Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="mjb235" data-source="post: 6755398" data-attributes="member: 6804470">I'm sorry if this has been brought up a million times but I've searched for something similar and my search-fu has been weak.I'm wondering what the point of having skills is in 5e at all.&nbsp; Since all skills are just attribute tests, and having proficiency in a skill only increases the skill by your proficiency modifier.&nbsp; This is compounded by the concept of tool proficiency which can essentially mean the same thing.&nbsp; What I'm wondering is why did they need to print skills in the first place?&nbsp; Beyond maybe for class or background proficiency choices.&nbsp; Essentially they could have thrown all of that away and when you choose a proficiency you would just say something like &quot;Roque the Rogue has proficiency in thieving and being acrobatic because he likes to jump around.&quot; That's 2 proficiencies and it covers thieves tools.&nbsp; If a DM find it too broad they can just ask the player to refine.&nbsp; &quot;What does thieving exactly mean?&quot; &quot;Oh, he's good at breaking into houses and unlocking doors&quot; &quot;Ok, put burglary instead&quot;.So then a DM just has to say &quot;Hm, make a dexterity check&quot; and the player can lobby &quot;Well, I have proficiency in burglary does this apply?&quot;.I can see it being useful to have examples there.&nbsp; Understanding the difference between perception and investigation is the difference between asking for a wisdom check or an intelligence check.&nbsp; But beyond that I don't see why having a defined &quot;Perception&quot; skill is necessary.&nbsp; Especially when you consider something like Athletics where the players guide specifically calls out athletics as possibly using strength or dexterity based on the circumstances.tl:dr, What's the point of having 'defined' skills, versus just using attribute checks and giving players proficiency's that they can choose with the GM?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="mjb235, post: 6755398, member: 6804470"] I'm sorry if this has been brought up a million times but I've searched for something similar and my search-fu has been weak. I'm wondering what the point of having skills is in 5e at all. Since all skills are just attribute tests, and having proficiency in a skill only increases the skill by your proficiency modifier. This is compounded by the concept of tool proficiency which can essentially mean the same thing. What I'm wondering is why did they need to print skills in the first place? Beyond maybe for class or background proficiency choices. Essentially they could have thrown all of that away and when you choose a proficiency you would just say something like "Roque the Rogue has proficiency in thieving and being acrobatic because he likes to jump around." That's 2 proficiencies and it covers thieves tools. If a DM find it too broad they can just ask the player to refine. "What does thieving exactly mean?" "Oh, he's good at breaking into houses and unlocking doors" "Ok, put burglary instead". So then a DM just has to say "Hm, make a dexterity check" and the player can lobby "Well, I have proficiency in burglary does this apply?". I can see it being useful to have examples there. Understanding the difference between perception and investigation is the difference between asking for a wisdom check or an intelligence check. But beyond that I don't see why having a defined "Perception" skill is necessary. Especially when you consider something like Athletics where the players guide specifically calls out athletics as possibly using strength or dexterity based on the circumstances. tl:dr, What's the point of having 'defined' skills, versus just using attribute checks and giving players proficiency's that they can choose with the GM? [/QUOTE]

Verification