D&D 5E L&L Sept 16th . The Latest on Skills

I like Empathy.
I think it depends how you view the purpose of the skill. The "obvious" use is simply to sense things in the intentions or worries of sentient creatures, but in 4E I have found that it makes sense to me to split it more like this:

- Perception = detecting things by their physical presence, whether by sight, sound, touch, taste or smell. This does include "searching" in most senses of the word.

- Insight = detecting things through inference, context and situation. This includes sensing the emotional state of creatures, but it also extends to things like illusions (which was called out in the 4E rules) and might well cover "streetwise" stuff, too, for sensing relationships and such like. It works on stuff that is obvious - or at least not hidden - but has non-obvious implications.

This fits well with the MBTI pairing of "Sensing" and "Intuitive" - maybe "Intuition" would be a good name?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


It is to prevent superskills.

I was only commenting on the name, superskills must be avoided at all costs, or the list gets too short and the result is being too close to just using the 6 abilities, which makes skills distinction pointless.

I know I suggested to lump Search into Perception, but actually what should be done instead is expand Search into Investigation and add more uses (e.g. not only searching for hidden objects but perhaps searching for immaterial clues, and why not searching for people in a city and information in a library?).

We should avoid the temptation of merging skills just because we want our PC to be more powerful. As you say, if we take a look at the list and assume a PC can pick 3 skills, there are clearly some dominant ones like Athletics and Acrobatics which will be taken by pretty much every martial character:


Acrobatics (Dex)
Animal Handling (Wis)
Arcana (Int)
Athletics (Str)
Deception (Cha)
History (Int)
Intimidation (Cha)
Medicine (Int)
Nature (Int)
Perception (Wis)
Performance (Cha)
Persuasion (Cha)
Religion (Int)
Search (Int)
Sense Motive (Wis)
Sleight of Hand (Dex)
Stealth (Dex)
Survival (Wis)

They are still quite few. We need more Str-based skills at least, but which ones? Break an object really didn't make any sense to me.

OTOH there is a good way out... it all depends on whether skills and proficiencies (and possibly also languages) are in the same "pool". If they are, then we're good to go with this list, because you could choose a proficiency or a language in place of a skill so the real list is much longer.

However I'd really like to see some Alchemy and Herbalism back into the game. They don't have to be skills strictly, they can be proficiencies, but I'd like them into the same pool.

Another good addition would be Appraise (tho it needs to be expanded because the 3e version really is too narrow), although it was practically there as Trade Lore, even tho that requires a specific subfield. Actually, professions (or trade lores, whatever they are called) should be there somewhere. I think they are a both a great tool for character building, and a good example of a skill that uses different abilities depending on the check, e.g. a master Trapsmith would make Int checks when designing new traps, Dex checks when crafting them, Wis checks when studying an existing trap or assessing the value, Cha checks when dealing with suppliers and customers...

Also we need a skill or proficiency in Devices, currently we have Thieves' Tools proficiency for traps and locks, but how about tinkerers and mechanics? This could however be absent in the core game and added later for specific campaign settings.

Finally a word about Riding: I am not sure this is better as a proficiency, perhaps it should be back as a skill, or it should be both at the same time. Checks are still needed in difficult situations, such as when trying to cross a river while on a horse, pursuing a target, not get stuck in a swamp, control a frightened horse etc, so this suggests it would be fine as a skill. OTOH it's also good to set some requirements for special mounts. I am not sure if it's better to assume everyone can ride a regular horse or only those proficient, but otherwise better mounts (warhorses, monstrous mounts, and of course flying mounts) are probably better restricted to proficient characters only (unless the mount is intelligent to drive by itself).
 

I like the sound of the proficiency system, it means there are still some tasks that require training, without necessarily requiring a particular skill. I hope they extend it to implements and magic items - you can become proficient with scrolls to be able to use them rather than the old use magic device skill.

I'm not sure about experts. It seems out of place with the rest of the system: if you're an expert, you gain a bonus that's greater than the bonus accrued over 20 levels. The rest of the system is entirely based around adventuring experience, so doubling the bonus from having a skill fits better I think. Even better if it doesn't increase your check at all, but means you can't roll less than 10. I don't know, it depends how easy it is to acquire skills and expertise.
 

I like the sound of the proficiency system, it means there are still some tasks that require training, without necessarily requiring a particular skill. I hope they extend it to implements and magic items - you can become proficient with scrolls to be able to use them rather than the old use magic device skill.

I'm not sure about experts. It seems out of place with the rest of the system: if you're an expert, you gain a bonus that's greater than the bonus accrued over 20 levels. The rest of the system is entirely based around adventuring experience, so doubling the bonus from having a skill fits better I think. Even better if it doesn't increase your check at all, but means you can't roll less than 10. I don't know, it depends how easy it is to acquire skills and expertise.

The expert bonus is a hack to get rogues, rangers, and bards to not fail their expertise.

Otherwise you'll have rangers and their low Wisdom (due to the array) failing checks to track because their skill bonus is +2 and the DC is 15. Or a Dex 16 level 1 rogue rolls a 9 and every is burned by a fire trap. Then everyone says you suck as a ranger/rogue/bard and tells you to go home.
 

The expert bonus is a hack to get rogues, rangers, and bards to not fail their expertise.

Otherwise you'll have rangers and their low Wisdom (due to the array) failing checks to track because their skill bonus is +2 and the DC is 15. Or a Dex 16 level 1 rogue rolls a 9 and every is burned by a fire trap. Then everyone says you suck as a ranger/rogue/bard and tells you to go home.

Right, but that's a hack, surely it would be better to let you take 10 if you roll badly?
 

Right, but that's a hack, surely it would be better to let you take 10 if you roll badly?

The problem with that is with Ability mod and Level bonus, it make many checks autosucceed.
Which isn't too bad if the PC only gets it to one skill. Rogue/Search, Ranger/Survival, and Bard/Persuasion.
But I don't know if WOTC wants to allow the expert bonus as a feat.
If expert can be a feat, +5 is better than take 10 or "treat 9 or lower as a 10."


Where is Gather Rumors?
 

Really, what it comes down to is that your class/race/background gives you a bunch of proficiencies. If you are proficient in something, you get a scaling bonus (+2-+6) to that check. If you're not, you just use your raw talent (attribute modifier).

You can become proficient in weapons (which grant a bonus to attack rolls), tools (healer kits, thief tools) and skills (stealth, athletics, perception).

I immediately thought this philosophy should be expanded to armors.
 

is there a need for search? A basic INT roll should suffice on its own, I'd have thought, when working at this level of granularity.
That makes wizards, not rogues, the best trapfinders.
Trapfinding should be a task of perception anyway. Search is a bad name for a skill that's not about noticing hidden stuff as it is about being able to analyze what you already see. Should be renamed to analysis and broadened to also apply to things like library research, puzzle solving etc.
 


Remove ads

Top