Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Xeviat" data-source="post: 6970264" data-attributes="member: 57494">How we have come full circle. Hi everybody. I find the skill system to be too simple in 5E. A few players in my group don't like that they feel like they can't improve their skills beyond leveling or multiclassing to get Expertise. Also, I've noticed that some skills seem far more useful than other skills. So I wanted to come in and spitball an idea.Goal: to add some complexity and options to the current skill system. This would be done to balance the skill choices against each other, while providing a way to improve upon skills for exploration and interaction without substantially hampering combat.Idea: The idea comes in two parts. The first part is to identify any "offender" skills, skills which are chosen far more than other skills (I'm looking at Athletics, Perception, and Stealth initially). Along with this, classes will be given more proficient skills to compensate. The thought here isn't to nerf the most used skills in practice, but simply even out the choices so they feel more like choices.I like this part, though even as I type it, I'm a little skeptical. I say this because I have a hard time thinking of someone who would want to choose Hide and not Move Silently. But I can think of people who may choose jump and not swim, or spot and not listen. I do feel weird saying it, because I was totally part of the group who wanted to see the skills combined in the first place back in 3E. But playing old Baldur's Gate again got me thinking; maybe they were split purposefully to make them more expensive because they're more useful.The second part of the idea is to add back skill ranks. But ranks wouldn't be to up your skill modifier, but to up your abilities with skills. Characters would get additional skill proficiencies at certain levels. 4s? 3s? We'll see. They can either spend those skills to gain new proficiency, or to learn new abilities with the skills they already have. Feats like Athlete, Actor, dungeon delver, linguist, observant, and skulker would fall in here. "Skill Talents", let's call them, to enhance skills and add new uses to them, especially those that aren't particularly used for combat.Feats are nice, but D&D is a war game at its roots and giving up +2 to my primary attacking stat (or Con) is a tough sell, especially when that stat is adding to the very skills I want to be good at. Feats should be for combat I say.Other Skill Talents can be added so they're well represented. Maybe things like expertise or situational advantage could be given out. More combative skill uses could remain as feats, but noncombat could be supported by a Skill Talent system.What are your thoughts?Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk</blockquote>

Verification