D&D 5E Do you ever let players stack skills?

[Jer]

I tend to treat knowledge skills a bit differently from other skills in that often the "penalty for failure" in a knowledge skill is that the game stalls because of that lack of knowledge. So I tend to use a GUMSHOE-inspired mechanic where just asking for the knowledge check with a particular skill is sufficient for a PC to get a baseline level of knowledge (enough to keep the game going) and then the better they roll the more depth or breadth of an answer they get. So if they have two skills that are relevant then I'll tell them to pick the one with the higher bonus but then bump them up to the next level of knowledge based on what they get on the roll (though a roll of 1 means that they only get the absolute minimum[*] and don't get a bump up at all). So for example if the players find a ruined shrine and failing to have that answer would stall the game (for whatever reason), then just asking me for a Religion or a History check is sufficient - even on a failed roll - for them to determine the name of the ancient obscure power whose shrine this was. But if they have both skills then I'd give them the information I would have handed out for the next better roll (like maybe on a minimal success I'd normally tell them additionally that this obscure power had a bloodthirsty reputation). And better rolls would get a bump up on the info (though at some point they just get "all of the information" and the extra skill doesn't really help them much).

For the more action skills like Athletics or Acrobatics I get annoyed at the overlap and irritated at being reminded of it. Then I give the player who took both skills advantage on the roll because it's usually the rogue and so there's not much harm in it.


[*] Or more typically when I can pull it off - a wrong answer that will keep the game going but play out for comedic effect at the right moment. My long-standing group of players are good with running with the "our wizard-historian says that King Feledes was a kindly king so that's how we're going to play it" even when he's rolled a 1 and they know it's probably wrong because they know that it'll be funnier when I eventually pull that 1 back out and the historian is proven wrong. Though they can't always count on it since sometimes I do give somewhat truthful, if minimal and sometimes twisted, information even on a roll of 1. Just to keep them guessing - I don't think they should just assume that a failed roll means that the opposite of whatever they think is true is the actual truth. It should be wrong, but contain enough truthful info that they know enough to not trust anything about it. Tough to pull off sometimes, but when it works it works.

 

[akr71]

I wouldn't let them stack the bonuses, but I might consider granting them advantage.

Yes, this is what I would do too. I would probably ask for a Medicine check, but if they gave a valid argument why it should be Investigation instead, I would let them go with it.

 

[seebs]

In one of our homebrew classes, intended to be roughly parallel to rogue for some purposes, we replaced Expertise with "if you have both tool and skill proficiencies applicable to a task, you can stack them".

 

[mrpopstar]

Say the party comes across a terribly mauled corpse. It would seem logical that a character skilled in both investigation AND medicine would be in a better position to determine what creature mauled the corpse and other details than a character skill in only one of the skills.

The outcome of an Intelligence (Investigation) check would reveal the most information. You would use it to discern from the appearance of the mauled corpse's wounds what kind of weapon dealt them, such as a sword or claw.

Party finds a magic relic. if you are skilled in both arcana and history, would you not have a better chance of knowing something about it than someone with a skill in just one?

An Intelligence (Arcana) check measures your ability to recall lore about the magic relic, eldritch symbols that might be on it, magical traditions that might involve it, the planes of existence it might come from, or the inhabitants of those planes that might have created it.

An Intelligence (History) check measures your ability to recall lore about historical events involving the magic relic, legendary people associated with it, ancient kingdoms in possession of it, past disputes, recent wars, and lost civilizations involved with it.

Each check measures your ability to recall different lore, and it's important that they remain separate.

But the rules state that "Your proficiency bonus can't be added to a single die roll or other number more than once."

I try to keep to the RAW, but I'm wondering if there is room to let characters with complementary skills benefit from that.

What I do, is when you have to two skills that can apply, I let you roll using both. Basically, it acts like advantage. Maybe your history skill wasn't helpful, but your arcana skill was.

I think that better reflects the value of overlapping expertise.

In truth, skills do not overlap, nor are they complementary in a grouped sense.

Generally I only allow this for knowledge-based skills. Your extra knowledge and study gives you extra rolls.

Combining bonuses actually gives you fewer rolls.

For activities that require both acrobatics and athletics, I treat it a bit differently. You are basically making multiple skill rolls for different things. For example, if you have to run along a railing an make a big jump to a balcony, you would roll independently for a dexterity (acrobatics) check to run along the railing and a strength (athletics) check to jump. Once isn't really helping the other. I find "athletics" to be rather silly as a "skill", but that's perhaps a topic for another thread.

You should treat knowledge skills the same.

 

[mrpopstar]

In your example, a character skilled in Investigation might find bits of hair and claw on the corpse, and maybe know from the position of the wounds that the monster jumped out at the victim. A character skilled in Medicine might know instead that the wounds targeted vital organs (a sign of intelligence?) and that the victim bled to death (meaning, the creature left the scene before finishing the victim off). A character skilled in both would get both pieces of information.

