D&D 5E Eliminating skill & feat taxes

[Staccat0]

I'm with you in theory, but when you have too few non-combat proficiencies with 5 or 6 PCs you can get spotlight issues.

For example, if I am a high charisma bard with a extroverted personality, I can railroad almost every conversation if there i only one social skill.
However, with the current grid -- you get the fighter stepping in to indimidate a guy who I can't smooth talk and the Cleric noticing he was lying with Insight.

I want Use Ropes to be brought back to 5e, as a tool.

I'm with you. For instance, "2nd Story Work" grants Rope proficiency in my game. As do some bacjkgrounds such as the Sailor.

 

[Saeviomagy]

For example, if I am a high charisma bard with a extroverted personality, I can railroad almost every conversation if there i only one social skill.

The way the current social skills are, you can do that anyway. Intimidate, deception and persuasion have so much overlap it's hard to tell which one should be used for basically any job. And having multiple skills just means that your example fighter doesn't participate in social encounters unless the goal is intimidation, which is bad. If the skill were simply interaction, he's not sent to the quiet corner when the big people start talking.

Besides, I think that trying to handle spotlight time mechanically is doomed to failure.

I agree that the skill system has flaws. I think there are too many skills with too much variety in how useful they are, and too many skills that were designed to support a specific class (medicine being wisdom, survival allowing tracking etc). The entire tool proficiency idea just seems bad to me.

I think these changes help that. I would probably not meld history and religion, lathough that is setting specific.

 

[Jediking]

So here's the problem. Do you bother taking proficiency in something that you are rarely going to use? If you have to chose between Athletics and Animal Handling which one do you take?

I want people to be able to play certain concepts without being penalized by their choices.

We have all of these broad useful skills, then we have some that are very narrow and overlap in theme with other skills.

Medicine is even more of a cost in a world with abundant magical healing.

It's part of the cost IMO. If you take a specific skill eg. Animal Handling, and the campaign expects a lot of riding/beasts/creative uses, then it is a viable option that benefits a character with Wisdom over Strength. Some situations (pulling an animal away) may allow the use for either skill to work.

If magical abundant healing is available, then I don't think that Medicine would be common in that particular setting. But if the party does not have a Cleric/Bard/Druid, then maybe some would like to pick it up.

I agree that people won't pick something that they would rarely use, but they have the option not to. It's up to them, their setting, and their DM how those skills can be applied and whether it is worth it.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

Good post, lots of food for discussion there, especially about the kits. I think the interaction of herbalism kit and poisoners kit is messy. I'm thinking that a herbalism kit should let you make potions and salves and poisons and cooking herbs and all sorts of things.

Then again, I like the fact that poisoners kit means "you are a poisoner - it says so, right there on your character sheet!".

Animal Handling - Remove it. Survival is enough. Maybe a bit of Nature for remembering how to deal with weird beasts

I disagree with this one. Animal Handling skill is for the characters who are expert riders or teamsters. I don't see an overlap between that and knowing how to survive in the wilds. In my game, Survival helps you trap and kill and animal, to eat it, but not to any care and feeding and (especially) domestication.

Performance - Now grants proficiency in all musical instruments. A performance check was either an instrument check or a persuasion check anyway. The Bard extra tool proficiencies now give proficiency in Performance instead.

Performance is more than just playing an instrument. It is reading the audience, tailoring your performance to what they want to hear, and using your performance to sway a crowd. For example, a politician giving a speech to a crowd of potential voters uses Performance.

 

[Staccat0]

The way the current social skills are, you can do that anyway. Intimidate, deception and persuasion have so much overlap it's hard to tell which one should be used for basically any job. And having multiple skills just means that your example fighter doesn't participate in social encounters unless the goal is intimidation, which is bad. If the skill were simply interaction, he's not sent to the quiet corner when the big people start talking.

Besides, I think that trying to handle spotlight time mechanically is doomed to failure.

I agree that the skill system has flaws. I think there are too many skills with too much variety in how useful they are, and too many skills that were designed to support a specific class (medicine being wisdom, survival allowing tracking etc). The entire tool proficiency idea just seems bad to me.

I think these changes help that. I would probably not meld history and religion, lathough that is setting specific.

I dunno, not in my experience I guess. Your mileage may vary. I see where you are coming from though.

I personally haven't had less fun playing 5e because of any skill stuff.

 

[Kalshane]

Performance is more than just playing an instrument. It is reading the audience, tailoring your performance to what they want to hear, and using your performance to sway a crowd. For example, a politician giving a speech to a crowd of potential voters uses Performance.

My understanding is Performance and Proficiency: Instrument are unrelated. Performance is singing, dancing, oration, etc. It doesn't cover instruments, because they are considered a tool and thus have their own proficiency.

5E takes great pains to separate Skills (things your character can do) from Tools (things your character knows how to use.) If a task requires a physical object to perform it (such as thieves' tools or a flute) it's a Tool proficiency, whereas if it's something your character can do without needing any gear, it's a Skill.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

If a task requires a physical object to perform it (such as thieves' tools or a flute) it's a Tool proficiency, whereas if it's something your character can do without needing any gear, it's a Skill.

That's a good point!

 

[Kryx]

If a task requires a physical object to perform it (such as thieves' tools or a flute) it's a Tool proficiency, whereas if it's something your character can do without needing any gear, it's a Skill.

It's true until it isn't. Climb (Athletics) for example would be heavily reliant on rope and pitons. Medicine is heavily reliant on medical supplies. Survival would use fishing lures, etc to survive.

 

[Scorpio616]

Saying that the system can't be wrong is ridiculous.

A fine example are feats so overpowered that some view them as a Must Take For Certain Builds AKA Feat Taxes.

 

[redrick]

The skills and tools don't have to be competitive with all other proficiencies, so long as there are no total outliers.

So, for instance, Animal Handling is probably gonna get used less than survival, but I'd say it's on par with Performance, and Medicine in a lot of games.

Stealth is awesome, but so is Athletics.

I think History/Religion/Nature/Arcana all produce results equally at our table.

Persuasion, Intimidate and Deceive are very different, and I do not truck with "swapping one out for the other." Generally speaking, I try to discourage players from only performing actions if they have the appropriate skill proficiency. "No, you can not 'acrobatics' your way up that rope." The point of bounded accuracy is to allow all characters to have a chance of success (and failure) at all tasks.

Most backgrounds also seem to provide one high-value adventuring skill, and one slightly less valuable skill. I encourage people to observe similar balance when creating custom backgrounds. A background that grants proficiency in stealth, athletics, thieve's tools and herbalism kits is not going to fly if I am the DM.