Why? Why is giving a small bonus to achieving the goal as hard as actually doing it solo? You aren't trying to achieve the task, you're trying to make it easier to do. Helping someone lift a box isn't as hard as soloing it. Aid being the DC you are helping against works fine at lower DCs but if you run into a difficult DC you have to be very optimized or even with the improved Degrees of Success you are cut off from Aid in the situation you'd be most likely to actually use it.
Sounds like we differ on the power of a +2. Fortune effects amount to about a +3 in PF2 from some analysis I've done. The DC is more flexible as my pinned comment says; this is the "typical" DC. So if the player can justify doing something else that assists with brain surgery, the GM can set another DC.
I think the level-based DC is easier than it looks, if you consider that the helping player basically gets to pick their best skill every time (if they're creative enough). I do like lowering the DC to (very) easy if the idea is (especially) creative, so that it's not a complete no-brainer what skill to aid with.
@@chrizzlybear5565 If their best skill doesn't apply don't allow it. If they always pick their best skill and it makes it super easy it's because you made it that way.
@@cheezeofages Oh, of course not! They always need to justify how their skill is actually helpful. If it's a bit of a stretch, maybe they can help if they meet a hard DC. If I don't see it at all, it won't work. However, there's usually more than one way to help and the more options there are, the more likely the PC is really good at the skill they use to aid.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPGApologies. I did some math and DC by Level has more downsides than I thought without buffing a success. I don't agree fundamentally with the DC being the same as the check you are Aiding. Helping someone lift a box isn't as hard as doing it alone, but that's not what your Degrees of Success do. You made a failed check to Aid provide Aid so it's not effectively the same DC. But fundamentally I don't agree with making a failed check to Aid provide Aid so... Either way I didn't mean to give the impression I think worse of the changes than I actually do. They are alright.
Your last comments reminded me of how aid worked in Star Wars Saga edition, which notably used the aid action to make low level mooks like Stormtroopers and Battle Droids relevant at higher levels, especially since both had mechanics that let them auto succeed at aiding attack rolls. This had the interesting effect of making minions act as buffs for more serious, and allowing the vanilla Stormtrooper to remain useful to the GM long after they'd ceased to be a threat simply shooting at the PCs, especially since Saga Edition has a lot of feats (being based on 3.5, NPCs had feats too) that could let someone trade accuracy for a bonus to damage, extra damage dice, or an extra attack. Your proposed rule seems like it could allow low CR monsters to help the "Boss," which could be quite interesting
My house rules for aid are similar to what you've described in terms of the Aid DC being the same as the main DC. Where we differ are the bonuses granted, for which I scale based on the expertise level of the aiding party member. When "trained" or "expert", bonuses start at +0 with failure and increase by 1 for each degree of success. "Master" increases all bonuses at each success level by another 1, and so on.
Something that aid and aid like actions falls short of imo is diferentiating between helping someone and working together to accomplish a task. For example (because I know that was really unclearly worded), two people working together to push a boulder is going to have a much bigger benefit than holding a lock steady while someone else picks it. One is giving someone assistance, where the other is sharing the worlload between two or more people. However, I do acknowledge that adressing this mechanically does have the tradeoff of rules complexity (and extra GM decision making), which may not be worth it.
In the case of two people pushing a boulder, I say that it shouldn't count as Aiding. Instead, in any situation where multiple players are all performing the same skill check simultaneously, everyone participating should roll the skill check, and the DM should take the highest result. Most tasks will have an upper limit on the number of people that can work on it simultaneously; for instance, a 10-foot wide door can only be forced open by two Medium creatures simultaneously, and possibly one additional Small creature.
@@imveryangryitsnotbutter I agree with you that pushing a boulder or similar tasks aren't a good fit for the aid rules, though I don't think that having everyone combined roll separately and take the highest result really captures the feel of a task that is too much for one person, even the strongest among you, to do alone, but with the help of others, even those weaker then them, can be accomplished. As a more grounded example, I cannot lift a dining table, not even a 5% chance of a success if I try alone. But with someone else lifting in the other end (who also cannot lift the table alone) we can lift the table, and fairly consistently, too. The simplest way to implement that into a ttrpg would be to have a different DC for attempting the task alone or with someone else, but that feels messy to me.
For our house rule we do normal aid rules but make the Aid DC the same as the check DC of it’s lower than 20. Makes early levels aids more successful; suddenly aiding a strike against a 13AC lv-1 mook is viable and fun at lv1 with a more achievable aid DC of 13
i like using the standard DC but instead of tying it to the character's level, tying it to the level of the thing in question. Like if you're helping someone deactivate a trap, you could be using the level 3 standard DC. Or if you're helping someone attack a boss creature you use the standard dc of that creature's level. I still like the idea of a +1 on a failure and giving the +4 to everyone on a critical success. Actually, the most common time people are using aid in my campaigns is for Treat Wounds where I do use 15.
I have kind of talked myself into liking the current Aid rules. At level 1, you're just beginning; if you have two brand-new at something people trying to work together, its just as likely they'll get in each others way as help, where as having a literal master helping you is much better at helping you. I had a barbarian in PFS that ended up using Aid quite a bit at low level, because a) I didn't have anything else to use my reaction for, and b) I often didn't have a great 3rd action (didn't want to move away because I needed to provide a flank, couldn't intimidate, etc). As you level and get more powerful things to do, the opportunity cost of an action and a reaction goes up.
I like this, probably going to use it! One thing that always kinda irked me even with the aid checks in 1E is that if someone goes to aid someone else and rolls really high... they could have just done the thing themselves and succeeded right then and there. So many times someone rolls a nat 20 to aid, then the person they are helping rolls a 2 and fails. If they had swapped who was rolling, the task would have been achieved, and every time that happens it's demoralizing. So, big bonus on a crit success on aid I think is fine
What if you made Aid checks similar to the Treat Wounds action, where you make a check based on the trained, expert, master and legendary DC. It could have the following effects: Critical Success: The target gains a +2 circumstance bonus to the check. If you made a check at a Master DC the bonus is +3 or at a Legendary DC the bonus is +4. Success: The target gains +1 circumstance bonus. If you made the check at a Master or Legendary DC then the target gains a +2 circumstance bonus to the check Critical Failure: The target takes a -1 circumstance penalty to the check. This way if you are maxed out at 1st level, you still need to roll at least an 8, but at the higher levels, you can guarantee a +2, but the player might have to choose between Legendary DC as a higher risk/reward instead of the safer Master DC. Assurance, Recall the Teachings and Inspire Confidence are still balanced in this system I believe
My Aid house rules: theres no need for a check, the action+reaction cost is enough of a cost, so you just get the +1 for trained, 2/3/4 for E/M/L. Also, you can Aid as a reaction if you haven't already used your reaction, without having prepared to aid, only if the situation is changed/unexpected and you can reasonably/logically provide aid where you are and in the situation: plead your case to the GM. Afterward, you are Stunned 1, so the action cost is still there.
I'm very much for this version and will be instituting it as a homerule in my game if my players are amenable. Considering in the last year+ of the campaign I don't think they've used the aid action more than twice, they'll probably be interested.
I've been using the "aid DC is the main DC". Which if nothing else, just helps me give them a fair DC. I think I got the idea to make this change from one of your videos. However, my players rarely use aid. I think changing the bonuses like you said to so that even a failure is +1 would make aid more popular at my table. So I might try that next.
Honestly using the DC the roll the main player is trying to beat is a nice way of handling it that I had also thought of. The added degrees of success really wasn't something I thought of though it does work as a good way of handling it without adding some other modifier to the role while making there a chance the player succeeds. As far as using the Aid for more actions, honestly I feel like it would be great if you could your own hero point in the act of aiding an ally. So long as the idea can be pitched to make sense for the GM allowing a player to take a hit or do some other action to save an ally in trouble would be a fun way of giving Hero Points another use while creating a case of aid that goes beyond what is normally allowed.
Whenever my party was fighting a boss character, they'd regularly have high defensive stats. So we were scrambling for any bonuses we could get to our rolls. Ronald's version which makes a +4 potentially available even at low levels is a huge boon to those fights. Even if I was playing a Fighter, I'd probably forgo my 3rd action and my Reactive Strike if I thought I had a good chance of offering an ally a +4 on their next attack. That said, it is situational. At low levels the +4 is no where near guaranteed. And at high levels, your ally may already have a +2 circumstance bonus from a different source, so the extra +2 may not be worth the action cost. But since this a free feature available to every character, I believe it would offer a lot of utility. I especially like that it would encourage roleplay moments as players trying to come up with ways to describe how they're providing assistance.
This is the best example of the game being designed for players to fail. To gear chase; because even your friends can't help you as much as that +1 thing-a-ma-bob. By the time you're of a level to regularly pass this test you're going to have gear that does it better. And they will have better options for their actions and reactions.
Mine’s a little weaker but still handy. The DC is one step lower than the helped DC for that +1, or +2/+3/+4 on Crit. However, what makes it stronger again is that it doesn’t cost an Action and a Reaction. It costs an Action OR a Reaction before the leading roll is made. That’s more intuitive for players who think of the Help Action in D&D, Team in Masks, or Create an Advantage in Fate. Plus this way it’s still viable for Champions.
I would be tempted to do something like this: Crit Success: +2 (+3 if Master) (+4 if Legendary) Success: +1 (counts as +2 for determining Aided skill crit success or crit failure) Failure: +1 Crit Fail: -1 It's a little more complicated, but the change to the crit thresholds seems like maybe a decent way to do a bonus that's sort of like +1.5. This keeps the reliability, but towns down the potentially very high power a bit. It would end up more complicated and wordy, but you could roll the increases for Master and Legendary down to the crit threshold as well. Or if the +4 is too powerful, you could make legendary Crit Success a +3 as well, but it also get the further +1 crti threshold. But I dunno, just some ideas. I don't have a lot of experience with the system, but the +4 being always on the table just seems REALLY strong. Anyway, I like the idea of Master and Legendary improving aid. Yes, it locks it behind higher levels, but importantly, it also limits how many skills you can grant the very powerful bonuses with. Which helps a little in keeping players with separate specialisations feel a bit more powerful in those directions.
