Perform vs. Proficiency in Instruments

[Squeeq]

You can make a Bard without any ranks in Perform at all. In fact, it's quite easy to, since you can take any three skills you want, and Perform is one of those skills that doesn't get used very often by a lot of DMs except for "I want to play music for the tavern! *rolls* My song was 19 good!" situations. However, your tool proficiencies are any three musical instruments. This is one of the few cases where it feels like the skill and the tool proficiencies overlap. It's like if there was a Lockpick skill, and also the Thief's Tools items - can you unlock a lock if you have proficiency in Lockpicking but don't have thief's tools? Could you if you had no skill in lockpicking but still were skilled in thieves tools? It seems like a huge redundancy, even though I know it's for fluff. If I'm playing a musical instrument totally untrained, but I'm performing for a crowd, I get my proficiency, but if I'm trained in the instrument, clearly I can't double my proficiency, so I still roll the same? Why even bother to learn any instruments, or conversely, why bother to take the perform skill? I have some homebrew things for making these more useful, but it still feels like flavor for flavor's sake.

[Coffee_Dragon]

The fact that Perform covers oration, acting, dancing, poetry and any other creative expressions that don't use "tools", but each instrument needs its own proficiency, has always bugged me. The tool proficiency rules are just kinda wonky. I would suggest that at a minimum each instrument proficiency should cover a family of instruments (e.g. woodwind, strummed or percussion). I would not however say that Perform nullifies the necessity of instrument proficiencies across the board unless the idea is to simply abolish them.

[Arkhios]

While not exactly written that way, one could definitely see that your proficiency with an instrument of choice was a requirement to be able to use that instrument as your Spellcasting Focus for bard spells.

[Blue Lantern]

Just because you can play an instrument, doesn't mean you are able to make a spectacle out of it.

[Plaguescarred]

You obviously don't need to be proficient with any musical instruments if you have proficiency in performance of all sort, you're that talented!

It'd better if you could double the proficiency bonus for any ability check you make that uses Performance while being also proficient with musical instruments like Expertise.

[CaptainSarathai]

I imagine them being separate or focused. So if you have "Perform" but no instrument proficiencies, then you're up there singing, reading poetry, acting out a story, doing stand-up comedy, putting on a burlesque show, etc.
So if you're trying to RP and you say,
"I have the 'Perform' skill, I play my flute for the crowd"
"Okay, are you proficient with a flute?"
"No."
"Well, unless you plan is to play it ironically, you're gonna suck at this - maybe do some interpretive dance instead."

For your example with something like Thievery and LockPicks or Thief Tools -
Thievery skill is knowing how to disarm complex traps. LockPicks let you unlock stuff without a key.
If you're a Thief and you come to a locked door, and don't have a lockpick, you might know some secret trick to open it, bit you're probably stuck.
If you have proficiency with a lockpick, but not the Thievery skill, and you come across a chest with a secret trap hidden inside, you can unlock it and open it, but you wouldn't know how to disable the intricate trap mechanism.

Also remember that part of why Skills and Tools are broken up, is so that you can use Skills to 'Help'. Two guys who know how to use a lockpick is kinda dumb - there's only one person at the door. But someone with Thievery could have his assistant operate the various lock mechanism of a trap, while he himself works out how the trap is put together, thus allowing a Help action from one or the other.

[Grod_The_Giant]

It's pointless and redundant, and the sort of thinking you need to rationalize it leads to systems where you have so many niche skills that no-one can be good at anything. Ditch the Perform skill and never look back.

[Naanomi]

I let people use Dex or Int for instrument tool use but almost always only CHA for perform (to represent technical expertise of the instrument). I can imagine some puzzles needing the actual instrument skill as well (the Goonies organ puzzle)

[Arkhios]

I let people use Dex or Int for instrument tool use but almost always only CHA for perform (to represent technical expertise of the instrument). I can imagine some puzzles needing the actual instrument skill as well (the Goonies organ puzzle)

That is a good point many people forget (or ignore) for some reason: Tools don't have a predetermined ability modifier with which the checks should be rolled by default. Sometimes it's enough if you have the proficiency or not. No rolls required. Simple and efficient, either you have the know-how, or you don't.

[Sigreid]

Many people can play the piano. There was one Liberace who put on a performance that filled concert halls and had fans so moved by his show that they would send him expensive jewelry. Tool use instrument lets you play competently. Your performance skill gets you picked out from the crowd of wandering minstrels to play at the palace you've been wanting to infiltrate.

That being said, if your table wants to have one tool proficiency called play music and performance to cover all non-instrument related entertainment skills? Why not. Have fun.

