The Quest to balance the skills!

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm very interested in making the skills all equally as valuable as one another. However, with the long history of medicine's low value in DnD, and Perception being VERY overpowered compared to every other skill, this is currently not the case.

For example, there's such a thing as Passive Investigation (as mentioned by the Observant feat), but it's not mentioned once in the Sunless Citadel Module, where Passive Perception is mentioned roughly 6-7 times.

I'm going to put the skills here, giving a brief summary on the main concerns of each one are. My goal isn't to make every skill the same, but to make it so that the investment in one will be equally as useful as investing in another.

I'd really like your help in making these better.

I'm also going to propose a system to track how much work each skill needs. A +1 - +3 means it's better than average, with +3 being way too valuable, and -1 - -3 will reflect the opposite. A 0 roughly means it's where it should be in terms of rough value compared to other skills.

Acrobatics, 0: Could be used slightly more often, but is a commonly referred skill.

Animal Handling, -2: Commonly trumped by very low level spells. The only real value most people come up with using this is to tame animals/creatures, which generally requires too much time, and time out of the adventure, for a minor benefitting creature that has all the same weaknesses of a familiar.

Arcana, +2: Used as the poor man's Identify, very frequently used by adventurers.

Athletics, +1 Used for Swimming, Grappling, and Climbing, which can all come up fairly often. Not so much Encumbrance or endurance, since most people ignore that stuff. Might be used regularly if you have a grappler,

Deception, +1 Used a little bit too much. I really think it should just be used if someone should be questioning your bluff. Often competes with Persuasion.

History, -1 This often depends on the individual DM, but I find that most people who invest in it don't get the value back. Will Expertise in this skill ever seem like a good idea? Most people would say "No", which is a problem.

Insight, -1 Generally used less than Deception or Perception. I feel like this is a really awkward skill that you never really know if it's valuable or not. It's used for really just one thing, with varying degrees of success.

Intimidation, -2 There are just not enough uses for this outside of torture that make it a reliable skill. If you use it on most people, you wind up making an enemy.

Investigation, -1 Due to the fact that most traps are found with Perception, and then tinkered with Thieves' Tools, and with a severe lack of interesting/foreshadowing clues by DMs, this often doesn't get much use, I find.

Medicine, -3 Hard to justify investing in this since Healer's Kit resolves most reliable uses for it, the Healer Feat trumps it even more, and with the fact that many classes get abilities that cure or make them immune to poisons and diseases, it's just not worth it.

Nature, -3 Stuck somewhere between Religion and Survival, it's hard to use this skill as well as anyone would like. Who even takes this skill?

Perception, +3 Used to counter stealth. Used to find traps. Used to find enemies so they don't surprise you. Used to listen. Used to find far away stuff. It's used for everything, ok?

Performance, -1 Despite being a unique skill, it doesn't get as much use as it could.

Persuasion, 0 Used about as often as it should, I find. It's all about convincing people to see your side, and this comes up fairly often enough to see value in this skill.

Religion, -2: Very rarely will this come up, and even more rarely will it change much. "You recognize this is a nature temple...in the forest...with plants inside...etc"

Sleight of Hand, -2 Besides stealing stuff, it's hard to justify this skill. No "confirmed" combat uses of it, things like Juggling would likely fall under Performance or a tool check. Beyond stealing, how do you use this?

Stealth, +3 Used pretty frequently for those who have it. Very often will stealth be relevant, and often is used in combat for some of the biggest advantages of all: Surprise and Sneak Attack.

Survival, +3 Track stuff, hunt stuff, feed your friends and family. Map a region, know where you're going. It's the universal huntsman skill, and is rarely a waste.


My idea, to shift the value from some skills over to others, is by either creating new ways to cause some skills value (like valuable uses of the Medicine skill, usable at all levels), or by shifting uses of one skill over to another (like foraging being a Nature skill vs. a Survival skill). Ideally, I'd like to see someone get as much value out of the Medicine skill as a medic, as someone would being a spy with Stealth.

