D&D 5E Number of skill proficiencies and niche protection

[MechaPilot]

You're over-analyzing. Especially because my point still stands. Even though, yes, any class can get it through backgrounds, it sill costs them something, even if that something is as small as a tool proficiency. Rogue's get it for absolutely free.

Rogues don't get it for free either. Everything costs, even if it's not readily apparent. Rogues have it at the expense of proficiency in another tool or language, just the same cost other classes would pay through backgrounds to get it.

 

[Proxxy55]

Rogues don't get it for free either. Everything costs, even if it's not readily apparent. Rogues have it at the expense of proficiency in another tool or language, just the same cost other classes would pay through backgrounds to get it.

That's arguable. I mean, they already have more skills than any other class. They are not visibly giving up any other feature to get it. That's a better way to put it. Yes, it does take up some of their power budget, but that's getting into an entirely different discussion. The point still stands that rogue's have a lot of useful skills, and can get expertise in them.

 

[MechaPilot]

That's arguable. I mean, they already have more skills than any other class. They are not visibly giving up any other feature to get it. That's a better way to put it. Yes, it does take up some of their power budget, but that's getting into an entirely different discussion. The point still stands that rogue's have a lot of useful skills, and can get expertise in them.

Yeah, like I said, being highly skilled is definitely part of the rogue's schtick. However, backstab/sneak attack sits at the very heart of how the rogue performs one of the central pillars of the game: combat. To say that sneak attack damage is not an inherent part of the rogue's identity simply because "it's the fighter's job to deal damage" is like saying fireball isn't part of the wizard's identity because it's just a damage dealing spell.

 

[ad_hoc]

I know any character can get proficiency with Thieves' Tools. I never said anything to the contrary. Actually read my post. I said no one can get it as easily, which is true. Rogue's get it, for free, as part of their class. For another class to get it, they have to take one of, if I read correctly, two different background.

I did read your post, you said that non-rogues can't get thieves' tool proficiency easily. I disagree and provided a reason.

Every background provides 2 tool proficiencies and/or languages.

You can mix and match to your desire.

Every character can easily get thieves' tools. You are wrong.

This is important to understand because it goes to the core design of 5e and why the premise of this thread is wrong. 5e is designed specifically to allow any character easy access any skill or tool proficiency.

 

[cbwjm]

The premise of this thread is number of skills not which skills are available.

Sent from my SM-G925I using EN World mobile app

 

[ad_hoc]

The premise of this thread is number of skills not which skills are available.

The premise of the thread is skill availability and class identity protection. Number of skills speaks to that but so does choice.

The base skills you get are:

2 for class, 2 for background = 4

Then you get up to 2 more for race and up to 4 more for class for up to 10 skills plus various tool proficiencies and languages.

Without multiclassing you have between 4-10 skills.

4 races in the PHB provide skills.
5 classes in the PHB provide more than 2 skills.

That is 5/12 classes in the PHB. Adding to that list won't invalidate any niche because there wasn't one to begin with.

 

[77IM]

I agree, two extra skills is excessive. One extra skill would be enough, especially from such a limited list.

I also think they were stingy with skills in the PHB, though. Monk should have definitely gotten 3, and I think certain subclasses should have gotten bonus skills too. I think wizard should have gotten Arcana for free, and druids gotten Nature for free, and bards gotten Performance for free; those are relatively weak skills that contribute more to class identity than they do to game-play utility.

I actually think Expertise should be more readily available to non-rogues and non-bards. Expertise breaks bounded accuracy pretty badly, especially if only a few characters get it. If we're going to increase the "bound" by 30% (+6) we might as well do it for everybody. In my ideal world, feats like Athlete would give Expertise on Athletics, etc.

 

[Horwath]

So I'm looking at the UA article for fighter, and seeing the same problem I saw in the other UA articles that had fighter subclasses.

They give them 2 additional skill proficiencies, which gives them as many as a rogue, and *more* than a ranger.

This really ticks me off because it is entirely throwing off the relationship between the classes in that area. It would be like giving rogues d12 for HD.

Note: The problem I have is not the number of skill proficiencies they are giving fighter, but the number these proposed subclasses are giving it *relative* to the number that other classes who are supposed to have more have. If you give it to fighter, you need to give extra proficiencies to rogues and rangers somehow--which won't happen because it would be retroactively altering the PHB.

those are subclasses that are focused on being skilled.

If you feel that rogue is threatened by it, you can always make rogue subclass that is focused on gaining more skills:

I.E.

at 3rd level you gain 4 skill proficiencies,

at 9th level you gain 2 expertise in skills,

at 13th level you gain 2 more expertise,

at 17th level your reliable talent goes from 10 to minimum 15 on the roll.

 

[CapnZapp]

I see the OP's issue.

If you view "skills" as an equally important area as "combat", the d12 hit dice comparison isn't that far-fetched.

The problem is something else: 5th edition just doesn't protect skills as a niche. You simply don't need a dedicated skill monkey - the number of truly essential skills is low enough that the party can cover them regardless of which classes the heroes have.

So I feel protesting against this fighter UA is kind of misplaced. If you want skills as a niche to be protected, you need to start somewhere else: you need to restrict the rule where you can pick any skill if you gain the same skill from your class and your background, and perhaps even make people gain only one, not two, background skills.