D&D 5E Why don't more classes grant bonus skills?

[doctorbadwolf]

You could do something like that, of course, but to my way of thinking it just complicates the issue. Players would probably want to take some feat or other, and if you only have those on a list, why not just use the things granted by the feats on the list?

I love feats (as many gamers do) but for me what makes them so special is their rarity. Given too many of them, and they start to lose some of their appeal.

Finally, I would only offer one save for "free" (somewhere in tier 3, since that is a plausible level to reach I think but not easy) because PCs begin with two, that would give them a third. Many subclasses also give a save, making 4 not that hard to get. And of course, resilient would grant a 5th! Thus you could have a PC with 5 saves before a monk gets diamond soul! Sure, they put a lot into it, but still....

IMO, the fact they put a lot into it completely justifies it.

I can see the logic of the complication argument, however.

 

[DND_Reborn]

IMO, the fact they put a lot into it completely justifies it.

I can see the logic of the complication argument, however.

I guess since the "free" save at (say) tier 3 is free, the subclass feature for a save is already there, so all they are really paying for is resilient, which comes with an ASI +1 as well! So, yes there is a lot into it, but not much they have to really "pay" to get it IME.

Nothing wrong with it, either way, though. shrug

 

[Umbran]

I think the reduced skill list, and bounded accuracy, have a lot to do with it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think the reduced skill list, and bounded accuracy, have a lot to do with it.

I can see the reduced skill list, if one assumes the default 18 skills subsume the vast majority of what will be called for in ability checks, but how would bounded accuracy fit into this issue???

 

[Umbran]

how would bounded accuracy fit into this issue???

Bounded accuracy means that you are more likely to be able to get by with a minor stat bonus, and maybe a Guidance.

For example, folks are talking about how monsters don't have many skill bonuses at all. That means, for example, that most monsters won't have high passive perception. So maybe you can sneak by with only a roll of 13, and you don't need proficiency to have a shot at that.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Bounded accuracy means that you are more likely to be able to get by with a minor stat bonus, and maybe a Guidance.

For example, folks are talking about how monsters don't have many skill bonuses at all. That means, for example, that most monsters won't have high passive perception. So maybe you can sneak by with only a roll of 13, and you don't need proficiency to have a shot at that.

Ok, I can see that. But I guess for myself I see the other side, too, where once PCs have proficiency and such, they are good enough that those low scores means they nearly always succeed. And constant success in a game such as D&D leads to boredom IME, but YMMV.

 

[Umbran]

But I guess for myself I see the other side, too, where once PCs have proficiency and such, they are good enough that those low scores means they nearly always succeed.

1) I am not here to argue if bounded accuracy is a Good Thing^(tm).

2) Yes, that's exactly the point. Within some focused scope you choose, your character is actually supposed to be pretty competent, and to often succeed. But, this scope is generally focused, so there's a lot out there that's still a challenge. And being a full skill monkey like a rogue is actually a class feature.

 

[Flamestrike]

I wouldnt mind giving each class a favored skill, where if you take it, you get 1.5 x Proficiency bonus in it (half expertise).

Barbarian - Intimidation
Bard - Performance
Cleric - Religion
Druid - Nature
Fighter - Athletics
Monk - Acrobatics
Paladin - History
Ranger - Survival
Rogue - Perception
Sorcerer - Arcana
Warlock - Arcana
Wizard - Arcana

 

[Xeviat]

I wouldnt mind giving each class a favored skill, where if you take it, you get 1.5 x Proficiency bonus in it (half expertise).

Barbarian - Intimidation
Bard - Performance
Cleric - Religion
Druid - Nature
Fighter - Athletics
Monk - Acrobatics
Paladin - History
Ranger - Survival
Rogue - Perception
Sorcerer - Arcana
Warlock - Arcana
Wizard - Arcana

I'd do a few adjustments to this, but very much yes. It's hard to imagine a character without good scores in these skills, except I disagree with your choice for the Paladin (but I recognize why you didn't want to choose Religion, since their oaths aren't always religious).

Heck, the Monk only getting 2 skills is way too few as it is. I cannot imagine a Monk without Athletics and Acrobatics, and now I only have two skill choices?

 

[DND_Reborn]

I would do some adjustments as well, since three classes have arcana.

But, I rare take bout Athletics and Acrobatics for the same character... it is usually one or the other, not both, by YMMV.