I believe that with the new remaster aid may see more use. But i think the initiative still sits in the GMs court to use aid in order to show players how useful it is.
I think this is a well thought out alternate rule, and I will be implementing this in my games henceforth, unless some issue comes up. I doubt there will be though, as this looks fairly consistent and works well with the provided case examples too.
running the beginner box and my players are struggling to use non combat actions (we are all DnD players). Aid is great way to use that 3rd action. I really like the teamwork aspect of PF2e and I think Im gonna try using your Aid House Rule. I will let you know how they like it....thanks!!!
I've homebrewed the Aid Action as follows as we felt it was too complicated and too restircitve especally if its a "willing action" You can only Aid when doing Skill Checks, and Perception Checks Regaurdless if they are in or out of combat You can not Aid in Attack rolls. When a Character Aids another character Add their proficancy bonus to the Check +2 for Trained, +4 for Expert, +6 for Master ect. This dose stack with Multiple Characters Untrained Characters in a skill must succeed a Flat DC10 Check to give a +2 Example: Character wants to Open Lock Door by Forcing it open. Character Rolls Athletics and is Aided by 2 other Characters who are Expertly Trained the DC for the Door is 25, Player rolls a total of 17 the 2 other characters add +8 to the roll for Aiding, Players met the DC. The only time I really use the Vanilla rule set is when its a Skill check IN COMBAT against a Unwilling Creature so things like Grappling a Target, Disarming a Target ect.
I have been using house rules for Aid at my web table, setting it so that the Aid DC is based on the aiding player's skill proficiency in what they are helping with. But I think the way you are doing it may be more interesting.
I really like your version! I probably would have the DC at 10+ The level of the person you're helping, but I'm not that familiar with PF2. This would mean that helping your level -2 nephew is really easy, but him helping you will probably result in more work for you 😅
I always ran aid as a Check DC-10. That way you dont have to succeed to aid, but if you would have rolled a success on your own, you would get a crit success in aiding.
I have a house rule for aid on saving throws. If it’s a dex saving throw a player can use their reaction to make a saving throw themselves and the “aided” player gets the better of the two rolls, the “aiding” player automatically fails the save - in essence it’s pushing your friend out of harms way and taking the hit instead.
I would use your revised degrees of success table but with one other adjustment. I would use the Treat Wounds DCs, Trained 15, Expert 20, Master 30, and Legendary 40 based on the proficiency of the TARGET you are aiding. It's harder to aid someone who is already so skilled, but you will likely be reasonably skilled as well in what you are attempting to aid with so this should still be reasonable (as reasonable as treat wounds is currently at least). DC 15 is much more reasonable at level 1 to successfully aid, and even at a failure it's a +1 with your table, and only reasonably a crit fail on a natural 1. The roll still matters at higher level and you are still more than likely benefiting the target with a +1 or a +2 and sometimes that critical +4. Helping someone with a lower proficiency than the maximum for the level? Even more likely to get that +4 but the end result would be much the same as helping someone with a higher prof by only +2.
Really like this rule. A level 2 human gunslinger with fakeout and cooperative nature could feasibly give a +4 bonus around 60%-ish of the time. Feels like crits would be far more common for people other than gunslinger and fighter. Which is a good thing.
Here's my thought. 1: If you are at least trained in the skill being used, you can choose to assist with no check required. 2: For every level of proficiency you have, you can provide a +1 bonus to the roll. (T +1, E+2, M +3, L+4) 3: If the skill test being attempted is above your proficiency level. (I.E. Master requirement, but assister's prof is Expert), You provide your bonus -1 to the skill test.)
I think it would be much more interesting to add some cool stunts to the Aid Action instead of just a numerical bonus. Something like throwing your Ally to a certain point (like circus artists do for example. The tactical Game Chroma Squad does something similar) You could also do something like combo attacks or remove certain conditions (helping your ally stand up for example)
The reason I did not go with task DC = aid DC is that it means that aiding is "as hard" as the task itself. Which is what I think the flat 20 DC was meant to avoid. My variant is that the aid DC is the simple DC that is right below that of the task DC, that is, for a task DC in the range [15...19], the aid DC is 15; for a task DC [20...29], the aid DC is 20; etc. Furthermore, I adjust the aid DC with the easy/hard table depending on whether I find the aid described by the player is effective or not. So if a player says they want to aid a rogue at lockpicking a 28 DC lock by giving a shoulder massage, the medicine DC will be 30 because I adjust with a +10 because I'm not convinced it's a good way to help (my not accept this aid at all really, just an example). Finally, expanding a ressource such as a spell slot may increase the aid degree of success by 1 if I think it's appropriate. The issue with my approach however is that it scales with large increments rather than linearly with the PC levels.
I really like this over all. I think using an action and a reaction to consistently grant at least a +1 on a single roll is pretty fair even if it will absolutely encourage players to maybe even use it too often because it makes your actions feel more meaningful (and I wouldnt let them Aid just anything either). My one worry is in the DC matching the DC of the check the pc you are aiding is attempting. Whats nice about Aid at higher levels is that even if I dont have a very high Athletics modifier, I can still consistently hit that DC 20 and provide a benefit to the pc going for a Grapple. If its the same DC as the Grapple check, this becomes a lot less reliable. And Im not certain how much allowing other checks will help out this issue.
You know I do think it's interesting that the Aid action requires a roll in the first place. I can't think of any other actions off the top of my head where you could make things *harder* for your allies as an inherent part of the action. In another system I play, Through the Breach, the Assist action doesn't require any roll (or flip in TTB's case) and adds the character's rank (proficiency bonus) to the assisted character's flip. I could see a house rule where this is brought into PF2e but it simply adds half your proficiency bonus to the assisted character's check as a circumstance bonus. This would cause issues with that bard feat, but maybe the fear could be changed to be something like "allows you to assist with tasks that you would normally need to be adjacent to from up to 30 yards away."
Aid having a chance to fail if you aren't good at something is exactly like running over to an EMT trying to perform CPR on a patient and making everything worse because you have no idea what you're doing despite your good intentions. At early levels you are not good enough at most things to safely worry about much more than your own survival. Aiding someone other than yourself being harder earlier on makes perfect sense, because people are at their least competent at the beginning of their journeys, and messing things up in a life-or-death scenario is almost always worse than having done nothing at all.
I just do away with the check entirely. I have a player decide how they want to Aid and what to "roll" and then: +1 for Trained +2 for Expert +3 for Master +4 for Legendary While do understand the verisimilitude behind Aid checks, I find that they slow combat down a bit, you're gonna Crit Success at higher level anyways(RAW), and that the check itself isn't that interesting, even when DC is scaled up. It also takes attention off the player's turn in combat. I'm not saying that it's a perfect house rule, and I'm usually hesitant in allowing Aid outside of combat(I save it for importamt checks), but, I can say that it's very quick. It also feels more in line with the gamist part of PF2, which is the system's strong point.
Derik from Knights of Last Call and most of the GMs on Northern Reaches use the following: Just a +1 Circumstance Bonus per level of proficiency in whatever skill/check you can justify; no roll necessary. You're already spending an action and a reaction on Aid. No need to slow down the game by rolling anything, and it incentives its use from level 1.
While I agree that Aid is too difficult at low levels, it does compete with very strong reactions (Reactive Strike, Amped Guidance, Champions' Reactions, Nimble Dodge...), so I don't feel like it's too powerful (some of those reactions are available at low levels!). Consuming one action and your reaction to give a bonus to one dice roll is good but costly, and the GM has the final say on whether you can help with your best skills or not. However, I think that more guidance to adjust the DC of Aid could be added, and that its DC20 is hard to reliably beat at low levels, so GMs should be more generous at those!
@@ShadowAraun DC10 is a bit too easy in 2e... but yeah it's a bit difficult at low levels, and since there is no insight given on how to ease it, GMs tend to default to 20 (I know I do ^^). I saw someone using DC-5 to Aid for a given action, and that looks like good middle ground.
Sounds good! I think I'll limit the bonus for a critical success to a +3 instead of a +4 though. I've yet to play Pathfinder (I'm hoping to with my group sometime soon) but you've always emphasized the power of these small bonuses and +4 seems like way too much even on a critical success. Yeah, Paizo thought it was okay when designing the Aid action, but we probably shouldn't be taking too much inspiration from the basic action that needs fixing. If your version of Aid hasn't been broken on a critical success though, lemme know.
Yeah, I've thought Aid needed some help for awhile now. It should be easier to help someone do something, not as difficult as it is for them to do the thing, and certainly not harder. I might make the Aid DC the DC of the check your ally is making -5. (So helping someone do a DC 15 medicine check become dc 10). This could be really strong with Cooperative Nature, +4 to checks to aid, so from the previous example DC 15 medicine check, is dc 10 to aid that check, effectively become DC 6 which might be automatic even at level 1. but I might be okay with that. I would probably keep the degrees of success the same in this instance, Crit Success (+2), Success(+1), Failure (nothing), Crit Failure (-1). The other idea I've been playing around with is that aid is the DC by level of the subject of the ally you are aiding (or the DC of the check you are aiding whichever is lower). So if an ally is using attacking a level 4 creature and you are aiding, the DC to aid is 19, if an ally is using medicine DC 20 on a level 3 creature, the DC to aid is 18, but if they were doing a DC 15 medicine check your DC to aid is only 15 because their check is lower than DC by level in this instance. Ronald's Rules of Aiding is interesting, but I think it's maybe a bit too much ,especially when ancestry feats that give sizable bonuses to Aid rolls or increase the effects of successful aid checks.
Interesting. Aid _absolutely_ needs a fix. I thought about using the main DC, but it felt too punishing with how DC's scales. Increasing the results does help with that.
I do a -5 to the dc for aid action. Most of the time, if a player wants to aid, it's because they don't think they beat the dc. Giving them a +1 on success and +2 on critical and only -1on crit fails.