[GAZ]

Instrument proficiency is the ability to play an instrument. Perform skill is the ability to put on a show. Not all performers can play an instrument (singers, comedians, acrobats, story tellers, etc.) and not all people who can play an instrument can put on a show (school music class, piano recital, songwriters, etc.) Savvy?

[Parra]

For your example with something like Thievery and LockPicks or Thief Tools -
Thievery skill is knowing how to disarm complex traps. LockPicks let you unlock stuff without a key.


except there is no Thievery skill. nor a Thief class, it’s a Rogue with one of its Subtypes being a Thief.

Nor are their Lock pick Tools. There is Thievery Tools that specifically allow you to disarm traps and open locked doors, and since it’s a tool anyone can learn it.

There is nothing in-built about the Thief class that makes them automatically better than any other class with proficiency with Thieves Tools (well expertise can, but that doesn’t have to be applied to the Thieves Tools).

To say you need a Thief to disarm traps is nothing more than a legacy idea from previous editions.

[Tanarii]

To say you need a Thief to disarm traps is nothing more than a legacy idea from previous editions.
Especially since you don't even need to be proficient with tools to use them. Just to get a bonus to using them.

Edit:



I let people use Dex or Int for instrument tool use but almost always only CHA for perform (to represent technical expertise of the instrument). I can imagine some puzzles needing the actual instrument skill as well (the Goonies organ puzzle)
That is a good point many people forget (or ignore) for some reason: Tools don't have a predetermined ability modifier with which the checks should be rolled by default. Sometimes it's enough if you have the proficiency or not. No rolls required. Simple and efficient, either you have the know-how, or you don't.
Not only that, 'play a stringed instrument' is specifically an example given of a Dex check. Not a Cha check.

IMO tool proficiency intrument (or any tool proficiency) clearly should apply if there's a question of knowledge related to its proper use too, even if the actual use might be a Str or Dex check. But I also let it apply to anything that's a reasonable consequence of learning to use it, such as lore-like knowledge related to the field of use (usually artisans tools). In the case of instruments, basic knowledge about how they're made or famous examples. (But not actually making one unless they also know the appropriate Artisan's Tools as well.)

(Caveat: in most cases checks on that kind of stuff would fall under what I'd consider 'no check needed' information.)

[Naanomi]

I find instrument skills to be more reasonable than most of the gambling ones

[Kryx]

Personally, I find tools to be rather poorly implemented in 5e. I've combined most with skills.

Instruments and Disguise Kit as part of Performance. Navigator's tools with Survival. Herbalism Kit and Poisoner's Kit with Medicine. Thieves' Tools with Sleight of Hand. Forgery is the only difficult one, but I'd place it under history as that kind of knowledge would be necessary to duplicate forms and the like.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Instrument proficiency is the ability to play an instrument. Perform skill is the ability to put on a show. Not all performers can play an instrument (singers, comedians, acrobats, story tellers, etc.) and not all people who can play an instrument can put on a show (school music class, piano recital, songwriters, etc.) Savvy?
Logical, perhaps. Good game design, no. If you write down a music-based skill, you expect to be able to use it to play music for people.

This thread is full of the kind of thinking that leads to games having a hundred-plus skills, all massively redundant and-- typically-- with barely enough points to be good at one thing.

[Vogonjeltz]

Especially since you don't even need to be proficient with tools to use them. Just to get a bonus to using them.

DMG 103, "Locked Doors. Characters who don't have the key to a locked door can pick the lock with a successful Dexterity check (doing so requires thieves' tools and proficiency in their use)."

Proficiency is required to use thieves tools on locked doors.

[Tanarii]

DMG 103, "Locked Doors. Characters who don't have the key to a locked door can pick the lock with a successful Dexterity check (doing so requires thieves' tools and proficiency in their use)."

Proficiency is required to use thieves tools on locked doors.
Damn. Really? I've totally overlooked that one.

Gonna have some pissed off players. :smallbiggrin:

[Vogonjeltz]

Damn. Really? I've totally overlooked that one.

Gonna have some pissed off players.

If it makes you feel any better, off the top of my head I don't think it's even every tool that actually requires proficiency to use, just some of them.

[Tanarii]

If it makes you feel any better, off the top of my head I don't think it's even every tool that actually requires proficiency to use, just some of them.
My original interpretation when I first read the PHB was you had to have proficiency to use the tool. It was someone on the forum that pointed out that you (generally) don't seem to need that.

However limiting one as critical to adventuring as thieves tools certainly makes sense. Might be why I made the assumption in the first place.

[Coffee_Dragon]

I also wouldn't let anyone hammer out a sword with their hands.

