D&D 5E Skills Redux

[DEFCON 1]

For my two current CoS campaigns I also futzed with skills quite a bit, so I definitely know where you are coming from. Here's a couple things I found when I set my stuff up:

- Background was the second thing players chose during character creation, before choosing their Class. The order went Race -> Background -> Class. Not only did it make sense from a progression standpoint (choosing what they were when they were born, to what they did before adventuring, to what they are now that they are an adventurer)... but it also eliminated the "doubling up" of skills. They got their Background skills first, then when they chose their Class, they chose other skills from the class list that they didn't yet have. Thus no doubling up ever resulted and no one got to chose "anything" that they wanted.

- I use the Variant Rule in the DMG where I do not align skills to abilities. I ask for an ability check, and then if a skill might apply, they can add their prof bonus to it. As a result of this, I didn't need to have skills cross over onto two lists (or however many), because I don't actually have set lists. Which thus eliminates what you've needed to do with Intimidate or Gather Information for example.

- Due to this non-assignment of skill to ability score, it impacted which skills I used, added, and eliminated. For instance, Intimidation was removed as a skill, and if someone tries to threaten someone (like by grabbing them around the throat), I'll assign it as a STR (Persuasion) check. By the same token, I removed Acrobatics, and instead any balancing or tumbling is now a DEX (Athletics) check. My skill list includes:

Animal Handling
Arcana
Athletics (includes Acrobatics, now a DEX (Athletics) check)
Commerce (any actions related to money, finance, appraisal or bartering)
Deception (includes Sleight of Hand, now a DEX (Deception) check)
Etiquette (anything related to the nobility or high society, both in action and knowledge)
Folklore (anything related to the common folk or low society, both in action and knowledge)
History
Insight
Investigation (basically what you use Dungeoneering for-- finding inanimate hidden things like traps or secret doors)
Nature
Perception (finding hidden people / creatures / living things that have taken the Hide action)
Persuasion (includes Intimidation, now a STR (Persuasion) check; includes Perform as well)
Religion
Stealth
Survival (includes Medicine, all humanoid medicinal or body knowledge or action falls under Survival)

- I retained Tools as something to also gain proficiency in, mainly because I use expanded Crafting rules. So to perfom Alchemy, Herbalism, Tinkering, Poisoning, and Smithing (to gain the resultant crafted works) you make applicable ability checks plus your prof bonus if you are proficient in the Tools. And I removed the Tool proficiencies that don't give you anything and instead can just fall under other skills (so Vehicles gone, Navigation Tools gone, Disguise Kit gone). I did retain Thieves Tools because while I could have just reincorporated Thievery as a skill like you did... I figured since I was retaining other Tools for crafting, then keeping Thieves Tools didn't cause any issues.

All in all, I've been happy with a lot of what I've done for these campaigns and they seem to work well. I don't expect you'll have much issue with your changes as well, since Skills are one of the easiest things to change around and one of the most obvious parts of the game to know when you don't like how the standard version works. Best of luck!

 

[CapnZapp]

The base rules for Backgrounds already allow you to freely swap out skill and tool proficiencies, languages, and features when you select your background. Your alternative here seems to weaken/narrow that. Why?

Another reasonable question - thanks. Maybe I was unclear, but I specifically want to stop people from picking the background with the skills their class is already giving them in order to "convert" the background skills into free skills.

With my change, if the background gives you a duplicate skill, you are restricted to your class list when you select a replacement.

This way a Rogue with the Criminal background will no longer be the least likely Rogue to have a criminal-y skill set. Now you have to actually pick backgrounds as a package deal.

I did not make this change lightly. I am fully aware of the benefits of the generosity in the rulebook rule, and that making this restriction carries a cost in limiting the number of archetypes possible.

But in the end, having "endless archetypes" is less important to me than to provide at least some niche protection.

It's been touched upon before, but it's not that my Redux takes you back to the bad old days of 3E where there was no way to gain skills outside your class list. You still have a Background. Optionally, you have a racial skill with as low as Int 12 and that could be "anything".

 

[Corwin]

This way a Rogue with the Criminal background will no longer be the least likely Rogue to have a criminal-y skill set.

I confess this went over my head.

 

[CapnZapp]

But it can be that trivial. It says do a perception, you think it should be investigation, you call for an investigation check. The written campaigns all have holes, if your players do something unexpected they go off the rails of the campaign and you either need to improvise or bring them back on the rails.