I agree adjusting the dc is best but i feel making players hit the dc theyd need to succeed to aid would counterintuitively work worse. I imagine situations where the aider crit succeeds giving a +4 that doesnt change a fail to a success despite someone already rolling the equivalent to a success might feel bad
I like it, though I do wish you would make a doc or pdf of your varies house rules and have them linked on your youtube channel so we can download them ourselves.
My main issue with setting the Main DC the same as the DC of the task is at that point, why does the aiding character not simply attempt the task themself? If you are trying to beat a DC 20 Arcana check and someone tries to help you out, why would they be "less successful" than you even though they beat the full DC? Making it slightly easier for the aiding character shows a small contribution they make to grant the other character their bonus. Like, the DC 20 Arcana check might be to identify a set of magical runes carved into a doorway, the party Wizard is the main guy here, but the Rogue happens to have some expertise in Arcana, so he attempts a DC 16 check to see if he can come up with any ideas to jog the Wizard's braincells and lead him in the right direction. Tldr; I think Aid should be slightly easier than the Check's main DC, because the supporting character isn't trying to beat the check themselves.
There still needs to be justification, and I probably wouldn't allow Aid on recalling knowledge or analyzing something to begin with (something I've brought over from 1e).
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I wouldn't allow it inside of combat, but during exploration when the group has time to just sit and think I believe it would make sense for them to put their heads together. Though I would also ask them to justify how their knowledge on this certain topic overlaps for the Aiding character's suggestions to be helpful.
One reason is because there are penalties for failure/critical failure and greater bonuses for critical success. Specifically in combat, aiding an attack roll of someone else would come without your own multiple attack penalty and thus already be 'easier' if it's an extra action. But if you do want to make it easier to aid instead, I would suggest reducing the amount of bonus in this alternate rule as it could be quite easy to get a critical success/+4 bonus if your DC is even a couple points lower.
I agree with your assessment, I'm probably going to try your method when I start my new campaign this winter. Idk if that will be the best test though since none of my current players are optimizers.
I think I like this. I was disappointed when the rule for aid were like that playing the beginner box. It seemed to me more likely to hurt than to help. Now it has a good way of helping similar to 5e.
I think aid's dc should be based on the aided player's roll dc. ie if someone is doing an athletics check with +6 than to aid would be a dc of 16. This would simulate real situations where skilled people are hampered by unskilled help and keep the usefulness at higher levels with people who have the same skills
This sounds like a pretty good system, though my issue with Aid DCs following or being higher than the actual DC is this: if you’re succeeding at the check without the circumstance bonus, why are you helping and not doing it yourself? I know there are some times someone specific needs to roll, but my point is, for those times, even that +4 makes sense. The task has effectively already been handled.
yeah this is my big thing, if someone critically succeeds when aiding a check and they were aiming at the same DC the main person is... well, the players could have just critically succeeded the thing they wanted to have happen right then and there
I've just been running it as a standard level based DC sometimes adjusted for difficulty, or 20, whichever is lower. Below 5, its easier to hit, and at 5 or above, it maintains its current power. Which is fine with me, because its expensive in the action economy and higher level combat has been using Aid as written for years and I haven't heard any horror stories about it. I do agree the newbies need the help, but I'm not convinced the flat 20 is too strong for the higher tier adventures. That being said, depending on what the players said they were doing to aid, I might still pump that 20 higher. Can't let them be too complacent. 😅
Honestly the thing I dislike the most about the Aid re/action is exactly that. I have to spend an action and a reaction with the possibility of actually making things worse. That seems like a pretty steep cost in this action economy. I prefer to split this action into 2 separate actions. Aid is a reaction that is used exclusively for attack and defense including skill actions with the attack trait. To use Aid, you must be within reach of an ally to aid in defending them, or near a foe to aid in attacking them. Assist is an action that is used help in skill checks excluding skill actions with the attack trait. As part of the assist action you can move up to your speed to reposition yourself to better assist an ally if need be. Typical DC is one degree lower than that of the main roll if using simple DCs, or 4 points lower if using level based DCs. Helping someone do a thing is inherently easier than doing the thing. No adjustments to the outcome. Not granting a bonus at all when you fail to help makes sense to me.
On your previous video, I suggested all item DCs should scale with the standard DC table, and for easy reference a "Standard DC" box should be added to the front of the character sheet. This change would also help the AID action if it were to scale based on the same table. I'd also really love to hear your opinion on my item DC suggestion. My table uses it and it improves QoL dramatically without affecting game balance at all.
Just skip the check. Action+Reaction is enough. +1 for trained, +2 for expert, +3 for master, +4 for legendary. It speeds up the game both in and out of combat.
I suggest fixing wounds, so they are actually wounds that stick. Savage Pathfinder can do it, so why not Remastered. But above suggestions are also appreciated
Any GM who plays this game should have the level-based DC chart within arms reach at all times. It's one of the most useful things in the game, so I don't understand the downside of "you need to memorize the chart" when a lot of stuff in the game already uses it.
i already did your Rule #1, but i feel like Rule #2 is better as an alternative than an addition to "base DC to Aid is as per other DCs" if you used "spell-like" -1/+1/+2/+4 results with a static DC of 20, then Aiding would still be worth it at level 1, but would grow and become more reliable as you level up (which it does RAW and when using only Rule #1, since proficiency out-scales level DCs)
Why even have to roll for aid? My group house ruled that the bonus you give is based on how well you are trained in the skill. Trained is +1, expert +2, master +3 and legendary +4. It feels bad if you roll higher than the person you are aiding and it wastes time. Give the bonus and move on. We don’t really ever aid on attack rolls so if it came up we would have to figure that part out.
Makes more sense to me. I'm thinking since the rules do state the GM can set the DC, this is still RAW. I'll share with my table that I'm doing it this way so they aren't surprised but I don't expect much of an issue. It benefits the players and makes sense.... Except I won't use failure as a +1. A fail isn't a partial success, you shouldn't benefit, in my opinion.
Conceptually, aiding a skilled person in a job should be a lot easier that doing the job (don't know how many times I've held a light or passed tools or some other low-skill task to aid someone in real life.) I'd address this by automatically giving the aider the benefits of Following the Expert if using the same task DC. Maybe 2x but I'd need to run the math.
Also, one assumes that the person in the party with the best bonus is going to be attempting the actual check, so same DC makes it effectively _harder_ to assist someone that do the task itself. Pretty hard for passing them prepared tools, mopping brow sweat, etc.
I think the crit at +4 is too big, -1/+1/+1/+2 or -1/+1/+2/+3 sounds better for me, but in general I agree with the DC being based on the DC, and a degree easier is the best approach
Well... When you became more proficient with skill - tasks become easier. So that's not a reverse difficulty 😄 And when you are unskillfull in something - you can make the situation worse, not better. That's make sense, actually.
Hey Ronald, I actually REALLY like these changes, I had tried running your previous suggestions to improve aiding using Level Based DC's in my games for the last few months, which I felt made early game Aiding a lot better buit later game Aiding was becoming a bit of a problem for my players.. I also found that it basically discouraged anyone who wasn't very focused in certain skills that could reasonably be used to aid with 'most' actions from ever using Aid, which I felt was not the desired outcome of the initial changes. I feel like these proposed changes are an improvement, however I do think it creates a bit of a problem in SOME cases, you already brought up how it would be very strong with Inspire Competence (but at the least, Inspire Competence, if I am not mistaken, can only be used to aid with skill checks, not stuff like Attack Rolls, and like you said, Inspire Courage is already very strong as is and would typically be competing for the Bards use of their composition cantrip) However, in the Stolen Fate campaign I am about to run, one of my players is going to be playing a Infinite Eye Psychic, which I and they are very excited to play as. If I were to run these changes to Aid however, I feel it would kind of both buff the base use of their Omnidirectional Scan psi cantrip, but also inadvertently weaken the usefulness of their amped version of the cantrip a bit? Maybe this is just such a weird edge-case issue, and maybe I'm discrediting the aspect that it also gives it's circumstance bonus to damage unlike usual aid... but what do you think of that when factoring in these changes? Love the videos by the way!
There are plenty of other classes who get shafted by these changes. Any class feature that uses Aid is balanced around being able to get that max bonus 90% of the time
@@feral_orc I mean I agree with you, but it still seems like terrible design given how Aid is like borderline unusable at early levels even when maximum investment in a skill, which just feels bad. And then for the check to suddenly no matter anymore as soon as you hit level 6 - 7 feels even weirder. At that point just having Aid not be a check at all and just having it give you a flat bonus to circumstance seems like an easier solution, albeit a boring one.
@@ryanhughes3569 I made the point in another comment from the game balance perspective, it being difficult at low levels and easier at high levels makes sense. At low levels the game does not expect you to have a circumstance, status or item bonus to your checks. So aid is difficult at low levels, because for the math to work it has to be.
"I also found that it basically discouraged anyone who wasn't very focused in certain skills..." Aid allows different checks that are different from the main check. Someone may not be good at attacking, but they can sure aid an Attack roll by using Deception to try to distract a creature, for example.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Oh yes for sure, but it basically just boils down to the player to come up with an explination for why X skill would be useful to aid for Y action. Like maybe someone being a skillful medic being able to pass on information of a vital point to an attacking fighter with their high proficency in medicine. But when you're playing with people who are newer to the system it can be kind of difficult to encourage that idea of "get creative and think of a flavorful reason on the fly as to how you could aid your friend with one of your best skills.", they would usually think of an idea of how they wanted to try and aid, and then I would go with "well, that sounds like you want to roll Performance or Deception here", or the like, when they are maybe trained at best in those skills. But that's mostly more to do with players who are not quite use to the idea of the flexibility of it being useable with just about any skill so long as you can think of an interesting idea as to why that skill could help someone in the given moment.
No mention of the swashbuckler's one for all ? As a bard I multiclassed into swashbuckler to learn that trick since it doesn't intervere with my singing.
Huh. Last week I heard the claim that it had been errata'd to DC 15. Looks like my fellow players were either misinformed or passed their "fast talk the GM" roll.
