D&D 5E When is it OK to let a player substitute one skill for another?

[Fauchard1520]

I'm not sure what to call it, but I see this mess all the time.

• Is it OK if use Intimidate instead of Diplomacy?
• Can I use Acrobatics to initiate a grapple?
• I worship the god of magic. Can I roll Arcana instead of Religion?
• If I scavenge some vines, is it OK to roll Survival instead of tool proficiency to make rope?

Do you just increase the DC for using an "off" skill? Do you give the player a hard "no" when it's too preposterous? How do you go about adjudicating these sort of questions?

(Comic for illustrative purposes.)

 

[Scott Christian]

Ah... the world of skill checks.

The only answer I've ever seen consistently is:

• It is always okay
• It is rarely okay

Per your examples, I am sure we will get a hundred philosophical answers on what others do. But what I see is most DMs just roll with it, unless they really want to temper a growing trend that bothers them. Your intimidation vs diplomacy is a perfect example of that. A DM might grow tired of someone having a +8 in intimidation, and a +3 in diplomacy, and them always wanting to use intimidation. I have seen some DMs say, well roleplay intimidation if that is what you are using. This way the player knows that if they cross a line, it might come back to bite them. Or a DM might change the DC as you say. Hard to intimidate a jarl that has been through two wars and is surrounded by guards. Or the DM might just say, intimidation will not work, roll diplomacy.

My own rule when dealing with any persuasion is to write the DCs according to the personality of the NPC. A guard might have a high intimidation DC, but if someone flirts with them, it is really low. I almost always try to give little hints prior to the interaction via showing their personality through their actions.

 

[iserith]

When I call for an ability check, I just ask for the ability check and the player applies whatever proficiency he or she thinks appropriate, based on the description that was already offered. So, for example, when the character is trying to influence an NPC's attitude and I deem that the effort has an uncertain outcome and a meaningful consequence for failure, then I will ask for a Charisma check. The player can then say they are applying Persuasion, if the character's interaction up to that point indicates the character is using tact, social graces, and good nature.

 

[Oofta]

When it makes sense? I mean, let's say they want to use intimidate instead of diplomacy. Well, that can have repercussions later on. They pissed someone off who maybe could have been an ally. Or maybe they used intimidate on someone that respects the show of force. Or diplomacy would have worked but this is a bureaucrat who will dig in their heels because they can.

I'm less likely to substitute acrobatics for things like grapple, acrobatics doesn't have anything to do with grappling. Climbing using acrobatics? Well, that depends on if there are things to swing from. For a straight wall it doesn't work but if you can swing from a rope and do a flip off the gargoyle, maybe.

When it comes to religion, worshipping a god of magic isn't going to cut it but someone might be able to remember some aspects of the religion using a history check. Perhaps the social impact, or the spread of the religion things that a religion check might not even reveal.

I try not to be too strict about this stuff but it does have to make sense. You can't use an investigation check to lift a barrel. Unless of course you figure out how to make a fulcrum to do the lifting for you.

 

[Morrus]

Whenever it sounds like fun.

 

[Rune]

I treat ability checks as descriptive, not prescriptive. That is to say, the check is for determining what happens when an action’s success is in doubt. It doesn’t actually determine the action, though.

Step one: determine the player’s intended outcome.

Step two: determine the player’s approach for achieving that outcome.

Step three: roll dice as (and if) necessary to determine the actual outcome.

In the example of intimidation vs. persuasion, the answer depends on whether Step 2 was threatening or tactful/logical. Noting that these approaches aren’t mutually exclusive.

Atheletics and acrobatics are tricky because they should both just be athletics anyway. Both require strength, conditioning, coordination and practice. It seems like the only reason they both exist is so they could be assigned to separate attributes, which is irrelevant in my games. That said, grappling is used to keep people from moving, so strength is appropriate.

Arcana vs. Religion for worshippers of a god of magic? Not relevant. The ability check describes the action, not the source of the proficiency.

Survival vs. tool proficiency to make rope out of vines? Survival. What tool proficiency would even apply, here? If any did, it could grant advantage.

 

[jgsugden]

I think a lot of people would benefit from looking at skill checks the way I do. It is not a question of which skill to use, but a question of whether a skill applies.

When a situation arises that requires a skill check, I let the PCs tell me what they want to do and then we quickly figure out what type of ability check(s) make sense. Figuring something out? That is intelligence? Intuiting or perceiving it? Wisdom. Nimbleness? Dexterity. Sometimes the answer for which skill applies to a challenge can be determined by the approach the PC wants to take to beating the challenge. Sometimes there may be a couple alternatives that make sense - strength or dexterity. Intelligence or wisdom.

Once I know which method the PC wants to take and we've figured out the ability score, I ask if there is a reason for the PC to be proficient. Maybe they have a skill proficiency that applies to the situation. Maybe they have a tool proficiency, a background feature, or personal experience within the game that would make them proficient.

For example, if there were a famous jewel and the PCs found it, and they wanted to know if they recognized it by the description, I would allow an intelligence check. It would be proficient for anyone with Jeweler's Kit proficiency, history proficiency, or that had a background where they dealt with Jewels.

For another example, if a PC told a threatening lie to an NPC in order to encourage them to do the thing that the NPC knew they should do, but didn't want to do, I'd call for a charisma check and allow them to be proficient on the check whether they had intimidation, deception, or persuasion.

 

[Umbran]

I'm not sure what to call it, but I see this mess all the time.

• Is it OK if use Intimidate instead of Diplomacy?

Sure. But realize that, if you use diplomacy, you are unlikely to make your relationship with this person worse, while with intimidation, it may work, but you are sure to make your relationship worse....

• Can I use Acrobatics to initiate a grapple?

Mechanically, no, because a grapple is an attack action, not an ability check. We might work out something else interesting you can do in combat that uses acrobatics...

• I worship the god of magic. Can I roll Arcana instead of Religion?

For understanding of your own religion, sure. But Arcana won't tell you much about other traditions - the target is gonna be super-high there.

• If I scavenge some vines, is it OK to roll Survival instead of tool proficiency to make rope?

Sure. It'll take a long time without tools, though.

 

[MGibster]

I'm not sure what to call it, but I see this mess all the time.

• Is it OK if use Intimidate instead of Diplomacy?
• Can I use Acrobatics to initiate a grapple?
• I worship the god of magic. Can I roll Arcana instead of Religion?
• If I scavenge some vines, is it OK to roll Survival instead of tool proficiency to make rope?

Do you just increase the DC for using an "off" skill? Do you give the player a hard "no" when it's too preposterous? How do you go about adjudicating these sort of questions?

(Comic for illustrative purposes.)

1. Yes, but using Intimidation to get what you want might make you a new enemy or complicate things.
2. No, you cannot use Acrobatics to initiate a grapple.
3. No, this is more related to theology so make a Religion role.
4. Yes, creating something akin to "rope" seems like something a survivalist might do.

 

[Seramus]

I offer two choices and say the choice affects the delivery. The skill they choose changes what happens, what they learn, and even possibly the DC.

"Please roll Cha + Persuasion OR Intimidation."

"Please roll Int + Arcana OR History."

"Please roll Str + Athletics OR Acrobatics."