Now, if someone thinks the values are a bit off, make the suggestion and I'll try to modify it appropriately.

What are your suggestions, guys?

[Dungeon-noob]

I'll admit to limited play experience, but i disagree on some of the ratings here, and my experience on this forum tells me i'm not alone. Noticeably nature, history and religion get fairly bad ratings, when i myself consider them usefull but not great. Basicly 0s, if your DM isn't screwing up how he should be using them. Medicine is more usefull then -3 at the first half of the levels by virtue of being able to save tons of spell slots with it, or substituting for it if no better healer is present. And anyone who knows of the diplomancer style knows persuation and deception are very powerfull skills.

As for how to fix them, many of these suffer more from DM tendencies then actual design errors. I think the best way to help bolster a lot of the weaker skills is to come up with more interesting scenario's for DMs to focus on them or ways to include them more easily, the more general the better.

[RazorChain]

Why?

Now go and pick up a skill based system and read it. Then you will come to the conclusion that not all skills are as valuable.

The most valuable skill is the one that gets you out of trouble at the moment.

Sleight of hand is the most valuable skill when you slip that uncurable poison into the evil overlords drink

Athletics is the best skill when you need to scale that wall and throw down a rope to rest of the group

Investigation is the most awesome skill when you are trying to solve prince Humperdinks murder

Insight is the best skill when you find out that you are being manipulated by barons daughter

It is part of the job as a DM to make skills matter. In a game of political intrigue skills like deception, insight and persuasion might be the most valuable skills

[Man_Over_Game]

I'll admit to limited play experience, but i disagree on some of the ratings here, and my experience on this forum tells me i'm not alone. Noticeably nature, history and religion get fairly bad ratings, when i myself consider them usefull but not great. Basicly 0s, if your DM isn't screwing up how he should be using them. Medicine is more usefull then -3 at the first half of the levels by virtue of being able to save tons of spell slots with it, or substituting for it if no better healer is present. And anyone who knows of the diplomancer style knows persuation and deception are very powerfull skills.

As for how to fix them, many of these suffer more from DM tendencies then actual design errors. I think the best way to help bolster a lot of the weaker skills is to come up with more interesting scenario's for DMs to focus on them or ways to include them more easily, the more general the better.


Why?

Now go and pick up a skill based system and read it. Then you will come to the conclusion that not all skills are as valuable.

The most valuable skill is the one that gets you out of trouble at the moment.

Sleight of hand is the most valuable skill when you slip that uncurable poison into the evil overlords drink

Athletics is the best skill when you need to scale that wall and throw down a rope to rest of the group

Investigation is the most awesome skill when you are trying to solve prince Humperdinks murder

Insight is the best skill when you find out that you are being manipulated by barons daughter

It is part of the job as a DM to make skills matter. In a game of political intrigue skills like deception, insight and persuasion might be the most valuable skills

Valid points. I'm not necessarily saying there's anything really wrong with the system itself. I'm requesting ways, practical ways, that DM's can create value for these skills. Yes, you can slip that bad guy a poisoned drink, but how often does that come up? You're going to invest in Expertise, in a single skill, in the hopes that it saves your bacon once in the campaign? Or do you put that Expertise in something you're going to use every day, like Stealth?

How does a DM make the Nature skill as useful, as often, as the Stealth skill? What are some common problems that may be solved by it? I find that there are just certain skills that DMs neglect, because players neglect, because everyone thinks they're useless. How could we show otherwise?

@Dungeonnoob, it's worth noting that Medicine checks to stabilize someone does not bring them back into battle. The Healer's Kit + Healer Feat can do this, but it doesn't require a check, as can any other healing spell. Stabilizing someone requires your Action, but Healing Word can bring them back into battle with a bonus action and a level 1 slot, so you can go and get rid of the thing that knocked down your friend in the first place. At lower levels, it might be a necessity (like if your only caster refuses to heal), but a begrudging one at that, that's easily circumvented by Healing Potions.