I have been using the Main DC = Aid DC bit for a while. There is one thing I have a problem with, with this option, though -- I find that at least 9 out of 10 times, the person aiding is using the same skill (as in assisting with Treat Wounds, or helping to Track). And if they're doing this...why are they aiding instead of doing it on their own? I don't have a solution that feels right, especially if we're going to combine with the higher bonuses/bonus on failure. So far, it's been handwaved away easily enough, but it just doesn't feel right.
I ve idea for the Save aid... What if you allow the aided pne to take cover behind you? Or something like that, i m not that good at remembering Cover rules. I think it would be as lesser cover but for reflex too? Not just ac. Or one of the bonuses
YT deleted my pinned comment! Grr. Here it is again.
ADDITIONS/ERRATA:
-The "main DC" is just the "typical" DC. The GM can also choose to use a different DC (e.g., if trying to use Deception to help an ally's attack roll by distracting an enemy, using the enemy's Perception DC), a Level-Based DC, or Simple DC from CRB p. 503.
-At 3:22, a caption says you automatically "critically" succeed at Level 6, but that's actually true at Level 14 with master proficiency in a skill.
-I've seen the idea that Aid as written simulates the party jelling together as a team. First, I think the gameplay effect on low levels is too important to ignore. Second, Aid as written doesn't care how long the PCs have been adventuring together. Third, why should +4 be walled off for lower-level characters? In Lord of the Rings, Samwise was low-level but we all know the Aid he offered was LEGENDARY.
-I see the idea popping up in the comments, of having tiers of DCs that have greater effect, like Treat Wounds does: +2/+3/+4 on a crit depending on doing a DC 20, 30, or 40 check. That is certainly something to try; I had discarded the idea because I wanted to keep it gameplay simple and avoid a probability problem every time someone wants to Aid. Also, "I want to try to Aid a lot unlike last time" I found hard to justify in the narrative.
-There is a good argument for getting rid of the roll altogether! A roll to Aid slows down play. Some tables might want to adapt what Derik of Knights of Last Call does: without a roll, you provide a +1 circumstance bonus if you are Trained in the check you would otherwise roll, and this goes up to +2 if you're Expert, +3 if Master, or +4 if you're Legendary.
-I forgot to include that on our Discord we also discussed nerfing some numerical bonuses to Aid that come from Feats. The human feat Cooperative Nature, for example, goes from a +4 circumstance bonus to a +2
-"Let's Fix Aid" thread on the Rules Lawyer Discord:
discord.com/channels/870925179570753616/1122390638307057724
Don't you think, that One for All would be too strong with this rule? And any CHA character could be TOO effective with this feat?
@@lemur_kf5992 I address that in the last 4 minutes. The other abilities I put up on screen are as strong if not stronger. And Occultism uses INT.
I personally like having seek and recall knowledge activate aid just like prepare does. These two ways to help the party don't need to compete with one another.
This is brilliant! It is thematically accurate in the sense that you are analyzing the situation so you could either notice things that you wouldn't have otherwise, or remember more detailed things about a subject than you would if you hadn't taken a second to. But, since your senses are heightened and you are not distracted by attempting to do anything else, you are also prepared to help someone if the opportunity arises. Plus it helps a bunch of actions that just don't feel worth it on their own a lot of the time.
Recall the teachings still only allows you to aid one ally at a time since you only have one reaction per round. The "prepare to aid all allies" text means instead of choosing which ally or action specifically, you can state a blanket trigger for aid, and react to whichever ally does it first(or at the most opportune time).
It's also got the Psyche trait, so you have to Unleash Psyche before you can do it. Meaning unless you go longer than five rounds in a combat, you can only use it for two (not the first round), and the tradeoff for *that* is you're stupefied 1 for two rounds afterward.
Great video, you aren't the only one who has had problems with the Aid action. I will say that I came up with a similar rule for my homegames, but I kept the -1/0/1/2 for crit failure/failure/success/crit success but I also made the DC the Main DC-5. The reason for that is that . . . helping should be easier than doing the main thing. If medic is doing surgery to save someone, it shouldn't be JUST as hard to hand someone the tools they ask for and make sure they are remembering the basics. If someone is trying to bust down a door, any amount of force is going to be helpful to that.
The other reason for reducing the DC to aid is that . . . likely you have your best person trying the skill check .. . . so the chances that someone else will succeed on the skill check are less. If I only have a +3 to medicine because my wisdom is 10, but I'm the only other guy in the party, then I'm probably not going to succeed on that surgery check, especially next to the cleric with +7. But I'd have a decent shot if the DC was reduced. Something to think about.
@VampByDay, Exactly what I was going to propose. It opens up aid to people who aren't as focused in that skill and it keeps the bonuses reasonable.
We have used the same rule as well and it works quite well. It also is a smaller change, since it just changes the default DC instead of the results of the different degrees of success.
I went with that for a while. What I propose is actually more generous, with a +1 circumstance bonus achievable at DC -10, and a +2 at DC+0, with the possibility of getting a +4 even starting at Level 1. But this is more of a compromise I suppose for people who want to not buff it too much.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG True, but also bigger chance of getting a crit fail . . . just depends on how you want to run it. I tend towards my thing just because I've seen some truly redonculus DCs out there in published adventures. One trap I saw had the DC set at 9 above what was a typical DC for that level.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Would using your way but with Aid DC -5 be overpowered? New to PF
As a newer PF2 GM running the Abomination Vaults, I really appreciate how this makes teamwork feel better mechanically. I hate that the opportunity cost for using Recall Knowledge or Aid is so high compared to how underwhelming they feel mechanically. I've been exceptionally generous with my answers whenever anyone tries to Recall Knowledge as a way to reward them for "burning" one of their precious actions. I think that learning the exact AC of the creature they're fighting, or maybe the exact Fort/Ref/Will defense they need to overcome, isn't too out of line. Now I have a really juicy carrot to encourage use of the Aid action, too! Thanks, Ronald!
ADDITIONS/ERRATA:
-I would add that the "main DC" is just the default/"typical"(!) DC. The GM can also choose to use a different DC (e.g., if trying to distract the enemy, using the enemy's Perception DC), a Level-Based DC, or Simple DC from CRB p. 503.
-At 3:22, a caption says you automatically "critically" succeed at Level 6, but that's actually true at Level 14 with master proficiency in a skill.
-I've seen the idea that Aid as written simulates the party gelling together as a team. First, I think the gameplay effect on low levels is too important to ignore. Second, Aid as written doesn't care how long the PCs have been adventuring together.
-I see the idea popping up in the comments, of having tiers of DCs that have greater effect, like Treat Wounds does: +2/+3/+4 on a crit depending on doing a DC 20, 30, or 40 check. That is certainly something to try; I had discarded the idea because I wanted to keep it gameplay simple and avoid a probability problem every time someone wants to Aid. Also, "I want to try to Aid a lot unlike last time" I found hard to justify in the narrative.
-I forgot to include that on our Discord we also discussed nerfing some numerical bonuses to Aid that come from Feats. The human feat Cooperative Nature, for example, goes from a +4 circumstance bonus to a +2
-There IS an argument for Aid to not require a roll at all: it slows down play! If a table feels this way, I personally would propose a +1 circumstance bonus with no roll required, and if the assisting check is Master or higher, it goes up to a +2. (EDIT: Derik of Knights of Last Call requires no roll, and the circumstance bonus is equal to the proficiency level of the Aiding check, +1 for trained, +2 for expert, etc.)
-"Let's Fix Aid" thread on the Rules Lawyer Discord:
discord.com/channels/870925179570753616/1122390638307057724
Eat well hungry algorithm and be satiated.
I find this remedied by using Simple DCs but the DCs are just thresholds. Same Aid check: if they beat a 20, they provide a +2. If they only beat a 15, they provide a +1. Even without being legendary, if anyone can hit a DC 40, they give a +4. Yes, even if it somehow happens at level 1. Nat 1s and 20s change the category result one step, as normal. Only hurts an ally on a 5- total, only fails to provide any bonus on a 14-, but the roll still matters to determine what bonus is given.
Love your content Ronald, you're my favorite PF2E RUclipsr. It's really funny that you made this video because I actually have a homebrew rule that is extremely similar!
The DC for Aid was based on the levels by DC chart. Players could spend multiple actions to lower the DC though. 1 action was the unaltered DC but 2 actions used to aid applied the easy modifier (-2 to the DC) and 3 actions applied the very easy modifier (-5 to the DC). Finally I did expand the bonus to also affect DCs. So you could aid your sorcerer companion and increase the reflex DC to avoid the incoming fireball from 22 to 23 (or higher if you critically succeeded or had better proficiencies).
@@malkyn9998 that seems like a reasonable way of adjusting it too. It sounds like it would accomplish the same goal: making it more useful and low levels, while keeping it useful but not guaranteed, at higher levels.
Thank you for bringing up the knights of last call ruling. I think I'll take that for my personal table to keep gameplay fast.
I actually like your version of aid. I have a group of people new to pathfinder and they have pointed out a few things they dislike. Aid is one of those things so i will be giving your version of aid a test in my next campaign
Definitely been deterred from trying aid in situations at lower level due to the wide failure chance
I just ran my first session of PF2E earlier this week, I think this will be the first house rule I impliment.
don't use any house rules yet. This change makes certain classes like Gunslinger who relied on Aid in the late game suck complete ass.
Another very ability to consider when changing the Aid action, is the human ancestry feat "cooperative nature", that flat +4 can mean a lot of aid crits at low level, expecislly when targetting AC
It's not in the video but in my pinned comment - on the Discord we said such abilities should cut their bonus in half.
Great video. Another alternative that may work could be doing something similar to how Treat Wounds or the advanced crafting system works where if you're a certain proficiency level, you can increase the DC of the check to get the better result. Maybe have Aids' default DC be 15 (to help lower levels), and provide a +1 bonus on both success and crit success. But if you're expert in attacks or the skill in question, you have the option to make the check at DC 20, and if you crit succeed, provide a +2 bonus (still +1 on success). Master would be DC 30 and give a +3 bonus on crit. Legendary would be DC 40 and give a +4 on crit.
