skill proficiencies point buy - Page 6
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 71
  1. #51
    Member
    Enchanter (Lvl 12)



    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    711
    Quote Originally Posted by Blue View Post
    The bigger idea was not just to pair skills and ability scores as needed, a variant rule that I have to say I'm the only one I see doing around here, but to trim down the skill list so everything on it was meaningful. Combining similar choices like Athletics & Acrobatics, and leaving them differentiated by the ability score. And folding little used ones like Medicine into other skills, again differentiated by ability score.
    Quote Originally Posted by tglassy View Post
    Athletics and acrobatics arent he same thing, though. Just because youre strong and athletic doesnt mean youll be able to do things an acrobat can do, and visa versa. They are both related to physical ability, but are very much different skills.
    I agree, I see a very large difference between Athletics and Acrobatics.
    Quote Originally Posted by ART! View Post
    The only issue there is it adds rolling of dice where previously there was none. Personally, as a DM, I prefer looking at the PC's Passive Perception, and whoever has it at or higher than, for instance, the bad guy's Stealth roll total - or 10+Stealth bonus, to be even quicker about it - whoever has an equal or higher PP notices the bad guy. It has the added bonus of not alerting the players to the fact that something fishy is going on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nebulous View Post
    Perception is totally messed up, especially when you have someone with Observant and a Passive DC of 22+ and the game doesn't adequately give examples. After 5 years of 5e we still confuse Investigation and Perception because of the overlap.
    We use passive scores somewhat differently. If you have a passive score that is high enough to "detect" something, the DM tells you to roll a check even if you don't say you want to. For example, if the characters walk past a secret door with a DC 20, a character with a Passive Perception of 20 or better might notice the door even if they aren't looking. So, the DM will tell the player to roll and if they make it, the character notices the secret door. In other words, high passive scores give you a chance to notice something but it isn't automatic.This makes Observant useful but not automatic since when you roll your check, you don't get the +5 bonus. If you play with passive automatically noticing things without a roll, it is too powerful, at least at our table. We've never had an issue with overlap of Investigation and Perception but I could see where others might have some problems if you don't have clear definitions in use.

  2. #52
    Member
    Greater Elemental (Lvl 23)

    Blue's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Cedar Grove, NJ 07009
    Posts
    4,990
    Quote Originally Posted by dnd4vr View Post
    I agree, I see a very large difference between Athletics and Acrobatics.
    The question isn't if you see a big difference between Athletics and Acrobatics. The question is if MECHANICALLY you see a big difference between Athletics and Acrobatics that aren't covered by the differences in ability scores? Many of the checks needed (escaping grapples, spells, etc.) right now can use either. And a bunch should. For example, right now someone with expertise in acrobatics with a 20 DEX has no indication that they can climb. That's STR (Athletics). I've literally had two different players curse that their uber-agile elves most likely would fail at climbing a tree or wall.
    Quote Originally Posted by dnd4vr View Post
    We use passive scores somewhat differently. If you have a passive score that is high enough to "detect" something, the DM tells you to roll a check even if you don't say you want to.
    This is double jeopardy. Just shy of half the people who could detect something will never get a roll, and of those that get a role many will still fail. Use one or the other, otherwise you are drastically changing the success/fail percentages in a way that messes up the math of the system.

  3. #53
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    4,068
    Quote Originally Posted by Blue View Post
    The question isn't if you see a big difference between Athletics and Acrobatics. The question is if MECHANICALLY you see a big difference between Athletics and Acrobatics that aren't covered by the differences in ability scores? Many of the checks needed (escaping grapples, spells, etc.) right now can use either. And a bunch should. For example, right now someone with expertise in acrobatics with a 20 DEX has no indication that they can climb. That's STR (Athletics). I've literally had two different players curse that their uber-agile elves most likely would fail at climbing a tree or wall. This is double jeopardy. Just shy of half the people who could detect something will never get a roll, and of those that get a role many will still fail. Use one or the other, otherwise you are drastically changing the success/fail percentages in a way that messes up the math of the system.
    "I've literally had two different players curse that their uber-agile elves most likely would fail at climbing a tree or wall."

