Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Professions in 5e
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7996656" data-attributes="member: 6677017"><p>I only read the first half of the thread, but I've noticed multiple people claim that sometimes only those who are proficient in a skill are allowed to attempt certain ability checks.</p><p></p><p>Where are you getting this? I'm pretty sure it's not in the PHB, and it doesn't sound like a variant or discussion in the DMG that I recall.</p><p></p><p>That is, in fact, the standard rule for tool proficiencies (even if it doesn't always make sense), but I'm curious where this rule is coming from regarding skills.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I recommend thoroughly reading the DMG. It doesn't provide exactly what you're asking for, but it does provide some alternatives to the standard skill rules, and it provides a little bit of discussion about the ramifications of using them.</p><p></p><p>It's also worth noting that there has been some advice given more than once on here that is not part of the RAW. The DM has a lot of leeway in their immediate interpretation, but some people have interpreted more leeway into it than the books grant. Some of the additional leeway is found in the variant rules in the DMG as alternative ways to set up your campaign, not as options to use alongside the standard rules.</p><p></p><p>So, for instance, using the standard rules for skills but having the DM allow you to use your proficiency because it makes sense for your background isn't following the rules in either the PHB or the DMG. There is no provision for that in the RAW. Those are two different systems for handling proficiency bonus to ability checks out of about three or four (one in the PHB, the rest as alternatives in the DMG), of which you choose one.</p><p></p><p>I'm also not aware of any rule for granting Advantage as some sort of "super-proficiency", other than in Xanathar's Guide to Everything which suggests it as a reward for having both a tool proficiency and a skill that applies to the same task. It should be noted that Xanathar's Guide to Everything provides some alternate systems that are incompatible with the ones in the PHB or DMG, so you have to analyze the alternate rules in it and decide which you want to use and how that relates to the core rules--it isn't just plug and play with the core.</p><p></p><p>I bring all that up because I'm a stickly for accuracy, and because you're coming from editions where RAW is very important and needs to be understood to play. I want to make sure you know what RAW (or at least where to find it) in 5e so you can interpret everything.</p><p></p><p>All that being said, most of those suggestions are pretty good. For what you're looking for, I think your own suggestion I quoted is possibly your best option. It makes one simple change that allows you to add back in everything you want.</p><p></p><p>One thing that is important to remember is that skills and weapon/armor proficiencies are worth more than tools/languages. The former are harder to get and are based on character advancement--you can't get them with downtime. Tools and languages are more limited and can be acquired through downtime outside of the character advancement system. You might consider using that as a standard for this sort of thing. Ask yourself, "is this something that I want to be able to be acquired outside of class advancement?" and if so, it might build into the tool/language mechanic space. Just make sure it compares properly to the stuff that is normally gated that way.</p><p></p><p>Background Features are interesting because they provide an automatic success or benefit at something--and it must be something that isn't combat relevant. They don't grant you proficiency, they don't allow you to make rolls you couldn't, and they don't grant you Advantage. They just say this thing is <em>true</em> regarding your character. You have retainers. You can find food for a few people. Commoners will help you if it isn't problematic for them to do so.</p><p></p><p>That is cool from one perspective (I'm a fan of auto-powers like that), but it can be problematic from a rules perspective because sometimes the DM has to decide if something qualifies for automatic success. I can automatically find food for (I think it's 6, but I can't recall) people; what happens if I try to find food for 7 of us? I'm asking the commoners for help with something, and the DM is iffy on whether it's putting them at risk. What happens then? Well, the DM has to decide. You might reasonably say that in those cases you get a roll with Advantage. That works okay with the commoners, but not as well with the food (since you could get none). Or you might say you get the 6 people worth of food free and then roll to see if you get extra. The DM might determine what the maximum level of help you get from the commoners is, and then you can make a Charisma check to see if you can get it any higher. Those are probably better ways than just letting your roll with Advantage because they preserve the automatic benefit element of the background.</p><p></p><p>As far as just a random suggestion of something that I do in my group that might not fit as well but is relevant for the topic, I allow characters to learn a new Background Feature with downtime the same as they would learn a tool/language. It seems to fit better in that build space than the skill/weapon/armor space, and it's reasonable that you might pick this stuff up (in fact, if someone becomes a noble they should pick up that feature where people treat you differently, even if it takes some downtime to practice presenting themselves properly).