Deducing, discerning, or determining that the wounds targeted vital organs would be the purview of an Intelligence (Investigation) check.

Wisdom (Medicine) checks have a purely palliative function, and they represent effort in a world where healing is the byproduct of rest and magic. They do not measure knowledge of anatomy, forensics, or medical examination.

 

[Rune]

Each check measures your ability to recall different lore, and it's important that they remain separate.

Distinct, perhaps, but separate? Why is that so important?

In truth, skills do not overlap, nor are they complementary in a grouped sense.

Really? Because I can't think of a single thing that Dexterity (acrobatics) does that couldn't be better handled with Dexterity (athletics) or Strength (athletics). Or, usually, some combination.

Combining bonuses actually gives you fewer rolls.

This is not a thing that the OP was advocating.

You should treat knowledge skills the same.

Why? How is the OP's, or Jer's, or my game in any way improved by adhering to an artificial enforced symmetry of mechanics that doesn't do what we want it to?

 

[Satyrn]

For activities that require both acrobatics and athletics, I treat it a bit differently. You are basically making multiple skill rolls for different things. For example, if you have to run along a railing an make a big jump to a balcony, you would roll independently for a dexterity (acrobatics) check to run along the railing and a strength (athletics) check to jump. Once isn't really helping the other. I find "athletics" to be rather silly as a "skill", but that's perhaps a topic for another thread.

On behalf of your players, I respectfully ask you to please stop doing this.

You're just providing more opportunity to fail by making them roll multiple checks in order to succeed at one task. It's like the exact opposite of the psuedo advantage you're providing the knowledge tasks - whenever something looks like it's a combination of Athletics and Acrobatics you're forcing this pseudo-disadvantage. It would discourage me from ever bothering.

Please just choose one skill to apply - or even let your players choose, and let that choice inform the way the attempt is described.

 

[iserith]

On behalf of your players, I respectfully ask you to please stop doing this.

You're just providing more opportunity to fail by making them roll multiple checks in order to succeed at one task. It's like the exact opposite of the psuedo advantage you're providing the knowledge tasks - whenever something looks like it's a combination of Athletics and Acrobatics you're forcing this pseudo-disadvantage. It would discourage me from ever bothering.

Please just choose one skill to apply - or even let your players choose, and let that choice inform the way the attempt is described.

Right. More checks is more chances to look stupid.

 

[Rune]

Deducing, discerning, or determining that the wounds targeted vital organs would be the purview of an Intelligence (Investigation) check.

Wisdom (Medicine) checks have a purely palliative function, and they represent effort in a world where healing is the byproduct of rest and magic. They do not measure knowledge of anatomy, forensics, or medical examination.

And what about Intelligence (Medicine)? Could that not measure such knowledge? Or is it your contention that such specialized knowledge is either available to all investigators or entirely unattainable in 5e?

Even if the mechanics of 5e serve to define the setting, rather than describe it (which very much seems to me not to be the case), your implication that healing is only a byproduct of rest and magic is undermined by the existence of the healer's kit. And the fact that it doesn't require proficiency to use undermines your broader point that the medicine skill exists solely to apply such things.

 

[mrpopstar]

Distinct, perhaps, but separate? Why is that so important?

Distinction is the byproduct of separation.

Really? Because I can't think of a single thing that Dexterity (acrobatics) does that couldn't be better handled with Dexterity (athletics) or Strength (athletics). Or, usually, some combination.

Normally, your proficiency in a skill applies only to a specific kind of ability check. I don't assume that variant rules are in play, and I disagree that Acrobatics and Athletics model similar effort.

This is not a thing that the OP was advocating.

It's the outcome of his practice.

Why? How is the OP's, or Jer's, or my game in any way improved by adhering to an artificial enforced symmetry of mechanics that doesn't do what we want it to?

I'm merely presenting the rules.

And what about Intelligence (Medicine)? Could that not measure such knowledge? Or is it your contention that such specialized knowledge is either available to all investigators or entirely unattainable in 5e?

Calling for an Intelligence (Medicine) check is a variant approach, but it remains my contention that knowledge of anatomy, forensics, and medical examination are not the purview of the Medicine skill.

Even if the mechanics of 5e serve to define the setting, rather than describe it (which very much seems to me not to be the case), your implication that healing is only a byproduct of rest and magic is undermined by the existence of the healer's kit. And the fact that it doesn't require proficiency to use undermines your broader point that the medicine skill exists solely to apply such things.

On the contrary, the healer's kit and its application only further my claim that Wisdom (Medicine) has only a palliative function (i.e. non-curative). — Take a closer look at the healer's kit. It does not provide any healing, it merely assists with the stabilization of a dying creature.

In 5th Edition, healing is the byproduct of rest and magic.