D&D 5E Sell me on 5th…

[EzekielRaiden]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but if you’re 4th level Class “A” and you take a level in Class “B”, and learn a new skill, you’re able to use it at 5th level proficiency (roughly speaking). Correct?

Proficiency bonus is purely a function of your total level. Anything which depends on proficiency bonus is thus determined by your total level.

Ditto for class abilities?

In general, no, unless the class feature explicitly says otherwise. Some features can be used a number of times per day equal to your proficiency bonus, so those would scale, but many other features do not scale this way. A number of them, e.g. Fighter's Second Wind, explicitly scale with your Fighter level. Most get improvements or extensions at specific class levels, so you wouldn't see those improvements until you reached the appropriate level. E.g. Bards get Bardic Inspiration a number of times per long rest equal to their Charisma modifier, but at Bard 5, it instead becomes that many uses per short rest, which is a major upgrade and exclusively tied to class level, not character level. A Bard 4/Fighter 7 with 18 Cha can still only use BI 4/day.

People just don’t learn like that. It’s divorced from reality in a way that really bugs me. A bridge too far. It pushes me out of my willing suspension of disbelief.*

I played cello for 20 years before picking up guitar. I was just short of professional cellist skill levels; I’d have been so if I were serious. Some of what I learned on cello DID translate to guitar, but I definitely didn’t play guitar anywhere near as well as I played cello. That took years more.

See also Michael Jordan’s baseball career. Arguably the NBA’s GOAT, and he couldn’t get out of MLB’s minor leagues.

So it irks me.





* Yes, I know this is a game that deals with bus-sized, fire-breathing reptilians with intellectual capacity to rival or eclipse human levels, but that’s not the point.

Unfortunately, granular skill development has a number of well-known frustrations, which is why D&D hasn't brought that back since 3e, and why even PF2e dropped that approach (though it didn't completely abandon granularity.)

Basically, it's a HUGE amount of bookkeeping, which many people find tedious and distracting. Especially when spending a few points to gain or improve a skill is pretty much pointless, which is a typical result of highly granular skill systems. E.g. I remember in the W20 game I played, I had spread my Ability (effectively "skill") points around early on because I wanted to represent a char who had been born into wealth, but afflicted with the natural Garou wanderlust/drive/aggression from a young age, so he drifted from interest to interest without settling down. That ended up being a mistake, albeit not a major one because the ST let me juggle a couple points around, and then I just plowed all of my XP into generically-useful Attributes first (if you're unfamiliar with WoD, Attributes = base stats, Abilities = skills.)

Also, if I'm being fully honest, the over-use and abuse of fiddly specific skill points as prerequisites for particular character options (especially PrCs) left a really, really bad taste in many players' mouths. That may have poisoned the well for skill points in D&D-alikes, perhaps not permanently, but for a very long time to come.

That said, you might check out 13th Age if you're looking for something with somewhat more "realistic" skills, in that skills there...barely grow at all, actually. Instead of being finicky specific things, they're tied to your Backgrounds, giving you the ability to do anything reasonably associated with who you were or what you did before your adventure began. You do get Background Points, but very infrequently, meant to represent significant improvement or branching out into new stuff. (Though even there...adding a relevant 1-point background ain't exactly changing the world as far as rolling goes.)

 

[Vaalingrade]

It's amazing what counts as a huge amount of bookkeeping that isn't worth it like adding a 1 to a sheet every month vs what we absolutely NEED to keep in the game like recalculating your encumbrance with every new item you pick up.

 

[Older Beholder]

As 5th comes into focus for me, I can see a conundrum. I might be happier playing the game with the maximum number of character building options available. But given my dislike of certain mechanics, I might not be interested in spending money on buying the books to have those options at my fingertips.

I’ll just have to evaluate this more fully if/when it becomes a real issue.

The more I thought about the example I used above of taking perceptron, the more I see your point. Overnight suddenly you’re an expert. Doesn’t make much sense.

But we‘re talking about an extreme example of level 19/ level 1 multiclassing splits, which is a pretty edge case that I’d suggest probably doesn’t happen too often.

I guess I’d pivot at this point and say the best selling point is that it’s worth trying 5E just to see how it plays.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Unfortunately, granular skill development has a number of well-known frustrations, which is why D&D hasn't brought that back since 3e, and why even PF2e dropped that approach (though it didn't completely abandon granularity.)

One man’s trash is another man’s treasure, as they say.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

If you use D&D Beyond, you can purchase the player options piecemeal and save some money. (Or potentially have someone else who has already bought them all share them with you.)

I’m not intrinsically anti-online resources, and I actually do use them in practice. But for something like RPGs, I strongly prefer a physical copy in my possession because those cannot easily be edited or simply disappear because of decisions completely beyond my control.

So D&D Beyond would be something I’d only consider if I already had the books (and I’d use it as an aid as opposed to a primary resource) OR if I had no other feasible option.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

One man’s trash is another man’s treasure, as they say.

Perhaps. The issue becomes whether a marketed product is worth marketing with something considered, as you put it, "trash" by a lot of folks because of its necessary features.

I am, of course, always open to suggestions for how any rule structure can be done better. Sometimes, a brilliant stroke can fix an errant rule and make it awesome.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Perhaps. The issue becomes whether a marketed product is worth marketing with something considered, as you put it, "trash" by a lot of folks because of its necessary features.

I am, of course, always open to suggestions for how any rule structure can be done better. Sometimes, a brilliant stroke can fix an errant rule and make it awesome.

It's also considered "treasure" by a lot of other folks. You're not saying we should only produce products the majority like, right?

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It's also considered "treasure" by a lot of other folks. You're not saying we should only produce products the majority like, right?

Certainly not. But if one wishes to play D&D, and has "MUST have skill points" as a critical priority, then there may be a problem.

 

[Parmandur]

I’m not intrinsically anti-online resources, and I actually do use them in practice. But for something like RPGs, I strongly prefer a physical copy in my possession because those cannot easily be edited or simply disappear because of decisions completely beyond my control.

So D&D Beyond would be something I’d only consider if I already had the books (and I’d use it as an aid as opposed to a primary resource) OR if I had no other feasible option.

One of the nice things WotC has done is make sure to consolidate iptions: if you get the PHB, Xanathar's, and Tasha's you have like 95% of the player crunch released for the Edition, and moat of what remains is Setting specific. Maybe Monsters of the Multiverse for Species choices.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Certainly not. But if one wishes to play D&D, and has "MUST have skill points" as a critical priority, then there may be a problem.

Depends on what D&D they want to play, of course. 4e and 5e's take is not my favorite. I liked the principle behind 3e's skill points, but in practice parts of it, like cross-class skills and the small number of points most classes got were real problems. I like the idea of feats and skills combined together (no ASI), and all classes get the same number of picks as they level from class buckets (where magical and combat abilities live) and general buckets (where everything else lives). You can pick the same thing more than once for increased effect.