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sword of Spirit, post: 7996656, member: 6677017"] I only read the first half of the thread, but I've noticed multiple people claim that sometimes only those who are proficient in a skill are allowed to attempt certain ability checks. Where are you getting this? I'm pretty sure it's not in the PHB, and it doesn't sound like a variant or discussion in the DMG that I recall. That is, in fact, the standard rule for tool proficiencies (even if it doesn't always make sense), but I'm curious where this rule is coming from regarding skills. I recommend thoroughly reading the DMG. It doesn't provide exactly what you're asking for, but it does provide some alternatives to the standard skill rules, and it provides a little bit of discussion about the ramifications of using them. It's also worth noting that there has been some advice given more than once on here that is not part of the RAW. The DM has a lot of leeway in their immediate interpretation, but some people have interpreted more leeway into it than the books grant. Some of the additional leeway is found in the variant rules in the DMG as alternative ways to set up your campaign, not as options to use alongside the standard rules. So, for instance, using the standard rules for skills but having the DM allow you to use your proficiency because it makes sense for your background isn't following the rules in either the PHB or the DMG. There is no provision for that in the RAW. Those are two different systems for handling proficiency bonus to ability checks out of about three or four (one in the PHB, the rest as alternatives in the DMG), of which you choose one. I'm also not aware of any rule for granting Advantage as some sort of "super-proficiency", other than in Xanathar's Guide to Everything which suggests it as a reward for having both a tool proficiency and a skill that applies to the same task. It should be noted that Xanathar's Guide to Everything provides some alternate systems that are incompatible with the ones in the PHB or DMG, so you have to analyze the alternate rules in it and decide which you want to use and how that relates to the core rules--it isn't just plug and play with the core. I bring all that up because I'm a stickly for accuracy, and because you're coming from editions where RAW is very important and needs to be understood to play. I want to make sure you know what RAW (or at least where to find it) in 5e so you can interpret everything. All that being said, most of those suggestions are pretty good. For what you're looking for, I think your own suggestion I quoted is possibly your best option. It makes one simple change that allows you to add back in everything you want. One thing that is important to remember is that skills and weapon/armor proficiencies are worth more than tools/languages. The former are harder to get and are based on character advancement--you can't get them with downtime. Tools and languages are more limited and can be acquired through downtime outside of the character advancement system. You might consider using that as a standard for this sort of thing. Ask yourself, "is this something that I want to be able to be acquired outside of class advancement?" and if so, it might build into the tool/language mechanic space. Just make sure it compares properly to the stuff that is normally gated that way. Background Features are interesting because they provide an automatic success or benefit at something--and it must be something that isn't combat relevant. They don't grant you proficiency, they don't allow you to make rolls you couldn't, and they don't grant you Advantage. They just say this thing is [I]true[/I] regarding your character. You have retainers. You can find food for a few people. Commoners will help you if it isn't problematic for them to do so. That is cool from one perspective (I'm a fan of auto-powers like that), but it can be problematic from a rules perspective because sometimes the DM has to decide if something qualifies for automatic success. I can automatically find food for (I think it's 6, but I can't recall) people; what happens if I try to find food for 7 of us? I'm asking the commoners for help with something, and the DM is iffy on whether it's putting them at risk. What happens then? Well, the DM has to decide. You might reasonably say that in those cases you get a roll with Advantage. That works okay with the commoners, but not as well with the food (since you could get none). Or you might say you get the 6 people worth of food free and then roll to see if you get extra. The DM might determine what the maximum level of help you get from the commoners is, and then you can make a Charisma check to see if you can get it any higher. Those are probably better ways than just letting your roll with Advantage because they preserve the automatic benefit element of the background. As far as just a random suggestion of something that I do in my group that might not fit as well but is relevant for the topic, I allow characters to learn a new Background Feature with downtime the same as they would learn a tool/language. It seems to fit better in that build space than the skill/weapon/armor space, and it's reasonable that you might pick this stuff up (in fact, if someone becomes a noble they should pick up that feature where people treat you differently, even if it takes some downtime to practice presenting themselves properly). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Professions in 5e
Top