D&D 5E What are the "True Issues" with 5e?

[iserith]

But you're remembering 6 categories paired to 18 skills instead of just 18 skills is my point. We added an extra step.

I only use the 6 ability scores. There are no extra steps.

As for tools; a decade in can we finally just admit no one uses them?

No thieves' tools in your games?

I can't remember a campaign that didn't see the players doing that and more with tools. Especially since there's a whole section on how they can work with skill proficiencies in XGtE.

Except it rarely just 'calls for muscles' or generic thinkiness. The strong guy is trying to do something Athletic and the wizard is trying to weasel his way out of spending a slot or admitting you beat him in the guessing game that is spell preparation.

I don't understand what you're saying here. My point was that you can take any task and roll it into six ability checks without concerning oneself with knowing any skills or tools. The player will take care of that as they advocate for their own bonuses. Which makes it easy for the DM.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I only use the 6 ability scores. There are no extra steps.

The extra step is assigning each task an ability, which is already associated with a skill.

No thieves' tools in your games?

Ah yes, the skill that got assigned a tool. Pick Locks.

I don't understand what you're saying here. My point was that you can take any task and roll it into six ability checks without concerning oneself with knowing any skills or tools. The player will take care of that as they advocate for their own bonuses. Which makes it easy for the DM.

What I'm saying is, that was already there with skills. We're just adding the step of deciding the ability for reasons I can only assume are either 1) giving the Dm something to do because they clearly aren't doing enough developing an entire game thanks to rulings not rules or 2) appealing to people who think Skills were a step too far for D&D and this was an aborted design for making skills optional like they did to feats.

 

[iserith]

The extra step is assigning each task an ability, which is already associated with a skill.

Ah yes, the skill that got assigned a tool. Pick Locks.

What I'm saying is, that was already there with skills. We're just adding the step of deciding the ability for reasons I can only assume are either 1) giving the Dm something to do because they clearly aren't doing enough developing an entire game thanks to rulings not rules or 2) appealing to people who think Skills were a step too far for D&D and this was an aborted design for making skills optional like they did to feats.

Remembering 6 things instead of 18 + 40ish things is easier in my view, and there are no extra steps. The DM is already having to decide which mechanic applies, if the outcome of the task the player described is uncertain. Only here, I need only remember 6 things instead of a whole lot more. I also play D&D 4e, so it saves me the embarrassment as referring to Deception as Bluff in a D&D 5e game.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Remembering 6 things instead of 18 + 40ish things is easier in my view, and there are no extra steps. The DM is already having to decide which mechanic applies, if the outcome of the task the player described is uncertain. Only here, I need only remember 6 things instead of a whole lot more. I also play D&D 4e, so it saves me the embarrassment as referring to Deception as Bluff in a D&D 5e game.

I'm arguing that you're not actually remembering just 6 things. You're remembering six procedures for 18+ 1 (Pick Locks) things.

 

[iserith]

I'm arguing that you're not actually remembering just 6 things. You're remembering six procedures for 18+ 1 (Pick Locks) things.

Nah, it's really just 6 things. It's the top line of each description of the ability checks in Chapter 7. One can stop reading right there and adjudicate an action with an uncertain outcome.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm arguing that you're not actually remembering just 6 things. You're remembering six procedures for 18+ 1 (Pick Locks) things.

I'm not sure why you're arguing that. I do skills the same way you do and I can understand that @iserith is really talking about a method that allows them to just pick one of the six ability scores when they ask for a check. Their players get to decide if they want to apply a skill and/or a tool to what they're doing, as appropriate. Seems legit.

 

[Red Castle]

I'm not sure why you're arguing that. I do skills the same way you do and I can understand that @iserith is really talking about a method that allows them to just pick one of the six ability scores when they ask for a check. Their players get to decide if they want to apply a skill and/or a tool to what they're doing, as appropriate. Seems legit.

Yeah, I also use skills most of the time, but sometimes when I don’t see a skill that really fit I will ask for an attribute check, then if the player think that a skill would fit, we discuss it.

So Iserith method is perfectly fine, I don’t see what’s wrong. It’s also a good way to clarify intentions by letting the player propose the skill he want to use.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm not saying they're wrong, I'm just questioning whether it's actually easier.

 

[Red Castle]

I'm not saying they're wrong, I'm just questioning whether it's actually easier.

For the DM, I would think so. The player tells you what he wants to do and you just assign an attribute roll based on the task: strength for physical, dex for agility, constitution for resilience, intelligence for knowledge, wisdom for awareness and charisma for social. Then, it’s up to the player to determine if there is one of his/her skill that could help based on how he approach the task.

The more I think about it, the more I think I might try it if my players are willing.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

I'm not saying they're wrong, I'm just questioning whether it's actually easier.

I mean, you could take their word for it. And accept it when they point out that 18>6.