This is more of a philosophical question than a direct question. Let's say a player wants to do something and there is no skill directly related to it, should you just go straight with it being just an ability check. or should you look for the closest skill and just use that. (Not the closest skill the player has, but the closest skill in the game.) The question I am asking is every action covered under the skill system, or not? How far should a skill be pushed to cover something not explicitly stated by it?
D&D 5E Are there actions not covered under a skill?
Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
Yes, there are actions for which there is no skill proficiency that would apply to an ability check to resolve said action. Initiative is probably the most common. If there is no skill (or tool proficiency) that relates to a player's stated action, then the character's proficiency bonus will likely not apply to an ability check to resolve the action. Not every action is covered by a skill, and I don't see any need to stretch the system to make that the case.
Kurotowa
Legend
This is a meta-conversation my group recently had. What it came down to was one person pointing out the "skill checks" don't really exist in 5e. Instead, everything is an ability check. First you determine the ability, then you ask if the character has something like a skill or tool proficiency that allows them to add their proficiency bonus, then you roll the dice. A skill check is just a shorthand for rolling one of the most common default ability/skill proficiency combinations. It doesn't limit what the DM can ask for or the players can suggest.
For example, in our game this week our group were investigating an urban worksite that people had disappeared from. I asked the DM if my character could roll Wis + Stealth to look at the problem from the other end and deduce "How would I sneak people out of here if I were trying to make them vanish?" He allowed it and a good roll got us pointed at the possibility of secret passages, which helped other PCs who were investigating the work equipment narrow their search.
So start with the ability. Ask yourself if there's a non-standard skill or tool that might apply. Ask the player in question if they have a proficiency they can justify using in the situation. And if there's really nothing, which should be fairly rare, then just roll a raw ability check.
For example, in our game this week our group were investigating an urban worksite that people had disappeared from. I asked the DM if my character could roll Wis + Stealth to look at the problem from the other end and deduce "How would I sneak people out of here if I were trying to make them vanish?" He allowed it and a good roll got us pointed at the possibility of secret passages, which helped other PCs who were investigating the work equipment narrow their search.
So start with the ability. Ask yourself if there's a non-standard skill or tool that might apply. Ask the player in question if they have a proficiency they can justify using in the situation. And if there's really nothing, which should be fairly rare, then just roll a raw ability check.
FarBeyondC
Explorer
Not all possible actions are covered by the skills and tools listed in the 5e system. Some of what isn't could be covered by optional systems (if desired) such as background proficiency, class proficiency, or race proficiency, while others simply are a test of raw ability where there's no skillful way to better accomplish one's desired goal.
To mirror what @Kurotowa said about other suggestions... character backgrounds, certain spells, and certain class features could all be offered as reasons why you might be allowed to add your proficiency bonus on various ability checks. It mainly comes down to you as a player being creative with what you know for your PC and justifying why your prof bonus could apply. Granted, some players find this idea of "skill fishing" to be irritating so you'll want check with your DM first and whether they want you to be creative in this way... but if they are good with it there's any number of ways what you know could apply.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
As @Kurotowa points out, there is no such thing as a skill check in 5e. There are only ability checks, which can be modified by various bonuses and penalties, one of the most common of which is the proficiency bonus. A skill is a type of proficiency, which allows you to apply your proficiency bonus to ability checks made to perform certain tasks. So rather than considering whether an action falls under a skill first and calling for an ability check if it does not, it’s more aligned with the design intent to consider which ability an action falls under first, and if a skill is applicable, mention that proficiency bonus can be added for it.
iserith
Magic Wordsmith
The important thing to keep straight in my view is this:
A task is not an ability check, nor an ability check a task.
A task is something the character does in the fictional world. An ability check is a mechanic the DM uses to resolve uncertainty as to the outcome of the task when there's a meaningful consequence for failure. Because a task's outcome might be certain (i.e. trivially easy or impossible) and because there may be no meaningful consequence for failure, the task may not have an ability check at all.
If those two criteria are met, however, an ability check of some kind is appropriate. A skill proficiency may or may not apply to that ability check, if the player's stated approach to the goal reasonably suggests that the skill proficiency was employed in the task. This is the reason why, in part, you want to make sure the player is reasonably specific when he or she describes what the character is doing. This makes it a lot easier for the DM to judge whether (1) there is an ability check in the first place and (2) whether a skill proficiency may apply (as well as whether there's advantage/disadvantage and what the DC is).
A task is not an ability check, nor an ability check a task.
A task is something the character does in the fictional world. An ability check is a mechanic the DM uses to resolve uncertainty as to the outcome of the task when there's a meaningful consequence for failure. Because a task's outcome might be certain (i.e. trivially easy or impossible) and because there may be no meaningful consequence for failure, the task may not have an ability check at all.
If those two criteria are met, however, an ability check of some kind is appropriate. A skill proficiency may or may not apply to that ability check, if the player's stated approach to the goal reasonably suggests that the skill proficiency was employed in the task. This is the reason why, in part, you want to make sure the player is reasonably specific when he or she describes what the character is doing. This makes it a lot easier for the DM to judge whether (1) there is an ability check in the first place and (2) whether a skill proficiency may apply (as well as whether there's advantage/disadvantage and what the DC is).
the Jester
Legend
There are definitely instances where no skill or tool applies, in which case, I ask myself, "What kind of character should know about/how to do this?" Those types get to use their proficiency bonus. Usually, this is based on class, race, or background.
