How are skill checks counted in the game?

[zen_onair]

Let's say I have 3 charisma, and my companion has 7
I have selected my character. whose charisma will count towards a skill check in dialogue? mine or my partner's? Or total? I don't understand

[Detective Costeau]

You use the skills and attributes of whoever is speaking.

[zen_onair]

Originally posted by Detective Costeau:

You use the skills and attributes of whoever is speaking.

But this is stupid, so you need to jump around all the characters and think about who to start the dialogue with?

[TripSin]

What's stupid is thinking you need to be successful on every roll.

[AokiYakumo]

Originally posted by zen_onair:

Originally posted by Detective Costeau:

You use the skills and attributes of whoever is speaking.

But this is stupid, so you need to jump around all the characters and think about who to start the dialogue with?

This is partially why it's generally advised for your Tav/DUrge to be a face character like a BRD, PLD, SRC, or WLK, so you don't HAVE to worry about who's got the best social skills.

And - toxic though their words may be - TripSin has a point. There's so many rolls in BG3 that thinking you're gonna succeed on all of them is realistically a bit absurd. The game also won't game-end you for a single bad roll - more, your own choices and actions can make that determination, such as going full Guns Akimbo on the Goblin Camp as opposed to playing the Hitman game and taking them on one small group at a time.

Plus, sometimes failed rolls lead to unique outcomes you wouldn't normally see otherwise.

Example: Failing the illithid roll on the nautiloid can change where Shadowheart spawns in the main game as well as her initial attitude towards you. If you leave her, she's understandably pissed. If you tried and failed, she's much more sympathetic.

So knowing all that, I'd place a fair bit less stock on the rolls themselves. They're gonna happen, some of them may dunk you, but it's never catastrophic and you can still enjoy the game otherwise.

Happy gaming.

[zen_onair]

Originally posted by TripSin:

What's stupid is thinking you need to be successful on every roll.

I don't think so, I don't want to always win checks, I just want the character with the highest skill value to pass the check, and it's very strange that the team doesn't have that.

It is logical that the most experienced person on the team should be tested, and not the one who is selected now.

[Kappa]

Originally posted by zen_onair:

Originally posted by Detective Costeau:

You use the skills and attributes of whoever is speaking.

But this is stupid, so you need to jump around all the characters and think about who to start the dialogue with?

Some dialogues are Tav only, and the other can be dealt with any of the character you want.
If you want to always your your social skills master character, it's best to:

1) make your character the diplomatic one ( even a barbarian could do with the right perks ).
2) make them a frontline/combatant ( this way you'll need no positioning and won't be in the eye of the storm with a wizard or rogue ).

[=M$= Oroberus]

Originally posted by zen_onair:

Originally posted by Detective Costeau:

You use the skills and attributes of whoever is speaking.

But this is stupid, so you need to jump around all the characters and think about who to start the dialogue with?

Why exactly should the charisma of someone who's not having the conversation while maybe not even being in the vicinity be taken into account?

I mean, if Tav tries to kick in a door, it's also Tav doing the kick, therefor Tavs strength is relevant and not the strength of Karlach which is dancing 15 meters away somewhere in the background xD

[Kappa]

Originally posted by =M$= Oroberus:

Originally posted by zen_onair:

But this is stupid, so you need to jump around all the characters and think about who to start the dialogue with?

Why exactly should the charisma of someone who's not having the conversation while maybe not even being in the vicinity be taken into account?

I mean, if Tav tries to kick in a door, it's also Tav doing the kick, therefor Tavs strength is relevant and not the strength of Karlach which is dancing 15 meters away somewhere in the background xD

I think they meant something like the group is next to an npc, the one who started the discussion is required a check to persuade them, and the charismatic one joins the discussion to take their side ( "What my friend is trying to say is..." or "I assure you my friend and I are..." or something similar )

[RollerPig]

Originally posted by Detective Costeau:

You use the skills and attributes of whoever is speaking.

this is not always true. When its story line driven there are certain times no matter who you initiate convo with it basically bounces to your TAV and uses there abilities

[Detective Costeau]

Originally posted by RollerPig:

Originally posted by Detective Costeau:

You use the skills and attributes of whoever is speaking.

this is not always true. When its story line driven there are certain times no matter who you initiate convo with it basically bounces to your TAV and uses there abilities

In which case, Tav is speaking, and the stats of whoever is speaking are used, yes.

[=M$= Oroberus]

Originally posted by Kappa:

Originally posted by =M$= Oroberus:

Why exactly should the charisma of someone who's not having the conversation while maybe not even being in the vicinity be taken into account?

I mean, if Tav tries to kick in a door, it's also Tav doing the kick, therefor Tavs strength is relevant and not the strength of Karlach which is dancing 15 meters away somewhere in the background xD

I think they meant something like the group is next to an npc, the one who started the discussion is required a check to persuade them, and the charismatic one joins the discussion to take their side ( "What my friend is trying to say is..." or "I assure you my friend and I are..." or something similar )

Again, why would they? Noone of your companions actually knows what 'you' want to say or what your 'goal' is in the dialogue and rerolling failed dialoge checks by reframing the question with another character is pretty frowned upon.

I get that people are used to 'group skill checks' by now based on many, many, MANY streamlined pseudo-rpgs on PC but having the chosen character do the checks is otherwise pretty normal imho

If Tav is not your Face, then maybe don't use Tav as main character in the Overworld ^^

[Detective Costeau]

Also, if you really don't like how this is done,
https://www.nexusmods.com/baldursgate3/mods/2171
there is a mod that will use the best modifier in the party for checks in dialog.

[Exarch_Alpha]

OP look the BG3 wiki, it´s pretty complete.

[zen_onair]

Originally posted by Detective Costeau:

Also, if you really don't like how this is done,
https://www.nexusmods.com/baldursgate3/mods/2171
there is a mod that will use the best modifier in the party for checks in dialog.

wow thanks!!! it really helps me!

[AnonymousWizard]

Originally posted by Kappa:

I think they meant something like the group is next to an npc, the one who started the discussion is required a check to persuade them, and the charismatic one joins the discussion to take their side ( "What my friend is trying to say is..." or "I assure you my friend and I are..." or something similar )

After having played Owlcat's offerings the fact that I can have a master con-man in the party and fail because he decides 'well Durge is doing the talking, guess I can't help him' is annoying. It's not that I always want to succeed, it's that I want companions speccing into social (or lore) skills to actually mean something.

In WotR I can drop literally zero points into Persuasion and still have a reasonable chance of passing checks if I bring one of like four different companions with me (out of six). ~In BG3 not only do social (and sometimes Lore) skills have to be on the character who's speaking there's four of the blasted things.