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

[tetrasodium]

I do not see any such barriers that make it difficult for a DM to add or subtract skills in the game. Might just be DMing style, but I have had different skill lists as well as used the Variant Ability Score variant rule for skills for every single campaign of 5E that I have run and have had no issues.

So I do not believe there is some systemic issue with the game as presented, but rather that individual DMs have styles which run counter to the skill system as presently constituted. Now of course that doesn't HELP them in any way, shape or form... the break between the 5E system and their DM styles will probably never reach an accord the player ultimately is happy with... but the game itself is not broken across the board. And we know this because some of us can and have been using the system without a problem-- either as-is or by making our own desired changes.

There are a few & they become obvious once you start looking at past editions.

Spoiler: for example

5e

3.5

2e

Not including the 4e sheet because I didn't play it enough

The character sheet itself is designed to wall off the ability to add or modify skills. It would be easier to add "arcane power armor" as a class of armor distinct from light medium & heavy armor than it would be to add a skill. Beyond that 5e has PCs with extremely few skills& almost always the same number of choices, that creates a second barrier to adding more skills in the form of PCs simply not having the budget to be proficient in them unless the addition is given free as a purely cosmetic technicality or part of a complete & total rewrite of the entire skill sysyem.

They didn't stop there though & I linked to an example from this very thread of presented barriers in the post you quoted. Wotc included the ability score associated with each skill & a box to precalculate the combo despite creating a skill system where the GM is supposed to call for an ability check which the player can make a case for why a particular skill proficiency is relevant enough to add the PC's proficiency bonus to the d20+called for attribute mod to the check. All of that creates friction for the GM if they attempt to call for an ability check & have the player ask if a particular skill proficiency should be added instead of simply calling for a particular skill check from an overly narrowed skill list.

 

[Reynard]

Some checks can be more complex when combining the single Ability check with both a Skill proficiency and a Tool proficiency.

There might be more like this.

For example, a "Relationship" might count as a kind of proficiency bonus when the check relates to the wellbeing of a specific loved one.

Possibly, an Alignment or other "Ideal" is a proficiency that adds when the check for an action that is conspicuously and difficultly representative of ones Ideal.

Possibly, a Flaw can do something weird and fun, such as granting Inspiration when the check fails.

Any roll might include two choices of proficiencies.

There needs to be more design thought about how such always-on advantage to a check plays out, but in principle it stays within the balance of the 5e gaming engine.

It doesn't matter how many potential bonuses you get if the whole thing is a singular binary roll.

 

[CreamCloud0]

i feel like 5e's skill system would've been so much more if it hadn't so explicitly tied each of the skills to a default stat, i know you can combine them how you feel is apropriate but that feels like more of the exception rather than the rule.

just look at investigation, it's the exact skill for this if you instead used CHA to represent learning things from talking to people, investigation(WIS) for all those times people say we should have streetwise back, then classic investigation(INT) for hitting the books

i also think skill challenges were a good seed of an idea, if they had been treated as just multi-stage skill checks, especially now we have bounded accuracy, as there's only so high your skill checks are going, being able to test for consistency of checks as your bar for difficulty rather than putting it all onto a single sky-high check

 

[tetrasodium]

i feel like 5e's skill system would've been so much more if it hadn't so explicitly tied each of the skills to a default stat, i know you can combine them how you feel is apropriate but that feels like more of the exception rather than the rule.

just look at investigation, it's the exact skill for this if you instead used CHA to represent learning things from talking to people, investigation(WIS) for all those times people say we should have streetwise back, then classic investigation(INT) for hitting the books

i also think skill challenges were a good seed of an idea, if they had been treated as just multi-stage skill checks, especially now we have bounded accuracy, as there's only so high your skill checks are going, being able to test for consistency of checks as your bar for difficulty rather than putting it all onto a single sky-high check

During actual play though "we"(the group) doesn't have bounded accuracy, it's only the gm who is bounded by it. PCs keep improving attribute mods and proficiency bonuses well past the point monster statblocks were targeted for & about that's before the PCs even start adding feats and magic items on top. The GM's DC scale has bounded accuracy, PCs have expertise advantage sometimes +5and potentially even the inability to roll less than 10 on a d20.

That's not bounded accuracy, it's an extreme handicap

 

[DEFCON 1]

The character sheet itself is designed to wall off the ability to add or modify skills. It would be easier to add "arcane power armor" as a class of armor distinct from light medium & heavy armor than it would be to add a skill. Beyond that 5e has PCs with extremely few skills& almost always the same number of choices, that creates a second barrier to adding more skills in the form of PCs simply not having the budget to be proficient in them unless the addition is given free as a purely cosmetic technicality or part of a complete & total rewrite of the entire skill sysyem.

