D&D 5E How can you add more depth and complexity to skill checks?

[iserith]

Ah, so it seems that in 4E, ability checks are seen as the exception rather than the rule. Does that about capture it?

Follow up question: In 3E, is it possible to make a non-proficient skill check?

I would say ability checks are the exception D&D 4e. It was true in my experience and the Rules Compendium actually says that DMs can differ on whether a Strength check or an Athletics check is appropriate (for example). I think it's probably safe to say most DMs would call for Athletics.

Despite playing D&D 3.Xe for 8 years, I do not recall very much about the rules so I can't answer your second question.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Offer more choice in build and action in regards to the ability check side of gameplay.

That's just a way to rephrase "I want more complex checks."

This is like asking, "What would a more complex spaghetti and meatballs recipe look like?" Well, what problem are you trying to solve? Saying, "Well I want it to have more flavors," doesn't explain anything. You've got to be able to explain what's wrong and why you think your recipe needs improvement.

The question is: What gameplay problem are you trying to solve by changing the game? What is your design goal? How can you tell if your change is better if you don't know why you'd make the change? You can't really begin to make game design choices about potential solutions until you have stated the problem that you're trying to fix as clearly as you can.

For example, let's say you change every skill check to require a die roll and looking up the result on a table. No matter how simple the check, you have to make a die roll and reference a table. That's more complex. Can we stop designing there? Does that solve the problem? How do we know? Do we need to make skill checks like rolling for treasure hoards? Rolling twelve times on six different tables? Do we need to have a 300 page book just about skills and skill checks? Is that too complex? How do we know?

A little board because I don't want to narrow in on an answer before I get the question, but DnD doesn't have a lot of mechanical hooks if you want to invest in skills.

Yeah, but you've already decided on the solution: make skill checks more complex. What we don't understand is why that's your solution. We want to know not just how you arrived as "increase complexity" as your solution, but what prompted you to improve the game in the first place.

What do you mean by "mechanical hook"? What does the game currently do? What does the game fail to do that you think it should do?

It feels like you're asking people to brainstorm designs that are more complex and then you'll evaluate them to see if you like them better. That's like making a better spaghetti and meatballs by asking everyone else to make a new recipe and then tasting every single one and then picking one.

 

[Oofta]

When I use skill challenges, I will frequently take a step back from the rules. Ask the players how they think they can help solve an issue and then let them declare a check or I ask for one.

A lot of times it will be a combination of straight ability checks along with skill checks. Let's say the building they're in is on fire and there's a burning section they can get through or around. The floor is buckling because of the heat, but there is a gap.

So if the goal is to get from point A to point B while avoiding as much damage as possible. I don't care if they swing from the chandelier, try to leap across the gap or just grit their teeth and do it the painful way by charging through the heat using their shield to protect themselves. First might be an acrobatics, an athletics, last a straight up con ability check.

Maybe they come up with something I didn't think of and try to analyze the situation to come up with some ingenious solution so an investigation check or look for an alternate route.

One thing I do though is have a list of what people are good at, so if they're stuck I can give them hints on options. I also try to be flexible, improvised actions are part of the fun and I want to reward it. A particularly clever approach will frequently be made with advantage.

Last but not least, degree of success also matters. Get high enough above the DC and you take no damage. Get low enough and you're in trouble which may mean taking damage and getting stuck. Make more checks or maybe somebody helps you out of a sticky situations.

 

[Oofta]

Not in 5E.

I don't know where you're getting that. You can do an ability check or an ability check with the addition of a skill bonus. "Sometimes, the DM might ask for an ability check using a specific skill ... Without proficiency in the skill, the individual makes a normal ability check."

You do not automatically get a proficiency bonus, it only applies if the skill applies.

 

[Hriston]

I don't know where you're getting that. You can do an ability check or an ability check with the addition of a skill bonus. "Sometimes, the DM might ask for an ability check using a specific skill ... Without proficiency in the skill, the individual makes a normal ability check."

You do not automatically get a proficiency bonus, it only applies if the skill applies.

They’re all ability checks. You said “ability check” means no proficiency bonus.

 

[Oofta]

They’re all ability checks. You said “ability check” means no proficiency bonus.

According to chapter 7 in the PHB you can have an ability check, or an ability check with the addition of a skill check proficiency modifier. The latter is a mouthful so I say skill check.

I'm done arguing semantics, have a good one.

 

[nomotog]

Yeah, but the thread title uses the word check, so it’s a bit misleading, but I can see that maybe the OP just wants a more detailed/complex skill system. I’m not sure.

That is actually not out of the question. I think the actual check mechanic of rolling vs a dc might be limiting by itself. Like you can stack daily powers on daily powers, but if everything ends up as a single ability roll then that can act as a bottle neck of depth.

 

[ART!]

Would a longer list of skills help?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

One mechanical thing you can do for ongoing tasks (presumably with some sort of time limitation or there is not much point) is to combine degrees of success and number of successes required. Example: Fallen rocks block a passage and the characters have to clear it before the really dangerous enemies that are pursuing catch them. So lets say this is athletics, with DC 10 and it requires six successes to clear all the rocks. However, every full five points past the DC counts as an extra success. So if the barbarian rolls 23 they grab a big armful of rocks (beating 10, 15, and 20, three successes) whereas if the wizard rolls only 14 they manage still to move couple of rocks (beating 10, one success) and so forth. And of course if someone decides to squeeze though before all the rocks are cleared, the still needed successes for the completion of the task might tell you something about how much they have already cleared and thus what the DC for the test needed for squeezing through might be.

 

[Tonguez]

do you want skill challenges? break a given challenge into multiple tasks all of which need to be resolved successfully to overcome it, each failed task should also get a consequence which provides another challenge or uses character resources