    First, climbing by default doesnt requir a check. Isnt it half speed unless it's difficult? What kind of tree climbing are we talking about?

    But, the system already allows the GM to allow/call-for a Dex (Athletics) check if they think it's appropriate.

    So your higher dex elf wanting to climb a tree just has to describe his actions in a way that leads the GM to decide (for a difficult climb) that Dex (Athletics ) is the appropriate call.

    Second, the two different proficiencies divide the types of training - the kinds of things a character has experience in. The player can choose the ones appropriate to their character. If your elf is supposed to be very good at climbing, why didnt you take athletics since that is the skill that includes climbing? Complaints like thst early on would likely be met with "ok so you wanna swap out what for what in your background?" In between games

    Third, to me, when a player is unhappy at the success/fail etc in a game they are playing in, that's more indicative of a disconnect between the GM depiction and their understanding. Did the GM not describe and set the scene with the tree up in a way that they understand why a check is even needed and why it's so difficult for them to succeed? In my gsmes, unless there are surprises or unknowns, my players tend to know the DC before attempting a task due to my efforts st being not just descriptive but informative in my depictions of the situations.

    Fourth, design...


    I would generally be against creating an overly broad "lets get physical" mega-skill myself when I see nature, religion, etc snd persuasion, deception, intimidate perform etc broken down as they are. It seem inconsistent with the rest.

    Consider...

    Physical stuff
    Ability scores tested Str or Dex (rarely con)
    Skills athletics, acrobatics, stealth, sleight hand and sometimes performance maybe?

    Brainy stuff
    Abilities tested Int Wis
    Religion, Arcana, History, nature, investigation, Medicine (insight arguably)

    Social stuff
    Ability tested Cha or Wis (possibly Int)
    Deception, Persuasion, Intimidation, insight, (investigation useful)

    What's left - survival, animal handling and perception?

    Regardless of where you put those, it really doesnt look like the physical set is somehow plagued by excessive sub-dividing and compared to the rest in need of consolidation.

  4. #54
    Member
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)



    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    444
    People aren't happy because the skill that lets them climb stuff is linked to a stat they want to dump. There's nothing inherently wrong with the idea that Strength should determine climbing ability either. Guys who free climb are not weak. Is there an argument for Dex maybe playing a role? Sure, but that's true of lots of skills. There's a pretty significant element of strength involved in Acrobatics for example, but I don't see many people complaining that their fighter should be able to use his STR there instead of DEX. STR is probably the biggest dump start in 5E, and I think that's the actual problem - people want to min max Dex, and rightfully so because it does more, and often (mostly) do that at the expense of STR (plus another stat). That's fine, but arguing that the main adventuring activity linked to STR needs to change to match your maxed stat feels a lot like asking to have your cake and eat it too (regardless of real world examples). It's a byproduct of a character build system that encourages dump stats and heavily rewards maxed stats.
    XP 5ekyu gave XP for this post

  5. #55
    Member
    The Great Druid (Lvl 17)



    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    4,674
    Yeah, if youre dumping strength, I dont care how acrobatic you are, you arent climbing anything difficult. At all. It is all strength there.

    Acrobatics is being able to flip around and have quick reflexes. Climbing has nothing to do with that. If your elf player dumped strength and is complaining because they cant do a pull up, Im sorry, but thats life. Make his character lift some weights and give him a few points of strength on his next ASI. Thats the best I can say.