They didn't stop there though & I linked to an example from this very thread of presented barriers in the post you quoted. Wotc included the ability score associated with each skill & a box to precalculate the combo despite creating a skill system where the GM is supposed to call for an ability check which the player can make a case for why a particular skill proficiency is relevant enough to add the PC's proficiency bonus to the d20+called for attribute mod to the check. All of that creates friction for the GM if they attempt to call for an ability check & have the player ask if a particular skill proficiency should be added instead of simply calling for a particular skill check from an overly narrowed skill list.

So the character sheet is missing a couple blank lines at the bottom to let someone handwrite in some new skills, the system and official sheet includes the ability score that is meant to be added to each set skill, and PCs only get a few skill choice/options to select from as per written in the book.

If you wish to call that "friction", that is your choice and/or your experience. I, however, find that to be anything but an unsurmountable problem, so I cannot agree with you that this is something that desperately needs to be "fixed" in the game. If a printed character sheet causes such consternation... I guess I can intellectually understand your issue, I just do not have nearly the same problems with it. After all, if just finding or creating a new character sheet itself would solve several of the issues, how can we really claim these things to be severe roadblocks to playing the game?

 

[FallenRX]

Random note.

Shouts outs to A5E for actually adding this mechanic back in the game as a Downtime action and putting it in the PHB

Great addition.

 

[tetrasodium]

So the character sheet is missing a couple blank lines at the bottom to let someone handwrite in some new skills, the system and official sheet includes the ability score that is meant to be added to each set skill, and PCs only get a few skill choice/options to select from as per written in the book.

If you wish to call that "friction", that is your choice and/or your experience. I, however, find that to be anything but an unsurmountable problem, so I cannot agree with you that this is something that desperately needs to be "fixed" in the game. If a printed character sheet causes such consternation... I guess I can intellectually understand your issue, I just do not have nearly the same problems with it. After all, if just finding or creating a new character sheet itself would solve several of the issues, how can we really claim these things to be severe roadblocks to playing the game?

You missed a few points and are downplaying how the linked example from this very thread where the implimentation conflicts with the design intent used to justify the mess of a skill system itself. It's a collection of problems caused by "don't worry about the GM, we are working on player stuff right now & will get to the GM later" followed by "this is player stuff that was already finished and we are working on GM stuff now."

Nothing about the example is "freeing" unless it is describing the player using it to override the GM's efforts & the GM is assumed some flavor of hostile gm.

 

[Pedantic]

i feel like 5e's skill system would've been so much more if it hadn't so explicitly tied each of the skills to a default stat, i know you can combine them how you feel is apropriate but that feels like more of the exception rather than the rule.

just look at investigation, it's the exact skill for this if you instead used CHA to represent learning things from talking to people, investigation(WIS) for all those times people say we should have streetwise back, then classic investigation(INT) for hitting the books

There's downsides here. I run an A5E game which has a default ability/skill separation, down to a character sheet that reflects it, and it really slows down play. My players have gotten better over time, but it's definitely hard to call for a "Charisma (Investigation)" check and slower for them to scan to their Cha mod and then to the skill and then back to Proficiency bonus.

I redesigned the character sheet to put proficiency modifiers directly next to all skills, which helps a little but is definitely slower than having a single modifier to reference.

i also think skill challenges were a good seed of an idea, if they had been treated as just multi-stage skill checks, especially now we have bounded accuracy, as there's only so high your skill checks are going, being able to test for consistency of checks as your bar for difficulty rather than putting it all onto a single sky-high check

I have opinions about skill challenges, but I don't think 5e benefits from the lack of clarity about what the magnitude of what a skill check accomplishes.

 

[DEFCON 1]

You missed a few points and are downplaying how the linked example from this very thread where the implimentation conflicts with the design intent used to justify the mess of a skill system itself. It's a collection of problems caused by "don't worry about the GM, we are working on player stuff right now & will get to the GM later" followed by "this is player stuff that was already finished and we are working on GM stuff now."

Nothing about the example is "freeing" unless it is describing the player using it to override the GM's efforts & the GM is assumed some flavor of hostile gm.

You can continue to say it's an issue for you, which is fine. But that doesn't change the fact that none of it is an issue for me and I suspect a lot of other players and DMs. Because if it was, you should have a lot more people agreeing with you here as you talk about it, but I've yet to see anyone else comment with the same vehemence you do about how WotC is screwing over DMs in both the books and these playtests. So perhaps the issue isn't as widespread or as problematic as you seem to think it is.

But you know, whatever. If that means you choose not to pick up the 5E24 books, then that is what it is. Nothing wrong with the decision if that's the way you decide to go.

 

[CapnZapp]

That is already one of the new mechanics in the glossary under a different name.

Care to explain?