D&D 5E Proficiency vs. Ability vs. Expertise

[Parmandur]

Well aware of this, but it is not a feature we feel is implemented in a "good" fashion.

If you want the chance of failure, again, go for the dice pooling: screwing over two Classes math is not such a great idea.

 

[Maxperson]

We already allowed a background skill to be chosen instead at the cost of the other background skill. This way, even Rogues can do it by default to gain a third expertise.

I think this is just standard RAW. Otherwise it would not be possible for bards to use all 4 of their expertise slots, since they only have 3 class skills that they can select. They must be able to pick from their backgrounds in order to fill in that last slot. Also, expertise just says pick from proficiencies, not class proficiencies, so they can select any skill they know.

 

[Esker]

No matter how hard you try, the lifetime pedantry award will always belong to Ovinomancer.

Giving 25% of the ability to everyone, is giving it away to others. Obviously. Everyone here, I am sure including you, understands that. You feigning misunderstanding that and then trying to argue the finer pedantic point for pages is not a game I have time to play today. So do please take the final word, and make sure you take a didactic tone in over explaining how I just don't understand that giving 25% of X is not giving away X

Guessing there's some history here I'm not aware of, so I'm not going to step in the vitriol, but Max and I were both suggesting giving the extra expertise to the rogue too, so they still have four more than everyone else. I would still characterize that as eating into the rogue's niche, but it was offered in the spirit of addressing an edge case, so that, hopefully, it would reduce some of the perceived need to weaken expertise.

 

[Maxperson]

I would still characterize that as eating into the rogue's niche, but it was offered in the spirit of addressing an edge case, so that, hopefully, it would reduce some of the perceived need to weaken expertise.

This is not uncommon in the game, though. Multiple classes have extra movement. Multiple classes have extra attack. Multiple classes have overlapping spells. Multiple classes get fighting styles to select from. And so on. By preserving the 4 extra for rogues, it doesn't take anything away from what rogues do best, which is skill monkey. They still dominate the other classes to the same extent that they did prior.

 

[Mistwell]

Guessing there's some history here I'm not aware of, so I'm not going to step in the vitriol, but Max and I were both suggesting giving the extra expertise to the rogue too, so they still have four more than everyone else. I would still characterize that as eating into the rogue's niche, but it was offered in the spirit of addressing an edge case, so that, hopefully, it would reduce some of the perceived need to weaken expertise.

No classes thing has been given to literally all the classes. It's more than "eating into the rogue's niche". Eating into it would be giving it to a couple of additional classes. It's completely negating any niche they have over it. Heck, even spells have not been given automatically to ALL the other classes. There are only so many skills which get such high use in a particular game where expertise is meaningful. If literally every class can get it in a skill, players will (as always) split their expertise across the valuable skills for that campaign, and the rogue will barely register as a blip of "extra" in doing those things. There will already be a perception, stealth, persuasion, acrobatics/athletic, etc. expert in the party. Rogue can now specialize in some skills that come up less often, or just one of those that others didn't choose, but the overall ability will be useful less often because of that - or they can double up on what others already do, and will be that focus has as often as before. Giving it away to everyone has the net effect of taking something very meaningful away from the rogue.

I mean think about it this way - if everyone could cast detect magic once per day, but the wizard can cast it 5 times per day instead of 4 (though before they were the only one in the party able to cast it), don't you think it will take something away from the wizard given it only comes up a few times a day for the party anyway?

Skills often work like that. There is one Persuasion guy for example usually. Once there are two where before there was only one, it comes up half as often for the guy who used to be the only one (or arguably slightly more than half). That's reducing the value of the ability in application, even if on paper they technically are allowed to use it just as often. Because the reality is players share spotlight, and giving away someone else's otherwise nearly-unique ability such that anyone else can do that same thing (though focused on only one skill but everyone has one so the entire party has as many as you do now split between a limited number of useful skills) means that spotlight will go away in a meaningful sum.

 

[Maxperson]

No classes thing has been given to literally all the classes. It's more than "eating into the rogue's niche". Eating into it would be giving it to a couple of additional classes. It's completely negating any niche they have over it. Heck, even spells have not been given automatically to ALL the other classes. There are only so many skills which get such high use in a particular game where expertise is meaningful. If literally every class can get it in a skill, players will (as always) split their expertise across the valuable skills for that campaign, and the rogue will barely register as a blip of "extra" in doing those things. There will already be a perception, stealth, persuasion, acrobatics/athletic, etc. expert in the party. Rogue can now specialize in some skills that come up less often, or just one of those that others didn't choose, but the overall ability will be useful less often because of that - or they can double up on what others already do, and will be that focus has as often as before. Giving it away to everyone has the net effect of taking something very meaningful away from the rogue.