[Arkhios]

I also wouldn't let anyone hammer out a sword with their hands.

Not even a goliath? They could probably *eat nails for breakfast and excrete chain. (*A finnish idiom, not sure if it works in english that well)
:smallbiggrin:

[brainface]

Not even a goliath? They could probably *eat nails for breakfast and excrete chain. (*A finnish idiom, not sure if it works in english that well)
:smallbiggrin:

I feel like it needs to be barbed wire instead of chain. (This is my contribution to the thread, ya'll welcome. ^^)

[Arial Black]

Instrument proficiency is the ability to play an instrument. Perform skill is the ability to put on a show. Not all performers can play an instrument (singers, comedians, acrobats, story tellers, etc.) and not all people who can play an instrument can put on a show (school music class, piano recital, songwriters, etc.) Savvy?

While this makes sense, it doesn't help us figure out why anyone should bother having proficiency in both; they don't stack.

The problem is, it doesn't make sense! It doesn't make sense that it is better for instrumentalists to avoid the Perform skill (because it would be completely wasted) and be proficient in a different skill. It doesn't make sense that Liberace (consumate showman that he was) doesn't need (or benefit from) proficiency in playing the piano!

[Socratov]

Not even a goliath? They could probably *eat nails for breakfast and excrete chain. (*A finnish idiom, not sure if it works in english that well)
:smallbiggrin:

thank you for giving my goliath barbarian deluded into believing he is a wizard a use of Fabricate...

[Asmotherion]

the way I see it:

Proficiency with an instrument is what makes you able to use the instrument effectivelly.

Performance is your ability to gain the attention of the crowd.

If someone was proficient to play the piano but not the lyre, and was performing with a lyre, he would still be better at it than someone who never touched an instrument.

In this way, I think performance is meant to be used as an ability to interact with the crowd. For instance, it could also be used to give a speach (together with the persuation skill), to perform a magic show (with the Arcana skill) or a prestidigitation (not the cantrip) show (with the deception skill). It is meant to calculate how captivating your performance is, rather than how good it actually is.

Example number one: Put a musician who plays exceptionally well the piano to perform a Betoven symphony. Wile a normal crowd will likelly be captivated by it, some people might not even turn an eye towards him.

Example number two: A politician can be very persuassive, (or deceptive) but his crowd might be bored, even fall asleep if he speaks with a monotonus voice for hours, without that making him any less persuassive.

Example number three: A magician can do a very extraordinary performance; however, some magicians are considered by the vast population something around un-cool to lame, wile others, performing the exact same tricks (or more extravagant variations) make millions by being really good with the crowd.


That said, I use it this way: Performance measures how many people actually pay attention to you. A second apropriate check (perhaps again performance, if you are performing a theatrical act) is meant to calculate how good you actually were. If you roll low or ace it, wile you rolled high on perform, you have an embaracing performance in front of a lot of people, and can go have a walk of shame. In the reverse case, you perform something amazing, but only a few if any notice what you accomplished because overall you were boring.

[Arkhios]

I feel like it needs to be barbed wire instead of chain. (This is my contribution to the thread, ya'll welcome. ^^)
That would work too! Or, to make a compromise: a spiked chain (I miss that weapon so much :smallbiggrin:)


thank you for giving my goliath barbarian deluded into believing he is a wizard a use of Fabricate...
Lol. You're welcome!

[sandvirm]

There is overlap, or at least the potential for it. I think it ultimately comes down to the preferred play style of the group. Some groups will find it redundant, others will find the separation useful.

Let's say there is an imaginary NPC, a king, with whom the players want to curry favor. In one group, the DM could simply allow the group to use any performance or instrument check in an attempt to impress the king. In another group, the DM may flesh out the king a little more and somehow let it be known to the players that the king misses his recently deceased mother who taught him to play the harp. The PCs say exactly what they are attempting rather than abstracting over it, and the DM calls for a Charisma (Harp) check rather than Charisma (Performance) because it is playing the Harp that matters for the story. Any attempts to impress the king by playing the harp may get advantage, have a lower DC than other methods, or be the only method that works but it is an automatic success -- all only if the player is proficient with the harp.

It is a bit up for interpretation, both on when and how to apply the rules or whether your group even should. Like so many other things in D&D, your mileage may vary.

[Vogonjeltz]

Not even a goliath? They could probably *eat nails for breakfast and excrete chain. (*A finnish idiom, not sure if it works in english that well)

Sounds similar to the line from Rocky (1976):

Mickey: You'll be able to spit nails, kid. Like the guy says, you're gonna eat lightning and you're gonna crap thunder. You're gonna become a very dangerous person.