D&D (2024) They need to bring back Gather Information in One DnD.

[FrogReaver]

Then there's also the bit that Some people actually like roleplaying the gathering information bit. Include a skill for that and that's kind of erased.

 

[Parmandur]

No, that's not my complaint. I think the OP has a reasonable point, and I could see a case for an expanded list, but I'm taking about skill DCs.

Players aren't given any real information about their skills do. That's no way to translate a +7 Survival bonus into a list of abilities. We have the barest of guidance on seeing DCs for DMs, but there's no real difference between a DC 12 and DC 14 check, despite the significant range that is takes up out of the RNG.

By a "complete skill system" I mean one that can be leveraged by players to achieve specific results.

The guidance in the DMG is quite good, only three numbers are usually needed for anything (15, 20, or 25). And players have no trouble in my experience using the system to do juat about anything that enters their mind.

 

[Horwath]

Then there's also the bit that Some people actually like roleplaying the gathering information bit. Include a skill for that and that's kind of erased.

If they want then they can.

However, some people are not so charismatic IRL, but they want to play a powerful sorcerer or a paladin.
This roll helps those kind of players,
On the opposite, I do not care how smooth you are in IRL if you decided to dump your CHA stat to be "the bestest barbarian evah", best that you can hope to get is advantage on your "d20 minus 2" roll.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

They just need to put downtime acrivities into the PHB.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Then there's also the bit that Some people actually like roleplaying the gathering information bit. Include a skill for that and that's kind of erased.

Those people can still roleplay it. That's not erased at all.

But rather, but not having a skill or process (which is already there) you dis-include people who don't feel comfortable acting out social situations.

Failure to have mechanics is not the same as enabling roleplay.

 

[Incenjucar]

Having mechanics also helps a DM give everyone an even chance and bypass favoritism and personal skills. A shy, nervous kid who mumbles and stutters but who is playing a 20 Cha bard shouldn't have a harder time with diplomacy than the Cha 8 wizard played by a professional actor and speech writer.

 

[R_J_K75]

My opinion is that not everything needs to be resolved with a dice roll. I don't see a problem with a player or group of players declaring that they want to gather information, investigate, etc. and the DM just telling them what they find out, or don't find out. Obviously attribute and skill checks are a major part of the game and have their place, but I think that players and DMs sometimes overly rely on them.

 

[tetrasodium]

My opinion is that not everything needs to be resolved with a dice roll. I don't see a problem with a player or group of players declaring that they want to gather information, investigate, etc. and the DM just telling them what they find out, or don't find out. Obviously attribute and skill checks are a major part of the game and have their place, but I think that players and DMs sometimes overly rely on them.

They don't need to be sure, but that's not a justification for ensuring that the GM can't be done with a roll by obvious rules omission.
Is there any reason for defending the absence of this particular skill other than a desire to use that absence in order to wall off the gm from being capable of using something mechanical that would place an obstacle that can't just get steamrolled by spur of the moment verbal solutions to perfect and immediate success?

 

[R_J_K75]

They don't need to be sure, but that's not a justification for ensuring that the GM can't be done with a roll by obvious rules omission.
Is there any reason for defending the absence of this particular skill other than a desire to use that absence in order to wall off the gm from being capable of using something mechanical that would place an obstacle that can't just get steamrolled by spur of the moment verbal solutions to perfect and immediate success?

In some cases, 5E is kept intentionally vague. The skill list in 3.x was too large, and with 5E a decision was made to truncate that list. Gather information was one of the skills that was omitted whether intentional or not I can't say but it's gone now. I'm sure if it had made the cut, then another skill would have gotten the axe and we'd probably be having a discussion about that skill instead of gather information.

 

[tetrasodium]

In some cases, 5E is kept intentionally vague. The skill list in 3.x was too large, and with 5E a decision was made to truncate that list. Gather information was one of the skills that was omitted whether intentional or not I can't say but it's gone now. I'm sure if it had made the cut, then another skill would have gotten the axe and we'd probably be having a discussion about that skill instead of gather information.

But in this particular case we are in a thread talking about a specific example of an obvious omission that some people are defending not "the 3.x list". There's a difference between skills being made vague & skills being made defensive though. Saying that "it doesn't need to be a dice roll" is good advice when the GM has the option of making it one or not when they feel it's the best course, it's quite a different scenario when that's being said because the GM can't because the skill was removed or the skill is one of several merged into a tiny selection of do everything skills with an impact on class specialization roles.