D&D 5E Skills and Saving Throws

[Falling Icicle]

In DnD Next, saving throws are ability checks. Skills grant bonuses to ability checks, but it isn't clear whether or not they can apply to saving throws. For example, should a character with the Balance skill be able to apply its bonus to the Dexterity saving throw to avoid slipping from a Grease spell?

What do you think?

 

[Li Shenron]

This is actually a very good point...

We (the gamers, but probably the designers themselves) are all so used to the fact that skills checks and saving throws have been two separate things in past editions, that we fail to notice that newcomers to the game may naturally see skill bonuses applicable to saving throws.

Generally speaking, I am not at all against this case. The only issue to watch for is players abuse, trying to get a bonus to all saving throws on the ground that "but I have Knowledge(Arcana), I should apply this against ALL spells because I know well how they work" and similar tricks.

But if the DM can keep it under control, and make it more situational I think it would be a nice idea (after all it happened before... 3.5 update the Grease spell so that some Reflex saves were replaced with Balance checks).

 

[GX.Sigma]

The rules are kind of unclear as to the difference, and it's foggy to begin with--what's a Wisdom save to disbelieve, and what's a Spot check to disbelieve? etc.

 

[Unwise]

Fourth edition has a precedence for this in a way. When you are entagled or grabbed by something, it calls for an Athletics or Acrobatics check to get out. Not a Str or Dex check. It would seem consistent enough with 4e to allow a skill check to get out of a web spell for instance.

One possible outcome of this is that some combat power-gamers might start choosing skills like balance, escape artist, resist interrogation, endurance, etc for their in-combat applications.

I'm not quiet sure how I feel about that, it could lead to some skills like endurance having a much greater application, as you could imagine it helping for almost every Con based save.

 

[Viking Bastard]

My take: Checks that PCs initiate are Skill Checks, while checks that are called for in reaction to something are Saves.

 

[Li Shenron]

My take: Checks that PCs initiate are Skill Checks, while checks that are called for in reaction to something are Saves.

Yes, I think this is also in the DM's guidelines of 5e playtest, but IMHO it's not the issue. The issue is whether we should allow skill bonuses (from background, race, scheme etc) to apply to saving throws, on the ground that in the latest packet "skills" are not rigidly defined checks but rather bonuses that you can apply on a variety of checks.

 

[Viking Bastard]

Yes, I think this is also in the DM's guidelines of 5e playtest, but IMHO it's not the issue. The issue is whether we should allow skill bonuses (from background, race, scheme etc) to apply to saving throws, on the ground that in the latest packet "skills" are not rigidly defined checks but rather bonuses that you can apply on a variety of checks.

Yes, but it is the first step towards answering the question. Once you've clarified this (as per [MENTION=6690511]GX.Sigma[/MENTION]'s wonderings) you have a clear differentation between the two: If the attempt at disbelief is iniated by the PC, it's a Skill Check and if it's called for by the DM as a response to some effect, then it's a Save.

Now, my vote is for No. Skills don't give plusses to Saves, as they aren't iniated by the PC.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Yes, but it is the first step towards answering the question. Once you've clarified this (as per @GX.Sigma 's wonderings) you have a clear differentation between the two: If the attempt at disbelief is iniated by the PC, it's a Skill Check and if it's called for by the DM as a response to some effect, then it's a Save.

Now, my vote is for No. Skills don't give plusses to Saves, as they aren't iniated by the PC.

The flaw in your logic is that actions initiated by a character are ability checks, not skill checks. And saves are now ability saves. While the difference between the two is a matter of action or reaction, they are otherwise the same thing. I say skills apply.

 

[hamstertamer]

I already thought this was good idea for skill ranks to be added to Saves

Tumble/acrobatics towards Evasion type saves
Concentration towards mind-effecting saves

 

[Li Shenron]

Yes, but it is the first step towards answering the question. Once you've clarified this (as per [MENTION=6690511]GX.Sigma[/MENTION]'s wonderings) you have a clear differentation between the two: If the attempt at disbelief is iniated by the PC, it's a Skill Check and if it's called for by the DM as a response to some effect, then it's a Save.

Now, my vote is for No. Skills don't give plusses to Saves, as they aren't iniated by the PC.

I understand how you're thinking about it, but IMHO it is a little dangerous to rely on the model (i.e. the artifact difference between a check and a saving throw) and the reality represented by such model. Because sometimes the model fall short...

For example, you cite "disbelief". I think that's an example of ambiguity of the model: how exactly do you "initiate" disbelieving? Is there really a difference between "active disbelieving" and "reactive disbelieving"? In the model yes, in reality not really.

Out-of-character (around the table) the difference may be real in the sense that maybe the DM asks you to roll so you can say that the player did not initiate, while another time the DM tells you nothing and the player asks "can I make a check to see if this is an illusion?". That means that whether it's a check or saving throw may depend on the DM even accidentally remembering or forgetting to call for a roll... In-character the two are the same thing.

Another problem, take a Listen check when there is a noise that can be heard (opposed to when choosing to listen to a door "in case there is something to hear" which is definitely "active"): this is a "passive" check or "reactive" check, it's definitely the DM who calls out for a check here since the players could have no idea. Should it still be a skill check then, or should it be a saving throw because it's reactive?

I just want to point out that the model has its own shortcomings.

My preference is to use the model only when it solidly matches with in-character reality, and otherwise just use common sense.

If you're worried about player's abuse, then I agree with you, and strictly enforcing the model has a benefit there. But there aren't that many skills IMO that can be used against many spells, so I don't think this can be easily abused, especially with the current "narrowness" of skills.

A "Sense Motive" bonus could be used in a saving throw vs a spell which lets the caster easily tell lies, but in fact such spells in the past usually granted Bluff bonues vs Sense Motive; but certainly "Sense Motive" shouldn't be allowed as a bonus to all illusion spells!

I think all this would be a better match with the current philosophy behind skills, which makes them loosely defined and detatched from specific ability checks. (But should they revert to a more strict model of skills, then I may change my mind and agree with you).