D&D 5E Convince. A potential skill narrowing option.

[Stormonu]

Oh that is -clever-, Delericho...

That is clever indeed. Level Up/A5e has some of that in Backgrounds and Culture, but yeah... I do like the idea of character classes and heritages having impact on who they're good at talking to, independent of -how- they're trying to talk to them.

Might get a bit fiddly... but I do like that.

I think it can be simplified a bit - most of it works from having something in common with the person you're talking to. A base upon which to start the conversation. Advantage/Disadvantage should work here very easily; you can define groups broadly or narrowly as you see fit.

Example: A King conversing about an alliance with another king might have advantage because they both understand the nature of their position. Conversely, a peasant trying to get the king to enact a law to reign in a wealthy merchant might have disadvantage because the peasant and the king have no common ground on determining "fair prices" for one or the other.

 

[Krachek]

Just continuing
athletic and acrobatic
survival and nature
religion and arcana

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Just continuing
athletic and acrobatic
survival and nature
religion and arcana

I did the latter two. (Well some of the religion went to lore, with history.)

 

[Jer]

I'm inclined to advocate therefore that instead of social skills, characters should be proficient in interacting with various groups - so the Fighter might be proficient with soldiers, the Paladin with nobles, and so on. The effect of that is that the social interactions are likely to be spread out a bit, as the best person for the job isn't always the designated Face.

I like this. Especially because I've been thinking quite a bit about how broad the proficiency mechanic can be, and how you could use downtime training to train up aspects of a skill without becoming proficient in the whole skill.

I'd keep the social skills for the folks who have the Face character as a concept, but the proficiency mechanic for anyone who isn't proficient in the broad skill based on background or on downtime "training" to pick up proficiency with social interactions with a specific group (unlike tool proficiency, social training would be more like hitting up the pub to carouse with the guards or making sure to attend all of Lady Muckitymuck's parties for this social season).

 

[Shiroiken]

I like it that some players are natural liars or con artists, and some others are naturally good at convincing.

The biggest issue I have with this is people skilled in Deception are good at lying, but suck at telling the truth. This leads to stupid situations where the player tries to "lie" in a way that actually tells the truth. Making them (and intimidation) the same skill makes the most sense.

 

[Baldurs_Underdark]

The biggest issue I have with this is people skilled in Deception are good at lying, but suck at telling the truth. This leads to stupid situations where the player tries to "lie" in a way that actually tells the truth. Making them (and intimidation) the same skill makes the most sense.

Players describe what the PCs are trying to do, and the DM calls what skill check they roll.

If the goal of the player is to communicate a truth to an NPC, but chooses a rather creative way to do so, then it's up to the DM to handle that. Either make the player roll a Persuasion, or if the PC puts up a real show you can even call for a Performance. But probably the best way to handle that PC it is by making the NPC take the wrong things serious and actually go with a lie that isn't a lie and let the whole plan fail.

 

[DND_Reborn]

What do you think?

We went further to a skilled called "Influence" which combined Deception, Intimidation, and Persuasion. After all, with all of those skills you are just trying to get someone to do something you want them to do that they might not want to do--whether you lie/deceive them, threaten them, or convince them.

Those are just the vehicles on the road of Influence.

After all, if the designers can be so blasé about combining climbing, jumping, and swimming (three VERY different things) into "Athletics", it made sense to do the same with overblown Charisma-based skills.

I am sure you could combined many of the INT and WIS skills as well, getting each ability to just a few skills, if you wanted to.

 

[Horwath]

Physical: athletics, acrobatics, endurance(STR, DEX or CON)
Thievery: stealth, sleight of hand, thief tools(DEX)
Lore: arcana, history, religion(INT)
Observation: investigation, perception, insight,(WIS or INT)
Survival: nature, an. handling, survival,(WIS or INT)
Influence: deception, intimidation, persuasion,(CHA)

medicine downranked to tool proficiency with healers kit, same as perform with various instruments,

Background gives one skill proficiency out of two options:
all classes get two less skill proficiency. yes some classes get only background or possibly racial skill.
subclasses that give 2 or 3 bonus skills, get only one.
rogues and bards get one expertise where they get two.

skilled feat: +1 ASI, one skill proficiency
skill expert: +1 ASI, one expertise

 

[MarkB]

Persuasion and Deception are both just ways to change a person's beliefs. Deception to make someone believe that something untrue is true, Persuasion to make them believe they should take a course of action when they start out believing they shouldn't.

And applying either involves applying some of the other. There's no point in deceiving someone into believing something untrue without also persuading them to act upon that information. And persuading someone to go against their own interests will involve some overselling of the benefits and underselling of the costs.

The two are close enough that I've frequently seen a player going for what they think is one approach, only for the DM to ask them to use the other skill when making the check.

So yeah, combining them into a single skill would certainly make a degree of sense.

 

[cbwjm]

Pathfinder had an option which reduced all the skills down to maybe a dozen. Persuasion was the skill used for deception, diplomacy, and intimidation. You could get bonuses for either, so a circumstance bonus might apply when you use Persuasion to intimidate someone. Every now and then I look at the 3 skills and think they could have done the same in 5e.