D&D (2024) They need to bring back Gather Information in One DnD.

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
Here are the RAW that @the Jester is probably referring to:


Is it crystal clear? Not really - the effect of 3.5-bleed is present in the editing ("variant," "other Charisma checks"). But it's there, and it makes sense.

When it becomes convoluted is when a player/DM approaches it with a 3.5 mindset: thinking that skills trump abilities, that PCs call for their own checks, and that checks must perpetually get more bonuses. 5e pushes (nudges?) against these ideas.

Edit: the 3.5 mindset might also be closely related to the Mercer Effect...
5e might get a lot of credit for using it as a backstop for an awful skill system but skills with other abilities was in the 3.5 dmg
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Yaarel

He Mage
In my games, Gather Information is a Charisma Persuasion check. It applies to crowds rather than individuals, but its essence is persuading people to divulge reluctant information.

This aspect of "shared secret" makes the Persuasion check distinguishable from the Intelligence History check that can remember or intuit info about a particular society whether regional or local.
 



Yaarel

He Mage
@tetrasodium

Heh, I mean, there is an official way to do it, for a group who chooses to use the variant.

Something being official isnt necessarily the same thing as something being coercive.

While all D&D rules are noncoercive because of "rule zero", many D&D fans nevertheless tend to enforce the default rules coercively.

Any legal system is inherently traditionalist and conservative, and resistant to progress, including D&D game rules. At least there are alternative variants.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
@tetrasodium

Heh, I mean, there is an official way to do it, for a group who chooses to use the variant.

Something being official isnt necessarily the same thing as something being coercive.

While all D&D rules are noncoercive because of "rule zero", many D&D fans nevertheless tend to enforce the default rules coercively.

Any legal system is inherently traditionalist and conservative, and resistant to progress, including D&D game rules. At least there are alternative variants.
It took me a bit to figure out why I got tagged & still just guessing... The haha wasn't saying anything specific about the content of 125, I just thought it was funny that there was back to back posts noting that something people mentioned about skills that 5e does/doesn't do is actually found in the 3.5 & 5e dmg. for what it's worth here's the 3.5 section I noted
VARIANT: SKILLS WITH DIFFERENT ABILITIES
Sometimes a check involves a character’s training (skill ranks) plus an
innate talent (ability) not usually associated with that training. A skill
check always includes skill ranks plus an ability modifier, but you can
use a different ability modifier from normal if the character is in a situ-
ation where the normal key ability does not apply.
For example:
• A character is underwater and tries to maneuver by pulling himself
along some improvised handholds. Since his body has natural buoy-
ancy (meaning he doesn’t need to pull as hard to lift himself), the
DM rules that the player should make a Climb check keyed to
Dexterity rather than to Strength.
• A character is trying to pick the best horse from several that a
merchant is selling. Normally this would be an Appraise check, but
familiarity with horses ought to count for something. The DM lets
the player use the character’s ranks in Ride instead of ranks in
Appraise and applies the character’s Wisdom modifier (as normal
for an Appraise check).
• A character needs to use main force to restrain a panicked horse.
Normally this would call for a Strength check, but a character skilled
at handling animals ought to be able to use his knowledge to
restrain the horse more easily. The DM lets the player add the char-
acter’s ranks in Handle Animal (but not his Charisma modifier) to
the Strength check.
• A character has created a masterwork dagger as a gift for a visiting
noble. He attempts to inscribe it with intricate designs. The DM
rules that this is a Dexterity check to which the character’s ranks in
Craft (weaponsmithing) apply.
• A character is trying to climb a ladder to the bottom of a very deep
chute. Normally, the DM would call for a Constitution check to see
if the character can keep going, but he can also allow the player to
add the character’s ranks in Climb to the roll.
These sorts of unusual situations are always handled on a case-by-case
basis, and only as exceptions. The vast majority of the time, use the
normal key ability.
Remember that when you change the way a skill works in this fash-
ion, you should dictate when the change comes into play—it’s not up
to a player to make this sort of decision. Players may try to rationalize
why they should get to use their best ability score modifier with a skill
that doesn’t normally use that ability, but you shouldn’t allow this sort
of rule change unless you happen to agree with it.
For comparison, the 5e version is

Variant: Skills with Different Abilities​

Normally, your proficiency in a skill applies only to a specific kind of ability check. Proficiency in Athletics, for example, usually applies to Strength checks. In some situations, though, your proficiency might reasonably apply to a different kind of check. In such cases, the DM might ask for a check using an unusual combination of ability and skill, or you might ask your DM if you can apply a proficiency to a different check. For example, if you have to swim from an offshore island to the mainland, your DM might call for a Constitution check to see if you have the stamina to make it that far. In this case, your DM might allow you to apply your proficiency in Athletics and ask for a Constitution (Athletics) check. So if you're proficient in Athletics, you apply your proficiency bonus to the Constitution check just as you would normally do for a Strength (Athletics) check. Similarly, when your half-‐‑orc barbarian uses a display of raw strength to intimidate an enemy, your DM might ask for a Strength (Intimidation) check, even though Intimidation is normally associated with Charisma.
I remember using the 3.5 one occasionally at the time & don't recall getting as many confused stares or efforts to use attrib1+attrib2+bonus from players as I do when using it in 5e.
 

Vikingkingq

Adventurer
This does feel like more of a table problem than a rules problem. My DM is very fluid with gathering information checks, so that we can use pretty much any skill as long as we come up with a good RP explanation for how we're trying to find some information.

So our Bounty Hunter Soul Knife Rogue generally uses Insight or Investigation or Deception to shake down leads from the criminal underworld, but my Sage Wizard usually uses Investigation or History at the library or the like, and so on.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
It took me a bit to figure out why I got tagged & still just guessing... The haha wasn't saying anything specific about the content of 125, I just thought it was funny that there was back to back posts noting that something people mentioned about skills that 5e does/doesn't do is actually found in the 3.5 & 5e dmg. for what it's worth here's the 3.5 section I noted
Ah. Your laugh puzzled me. I thought it might be the irony of both "official" and "voluntary", as if the variant rule is somehow less official.

[3e] VARIANT: SKILLS WITH DIFFERENT ABILITIES
Sometimes a check involves a character’s training (skill ranks) plus an innate talent (ability) not usually associated with that training. A skill check always includes skill ranks plus an ability modifier, but you can use a different ability modifier from normal if the character is in a situation where the normal key ability does not apply.

[5e] VARIANT: SKILLS WITH DIFFERENT ABILITIES
Normally, your proficiency in a skill applies only to a specific kind of ability check. Proficiency in Athletics, for example, usually applies to Strength checks. In some situations, though, your proficiency might reasonably apply to a different kind of check. In such cases, the DM might ask for a check using an unusual combination of ability and skill, or you might ask your DM if you can apply a proficiency to a different check. For example, if you have to swim from an offshore island to the mainland, your DM might call for a Constitution check to see if you have the stamina to make it that far. In this case, your DM might allow you to apply your proficiency in Athletics and ask for a Constitution (Athletics) check. So if you're proficient in Athletics, you apply your proficiency bonus to the Constitution check just as you would normally do for a Strength (Athletics) check.


I remember using the 3.5 one occasionally at the time & don't recall getting as many confused stares or efforts to use attrib1+attrib2+bonus from players as I do when using it in 5e.
I like when the DMs Guide includes variant traditions that are nonmajority but worthwhile.

Heh, I like it even better when the variants are well thought out, easy to implement, and dont require rewriting the Monster Manual.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top