OneDnD Should reliable talent be a feature that all characters get with proficiency/expertise?

Horwath

Hero
Rogues reliable talent gives ability to treat any skill/tool roll that you are proficient from 1-9 as a 10. So you cannot fail easy/medium tasks or even hard ones.

But, one reason why everyone is focusing on getting skill bonuses as high as possible is to negate the chance to fail at easy tasks.

What if when you gain proficiency in a skill/tool you treat all rolls of 1-4 as 5.
when you have expertise, you treat all rolls 1-7 as 8.
rogue with reliable talent will treat all rolls with proficiency 1-9 as 10, and
all rolls with expertise of 1-11 as 12.

with this change expertise can be lowered a little to 1 and 1/2 prof bonus(round up)
that is:
+3 at 1st level
+5 at 5th level
+6 at 9th level
+8 at 13th level
+9 at 17th level
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Absolutely not. If something is supposed to be that trivial, then you shouldn't be rolling in the first place. If you can fail the roll with a low roll, then it's not trivial. Reliable Talent is an amazing ability that's on par with 3 attacks per round; giving it away for free (even a weaker version of it) is a terrible idea.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Absolutely not.

It’s an iconic Rogue ability in 5e that is often basically the capstone ability of the class, since so many games end before 12th level. Absolutely only the rogue should have this, just like only the fighter should get additional extra attacks and only the Wizard should get signature spells.
 

For a game using bounded accuracy there should be more abilities/features/etc. that raise the floor of a roll without altering the ceiling. Things like Reliable Talent, Portent, and Elemental Adept do this already so its not like the system can't handle it as a mechanic. Reroll abilities like Elven Accuracy, Lucky, Great Weapon Fighting, Halfling Luck, and Savage Attacker also have the chance to increase the floor though it's not guaranteed. The granddaddy of them all is Advantage. It may not necessarily raise the floor but it increases the average without changing the maximum and anyone playing 5e knows how to use it. Unfortunately, due to the canceling/redundant nature of advantage you can only hang so much off of it.

While I wouldn't want to change the basic proficiency system I would like to see feats and items that can give you 'treat rolls of X-Y as Y+1' for some checks. Items like Belt of the Olympian (treat Athletics checks of 1-5 as 6), The Seeker's Incense (1/day you can breathe in this incense, treat Perception checks of 1-7 as 8 for the next hour), the Quick Reflexes (when you roll initiative you can use your reaction to make your d20 roll a 10 instead of rolling), or the Headsman's Axe (when you roll damage treat all rolls below your proficiency bonus as your proficiency bonus).
 

Something my current DM does a lot that I'm going to use next time I DM is making a lot of content auto-succeed or unlock simply based on proficiency. Trained in Arcane? You automatically get the lore. Trained in Survival? You automatically recognize that there are tracks at the scene. Trained in History? The name automatically rings a bell.

What he often does is ask what skill each person wants to use and then give us information based on what each person picks. Sometimes he just tells us the info and lets us know it's because someone is trained. I feel that in a lot of games, there's a huge or emphasis on rolling for everything when simply being proficient should be enough.
 

rules.mechanic

Craft homebrewer
I prefer dice pools to minimum rolls, so am currently testing out expertise as advantage instead of a further fixed bonus. We do allow advantage to stack though...
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
I prefer dice pools to minimum rolls, so am currently testing out expertise as advantage instead of a further fixed bonus. We do allow advantage to stack though...
Have you tried proficiency dice? Instead of adding a flat bonus, proficiency adds a die; starts at d4, increases in size at each level that PB usually goes up. Expertise lets you add a second die of the same type.
 

Pauln6

Adventurer
Rogues reliable talent gives ability to treat any skill/tool roll that you are proficient from 1-9 as a 10. So you cannot fail easy/medium tasks or even hard ones.

But, one reason why everyone is focusing on getting skill bonuses as high as possible is to negate the chance to fail at easy tasks.