So at level 15, when you get access to legendary skills, you'll have a tough time getting that 50 you need for the legendary crit success. But getting the 40 for the Master crit success is very doable. And as you approach level 20, getting that 50 for a legendary crit success becomes that much easier.
As for letting Aid be used on saving throws, I don't think that makes much sense, as saving throws tend to represent split-second near-subconscious actions done by the character to withstand or avoid an attack. How do you Aid a character's Fortitude save against poison or a Will save to fight off some illusion or charm effect? I could see spending an action to prepare to push an ally out of an AOE effect that would call for a Reflex save. But I think for simplicity's sake, don't make exceptions.
Nurses assist in brain surgery. Handing the right tool and mopping the doctor's brow are incredibly useful. Assistance isn't automatically doing the job yourself.
3:22 Level 6 with expert and assurance is a normal success, not a critical success; that's at 14 with master.
Thanks, adding a correction
I don't love rolling to see how much of a bonus I give to another roll. I'd prefer to just say you give your ally a +x. At our table aid gives +1 at trained, +2 at expert and so on.
Ends up being a huge buff at low levels, very small buff at higher levels. +4 might be too much, and +1 might be too little, but eh... Still better than it was, and it speeds things up.
Also, catfolk can already aid reflex throws. Graceful Guidance I think? Pretty sure there's a ancestry that can do the same for wil saves. Not super clear how that works when you normally need to prepare to Aid.
But that's why I took Bellflower Tiller so I don't need to prepare.
I think this makes a lot of sense. The big point for me is the fact that aid never works at low levels and always works at high levels. I think regardless of how people feel about your proposed solution, it's hard to argue how weird it is that a system that's all about strategy and teamwork made the "aid" action a trap for new players and a boring freebie for experienced players.
I think I'll try this out, I like the sound of it more than the actual rule.
Aid is fine. Aid becoming easier as you level isn't a bug, it's a feature. It's not supposed to reflect you and your party becoming more unified, it's meant to show YOUR progression from a lowly adventurer to someone who can not only begin to handle themselves, but also help others due to their expertise.
It's a feature that many of us disagree with.
While I agree with your take in the abstract, I just don’t embrace it upon application. Aid-the very name of which implies beneficial help-is simply too hard to pull off at lower levels as a mechanic. I’ve been running multiple games since the 2019 PF2 inception, and I found out quickly that if I don’t house rule it to make it a bit easier at earlier levels, people simply don’t use it. You can justify the difficulty as much as you want, but after a year’s worth of data at my table, it literally conditioned players to avoid it. And that learned behavior carried on into the later levels when it becomes much easier to use. Again, this is anecdotal, but I’m willing to bet my experiences reflect most other experiences. The only players using Aid were Bards, Human characters with the Cooperative Nature feat, and Halflings, with their Ancestry feat. With the arrival of Swashbuckler, and the ‘All For One’ feat, I realized I could add them to the list, but the root issue wouldn’t change.
In the years since making the change to Aid, players at my table have adapted it into their schema of common combat options, keeping it viable from levels 1-20. This has helped make better players at my table, as even Fighters will, at later levels, recognize when it’s more advantageous to give up their precious AoO in favor of securing a fellow member’s own attack or other option. While that’s always been an option at mid/late levels, in practice it was missing because the players had been conditioned at the very start to ignore Aid.
The main problem I have with this is the reduction of power at higher levels and think that it could have the inverse effect of disincentivizing it's use.
Early on people struggle to use it because of the height of the DC. As your toolkit expands, it's going to be competing with so many other reactions/actions that, I think, it needs to sit in this very strong place to make it stay attractive at these higher levels. It's already hard enough for people to adjust to the idea that "the teams damage is my damage" that making it less immediately powerful will probably make it less likely to be utilized, especially in combat - unless your group is already very predisposed to like the action.
While I recognize that there is not a specific call out in the Aid Action, my belief is that the intent is the verisimilitude of it all. I think that it should be that powerful because, I believe, it does attempt to encompass that idea of people being "that" in tune with one another from months/years of adventuring. I've played a number of characters that use Aid consistently in our higher level encounters to increase the pay off in combat of my group and seeing that power diminish to only a +2 for a larger percentage of the time would feel bad to me when I built a character specifically around the idea of hitting that +4 as much as possible as early as possible.
I recognize this, as with most houserules, would definitely be better as a Session 0 topic and so I would strongly recommend against adding it into a campaign that is already in progress at the least.
As much as I like the narrative of having a set DC and therefor have the cool moment of "You just met and cant cooperate well" and once you are high level you basically are master of teamwork. It quickly falls appart as soon as someone doesnt start their adventure at level 1, so I agree that it needs a change and I bet it will get one in the remaster.
It shoudlnt give a +1 at a failure considering that compare to something like guidiance it has no limit except for costing an action and reaction.
What about giving it the "treat wounds" treatment? giving a +1 at DC 15, +2 at DC 20, +3 at DC 30 and +4 at DC 40 success.
The crit fail staying giving a -1 and crit success giving an aditional +1 (up to +4, so critically suceeding at DC40 wont do anything)
A fail wont do anything
Maybe fail could give a +1/-1 till you attempt to aid again in the next minute when aiding with the same skill.
I'm not sure where that narrative comes from about veteran heroes getting better at aiding each other. I don't think it comes from Paizo; I think it's something players have invented to justify the rule. Yeah, Bill the Replacement Character joining the party at Level 15 suddenly jelling with the party doesn't make much sense! The fact that you already have a +35 should already account for how much better you've gotten at what you're trying imo.
Happily, Guidance stacks with Aid as it's a status bonus. Let's not forget how the default rule makes Guidance look trivial beyond a certain level.
I had discarded the idea of making it like Treat Wounds as I wanted to avoid a probability problem every time someone wants to Aid. Also, "I want to Aid a lot unlike last time" I found hard to justify.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Its definetely a player justification with the team growing together.
What probability problem?
For the justification:
Its rather that as you get better proficency ranks you are capeable of aiding better. Same as with the treat wounds DCs. I am not a medicine guy and have no clue so it will sound silly, but for trained you just loosely put on a bandage and just rub the ointment on someone and as you get higher you do the challenging version of it and put on the bandages tighter, but not too tight, put on more dangerous and careful ointments and whatelse.
Same thing can be applied to the aid stuff. DC 15 you assist someone and do the most basic, but as you go higher you put in more work into helping someone. Putting on a more complexe guitar solo to motivate your boulder carrying barbarian, or the barbarian holding the beam balanced on which the wizard is balancing with their whole body with each muscle activated instead of just using the arms or so.
12:40
I think this is actually really cool. The power boost that this gives the psychic makes this ability a thing that they should be doing all the time. Which makes them "Feel" more like a psychic.
I have a sort of house rule that with things like this, the player (or table) is required to come up with the parable, or axiom that is helpful.
This keeps things flavorful and interesting, while eliminating the pattern of: PC roll CHA, says aloud to the table "I say the good shit", and then the in game effect happens.
Gonna have to steal this for my upcoming game, appreciate it Ronald!
I am GMing my first campaign. I hadn't considered the raw DC for Aid. I would have and intend to use the standard DC for the levels with adjustments as the CR recommends. So level 1 standard DC at 15 seem a good spot. I still want to have players justify the action they take as a logic path to success. Half way in I was already at the house rule before you got to it. It seems a sensible fix.
The problem with this is if you run into a hard DC, the one you'd most want and need help with, even if you increase the effects on a Success you are still spending an action and a reaction to make a check that's hard to succeed for a Success to *possibly* help. +2 is powerful, but it only has a chance of doing anything because they have to roll one of the numbers on the die that needs the bonus to succeed or crit. This is far more egreious if you use the same skill the task requires, beat the DC, and then the person you are helping fails.
And as to the "Logically it would be hard to Aid brain surgery." Why? Why is giving a small bonus to achieving the goal as hard as actually doing it solo? You aren't trying to achieve the task, you're trying to make it easier to do. Helping someone lift a box isn't as hard as soloing it.
Aid being the DC you are helping against works fine at lower DCs but if you run into a difficult DC you have to be very optimized or even with the improved Degrees of Success you are cut off from Aid in the situation you'd be most likely to actually use it.
Sounds like we differ on the power of a +2. Fortune effects amount to about a +3 in PF2 from some analysis I've done.
The DC is more flexible as my pinned comment says; this is the "typical" DC. So if the player can justify doing something else that assists with brain surgery, the GM can set another DC.
I think the level-based DC is easier than it looks, if you consider that the helping player basically gets to pick their best skill every time (if they're creative enough). I do like lowering the DC to (very) easy if the idea is (especially) creative, so that it's not a complete no-brainer what skill to aid with.
@@chrizzlybear5565 If their best skill doesn't apply don't allow it. If they always pick their best skill and it makes it super easy it's because you made it that way.
@@cheezeofages Oh, of course not! They always need to justify how their skill is actually helpful. If it's a bit of a stretch, maybe they can help if they meet a hard DC. If I don't see it at all, it won't work. However, there's usually more than one way to help and the more options there are, the more likely the PC is really good at the skill they use to aid.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPGApologies. I did some math and DC by Level has more downsides than I thought without buffing a success.
I don't agree fundamentally with the DC being the same as the check you are Aiding. Helping someone lift a box isn't as hard as doing it alone, but that's not what your Degrees of Success do. You made a failed check to Aid provide Aid so it's not effectively the same DC.
But fundamentally I don't agree with making a failed check to Aid provide Aid so...
Either way I didn't mean to give the impression I think worse of the changes than I actually do. They are alright.