I mean think about it this way - if everyone could cast detect magic once per day, but the wizard can cast it 5 times per day instead of 4 (though before they were the only one in the party able to cast it), don't you think it will take something away from the wizard given it only comes up a few times a day for the party anyway?

Skills often work like that. There is one Persuasion guy for example usually. Once there are two where before there was only one, it comes up half as often for the guy who used to be the only one (or arguably slightly more than half). That's reducing the value of the ability in application, even if on paper they technically are allowed to use it just as often. Because the reality is players share spotlight, and giving away someone else's otherwise nearly-unique ability such that anyone else can do that same thing (though focused on only one skill but everyone has one so the entire party has as many as you do now split between a limited number of useful skills) means that spotlight will go away in a meaningful sum.

Religion, investigation, perception, arcana, religion, nature, athletics, survival, medicine, stealth, history, intimidation, persuasion, insight and deception. That's the list of commonly used skills. Pretty much the entire 5e list. They didn't want to put out a long list of narrowly used skills. The rogue is just fine with our proposal and isn't going to suffer a drop.

 

[Fenris-77]

Athletics is on the Rogue list.

I was replying to a post suggesting that the list for expertise simply be Dex and Cha skills.

 

[Leatherhead]

Niche protection is an outdated concept that shackles character builds more than it helps them. The best thing to do with the Rogue class would be delete it and give the skill-enhancing bits to the Fighter.

Besides, everyone always goes on about Rogues when talking about Expertise as if there wasn't a Bard in the room trying desperately to not get noticed while stealing the spotlight and upstaging everyone.

 

[Esker]

I was replying to a post suggesting that the list for expertise simply be Dex and Cha skills.

Oh, I know. I was just saying that if you just say the skills have to be on the rogue list (instead of saying Dex and Cha), you cover all the most natural cases, including climbing. It'd also be weird not to allow investigation, insight, or perception, which aren't Dex or Cha either.

 

[Esker]

No classes thing has been given to literally all the classes. It's more than "eating into the rogue's niche". Eating into it would be giving it to a couple of additional classes. It's completely negating any niche they have over it. Heck, even spells have not been given automatically to ALL the other classes. There are only so many skills which get such high use in a particular game where expertise is meaningful. If literally every class can get it in a skill, players will (as always) split their expertise across the valuable skills for that campaign, and the rogue will barely register as a blip of "extra" in doing those things. There will already be a perception, stealth, persuasion, acrobatics/athletic, etc. expert in the party. Rogue can now specialize in some skills that come up less often, or just one of those that others didn't choose, but the overall ability will be useful less often because of that - or they can double up on what others already do, and will be that focus has as often as before. Giving it away to everyone has the net effect of taking something very meaningful away from the rogue.

I mean think about it this way - if everyone could cast detect magic once per day, but the wizard can cast it 5 times per day instead of 4 (though before they were the only one in the party able to cast it), don't you think it will take something away from the wizard given it only comes up a few times a day for the party anyway?

Skills often work like that. There is one Persuasion guy for example usually. Once there are two where before there was only one, it comes up half as often for the guy who used to be the only one (or arguably slightly more than half). That's reducing the value of the ability in application, even if on paper they technically are allowed to use it just as often. Because the reality is players share spotlight, and giving away someone else's otherwise nearly-unique ability such that anyone else can do that same thing (though focused on only one skill but everyone has one so the entire party has as many as you do now split between a limited number of useful skills) means that spotlight will go away in a meaningful sum.

Yeah, I'm cognizant of all of this, which is why if I did this (which I don't know that I would, but I like it better than making expertise worse) I wouldn't want the other classes to have an unrestricted choice of skills. I'd want to consciously avoid the rogue list to the extent possible (except for bards): arcana/history/religion for wizards, religion/medicine for clerics and paladins, nature/survival/animal handling for rangers and druids, ... Admittedly the other classes are tougher: monks could probably get acrobatics and barbarians and fighters athletics even though those are on the rogue list, since they tend to be individual checks not group ones. But I don't know what to do with sorcerers and warlocks.