D&D (2024) How would you change skills in 5.5e

[Minigiant]

How? How would any of it break? 'instead of using Cha for Intimidation, you can use Str' just replaces all references to Cha with Str. NOTHING HAS CHANGED besides there being more room for character concepts to actually do stuff you'd expect them to be able to do.

You've nerfed or buffed supposed skill classes depending on DM adjudication.

If a PC can simple swap Strength to Intimidation, what's to stop a cleric from using Wisdom for EVERY skill check by praying first.

"I pray for guidance and recall a holy story related to this situation) ".

Or a wizard or any intelligence class adding bits of academia into everything to roll Intelligence.

It works as a one off. It doesn't upscale. That's why it is done or suggest as a class feature (Holy order, Primal Knowledge) to limit use.

And STR based Intimidation is cited so often as the only example that it proves my point that there just should 4-7 more skills to handle these situations. Perception and Investigation are separate skills. It isn't Perception (INT or WIS or CON) for a reason.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

You've nerfed or buffed supposed skill classes depending on DM adjudication.

Now you're acting like DnD skill system is a finely tuned engine with careful balance considerations.

If a PC can simple swap Strength to Intimidation, what's to stop a cleric from using Wisdom for EVERY skill check by praying first.

Ah, so we can only do all-or-nothing extremes. If a GM, one time, allows a player to use Survival OR Nature to determine where a plant might be coming from, then they must also allow anyone to use Athletics to do the same. I see, I see.

Perception and Investigation are separate skills.

And we've seen just how often Investigation gets called for, and official adventures are no better about it. Splitting skills up can serve a purpose, but it can also lead you to Use Rope as a skill. Condensing skills (like we no longer have Climb/Jump/Swim as separate skills) or eliminating skills (Perception would be a prime contender for this) can also serve a purpose.

 

[Minigiant]

Now you're acting like DnD skill system is a finely tuned engine with careful balance considerations.

I'm not. The 5e D&D skill system is weak, unsupported, a held up with matchsticks.

It only works in no serious play and it you fiddle with it to make real use of it, it falls apart.

Ah, so we can only do all-or-nothing extremes. If a GM, one time, allows a player to use Survival OR Nature to determine where a plant might be coming from, then they must also allow anyone to use Athletics to do the same. I see, I see

My point is that it only works if done rarely.

"Doing it once is fine. Doing it a lot requires a new rewrite" is the backbone of GMing and Houserules.

 

[fuindordm]

I think the current skill list is the right size to make assigning skill proficiencies an interesting choice in character creation, and to provide PCs with different hooks for interacting with the world.

There is ample rationale for reducing or consolidating skills, or leaning into their polyvalence vis-a-vis attributes in order to simplify the rules. However, if a new edition or house rule starts going down this road I would prefer to eliminate skills altogether and reduce them to attribute rolls, similar to how Castles and Crusades resolved this issue.

 

[Pauln6]

Definitely. Right now it's...

Player: 'I'm going to search for secret doors'
GM: 'Alright, roll Investigation'
Player: 'Oh, uh, I'm not a Wizard so I have no reason to have Int. What if I just step into the room and randomly glance around?'
GM: 'Finally! Then you can roll Perception as intended!'

This is down to a lack of guidance in the DMG. 3E would assign different DCs to different skills. Spotting a secret door with perception should be +10 DC unless you are an elf. It's a secret. But even if you find it, it still takes investigation to work out how to open it unless the player can figure it out.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

This is down to a lack of guidance in the DMG.

If it's in the DMG, it might as well not exist.

 

[Emberashh]

If it's in the DMG, it might as well not exist.

Memes say DMG bad so never read it ever.

 

[Minigiant]

I think the current skill list is the right size to make assigning skill proficiencies an interesting choice in character creation, and to provide PCs with different hooks for interacting with the world.

There is ample rationale for reducing or consolidating skills, or leaning into their polyvalence vis-a-vis attributes in order to simplify the rules. However, if a new edition or house rule starts going down this road I would prefer to eliminate skills altogether and reduce them to attribute rolls, similar to how Castles and Crusades resolved this issue.

The current skill list is great for light hearted beer and pretzels dungeon play.

Once you go deeper it shows cracks.

 

[Minigiant]

Memes say DMG bad so never read it ever.

Perkins more or less admitted that the DMG was rushed unpatched content because most of the time was spent on the PHB.

Even if people read the DMG, most of it was bad unbalanced or unfinished content.

 

[delericho]

If it's in the DMG, it might as well not exist.

I mostly agree, except for one detail: if something should be in the DMG but isn't, that's a failure of the DMG. If something is in the DMG but goes unnoticed because I haven't bothered read it, that's on me.