Your last comments reminded me of how aid worked in Star Wars Saga edition, which notably used the aid action to make low level mooks like Stormtroopers and Battle Droids relevant at higher levels, especially since both had mechanics that let them auto succeed at aiding attack rolls. This had the interesting effect of making minions act as buffs for more serious, and allowing the vanilla Stormtrooper to remain useful to the GM long after they'd ceased to be a threat simply shooting at the PCs, especially since Saga Edition has a lot of feats (being based on 3.5, NPCs had feats too) that could let someone trade accuracy for a bonus to damage, extra damage dice, or an extra attack. Your proposed rule seems like it could allow low CR monsters to help the "Boss," which could be quite interesting
My house rules for aid are similar to what you've described in terms of the Aid DC being the same as the main DC. Where we differ are the bonuses granted, for which I scale based on the expertise level of the aiding party member. When "trained" or "expert", bonuses start at +0 with failure and increase by 1 for each degree of success. "Master" increases all bonuses at each success level by another 1, and so on.
Something that aid and aid like actions falls short of imo is diferentiating between helping someone and working together to accomplish a task. For example (because I know that was really unclearly worded), two people working together to push a boulder is going to have a much bigger benefit than holding a lock steady while someone else picks it. One is giving someone assistance, where the other is sharing the worlload between two or more people.
However, I do acknowledge that adressing this mechanically does have the tradeoff of rules complexity (and extra GM decision making), which may not be worth it.
In the case of two people pushing a boulder, I say that it shouldn't count as Aiding. Instead, in any situation where multiple players are all performing the same skill check simultaneously, everyone participating should roll the skill check, and the DM should take the highest result. Most tasks will have an upper limit on the number of people that can work on it simultaneously; for instance, a 10-foot wide door can only be forced open by two Medium creatures simultaneously, and possibly one additional Small creature.
@@imveryangryitsnotbutter I agree with you that pushing a boulder or similar tasks aren't a good fit for the aid rules, though I don't think that having everyone combined roll separately and take the highest result really captures the feel of a task that is too much for one person, even the strongest among you, to do alone, but with the help of others, even those weaker then them, can be accomplished.
As a more grounded example, I cannot lift a dining table, not even a 5% chance of a success if I try alone. But with someone else lifting in the other end (who also cannot lift the table alone) we can lift the table, and fairly consistently, too. The simplest way to implement that into a ttrpg would be to have a different DC for attempting the task alone or with someone else, but that feels messy to me.
For our house rule we do normal aid rules but make the Aid DC the same as the check DC of it’s lower than 20. Makes early levels aids more successful; suddenly aiding a strike against a 13AC lv-1 mook is viable and fun at lv1 with a more achievable aid DC of 13
i like using the standard DC but instead of tying it to the character's level, tying it to the level of the thing in question. Like if you're helping someone deactivate a trap, you could be using the level 3 standard DC. Or if you're helping someone attack a boss creature you use the standard dc of that creature's level. I still like the idea of a +1 on a failure and giving the +4 to everyone on a critical success.
Actually, the most common time people are using aid in my campaigns is for Treat Wounds where I do use 15.
I have kind of talked myself into liking the current Aid rules. At level 1, you're just beginning; if you have two brand-new at something people trying to work together, its just as likely they'll get in each others way as help, where as having a literal master helping you is much better at helping you.
I had a barbarian in PFS that ended up using Aid quite a bit at low level, because a) I didn't have anything else to use my reaction for, and b) I often didn't have a great 3rd action (didn't want to move away because I needed to provide a flank, couldn't intimidate, etc). As you level and get more powerful things to do, the opportunity cost of an action and a reaction goes up.
I like this, probably going to use it! One thing that always kinda irked me even with the aid checks in 1E is that if someone goes to aid someone else and rolls really high... they could have just done the thing themselves and succeeded right then and there. So many times someone rolls a nat 20 to aid, then the person they are helping rolls a 2 and fails. If they had swapped who was rolling, the task would have been achieved, and every time that happens it's demoralizing. So, big bonus on a crit success on aid I think is fine
What if you made Aid checks similar to the Treat Wounds action, where you make a check based on the trained, expert, master and legendary DC. It could have the following effects:
Critical Success: The target gains a +2 circumstance bonus to the check. If you made a check at a Master DC the bonus is +3 or at a Legendary DC the bonus is +4.
Success: The target gains +1 circumstance bonus. If you made the check at a Master or Legendary DC then the target gains a +2 circumstance bonus to the check
Critical Failure: The target takes a -1 circumstance penalty to the check.
This way if you are maxed out at 1st level, you still need to roll at least an 8, but at the higher levels, you can guarantee a +2, but the player might have to choose between Legendary DC as a higher risk/reward instead of the safer Master DC. Assurance, Recall the Teachings and Inspire Confidence are still balanced in this system I believe
I like it. I will incorporate a similar change in my game.
My Aid house rules: theres no need for a check, the action+reaction cost is enough of a cost, so you just get the +1 for trained, 2/3/4 for E/M/L.
Also, you can Aid as a reaction if you haven't already used your reaction, without having prepared to aid, only if the situation is changed/unexpected and you can reasonably/logically provide aid where you are and in the situation: plead your case to the GM. Afterward, you are Stunned 1, so the action cost is still there.
Great adjustment to Aid - I'll be using this going forward - thanks
I'm very much for this version and will be instituting it as a homerule in my game if my players are amenable. Considering in the last year+ of the campaign I don't think they've used the aid action more than twice, they'll probably be interested.
I've been using the "aid DC is the main DC". Which if nothing else, just helps me give them a fair DC. I think I got the idea to make this change from one of your videos. However, my players rarely use aid. I think changing the bonuses like you said to so that even a failure is +1 would make aid more popular at my table. So I might try that next.
Honestly using the DC the roll the main player is trying to beat is a nice way of handling it that I had also thought of. The added degrees of success really wasn't something I thought of though it does work as a good way of handling it without adding some other modifier to the role while making there a chance the player succeeds. As far as using the Aid for more actions, honestly I feel like it would be great if you could your own hero point in the act of aiding an ally. So long as the idea can be pitched to make sense for the GM allowing a player to take a hit or do some other action to save an ally in trouble would be a fun way of giving Hero Points another use while creating a case of aid that goes beyond what is normally allowed.
Whenever my party was fighting a boss character, they'd regularly have high defensive stats. So we were scrambling for any bonuses we could get to our rolls. Ronald's version which makes a +4 potentially available even at low levels is a huge boon to those fights. Even if I was playing a Fighter, I'd probably forgo my 3rd action and my Reactive Strike if I thought I had a good chance of offering an ally a +4 on their next attack.
That said, it is situational. At low levels the +4 is no where near guaranteed. And at high levels, your ally may already have a +2 circumstance bonus from a different source, so the extra +2 may not be worth the action cost. But since this a free feature available to every character, I believe it would offer a lot of utility. I especially like that it would encourage roleplay moments as players trying to come up with ways to describe how they're providing assistance.
This is the best example of the game being designed for players to fail. To gear chase; because even your friends can't help you as much as that +1 thing-a-ma-bob. By the time you're of a level to regularly pass this test you're going to have gear that does it better. And they will have better options for their actions and reactions.
Mine’s a little weaker but still handy. The DC is one step lower than the helped DC for that +1, or +2/+3/+4 on Crit. However, what makes it stronger again is that it doesn’t cost an Action and a Reaction. It costs an Action OR a Reaction before the leading roll is made. That’s more intuitive for players who think of the Help Action in D&D, Team in Masks, or Create an Advantage in Fate.
Plus this way it’s still viable for Champions.
Once again D&D players not having a clue how the rules to the game work. I'll never get tired of it
I would be tempted to do something like this:
Crit Success: +2 (+3 if Master) (+4 if Legendary)
Success: +1 (counts as +2 for determining Aided skill crit success or crit failure)
Failure: +1
Crit Fail: -1
It's a little more complicated, but the change to the crit thresholds seems like maybe a decent way to do a bonus that's sort of like +1.5. This keeps the reliability, but towns down the potentially very high power a bit. It would end up more complicated and wordy, but you could roll the increases for Master and Legendary down to the crit threshold as well. Or if the +4 is too powerful, you could make legendary Crit Success a +3 as well, but it also get the further +1 crti threshold. But I dunno, just some ideas. I don't have a lot of experience with the system, but the +4 being always on the table just seems REALLY strong.
Anyway, I like the idea of Master and Legendary improving aid. Yes, it locks it behind higher levels, but importantly, it also limits how many skills you can grant the very powerful bonuses with. Which helps a little in keeping players with separate specialisations feel a bit more powerful in those directions.
I believe that with the new remaster aid may see more use. But i think the initiative still sits in the GMs court to use aid in order to show players how useful it is.
I think this is a well thought out alternate rule, and I will be implementing this in my games henceforth, unless some issue comes up. I doubt there will be though, as this looks fairly consistent and works well with the provided case examples too.
running the beginner box and my players are struggling to use non combat actions (we are all DnD players). Aid is great way to use that 3rd action. I really like the teamwork aspect of PF2e and I think Im gonna try using your Aid House Rule. I will let you know how they like it....thanks!!!
On paper it looks pretty cool, I am going to try it with my group.
I've homebrewed the Aid Action as follows as we felt it was too complicated and too restircitve especally if its a "willing action"
You can only Aid when doing Skill Checks, and Perception Checks Regaurdless if they are in or out of combat
You can not Aid in Attack rolls.
When a Character Aids another character Add their proficancy bonus to the Check +2 for Trained, +4 for Expert, +6 for Master ect.
This dose stack with Multiple Characters
Untrained Characters in a skill must succeed a Flat DC10 Check to give a +2
Example: Character wants to Open Lock Door by Forcing it open. Character Rolls Athletics and is Aided by 2 other Characters who are Expertly Trained the DC for the Door is 25, Player rolls a total of 17 the 2 other characters add +8 to the roll for Aiding, Players met the DC.
The only time I really use the Vanilla rule set is when its a Skill check IN COMBAT against a Unwilling Creature so things like Grappling a Target, Disarming a Target ect.
I have been using house rules for Aid at my web table, setting it so that the Aid DC is based on the aiding player's skill proficiency in what they are helping with. But I think the way you are doing it may be more interesting.
