D&D 5E Some thoughts on skills.

Weiley31

Legend
I found this strange too. @Weiley31, what is the appeal of PF1 over 3.5 here? They combined some skills down, made some class changes to offer more skill points and changed providing extra ranks at level 1 over to providing a +3 bonus to class skills, along with removing the (admittedly obnoxious) cross-class skill penalty, but the guts of the system seem very much the same.
Cross Class skills penalty just rubbed me the wrong way if I'm to be quite honest. And I just liked the condensed/combined skill list makes applying skill points less annoying.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

The problem with this is if someone looks at the odds it doesn't make sense subjectively IMO.

Why does a "Very Easy" task have a 20% of not succeeding? It is Very Easy, after all.
Why is something "Very Hard" not even possible by someone without experience and/or training?

The DC's should all be 5 lower as I see it:

Very Easy - 0
Easy - 5
Moderate - 10
Hard - 15
Very Hard - 20
Nearly Impossible - 25

Maybe? Why even have a DC 0, though? It's not worth rolling at that point - the DM should just grant auto-success and move on. I mean, a DC of 5 is quite often not worth rolling either.

By moving all the numbers down 5, you've transferred your objection to the other end, making "Nearly Impossible" into "Not so Nearly Impossible."

At the end of the day, this is just a semantics thing. Label them whatever you want and, during game play, the DM should just choose a DC that feels appropriate for the odds of completing the task at hand, right?
 

ph0rk

Friendship is Magic, and Magic is Heresy.
the DM should just choose a DC that feels appropriate for the odds of completing the task at hand, right?
Odds for a typical level 1 PC, or odds for that party with those classes and that set of skills and expertise? Because the latter means that proficiency without expertise essentially becomes the new cross-class skill.
 

Odds for a typical level 1 PC, or odds for that party with those classes and that set of skills and expertise? Because the latter means that proficiency without expertise essentially becomes the new cross-class skill.

It can get a bit muddled trying to interpret those labels, yes? The odds will certainly be better for a tier 4 PC with the particular set of skills and expertise for a specific task than for the typical level 1 PC.

I think of those odds as being: "How difficult is this task in general" and I believe that to be the intent of the designers in this case. Further, I use the guidance of 10 = easy, 15 = medium, 20 = hard for a given approach to resolving a specific goal regardless of the level or proficiencies of the character attempting it. Some characters will make that "hard" task seem trivial with all their bonuses and whatnot, for others it might be extra difficult. Personally, as DM, I'm less concerned with consistency of labels and the realism that may be behind that desire; I'm more concerned with consistency of adjudication. Other tables may want that granularity but I am of the opinion that rules granularity really is not the point of 5e.
 

Tonguez

A suffusion of yellow
I dont think I agree with much of OP except decoupling Stat from skill (Which is already raw).
My only thing is make perception passive only and replace its active bits with Investigate. Toolkits should give a +2 bonus
also healing spells should require a medical kit to stabilise a pc first
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Maybe? Why even have a DC 0, though? It's not worth rolling at that point - the DM should just grant auto-success and move on. I mean, a DC of 5 is quite often not worth rolling either.

By moving all the numbers down 5, you've transferred your objection to the other end, making "Nearly Impossible" into "Not so Nearly Impossible."

At the end of the day, this is just a semantics thing. Label them whatever you want and, during game play, the DM should just choose a DC that feels appropriate for the odds of completing the task at hand, right?
DC 0 probably not, but without proficiency and a negative ability modifier it would be possible, or with other penalties some how.

As to the "why bother" aspect, it is the same for ANY ability check-- you only make it if there is a significant cost for failure.

Nearly Impossible is still nearly impossible IMO, YMMV of course. I posted a thread about this sort of stuff months ago. It focused on how likely should someone be at doing a "difficult" task.


Semantics is really not the point. It really comes down to the probabilities. As for the DM just choosing the DC for what feels appropriate, I agree as long as it is true FOR THE WORLD, not just the PC. Very little annoys me as much as the escalating DCs to make a task harder for higher level PCs. But this is something I've been thinking about for PCs in other ways as well...
 

Stormonu

Legend
I've been thinking on this lately, and propose the following:

Skills
Skills are important to characters as they help to define what a given individual is capable or incapable of performing.

Non-Proficient A character who is non-proficient in a skill adds one-half their ability score modifier to the roll. If you have a negative ability modifier, you subtract the full ability score modifier from the total.

Proficient Characters who are proficient in a skill add their proficiency bonus and their full ability score modifier to the total.

Expertise When you gain expertise in a skill, chose a subskill from the appropriate list for each skill. When you perform skill checks involving the subskill you add your ability modifier and twice your proficiency bonus to the result. You otherwise act as you have proficiency with the skill, allowing you to add your proficiency bonus and ability score modifier to the total. If you have a negtive ability modifier, you instead treat it as 0 when you use the skill.

Mastery If you have mastery of a skill, you gain the benefits of expertise with the skill. Also, once per short rest you can choose to automatically succeed on a skill test with the skill. Furthermore, if you are not rushed or under pressure, you can choose to change the result of the d20 roll to equal 10.

