D&D 5E Some thoughts on skills.

[Ruin Explorer]

More broadly, I think character generation and advancement resources should be definitively split between the 3 pillars, to encourage capability in all those pillars, which should promote engagement in all three pillars in play.

Yeah I think this is a big place I see D&D as falling down these days.

There's no sense that you get power in all three pillars when you create a character. Many classes have significant power in combat, and relatively little in the others, and the others aren't really highlighted.

Further, as you advance, many classes basically gain nothing in the Exploration and Social pillars. Their skills increase with the PB and stat mods, but that's not really anything. You don't gain more skills (which I think is really, really dumb), and many classes/subclasses gain either literally nothing else, or very, very little else (like 1-2 abilities which are occasionally applicable).

Whereas Full Casters constantly gain access to more and more power in the Exploration and Social pillars. Often kind of insanely more. They're stuck with the same number of skills as others, but they gain this on top of that. They don't necessarily have to use it, but the power and flexibility gain is there.

Personally I think all classes which aren't Full Casters need some significant additions to them in order to actually gain power in those other two pillars as time goes on. Whether that's fiat/narrative abilities (which most spells that function in those pillars are), more skills, skills working better, other abilities (climb speed, ability to avoid climb checks, for example) or whatever. Full Casters probably shouldn't get extra skills etc. because they're already getting their punch in those pillars from the spells.

(As an aside, were I redesigning D&D, I might reduce the number of full casters by a very large amount, possibly just leaving the Wizard lol.)

 

[R_J_K75]

hmm thats starting to sound far more like Fate or Cortex. And could certainly be done using Stat+Background pairs

its doable but personally

Athletics = Movement (swim, burrow, climb, jump, swing, fly, run)
Power = Grapple/Push, Lift, Bend, Break
Agility = Acrobatics (balance, dodge, tumble), dance, juggle, stealth
Dexterity = Sleight of hand, Craft, picklocks, pickpocket, arts, throw, shoot
Persuasion = Influence (cha), Intimidate (str), Animal handling
Investigate = active search, research, tracking, appraisal, insight (NB Perception is passive only)
Endurance = resilience, stamina, concentration
Lore = Arcana, History, Nature, Planar, Culture (Language), etc

I haven't really given it much thought other than my initial post. Im not sure how it should be done but I think some skills need to be condensed while others need to be expanded or clarified. I like that the PHB leaves some room for interpretation on part of the DM but some skills are too open ended. I've often wondered if the game even needs the skill system when most players just seem to automatically reach for their dice to make a skill check to resolve most situations.

 

[Stormonu]

Personally, I'd like to see weapon* and armor** use become skills. Maybe magic*** too. I miss the like of the fighter's quick attack advancement and just being better in melee combat than the other classes.

* I'd go with groups, like Blades, Axes, Bludgeons, Bows, etc. rather than individual weapons.
** Being proficient with armor in this case would let you add your PB to AC, and maybe allow for certain stunts, along the lines of Shield Bash/Rush and such
*** Probably broken down into groups, such as Abjuration, Necromancy, Earth, Geomancy and the like. Could make skill checks replace save DCs (caster becomes active, needing to beat enemy's static save DC) and Spell Attack rolls.

 

[R_J_K75]

(As an aside, were I redesigning D&D, I might reduce the number of full casters by a very large amount, possibly just leaving the Wizard lol.)

Id definitely get rid of every caster besides wizard, cleric and bard. I can't stand warlocks and sorcerers and wish they were removed from the PHB.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Id definitely get rid of every caster besides wizard, cleric and bard. I can't stand warlocks and sorcerers and wish they were removed from the PHB.

I'd keep Warlocks and Sorcerers as classes, just not as Full Casters. I think the whole Full Caster thing is some played-out-ass 3E nonsense that shouldn't have made it to 5E the way it did.

 

[ph0rk]

If we are throwing rocks, I’d make sorcerer a subclass of wizard. Make wizards true vancian and the sorc subclass not, but with a limit on spells known. Maybe make vancian vs spontaneous akin to pacts for warlocks. Or delete sorcerers altogether.

Keep warlocks, as-is. The arcanum list is already pretty restricted. Warlocks make for a more interesting “didn’t go to school” arcane caster than sorcerer anyway. Make warlocks int rather than cha.

Make clerics (and druids) cast spell levels 1-7 ish again. Merge these classes - wild shape and channel divinity are charges, just make these one class.

Make bards cast levels 1-6 again.

Make paladins and rangers cast spell levels 1-4 again.

Give arcane tricksters and eldritch knights mechanics that aren’t just spells, and adjust their casting accordingly.

 

[DND_Reborn]

FWIW, in the full Mod:

Artificers DO NOT EXIST!
Bards are half-casters (5th level max)
Clerics are CHA-based, not WIS-based
Druids -- no changes
Paladins gain Cleric cantrips
Rangers gain Druid cantrips
Sorcerers are a subclass of Wizard
Warlocks are half-casters (5th level max) [ In a prior version they were a subclass of Clerics ]
Wizards -- no changes

All spell lists have been revised to reduce overlap by half. All 6th+ level spells are unique to a single class.

 

[R_J_K75]

I'd keep Warlocks and Sorcerers as classes, just not as Full Casters. I think the whole Full Caster thing is some played-out-ass 3E nonsense that shouldn't have made it to 5E the way it did.

Yeah you said it better than I did. I was thinking along similar lines that they could show up in a supplemental book, a 1/2 caster, sub class or however theyre done. I personally dont care for them and prefer if they showed up as an option rather than a base PHB class. I didn't like the sorcerer when it showed up in 3E or the warlock in 4E and was disappointed when they were in 5E.

 

[Clint_L]

What if you just had one skill: "background," which you got to build during character creation. Just list the various skills and sub-skills and let players choose X number. Make it a skill tree so to get the really specialized one, you have to have the antecedent skills. Have some pre-made so characters don't have to think hard if they don't want to.

Then when something comes up that is relevant to their character's origins, player just make a background check.

 

[Pedantic]

What if you just had one skill: "background," which you got to build during character creation. Just list the various skills and sub-skills and let players choose X number. Make it a skill tree so to get the really specialized one, you have to have the antecedent skills. Have some pre-made so characters don't have to think hard if they don't want to.

Then when something comes up that is relevant to their character's origins, player just make a background check.

Every day, we stray yet further from the light of objective skill DCs. That's just a return to 2e background professions with arguably even less rules.