I really like your version! I probably would have the DC at 10+ The level of the person you're helping, but I'm not that familiar with PF2. This would mean that helping your level -2 nephew is really easy, but him helping you will probably result in more work for you 😅
I am going to try this version tonight.
I always ran aid as a Check DC-10. That way you dont have to succeed to aid, but if you would have rolled a success on your own, you would get a crit success in aiding.
I have a house rule for aid on saving throws. If it’s a dex saving throw a player can use their reaction to make a saving throw themselves and the “aided” player gets the better of the two rolls, the “aiding” player automatically fails the save - in essence it’s pushing your friend out of harms way and taking the hit instead.
I would use your revised degrees of success table but with one other adjustment. I would use the Treat Wounds DCs, Trained 15, Expert 20, Master 30, and Legendary 40 based on the proficiency of the TARGET you are aiding. It's harder to aid someone who is already so skilled, but you will likely be reasonably skilled as well in what you are attempting to aid with so this should still be reasonable (as reasonable as treat wounds is currently at least).
DC 15 is much more reasonable at level 1 to successfully aid, and even at a failure it's a +1 with your table, and only reasonably a crit fail on a natural 1. The roll still matters at higher level and you are still more than likely benefiting the target with a +1 or a +2 and sometimes that critical +4. Helping someone with a lower proficiency than the maximum for the level? Even more likely to get that +4 but the end result would be much the same as helping someone with a higher prof by only +2.
Really like this rule. A level 2 human gunslinger with fakeout and cooperative nature could feasibly give a +4 bonus around 60%-ish of the time. Feels like crits would be far more common for people other than gunslinger and fighter. Which is a good thing.
Here's my thought.
1: If you are at least trained in the skill being used, you can choose to assist with no check required.
2: For every level of proficiency you have, you can provide a +1 bonus to the roll. (T +1, E+2, M +3, L+4)
3: If the skill test being attempted is above your proficiency level. (I.E. Master requirement, but assister's prof is Expert), You provide your bonus -1 to the skill test.)
I think it would be much more interesting to add some cool stunts to the Aid Action instead of just a numerical bonus.
Something like throwing your Ally to a certain point (like circus artists do for example. The tactical Game Chroma Squad does something similar)
You could also do something like combo attacks or remove certain conditions (helping your ally stand up for example)
The reason I did not go with task DC = aid DC is that it means that aiding is "as hard" as the task itself. Which is what I think the flat 20 DC was meant to avoid. My variant is that the aid DC is the simple DC that is right below that of the task DC, that is, for a task DC in the range [15...19], the aid DC is 15; for a task DC [20...29], the aid DC is 20; etc. Furthermore, I adjust the aid DC with the easy/hard table depending on whether I find the aid described by the player is effective or not. So if a player says they want to aid a rogue at lockpicking a 28 DC lock by giving a shoulder massage, the medicine DC will be 30 because I adjust with a +10 because I'm not convinced it's a good way to help (my not accept this aid at all really, just an example). Finally, expanding a ressource such as a spell slot may increase the aid degree of success by 1 if I think it's appropriate. The issue with my approach however is that it scales with large increments rather than linearly with the PC levels.
I really like this over all. I think using an action and a reaction to consistently grant at least a +1 on a single roll is pretty fair even if it will absolutely encourage players to maybe even use it too often because it makes your actions feel more meaningful (and I wouldnt let them Aid just anything either). My one worry is in the DC matching the DC of the check the pc you are aiding is attempting. Whats nice about Aid at higher levels is that even if I dont have a very high Athletics modifier, I can still consistently hit that DC 20 and provide a benefit to the pc going for a Grapple. If its the same DC as the Grapple check, this becomes a lot less reliable. And Im not certain how much allowing other checks will help out this issue.
You know I do think it's interesting that the Aid action requires a roll in the first place. I can't think of any other actions off the top of my head where you could make things *harder* for your allies as an inherent part of the action.
In another system I play, Through the Breach, the Assist action doesn't require any roll (or flip in TTB's case) and adds the character's rank (proficiency bonus) to the assisted character's flip. I could see a house rule where this is brought into PF2e but it simply adds half your proficiency bonus to the assisted character's check as a circumstance bonus.
This would cause issues with that bard feat, but maybe the fear could be changed to be something like "allows you to assist with tasks that you would normally need to be adjacent to from up to 30 yards away."
Aid having a chance to fail if you aren't good at something is exactly like running over to an EMT trying to perform CPR on a patient and making everything worse because you have no idea what you're doing despite your good intentions. At early levels you are not good enough at most things to safely worry about much more than your own survival. Aiding someone other than yourself being harder earlier on makes perfect sense, because people are at their least competent at the beginning of their journeys, and messing things up in a life-or-death scenario is almost always worse than having done nothing at all.
I just do away with the check entirely. I have a player decide how they want to Aid and what to "roll" and then:
+1 for Trained
+2 for Expert
+3 for Master
+4 for Legendary
While do understand the verisimilitude behind Aid checks, I find that they slow combat down a bit, you're gonna Crit Success at higher level anyways(RAW), and that the check itself isn't that interesting, even when DC is scaled up.
It also takes attention off the player's turn in combat.
I'm not saying that it's a perfect house rule, and I'm usually hesitant in allowing Aid outside of combat(I save it for importamt checks), but, I can say that it's very quick.
It also feels more in line with the gamist part of PF2, which is the system's strong point.
Derik from Knights of Last Call and most of the GMs on Northern Reaches use the following:
Just a +1 Circumstance Bonus per level of proficiency in whatever skill/check you can justify; no roll necessary.
You're already spending an action and a reaction on Aid. No need to slow down the game by rolling anything, and it incentives its use from level 1.
Much better.
I was going to say the same thing. This is the best house rule for aid that I have come across.
While I agree that Aid is too difficult at low levels, it does compete with very strong reactions (Reactive Strike, Amped Guidance, Champions' Reactions, Nimble Dodge...), so I don't feel like it's too powerful (some of those reactions are available at low levels!). Consuming one action and your reaction to give a bonus to one dice roll is good but costly, and the GM has the final say on whether you can help with your best skills or not. However, I think that more guidance to adjust the DC of Aid could be added, and that its DC20 is hard to reliably beat at low levels, so GMs should be more generous at those!
I find it wild they set it to a dc 20 in 2e, in 1e it was a 10.
@@ShadowAraun DC10 is a bit too easy in 2e... but yeah it's a bit difficult at low levels, and since there is no insight given on how to ease it, GMs tend to default to 20 (I know I do ^^). I saw someone using DC-5 to Aid for a given action, and that looks like good middle ground.
Sounds good! I think I'll limit the bonus for a critical success to a +3 instead of a +4 though. I've yet to play Pathfinder (I'm hoping to with my group sometime soon) but you've always emphasized the power of these small bonuses and +4 seems like way too much even on a critical success. Yeah, Paizo thought it was okay when designing the Aid action, but we probably shouldn't be taking too much inspiration from the basic action that needs fixing.
If your version of Aid hasn't been broken on a critical success though, lemme know.
Yeah, I've thought Aid needed some help for awhile now. It should be easier to help someone do something, not as difficult as it is for them to do the thing, and certainly not harder. I might make the Aid DC the DC of the check your ally is making -5. (So helping someone do a DC 15 medicine check become dc 10). This could be really strong with Cooperative Nature, +4 to checks to aid, so from the previous example DC 15 medicine check, is dc 10 to aid that check, effectively become DC 6 which might be automatic even at level 1. but I might be okay with that. I would probably keep the degrees of success the same in this instance, Crit Success (+2), Success(+1), Failure (nothing), Crit Failure (-1).
The other idea I've been playing around with is that aid is the DC by level of the subject of the ally you are aiding (or the DC of the check you are aiding whichever is lower). So if an ally is using attacking a level 4 creature and you are aiding, the DC to aid is 19, if an ally is using medicine DC 20 on a level 3 creature, the DC to aid is 18, but if they were doing a DC 15 medicine check your DC to aid is only 15 because their check is lower than DC by level in this instance.
Ronald's Rules of Aiding is interesting, but I think it's maybe a bit too much ,especially when ancestry feats that give sizable bonuses to Aid rolls or increase the effects of successful aid checks.
Excellent! Well thought-out advice. Thanks.
Interesting. Aid _absolutely_ needs a fix.
I thought about using the main DC, but it felt too punishing with how DC's scales. Increasing the results does help with that.
I do a -5 to the dc for aid action. Most of the time, if a player wants to aid, it's because they don't think they beat the dc. Giving them a +1 on success and +2 on critical and only -1on crit fails.
I agree adjusting the dc is best but i feel making players hit the dc theyd need to succeed to aid would counterintuitively work worse.
I imagine situations where the aider crit succeeds giving a +4 that doesnt change a fail to a success despite someone already rolling the equivalent to a success might feel bad
I like it, though I do wish you would make a doc or pdf of your varies house rules and have them linked on your youtube channel so we can download them ourselves.
My main issue with setting the Main DC the same as the DC of the task is at that point, why does the aiding character not simply attempt the task themself? If you are trying to beat a DC 20 Arcana check and someone tries to help you out, why would they be "less successful" than you even though they beat the full DC? Making it slightly easier for the aiding character shows a small contribution they make to grant the other character their bonus.
Like, the DC 20 Arcana check might be to identify a set of magical runes carved into a doorway, the party Wizard is the main guy here, but the Rogue happens to have some expertise in Arcana, so he attempts a DC 16 check to see if he can come up with any ideas to jog the Wizard's braincells and lead him in the right direction.
Tldr; I think Aid should be slightly easier than the Check's main DC, because the supporting character isn't trying to beat the check themselves.
There still needs to be justification, and I probably wouldn't allow Aid on recalling knowledge or analyzing something to begin with (something I've brought over from 1e).
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG I wouldn't allow it inside of combat, but during exploration when the group has time to just sit and think I believe it would make sense for them to put their heads together. Though I would also ask them to justify how their knowledge on this certain topic overlaps for the Aiding character's suggestions to be helpful.
