D&D 5E Is Expertise too good?

[FrogReaver]

Im going to use skill crits (critical successes) and skill fumbles anyway, for everyone. I like the alignment with combat math.

The reason I have been hesitant is, there is a tradition of gauging the ‘amount’ of success or failure, by whether the total skill roll was 0, 5, or 10 above or below the required DC. This was interesting. But I think the advantages of simply using combat math for skills, including crits and fumbles, by far out way any advantage of a convoluted system.

There is value in apply the consistent standards of combat math and bounded accuracy for all challenges.

One issue with applying the same numbers in combat to out of combat is that a single hit or miss in combat doesn't risk disastrous results. Combat is made up of multiple attacks each with a chance to hit and miss. Skill checks would be the equivalent to rolling a single attack roll to resolve the whole combat.

So while I like where you are going I can't help but feel like skills are inherently different than combat and may not should totally mimic the combat system because of that?

 

[FrogReaver]

As we speak, there are many who are complaining about the archery bonuses obsoleting melee combat.

The fact that archery violates bounded accuracy has already disrupted the game.

No. That's sharpshooter + archery.... which ends up being better than GWM + Great Weapon Fighting style

Without sharpshooter, archery style is pretty underwhelming.

 

[Yaarel]

Heh, the moral for design seems to be.

Bounded accuracy is powerfully helpful to the D&D game, but it is also fragile, and designers need to make a persistent effort to avoid ‘bigger’ bonuses in any design space.

 

[Yaarel]

The tradition of deliriously high bonus numbers (I am looking at you 3e), is wrongminded. It is like crack and hard leave behind. 5e made the sober choice to focus on the living ecology within bounded accuracy. At least most of the time. And the game benefits from this sobriety.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The skill bonus you have vs the DC check isn't what creates uncertainty. Uncertainty is a DM call. It's part of how the game is played. The DM, not some numbers decide when something is uncertain.

That's up to interpretation. Personally, I directly equate the concept of uncertainty to whether the possible outcomes are within the d20 range; e.g. you don't have to roll to break down a door IFF your modifier to the check is sufficient to hit the break DC even were you to roll a 1, and there's no point in rolling if the DC is more than 20 points above your modifier.

(Keep in mind, also, that my determination of the DC is going to depend on your approach; it may well end up at zero, if you describe an approach which cannot possibly fail.)

The alternative can get... I don't want to say weird, as much as it's unpredictable. I mean, some DMs like to give characters freedom to do anything that they (the DM) imagine someone with those stat should be able to do. ("You have a Strength of 20 - you are literally the strongest human who could possibly live - so of course you can kick down that wooden door.") But other players can feel cheated when they thought they understood how the world was supposed to work, only to find that there's a major discrepancy between their understanding from the rules and the way that the DM rules it. ("You should have plenty of time to pick that lock, because I know roughly how strong that ogre is and roughly how strong that door is, and I estimate that it will take about a minute for it to break through.")

One of the big reasons why people use codified rule systems over more free-form ones is that it gets everyone on the same page about how the world is supposed to work. That's why DMs need to declare their house rules before the campaign starts, so everyone can make meaningful decisions instead of just guessing blindly.

 

[Yaarel]

One issue with applying the same numbers in combat to out of combat is that a single hit or miss in combat doesn't risk disastrous results. Combat is made up of multiple attacks each with a chance to hit and miss. Skill checks would be the equivalent to rolling a single attack roll to resolve the whole combat.

So while I like where you are going I can't help but feel like skills are inherently different than combat and may not should totally mimic the combat system because of that?

I agree with your point here. A skill check is all or nothing, which sometimes might mean life or death.

As a caveat, also keep in mind. Sometimes combat is all or nothing, like casting a Fireball spell, or failing a Stun save.

Moreover, at least in my style, many skill checks are happening during combat. So there is a sense of accumulating successes.



Just brainstorming here. Perhaps a skill challenge can routinely have in mind at least two skills. One athletics, an other nature, or one persuasion, an other history. Or so on. Then both challenges need to be overcome to fully resolve the challenge. Success in each skill check results in a partial success. One success and one failure results in a partial success with an odd outcome.

 

[FrogReaver]

[MENTION=58172]Yaarel[/MENTION] , Just thinking

Combat AC's range from about 11-25. There may be an outlier or 2 outside that range. Most combat AC's range from 13-20. In other words, there's not really a full 20 AC range in what you fight in combat. It's closer to a +15 AC range. Most AC's in combat come out closer to a range about half that. Skill checks tend to go from DC 5 to DC 30. I think part of the issue is that skill checks DC's have to large a range.

In combat everyone gets proficiency bonus to their attack check. It's a given. So stat differences of maybe +2 to +5 or +7 (with archery style) are the only differences players will ever realistically see in their chance to hit differences. So a range of about +5. Skills have a difference in range of -1 to +11 so a range of about 12. That difference in range needs to decrease.

I would suggest we leave proficiency out of the bonus on skill checks and find some other meaning for it, this way our range on skill bonus differences stay around the +5 that combat has it at. Possibly have proficiency add an extra d20 dice that stacks with advantage (allowing up to 3 dice to be thrown at a time)

I suggest we have expertise give a 3rd dice on skill checks. Or maybe a chance of auto success.

 

[FrogReaver]

I agree with your point here. A skill check is all or nothing, which sometimes might mean life or death.

As a caveat, also keep in mind. Sometimes combat is all or nothing, like casting a Fireball spell, or failing a Stun save.

Moreover, at least in my style, many skill checks are happening during combat. So there is a sense of accumulating successes.



Just brainstorming here. Perhaps a skill challenge can routinely have in mind at least two skills. One athletics, an other nature, or one persuasion, an other history. Or so on. Then both challenges need to be overcome to fully resolve the challenge. Success in each skill check results in a partial success. One success and one failure results in a partial success with an odd outcome.

Multiple dice rolls on a skill sure feel a lot like multiple attack rolls. I'm leaning more and more toward both proficiency and expertise granting extra dice for a skill check instead of + bonuses. Multiple dice also add a bit of a diminishing returns type effect which is probably good.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's up to interpretation. Personally, I directly equate the concept of uncertainty to whether the possible outcomes are within the d20 range; e.g. you don't have to roll to break down a door IFF your modifier to the check is sufficient to hit the break DC even were you to roll a 1, and there's no point in rolling if the DC is more than 20 points above your modifier.

...

DM is free to determine uncertainity however he likes. That you have developed a subsystem to essentially do so for you doesn't mean you are avoiding using the rule that the DM decides. You as the DM have chosen to use that subsystem to decide uncertainty and so you as the DM made the decision on what was uncertain and what was not.

 

[Yaarel]

I think I have decided what I am going to do.

• Crits and fumbles possible for any skill check
• Proficiency is normal while leveling across tiers (from +2 to +6)
• Expertise equals advantage (two d20s)
• Expertise plus situational advantage equals Accuracy (can reroll one of the two d20s)