Listed below is a list of skills according to the ability they are normally associated with. A list of expertise subskills is listed for each skill.

Strength
Athletics.
Climbing, Jumping, Lifting

Dexterity
Acrobatics.
Balance, Escape, Tumble
Sleight of Hand. Conceal, Palm, Trickery
Stealth. Hide, Silence, Surprise

Constitution
Endurance.
Fortitude, Resistance, Revival

Intelligence
Arcana.
Aberrations, Alchemy, Existential (Planar Group), Spellcraft, Traditions (Specific)
History. Ancient, Legendary, Monstrosities, Recent, Regional (Specific)
Investigation. Deduction, Factfinding, Interrogation
Religion. Afterlife, Celestials, Fiends, Rituals, Spellcraft, Traditions (Specific)
Nature. Beasts, Fey, Plants, Terrain (Specific), Seasons, Weather

Wisdom
Animal Handling. Command, Husbandry, Ride, Train
Insight. Empathy, Familiarity, Humanoids
Medicine. Diagnose, Herbalism, Stabilize, Treatment
Perception. Listen, Smell, Spot, Taste
Survival. Camping, Hunting, Tracking, Trailblazing

Charisma
Deception.
Cheat, Disguise, Gamble, Fast-talk, Lie, Misdirect
Intimidation. Blackmail, Bully, Insinuate, Violence
Performance. Act, Dance, Orate, Play Musical Instrument (Specific Group), Sing
Persuasion. Bargain, Command, Persuade
 

R_J_K75

Legend
Rather than the Ranger never being lost
Yeah at least modify any skill/feat or feature that allow auto successes such as this. It's ridiculous IMO to think that someone can NEVER be surprised, lost or seen while hiding, etc. As a DM if a player tries to pull this card in a very specific situation which would clearly nullify an auto success my response is tough luck. Obviously, this happens very rarely, and I usually build in a save or skill check with maybe advantage/disadvantage. I always try to give the players a chance of success in situations where it really counts but I don't always allow auto successes unless it's something so simple that it really doesn't warrant a check anyhow. This is my only real gripe with the skill system.

I'm fine with them combining similar skills, make the jump skill somewhat usable without needing a slide rule and abacus. Expanding the list somewhat is probably a good idea but I don't want to see anything as extensive as 3.x though. OTOH I personally might like to see a skill list more condensed in some aspects, could athletics, acrobatics, sleight of hand, stealth be combined into a single rogue skill? IDK, if you are a rogue, criminal, etc. then it makes sense, if you're another class or background then you can still take these separately. Tool proficiencies, ditch them, unless I'm playing Tim Taylor or Bob Villa...err Norm Abram (because we know he did all the work and Bob just showed up to turn a screw or two while the credits rolled), I don't need them and don't use them. The skill system leaves something to be desired so anything 1D&D can do to make it better I'm all for it.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
Athletics. Climbing, Jumping, Lifting
I would add Swimming (since you have climbing, jumping) and Grappling/Shoving as well.

Here is the skill breakdown for our Mod:
1674391009015.png


Brawn. Used for lifting, breaking, or bending and other feats of strength.
Grapple. Replaces Athletics for grappling/shoving.
Knowledge. A broad catch-all term. You must choose an area of knowledge, which could be anything, such as Arcana & the Multiverse, History & Geography, Nature, Religion, Strategy & Tactics. This skill can be taken multiple times.
Language. Fluency in a language, includes reading/writing if INT 8 or higher. This skill can be taken multiple times.
Healing. Replaces Medicine. You can use a healing kit to restore 1d6 hit points after a short rest.
Influence. This skill is used when you want to convince someone to do something, either by deception, intimidation, or persuasion.
Protocol. Used for conducting proper etiquette, rank, or position.
 

Reynard

Legend
I would add Swimming (since you have climbing, jumping) and Grappling/Shoving as well.

Here is the skill breakdown for our Mod:
View attachment 273408

Brawn. Used for lifting, breaking, or bending and other feats of strength.
Grapple. Replaces Athletics for grappling/shoving.
Knowledge. A broad catch-all term. You must choose an area of knowledge, which could be anything, such as Arcana & the Multiverse, History & Geography, Nature, Religion, Strategy & Tactics. This skill can be taken multiple times.
Language. Fluency in a language, includes reading/writing if INT 8 or higher. This skill can be taken multiple times.
Healing. Replaces Medicine. You can use a healing kit to restore 1d6 hit points after a short rest.
Influence. This skill is used when you want to convince someone to do something, either by deception, intimidation, or persuasion.
Protocol. Used for conducting proper etiquette, rank, or position.
Out of curiosity, why no Constitution Skills? You could do Concentration and Endurance (extended athletics, basically), and move Survival to Constitution, then maybe give Wisdom back Insight or something. That's just spitballing, but mostly I'm wondering why you left Con out of the skill structure.
 

Remove ads

Top