One reason is because there are penalties for failure/critical failure and greater bonuses for critical success.
Specifically in combat, aiding an attack roll of someone else would come without your own multiple attack penalty and thus already be 'easier' if it's an extra action.
But if you do want to make it easier to aid instead, I would suggest reducing the amount of bonus in this alternate rule as it could be quite easy to get a critical success/+4 bonus if your DC is even a couple points lower.
I agree with your assessment, I'm probably going to try your method when I start my new campaign this winter. Idk if that will be the best test though since none of my current players are optimizers.
I think I like this. I was disappointed when the rule for aid were like that playing the beginner box. It seemed to me more likely to hurt than to help. Now it has a good way of helping similar to 5e.
I think aid's dc should be based on the aided player's roll dc. ie if someone is doing an athletics check with +6 than to aid would be a dc of 16. This would simulate real situations where skilled people are hampered by unskilled help and keep the usefulness at higher levels with people who have the same skills
This sounds like a pretty good system, though my issue with Aid DCs following or being higher than the actual DC is this: if you’re succeeding at the check without the circumstance bonus, why are you helping and not doing it yourself? I know there are some times someone specific needs to roll, but my point is, for those times, even that +4 makes sense. The task has effectively already been handled.
yeah this is my big thing, if someone critically succeeds when aiding a check and they were aiming at the same DC the main person is... well, the players could have just critically succeeded the thing they wanted to have happen right then and there
I've just been running it as a standard level based DC sometimes adjusted for difficulty, or 20, whichever is lower. Below 5, its easier to hit, and at 5 or above, it maintains its current power. Which is fine with me, because its expensive in the action economy and higher level combat has been using Aid as written for years and I haven't heard any horror stories about it. I do agree the newbies need the help, but I'm not convinced the flat 20 is too strong for the higher tier adventures. That being said, depending on what the players said they were doing to aid, I might still pump that 20 higher. Can't let them be too complacent. 😅
Honestly the thing I dislike the most about the Aid re/action is exactly that.
I have to spend an action and a reaction with the possibility of actually making things worse.
That seems like a pretty steep cost in this action economy.
I prefer to split this action into 2 separate actions.
Aid is a reaction that is used exclusively for attack and defense including skill actions with the attack trait.
To use Aid, you must be within reach of an ally to aid in defending them, or near a foe to aid in attacking them.
Assist is an action that is used help in skill checks excluding skill actions with the attack trait.
As part of the assist action you can move up to your speed to reposition yourself to better assist an ally if need be.
Typical DC is one degree lower than that of the main roll if using simple DCs, or 4 points lower if using level based DCs.
Helping someone do a thing is inherently easier than doing the thing.
No adjustments to the outcome.
Not granting a bonus at all when you fail to help makes sense to me.
On your previous video, I suggested all item DCs should scale with the standard DC table, and for easy reference a "Standard DC" box should be added to the front of the character sheet. This change would also help the AID action if it were to scale based on the same table.
I'd also really love to hear your opinion on my item DC suggestion. My table uses it and it improves QoL dramatically without affecting game balance at all.
I will say that I have not seen the point of Aiding in 2e yet in my rather short time playing it. This seems to make it better.
I'm only slightly sad All for One from the Swashbuckler wasn't mentioned.
Just skip the check. Action+Reaction is enough. +1 for trained, +2 for expert, +3 for master, +4 for legendary. It speeds up the game both in and out of combat.
I suggest fixing wounds, so they are actually wounds that stick. Savage Pathfinder can do it, so why not Remastered. But above suggestions are also appreciated
Any GM who plays this game should have the level-based DC chart within arms reach at all times. It's one of the most useful things in the game, so I don't understand the downside of "you need to memorize the chart" when a lot of stuff in the game already uses it.
I like this version of aid more.
i already did your Rule #1, but i feel like Rule #2 is better as an alternative than an addition to "base DC to Aid is as per other DCs"
if you used "spell-like" -1/+1/+2/+4 results with a static DC of 20, then Aiding would still be worth it at level 1, but would grow and become more reliable as you level up (which it does RAW and when using only Rule #1, since proficiency out-scales level DCs)
Why even have to roll for aid? My group house ruled that the bonus you give is based on how well you are trained in the skill. Trained is +1, expert +2, master +3 and legendary +4. It feels bad if you roll higher than the person you are aiding and it wastes time. Give the bonus and move on. We don’t really ever aid on attack rolls so if it came up we would have to figure that part out.
Makes more sense to me. I'm thinking since the rules do state the GM can set the DC, this is still RAW. I'll share with my table that I'm doing it this way so they aren't surprised but I don't expect much of an issue. It benefits the players and makes sense.... Except I won't use failure as a +1. A fail isn't a partial success, you shouldn't benefit, in my opinion.
Aid needs the Aid action....
Conceptually, aiding a skilled person in a job should be a lot easier that doing the job (don't know how many times I've held a light or passed tools or some other low-skill task to aid someone in real life.) I'd address this by automatically giving the aider the benefits of Following the Expert if using the same task DC. Maybe 2x but I'd need to run the math.
Also, one assumes that the person in the party with the best bonus is going to be attempting the actual check, so same DC makes it effectively _harder_ to assist someone that do the task itself. Pretty hard for passing them prepared tools, mopping brow sweat, etc.
I agree with this, house rule is probably how I would run it. Sidenote, why can't all focus cantrips be as good as bards?
I think the crit at +4 is too big, -1/+1/+1/+2 or -1/+1/+2/+3 sounds better for me, but in general I agree with the DC being based on the DC, and a degree easier is the best approach
Une des lectures épiques la plus hilarante
I like it - this is how it should have been in the book.
Well... When you became more proficient with skill - tasks become easier.
So that's not a reverse difficulty 😄
And when you are unskillfull in something - you can make the situation worse, not better.
That's make sense, actually.
Hey Ronald, I actually REALLY like these changes, I had tried running your previous suggestions to improve aiding using Level Based DC's in my games for the last few months, which I felt made early game Aiding a lot better buit later game Aiding was becoming a bit of a problem for my players.. I also found that it basically discouraged anyone who wasn't very focused in certain skills that could reasonably be used to aid with 'most' actions from ever using Aid, which I felt was not the desired outcome of the initial changes.
I feel like these proposed changes are an improvement, however I do think it creates a bit of a problem in SOME cases, you already brought up how it would be very strong with Inspire Competence (but at the least, Inspire Competence, if I am not mistaken, can only be used to aid with skill checks, not stuff like Attack Rolls, and like you said, Inspire Courage is already very strong as is and would typically be competing for the Bards use of their composition cantrip)
However, in the Stolen Fate campaign I am about to run, one of my players is going to be playing a Infinite Eye Psychic, which I and they are very excited to play as. If I were to run these changes to Aid however, I feel it would kind of both buff the base use of their Omnidirectional Scan psi cantrip, but also inadvertently weaken the usefulness of their amped version of the cantrip a bit? Maybe this is just such a weird edge-case issue, and maybe I'm discrediting the aspect that it also gives it's circumstance bonus to damage unlike usual aid... but what do you think of that when factoring in these changes?
Love the videos by the way!
There are plenty of other classes who get shafted by these changes. Any class feature that uses Aid is balanced around being able to get that max bonus 90% of the time
@@feral_orc I mean I agree with you, but it still seems like terrible design given how Aid is like borderline unusable at early levels even when maximum investment in a skill, which just feels bad. And then for the check to suddenly no matter anymore as soon as you hit level 6 - 7 feels even weirder.
At that point just having Aid not be a check at all and just having it give you a flat bonus to circumstance seems like an easier solution, albeit a boring one.
@@ryanhughes3569 I made the point in another comment from the game balance perspective, it being difficult at low levels and easier at high levels makes sense. At low levels the game does not expect you to have a circumstance, status or item bonus to your checks. So aid is difficult at low levels, because for the math to work it has to be.
"I also found that it basically discouraged anyone who wasn't very focused in certain skills..."
Aid allows different checks that are different from the main check. Someone may not be good at attacking, but they can sure aid an Attack roll by using Deception to try to distract a creature, for example.
@@TheRulesLawyerRPG Oh yes for sure, but it basically just boils down to the player to come up with an explination for why X skill would be useful to aid for Y action. Like maybe someone being a skillful medic being able to pass on information of a vital point to an attacking fighter with their high proficency in medicine.
But when you're playing with people who are newer to the system it can be kind of difficult to encourage that idea of "get creative and think of a flavorful reason on the fly as to how you could aid your friend with one of your best skills.", they would usually think of an idea of how they wanted to try and aid, and then I would go with "well, that sounds like you want to roll Performance or Deception here", or the like, when they are maybe trained at best in those skills.
But that's mostly more to do with players who are not quite use to the idea of the flexibility of it being useable with just about any skill so long as you can think of an interesting idea as to why that skill could help someone in the given moment.
No mention of the swashbuckler's one for all ? As a bard I multiclassed into swashbuckler to learn that trick since it doesn't intervere with my singing.
Huh. Last week I heard the claim that it had been errata'd to DC 15. Looks like my fellow players were either misinformed or passed their "fast talk the GM" roll.
I have been using the Main DC = Aid DC bit for a while. There is one thing I have a problem with, with this option, though -- I find that at least 9 out of 10 times, the person aiding is using the same skill (as in assisting with Treat Wounds, or helping to Track). And if they're doing this...why are they aiding instead of doing it on their own? I don't have a solution that feels right, especially if we're going to combine with the higher bonuses/bonus on failure. So far, it's been handwaved away easily enough, but it just doesn't feel right.
I ve idea for the Save aid...
What if you allow the aided pne to take cover behind you?
Or something like that, i m not that good at remembering Cover rules.
I think it would be as lesser cover but for reflex too? Not just ac.
Or one of the bonuses
Nice!
I'm going to stress test this with a Gathered Lore Psychic using the human feats to gain bonuses to aid
Lets see if I can break it :)
I was thinking Swashbuckler with All For One and Pathfinder Agent's Aid support chain
Oh that's nice