AbdulAlhazred
Legend
Obviously I'm not strongly disagreeing with you on which system would do this better. OTOH, 5e is too 'loose' for this analysis! It doesn't have level-graded DCs AT ALL, so we have literally NO IDEA WHAT THE CORRECT DC IS. Nor does it have more than the vague D&D-ur-concept that low level PCs take on 'low level adventures' (canonicalized only on in the case of combat). So, the problem becomes, your math is correct, I think my Catfolk has a +8 at level 1 (or soon thereafter). He also got a cloak that sometimes gives him advantage on Stealth checks, but only in natural terrain, so it might not count here. OTOH we don't know the DC is 20. Presumably there's a mix of DCs, and without guidance, yeah, maybe the real key one is a 20, but maybe its a 15 or a 10. I guess we could include Inspiration in this discussion too, though it is a pretty weak mechanic that is poorly integrated. Still, if we're at a critical juncture it can be brought into play.What you guys are missing with this is what is trying to be demonstrated and how one should go about demonstrating that:
1) Its necessary to go to the tails of the distribution to demonstrate just how different these two games are in terms of both (i) genre and (ii) what is actually happening at the table to get us there.
2) I've talked about the extreme differences in genre (i), so lets talk about how one gets there. I've poked at it, but let me try to demonstrate just how enormously different the play yield is for the formulation of actual action resolution procedures + the resources that individual PCs can call upon to make this happen.
a) The Fighter that AA is proposing above is not your bog-standard D&D Fighter. Its not a shield-bearing, medium to heavy armor wearing tank nor a Strength-specialized, but Dex-average (or deficient), Berserker who isn't proficient in Stealth. Its a Dex-heavy duelist/skirmisher, archer, invested in Stealth or something like this. Out of the historical spread of the bajillion D&D Fighters that have been made...this makes up what ridiculously low %? Maybe 1 in 10 (at best)?
Let's take this guy at level 7. Lets give him +5 Dex and Training in Stealth. He's +8 Stealth. Against a DC 20 stealth obstacle (as proposed above), he's only succeeding 40 % of the time.
b) Now let's take the Blades analogue; the Cutter. This only a 1st level character...not a 7th level character. This character has NO INVESTMENT IN PROWL (Stealth in 5e).
This character can spend 2 out of his 9 available Stress or they can Accept a Devil's Bargain or a Teammate can spend 1 Stress to Assist to yield a Success w/ Complications (so he's done his stealthy thing but something else has happened to complicate the situation) 50 % of the time! And if they want, they can Resist the Complication (and they'll surely have 2d6 to do so because Prowl falls under Prowess...the physical "Saving Throw" to use D&D parlance)!
I don't have to go "off-script" or outside the bog standard Fighter in Blades for someone to be stealthy. I don't have to invest in stealth. I can be 1st level.
If this doesn't demonstrate that the paradigm is fundamentally different in terms of breadth of competency/capability and the cognitive space that players are inhabiting during play, I don't know what will. Just like D&D 5e, Blades is absolutely about leveraging your strengths. But the active tools (and the player-facing nature of the whole game) to manage your weaknesses is fundamentally different.
The upshot of this is that everyone is managing their individual collective limited use resources (Stress, Armor, Special Armor, Loadout Slots including Consumables) and managing all of the other considerable aspects of PC and Crew play/life (Harm, Trauma, Heat, Coin, Cohorts, Clocks, Assets like Vehicles/Tools) to push every caper toward low-exposure (including body count as body count creates multiple feedback loops from Heat to potential Clocks that you have to deal with during Downtime) and expected return. So if you want to get something done, there are a great many individual buttons and levers to push to (a) leverage your (and others) strengths, (b) minimize your weaknesses, (c) deal with complications as they (inevitably) arise, (d) punch above your weight (higher returns) to ensure that things don't go all A-Team with explosions and body count and getaway chases and the attendant significantly increased exposure left in the Crew's wake (which they'll have to answer for because of the feedback loops of the system).
Yes, sometimes it turns into A-Team. But that is hugely rare in Blades.
I've probably run 200 Scores as a GM (maybe more). The number of times its turned into A-Team I could count on probably 2 hands. Lets even double that to 20/200. That is 10 % of the time it turns into A-Team. So its probably somewhere between 5 % at the low end and 10 % at the high end that Blades turns into A-Team. D&D capers? Its nearly A-Team all the way down (its got to be 75 - 90 % A-Team). Which is awesome. But its not the same play space, its not the same genre outputs, and that is because the system architecture and incentive structures ensures that.
All I was intending is that 5e, like 4e, does allow for a pretty good "sneak party" that doesn't have to sacrifice much/anything. I'd note that my Catfolk Battlemaster is also a darn effective combatant who can rip enemies apart in a flash! So, I didn't sacrifice anything/much to get stealth. I did notice the Gnoll Barbarian was hitting harder than me, but the difference wasn't HUGE, and my superiority dice tricks seemed to make up for it adequately (and hey, being an encounter rest refresh class was nice). I wasn't stepping on the rogue much either, her stealth and sleight of hand checks were all a good bit better than mine. I'd be more the guy tagging along for artillery support while she was scouting more than being the PRIMARY sneak.
So the problem is, again, lack of structure in 5e. It has no process to put skill checks in context, and not even a really useful DC setting mechanism. Frankly my overall assessment of 5e is it is OK in terms of skills will suffice for 'exploration checks' when someone wants to search or whatnot. Otherwise the game works best when you go in swinging. Likewise social stuff is best handled either with magic or simply by RP. If the GM decides they want a check, well the rules have already put that on them. If playing with an unfamiliar GM you should play conservative, there's little way to know how they will rule on things, and the game itself is pretty much silent.
I stated before that skills are optional. Going back over the PHB it doesn't really say that, they are ASSUMED, but the DMG provides a lot of alternatives. As written Skills seem pretty 'non-core', no other part of the game seems to really depend on them, though leaving them out will bone some classes...