What if when you gain proficiency in a skill/tool you treat all rolls of 1-4 as 5.
when you have expertise, you treat all rolls 1-7 as 8.
rogue with reliable talent will treat all rolls with proficiency 1-9 as 10, and
all rolls with expertise of 1-11 as 12.

with this change expertise can be lowered a little to 1 and 1/2 prof bonus(round up)
that is:
+3 at 1st level
+5 at 5th level
+6 at 9th level
+8 at 13th level
+9 at 17th level
I do think that expertise does let the ceiling elevate to silly levels and that this can lead to a feeling that if you don't have expertise, you might as well not bother rolling. I don't know if having a minimum roll of 5 plus half your proficiency bonus is the answer but I would be interested to see the number crunching.

I suppose normal expertise caps (assuming 20) at 19-37. This version caps at 19-34.

At lower levels though (assuming 16) it would be 9-27 vs 11-26. That doesn't seem like a massive difference but personally I think that bringing down that ceiling and giving more consistency at lower levels is appealing. Of course the numbers are lower if the skill is not in your primary stat.

I realise that some are saying you should not make players roll for low DCs but I'm not a DM that subscribes to rolls being pass or fail. I use degrees of success using a DC scale for each roll. Not always easy to do on the hoof but at least those without expertise don't feel completely useless.
 

Something my current DM does a lot that I'm going to use next time I DM is making a lot of content auto-succeed or unlock simply based on proficiency. Trained in Arcane? You automatically get the lore. Trained in Survival? You automatically recognize that there are tracks at the scene. Trained in History? The name automatically rings a bell.

What he often does is ask what skill each person wants to use and then give us information based on what each person picks. Sometimes he just tells us the info and lets us know it's because someone is trained. I feel that in a lot of games, there's a huge or emphasis on rolling for everything when simply being proficient should be enough.

That is kinda a variant rule in the DMG.

I think making 5 + prof bonus + ability modifier the flaw for every check would not be bad.

I also like the auto succeed rule of stat-5. That is very helpful foe characters with a 10, a 15 or a 20 in a certain stat. It does disregard the proficiency, but I like the fact that it makes stats count.

So someonw with a dump stat of 8 doesn't autosucceed on DC 5 challenges, they might wven fail if they are proficient, but someone with a natural aptitude, stat = 10 or more won't fail on teivial thing, even without proficiency.

So take a knowledge skill: someone with in 8 might be trained but still sometimes forgets what thwy learned. Someone with int 10 has picked up trivial thing and does not forget trivial things, because they mixed something up...

That seems plausible looking at real life.

Of course, when it comes to special knowledge, the one with proficiency will have a better chance to succeed, as is expected.

That also seems quite plausible.
 

rules.mechanic

Craft homebrewer
Have you tried proficiency dice? Instead of adding a flat bonus, proficiency adds a die; starts at d4, increases in size at each level that PB usually goes up. Expertise lets you add a second die of the same type.
Yeah, one of my groups really liked it and still uses it but other found it a bit annoying when there were other dice in the mix too (Bardic Inspiration, Guidance, etc). Proficiency dice are actually where we got the idea of expertise as advantage from - we played expertise as advantage on the proficiency die (the proficiency die section of the DMG was pretty brief and we were wary of the potential range that adding two proficiency dice might otherwise enable).
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
No -- it's a rouge ability, and there has to be some niche that it gets to keep.

Ironically, other classes keep stealing the rogue's stuff as it is!
 

Giving it only to Rogues was a truly idiotic decision.

Completely senseless. Taking away Take 20 and Take 10 were also boneheaded brainfails, frankly.

So at this point, as much as it may make some Rogue fans cope and seethe, I think more classes than just Eloquence Bard should have access to it. It's one of the best approaches for making D&D work better. Stamping your foot and saying "ROGUES ONLY!!!" is just intentionally perpetuating bad design imho.
 

