D&D 5E (2024) There is sauerkraut in my lederhosen: Snarf's Guide to Using (and adjudicating) Skills in 5e

[KYRON45]

I didn't read this, but it has "skills" in the headline. Skill checks are the worst.
But Snarf....Snarf is the best.
There should be "Snarf Checks".

Player: I want to do this thing....rolls...fails
Player: SNARF CHECK!!!
DM: Son of a......

I'm still working on the details.

 

[Maxperson]

You can make the check without the book

Then what's the point of the tool and tool proficiency?

 

[Parmandur]

I'll chime in as another DM who has degrees of success. I also started using success with a cost for narrow failed rolls, though I do like @Parmandur's d6 idea. I'm going to have to think about that one for a while.

What I don't do, is just have success with the roll determining cost, coolness, etc. I think failure should be a possibility.

Just to be transparent, I didn't come up with it: it's from the new Stormlight Archives RPG, but frankly I think you can airdrop it into 5E pretty easily.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I didn't read this, but it has "skills" in the headline. Skill checks are the worst.
But Snarf....Snarf is the best.
There should be "Snarf Checks".

Player: I want to do this thing....rolls...fails
Player: SNARF CHECK!!!
DM: Son of a......

I'm still working on the details.

....I recommend starting with "Everyone at the table does a shot."

 

[Parmandur]

....I recommend starting with "Everyone at the table does a shot."

Always.

 

[Minigiant]

Then what's the point of the tool and tool proficiency?

How I do it is you add your proficiency modifier if you have proficiency and have Advantage if you have an associated book.

 

[I'm A Banana]

That's one example, but the idea should be clear- skills, especially the non-game skills, should not be considered as some stand-alone ability, but should be considered in the context of the character and the world, and players should be consistently rewarded for playing their characters as characters- which means leveraging what makes them different, unique, and fun.

One of the things I've become convinced of is that we don't need a list of 18 unique skills. D&D 2014 had something called "background proficiency" as an optional rule, very reminiscent of AD&D's Secondary Skills. This is enough. One thing, beyond my class, that I can say "I'm good at this," and if I think something makes sense for me to add my proficiency bonus to, I can make an argument.

If we took all the "non-game skills" out and rolled them into background proficiency/a secondary skill, we could be left with just like 5-7 skills that might be worth keeping around. And even those, I'd wager, could use some alternate subsystems instead of the skills system.

 

[Maxperson]

How I do it is you add your proficiency modifier if you have proficiency and have Advantage if you have an associated book.

That's not bad mechanically, but it still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. One book just wouldn't have enough in it to reliably grant advantage. You'd need an Encyclopedia Britannica set on hand for whichever knowledge skill you are using.

 

[Horwath]

We used a lot of variant abilities for skills, also some skills can be removed from the game.

Acrobatics: merged into athletics. Use STR, DEX or CON depending on activity.
Animal handling: merged into Survival
Medicine: merged into Nature. May use Wis instead of Int in some situations.
Investigation merged into Perception. This is little problematic, as it boost even more Perception, but it ends debates on what can I roll and why I cannot roll(what I do have proficiency) vs why do I have to roll(what I do not have proficiency). Int or Wis depending on type of check. Maybe even Dex if you need to be tactile in your search.

4 Cha skills stay separate, but as they are little weak, maybe you can get 2 proficiency for price of one. Expertise still stays the same.

that leaves you with 14 skills. and you can get 4 for 2 proficiency slots.
now you need 12 skill proficiency slots to get all skills.

 

[Minigiant]

That's not bad mechanically, but it still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. One book just wouldn't have enough in it to reliably grant advantage. You'd need an Encyclopedia Britannica set on hand for whichever knowledge skill you are using.

To get Advantage, the book would have to be a large reference guide. Or you'd need several guides.