D&D 5E Paring the skill list

[Greg K]

Skills are supposed to be an optional module. Stealth and Perception are both core to the game, so perhaps it would be best if we excluded them entirely from the skill module.

If people just want to use ability scores for Stealth and Perception, that is the non skill module. If they want to house rule Stealth and Perception out of the skill module, no problem. Removing Perception and Stealth skills from the skill module? No, thank you.

 

[Derren]

Skills are supposed to be an optional module.

Another reason why 5E doesn't interest me much. Without skills you are back to a hack&slash centric game where the only rules you have are rules for combat.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Another reason why 5E doesn't interest me much. Without skills you are back to a hack&slash centric game where the only rules you have are rules for combat.

Not that you have to be interested in D&D Next, but skills are still going to be an option, and attribute checks are the core mechanic and are in no way limited to combat.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

If people just want to use ability scores for Stealth and Perception, that is the non skill module. If they want to house rule Stealth and Perception out of the skill module, no problem. Removing Perception and Stealth skills from the skill module? No, thank you.

Why not? D&D is already a system where many facets of training are handled by class features instead of skills. Stealth and perception seem like good candidates to me because of how commonly used they are.

 

[Derren]

Not that you have to be interested in D&D Next, but skills are still going to be an option, and attribute checks are the core mechanic and are in no way limited to combat.

Which is kind of boring as then birth replaces learning. People don't learn to be good at something, they are born good at something. Also, why would someone who writes thoughtful poems (high wisdon) be good at spotting things?
If they wanted a skill-less version of the game that one should be the option and not the one with skills (not that skills in 5E do much, attributes are still the biggest factor). Combat on the other hand is always a center of the game and not also just an option. This decision shows to me what WotC is aiming at and I do not like it at all.

 

[Szatany]

Another reason why 5E doesn't interest me much. Without skills you are back to a hack&slash centric game where the only rules you have are rules for combat.

So use the skill module in your games. You're the person it was invented for.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Skills are supposed to be an optional module.

I'm not sure on what evidence this can be claimed. Even if it was once said in an interview or something, that was many playtest packets ago, and I see no evidence that this view is reflected in the recent versions, or that the designers have any desire to implement this sort of modularity.

 

[Derren]

So use the skill module in your games. You're the person it was invented for.

From everything I have heard so far skills only provides a small bonus to ability rolls. Still doesn't solve the "born for skill" issue.

 

[Zaran]

Yeah -- that's what I meant. Perception, with an ability to get a specific bonus on Search.

The thing is the rules already allow for for the GM to say "Roll an Intelligence Check to search the chest" There should be no reason why there needs to be both Search and Spot since the Perception skill can be added to whatever Attribute makes sense at the time.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

I like narrow specific skills that you have to invest in. You can't say you like narrow skills but you like a system that makes you good at all Intelligence based skills because you have a high Intelligence or high dex etc.. I like the idea of having to learn something specific and having to choose between this skill or that one. Wait a minute, [notranslate]Pathfinder[/notranslate] already does this so that's another strike against 5th edition in my book.