Horwath

Hero
Giving it only to Rogues was a truly idiotic decision.

Completely senseless. Taking away Take 20 and Take 10 were also boneheaded brainfails, frankly.

So at this point, as much as it may make some Rogue fans cope and seethe, I think more classes than just Eloquence Bard should have access to it. It's one of the best approaches for making D&D work better. Stamping your foot and saying "ROGUES ONLY!!!" is just intentionally perpetuating bad design imho.
Agree, that is why I scaled it better for rogues. And rogues get more expertise in general.

Then again, if we replace d20 with 3d6 for skills only, we would not have to have this kind of fixes.
 

Agree, that is why I scaled it better for rogues. And rogues get more expertise in general.
Personally I've been considering, based on the fact that it's apparently fine for full casters to have fiat/always work-type abilities, giving Rogues a sort of "auto-succeed" ability like once per long rest (probably going up to 3 times by L20). I.e. "After you fail a skill check with a skill you have Expertise with, which you were capable of succeeding at, you can declare that you succeeded at it. This is treated as a normal success. You may use this ability once per long rest".

Obviously this would only work for DMs who understand that succeeding at Persuade on the king doesn't mean he automatically gives you his entire kingdom, but at this point I think that's like 90% of DMs (I also think this existing would help the remaining 10% to understand that a successful Persuade check is not mind control).
 

Horwath

Hero
Personally I've been considering, based on the fact that it's apparently fine for full casters to have fiat/always work-type abilities, giving Rogues a sort of "auto-succeed" ability like once per long rest (probably going up to 3 times by L20). I.e. "After you fail a skill check with a skill you have Expertise with, which you were capable of succeeding at, you can declare that you succeeded at it. This is treated as a normal success. You may use this ability once per long rest".

Obviously this would only work for DMs who understand that succeeding at Persuade on the king doesn't mean he automatically gives you his entire kingdom, but at this point I think that's like 90% of DMs (I also think this existing would help the remaining 10% to understand that a successful Persuade check is not mind control).
When you fail a skill check that you have Expertise in, you can treat the d20 roll as 15.
You can use this only if 15 on roll would be enough to succeed.
you can do this a number of times equal to your proficiency bonus.
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
Absolutely not. If something is supposed to be that trivial, then you shouldn't be rolling in the first place. If you can fail the roll with a low roll, then it's not trivial. Reliable Talent is an amazing ability that's on par with 3 attacks per round; giving it away for free (even a weaker version of it) is a terrible idea.
Yeah, I'm going with this one, keeping in mind that it's often crisis situations like combat that make rolls that shouldn't need to be taken (trivial) suddenly become non-trivial. And I'd be surprised if there were any class more reliant on their ability (skill) checks in combat/adverse situations than a rogue. Reliable Talent is basically a 5e version of the Skill Mastery rogue talent from 3e.
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
Taking away Take 20 and Take 10 were also boneheaded brainfails, frankly.
As much as I miss the ability to intentionally do so, the 5e DMing guidance to roll only when the check is consequential is supposed to take the place of Take 10. Any place where a PC could reliably Take 10 before is an appropriate situation for not rolling in the first place in 5e.
I do think some discussion of that would have been a useful sidebar in the DMG.
 


renbot

Explorer
This just might be the grey in my beard talking, but I never truly did away with "take 10" in 5e, although I don't call it that. I especially use this with Knowledge checks (I'm sorry, the Wizard simply HAS to have a higher Arcana check than the Barbarian, just like the Barbarian is better at swinging a greataxe) but my players have also learned that any proficiency can have a "passive score" and they are no longer confused when I say "what is your Passive Acrobatics?" as though that were a thing. As with the original "take 10," it never applies when under pressure or if the result has a significant negative/positive consequence, but unlike the original the PC never gets to say they are doing it, it is something that I grant them and I do so pretty sparingly.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top