  6. #56
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    4,068
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenris-77 View Post
    People aren't happy because the skill that lets them climb stuff is linked to a stat they want to dump. There's nothing inherently wrong with the idea that Strength should determine climbing ability either. Guys who free climb are not weak. Is there an argument for Dex maybe playing a role? Sure, but that's true of lots of skills. There's a pretty significant element of strength involved in Acrobatics for example, but I don't see many people complaining that their fighter should be able to use his STR there instead of DEX. STR is probably the biggest dump start in 5E, and I think that's the actual problem - people want to min max Dex, and rightfully so because it does more, and often (mostly) do that at the expense of STR (plus another stat). That's fine, but arguing that the main adventuring activity linked to STR needs to change to match your maxed stat feels a lot like asking to have your cake and eat it too (regardless of real world examples). It's a byproduct of a character build system that encourages dump stats and heavily rewards maxed stats.
    Also, honestly, put one of your proficiencies into athletics and even with 8 str you are in good standing for most climbs that the majority of your party will be willing to try. If its gonna be needing prime-stst plus prof to try, many in your group wont be lining up for it - just the one specialist.

    And this ignores that the default for climb is * no check needed*.

    " my elf cant climb trees" is a GM isdue, not a skill parsing one.
    Last edited by 5ekyu; Friday, 7th June, 2019 at 06:23 PM.

  7. #57
    Member




    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Las Cruces, NM
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by Xeviat View Post
    I'd rather people roll a die to notice a trap than just check their passive Perception. Since I know what their passive scores are, I'm either deciding I want them to find the trap, I want them to not find the trap if they're hurrying, or I don't want them to find the trap unless they're looking for it. I prefer it to be random all the time, and a last second Wis save to notice the trap before you trigger it is better.

    Let them roll a Perception check when they're actively searching. Skills should always be called upon by players IMHO.
    I would humbly suggest that if you need PCs to roll a dice to notice traps, you have too many "gotcha" types of traps and you aren't making traps into encounters. To me the best traps are the ones that PCs notice right away -- the trick is how to overcome the trap. If the trap is just save or take damage they are generally unfun and just become a hp tax.

  8. #58
    Member
    Cutpurse (Lvl 5)



    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bloomington, IN, USA
    Posts
    159
    In games I've played in and run, using Acrobatics to climb is pretty common. If there are things to jump onto, off of, bounce off of, etc, then an acrobatics roll or two might get you where you're trying to be. Think wuxia stunts getting tot he top of a wall by bounding back and forth between the wall and a tree or another building or a pole or something, as opposed to an Athletics climb straight up the wall with maybe using the tree for support or back-up.

  9. #59
    Member
    The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)



    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    4,068
    Quote Originally Posted by ART! View Post
    In games I've played in and run, using Acrobatics to climb is pretty common. If there are things to jump onto, off of, bounce off of, etc, then an acrobatics roll or two might get you where you're trying to be. Think wuxia stunts getting tot he top of a wall by bounding back and forth between the wall and a tree or another building or a pole or something, as opposed to an Athletics climb straight up the wall with maybe using the tree for support or back-up.
    Since jumping, climbing and grabbing onto are *all* default Strenth checks in 5e, I could easily see an approach involving jumping onto, grabbing onto etc tree to wall etc as a good case for Strength (Acrobatics) climbing checks. Definitely agree with you there.

    In fact, I might even let such take a no-roll-needed half-speed climb into making a check to try and get it done at full speed.

    No arguments.
    Last edited by 5ekyu; Friday, 7th June, 2019 at 09:43 PM.

  10. #60
    Member
    Myrmidon (Lvl 10)



    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    444
    Yup, using Acrobatics to climb is common. That doesn't mean it's not (up to a point) a self serving move by groups who don't want to see their Dex maxed characters slighted by something as plebian as a skill check. One of the reasons, maybe the main reason, that the skills are spread over the different stats is so that every build has something they're good at and no one stat dominayes too much. Dex builds are already king of 5E and I don't think they need any more help. The arguments from realism are fine, and there's a good reason people index them, but D&D is a game, not a simulation. The real world isn't the issue.
    XP ART! gave XP for this post

Similar Threads

  1. Number of skill proficiencies and niche protection
    By Sword of Spirit in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: Sunday, 25th December, 2016, 11:30 AM
  2. starter set character skill proficiencies - too many?
    By evilbob in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Tuesday, 8th July, 2014, 04:45 PM
  3. tool proficiencies: what's the point?
    By On Puget Sound in forum *Dungeons & Dragons
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: Friday, 11th October, 2013, 04:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •