D&D 5E The Wonkiness of Tool Proficiency

[Scorpio616]

Tool proficiency keeps players from wasting the DMs time and breath. They don't see it on the sheet, they don't ask to try it.

 

[SilverfireSage]

It is really worth noting that there is no such thing as a skill check in 5E.

There are ability checks, saving throws and attack rolls.

Skill and tool proficiencies are used with ability checks.

Cheers!

Wow I never thought of it that way, but that's the best way to actually put it. The only reason they even have the skill list is likely because of the "out of sight, out of mind" trope where someone didn't know they could do something because it wasn't ontheir character sheet. The reason they don't hve the tools listed under skills is because they can't be done if you don't have the tool, and therefore having the tool under the equipment will put it in sight as it were. That's actually really smart of them in streamlining all of this.

 

[BigVanVader]

Maybe off topic a bit, but this suddenly reminded me of Ocarina of Time, where Link would open up chests by just running up and kicking it right in the lock. It was awesome.

 

[Plaguescarred]

I like the way 5E handles Skills and tool proficiency personally. Everything is an ability check which may add a bonus if proficient with the relevant skill or tool to perform the task, where skills represent more an expertise you have in a certain field as opposed to tools which are psysical item.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Not by the Basic game rules, they aren't.

There is no training for new skills in the Basic rules of which I am aware. Just Tools and Languages.

You are of course technically correct adhering strictly to RAW. I just found the notion of learning skills that you didn't know before as an impossibility to be ludicrous considering the multiclassing rules.

Take a level of fighter- POOF! no problem, you are now a trained warrior with a fighting style. Wanna learn out door survival techniques from the barbarian over the course of 250 days? Nope! Completely impossible!!

 

[nomotog]

I believe the reason there isn't just a disable device skills is because for the longest time in the playtest skills were going to be an optional thing and they needed something to let rogues do rougey things. It makes perfect sense when you kind of forget about or ignore the skill list. Like in my groups character sheets we just have a section called proficiencies (tool, skill, whatever) and no set skill list. (In theory a player could take a proficiency in anything, but in practice we still use the books skills.)

 

[MerricB]

You are of course technically correct adhering strictly to RAW. I just found the notion of learning skills that you didn't know before as an impossibility to be ludicrous considering the multiclassing rules.

Take a level of fighter- POOF! no problem, you are now a trained warrior with a fighting style. Wanna learn out door survival techniques from the barbarian over the course of 250 days? Nope! Completely impossible!!

This is Mike's explanation for the rule, from the recent reddit discussion:

"It's definitely a case where it comes down to the group. Since some classes receive more skills than others, we decided to not put that option in there for "soft" balance reasons.

"By soft, I mean the following - it doesn't break the game, but it might irritate some players. Niche protection is a key part of class design, and a lot of players see skill training as a key part of the rogue and bard. Letting other classes match them in skills might make those classes feel squeezed out.

"As a DM, you can use it without issue if you feel that your table will be fine with the change. Like a lot of things in RPGs, you might find an issue that exists for D&D players as whole doesn't affect your group."

Cheers!

 

[ExploderWizard]

This is Mike's explanation for the rule, from the recent reddit discussion:

"It's definitely a case where it comes down to the group. Since some classes receive more skills than others, we decided to not put that option in there for "soft" balance reasons.

"By soft, I mean the following - it doesn't break the game, but it might irritate some players. Niche protection is a key part of class design, and a lot of players see skill training as a key part of the rogue and bard. Letting other classes match them in skills might make those classes feel squeezed out.

"As a DM, you can use it without issue if you feel that your table will be fine with the change. Like a lot of things in RPGs, you might find an issue that exists for D&D players as whole doesn't affect your group."

Cheers!

Due to expertise, even a character who becomes trained won't be the equal of the expert character.

As far as niche protection goes that is blown out of the water if any character can just pick up a level in any class.

I think I'm going to bring everything into a uniform line for my upcoming campaign. Skills, languages, tools AND other classes can all be learned after play begins but they ALL require 250 gp and 250 game days. That makes the field even. Those who want to dedicate to learning new things can put the time in and get them.

 

[Tormyr]

It is really worth noting that there is no such thing as a skill check in 5E.

There are ability checks, saving throws and attack rolls.

Skill and tool proficiencies are used with ability checks.

Cheers!

Yeah, you are right. It is easy to forget that it is a Wisdom (Perception) check instead of a Perception check. This leaves interesting combinations like Strength (Intimidation) open in certain situations. It also makes the jump to Dexterity (Thieves Tools) easier to grok.

 

[Syunsuke]

For niche protection, you might give certain class discount to learn new skill/tool proficiency. Say, "rogue can learn new skill at 200 days/ 200 gp".

Thinking about that, you can give discount based on ability bonus, too.
Like, if your Wis bonus is +2, you can learn Wis-based skill at 20% off.