It being a written campaign doesn't change anything about the if X is under used, use it more solution. Or you can add pages of codified rules. The first options works way better for me, but if the second works for you that's great. I just think its a style thing and nothing lacking in the core rules.

If it says Perception the last thing I want to think about is Investigation How about simply using Perception and not making that a part of the problem...

And when it does say Investigation I'm only annoyed I'm asking for a skill nobody is finding useful - it doesn't feel "fair" to force the use of a skill that rarely.

It all boils down to the basic fact that I never understood why Investigation is in the game, what it does and why it was added.

To me, everything worked just fine in all the other games I've run and none of them have this strange undefined skill...

 

[CapnZapp]

This is my biggest issue with skills in 5E. I personally like skills to help define a class, not just make the class better at them.

I'm not entirely sure what you want instead, but I am reasonably sure we should discuss it in another thread

 

[CapnZapp]

I asked for an example, because I would like to know if the book says something like, "A successful DC 15 Wisdom (Perception) check informs the character that there is a pressure plate in the floor that triggers the ceiling to collapse when stepped on." Because that would indeed be a poor application of the Perception skill.

It sound like you have a clear picture of when to use Investigation.

But why isn't the skill then called Find Traps?

I could continue by asking you to explain where you use Perception and where you use Investigation, but to be honest I feel that is out of scope of this thread.

Let's discuss Investigation elsewhere.

 

[Satyrn]

Let's list the skills alphabetically, and provide each with a few keywords to help DMs to understand when to use them

some of your design goals (niche protection most of all) are the opposite of what I want from a skills system, but the keyword approach as a guideline to help DMs and players decide which skill might apply is gold.

Simple, straightforward and nicely open to broad loose rulings and (by adding more keywords) to stronger codification depending on the table's preference.

Very 5e.

 

[CapnZapp]

I confess this went over my head.

I mean that Criminal provides Deception and Stealth, two very "criminal-y" skills.

I don't want characters to pick Criminal in order to acquire decidely un-criminal skills; but by the rules as written that is exactly what happens / can happen when the character is a Rogue.

This is not merely theorycrafting by the way. My players generally made sure their background overlapped with their class, so they could get one or two free skills, essentially rending the restriction that is the class list moot.

This is what my change will put an end to.

Any character picking Criminal will get criminal-y skills. Either because they gain Deception and Stealth, or because their class list is already sufficiently criminal-y.

A Rogue could have Depection and Stealth already, and could then pick, for example, Thievery and Dungeoneering instead. But she could not pick Criminal to get Feylore or History, for example.

(Of course, IRL examples doesn't involve History - IRL examples almost always involve characters without Perception on their class list getting Perception. What's the point then about restricting Perception to only some classes...?)

Hope that sorts it out.

 

[Satyrn]

Another reasonable question - thanks. Maybe I was unclear, but I specifically want to stop people from picking the background with the skills their class is already giving them in order to "convert" the background skills into free skills.

With my change, if the background gives you a duplicate skill, you are restricted to your class list when you select a replacement.

This way a Rogue with the Criminal background will no longer be the least likely Rogue to have a criminal-y skill set. Now you have to actually pick backgrounds as a package deal.

I did not make this change lightly. I am fully aware of the benefits of the generosity in the rulebook rule, and that making this restriction carries a cost in limiting the number of archetypes possible.

But in the end, having "endless archetypes" is less important to me than to provide at least some niche protection.

It's been touched upon before, but it's not that my Redux takes you back to the bad old days of 3E where there was no way to gain skills outside your class list. You still have a Background. Optionally, you have a racial skill with as low as Int 12 and that could be "anything".

The default rule in the PH is that the the players are allowed to make up their background from scratch, so they can always get any 2 skills they want that way.

Which means I'm suggesting that your Background Redux ought to close that off, presenting them as "pick from this list or work with you DM to create a new one."

(Again, something totally against my dislike of niche protection, but this ain't for me. )

 

[Ganymede81]

I did not make this change lightly. I am fully aware of the benefits of the generosity in the rulebook rule, and that making this restriction carries a cost in limiting the number of archetypes possible.

Wouldn't this encourage background shopping, though? There are a lot of backgrounds out there (in the PHB or otherwise), and most PCs under your system would be able to select a background that gets them the two non-class skills that they want. Players would be incentivized to eschew a more coherent background choice in favor of the background that lets them get the skill package they prefer.

This only really seems to narrow the options for players that want a non-class skill package that isn't offered by any of the backgrounds.