[Willie the Duck]

Athletics has to be considered +3(situational) given its use in grapple checks (and the relative value vs. acrobatics is because you grapple a lot more if you are choosing to do so, so the offensive grapple value is key).

My group makes more traps and the like found with investigation, but also consider it to have taken over for 3e's "gather info" social skill.

We also generally have History take over for 3e's Knowledge: Nobility and Knowledge: Local.

[Galactkaktus]

You have passive scores for all skill checks they just aren't that widely used.

[Vogie]

If you reintroduce the 4e mechanic of Skill challenges into your games, this largely goes away. Players that have only, for example, Arcana and Perception skilled up will find themselves tapped out after a couple rounds, because the mechanic rewards the well-rounded.

If you were to try to change the system, I'd suggest pouring over some of the White Wolf books - replacing skill proficiencies with Dots would allow you to create something akin to feats, but spread out over the campaign.

[Man_Over_Game]

Athletics has to be considered +3(situational) given its use in grapple checks (and the relative value vs. acrobatics is because you grapple a lot more if you are choosing to do so, so the offensive grapple value is key).

My group makes more traps and the like found with investigation, but also consider it to have taken over for 3e's "gather info" social skill.

We also generally have History take over for 3e's Knowledge: Nobility and Knowledge: Local.

I made a dumb and forgot about grappling. Endurance doesn't come up very often, but I did jack the number up. Good advice.


You have passive scores for all skill checks they just aren't that widely used.
Sure. When would a passive Investigation skill be preferable to a passive Perception skill? How do we, the DMs, make those circumstances just as common as when a Passive Perception would be useful?

[Ganymede]

Instead of changing the skills, why not change the adventures?

[Wildarm]

A DM can definitely make less popular skills more useful in their adventure design. I keep track of what skills the party is proficient with and often give a person with a less common skill a chance to make a check to gain some useful info or advantage in a situation. Other players who would like to try usually have to come up with a RP reason why their character might know some specialized knowledge relative to the situation(which can be fun in it's own right). It's nice as it can shine the spotlight on a character and rewards player choice or creativity.

One of the things I hate the most about the skill system in 5e is there are very few ways of picking up additional skills through character levels outside of spending a feat. I always thought they should give players an additional skill choice from their class skills at Class Lv6 and Class Lv12(no expertise though). Characters keep improving in abilities but outside of skill monkey classes, they never improve in skills which I would consider core to a classes identity. Never learned anything about Religion before joining the church(lv1)? Too bad, your cleric NEVER learns anything more about religion.

[Galactkaktus]

Sure. When would a passive Investigation skill be preferable to a passive Perception skill? How do we, the DMs, make those circumstances just as common as when a Passive Perception would be useful?

Every time people are looking through things more thouroghly. And not just scanning the surface. And you don't want to roll for every instance of people searching rooms.

[Keravath]

I don't think I understand the point.

Each of the skills applies to a specific area of expertise/knowledge/skill. How often each comes up depends entirely on the nature of the challenges that are encountered and how the DM runs the encounters.

Each skill has a use but some are more niche than others since the situations where they are applicable come up less often. Rebuilding the skill system to address issues in the game in terms of how frequently the skills are required to solve in game problems seems to me to be looking at it from the opposite direction since it is the frequency of specific problems in the game that is the issue not the skills.

Would you want to create separate perception skills for seeing, hearing and smelling just so folks who are proficient at seeing something get to use their skill in a limited set of situations while other folks who are proficient at hearing perception would be applied for different challenges? It seems to me to add complexity with no benefit.

Besides which passive skills are a great tool and save a lot of dice rolling.

[stoutstien]

Give medicine skill free to druids and clerics. Allow them to use it to treat one disease/poison/lv of exhaustion per short/long rest with a check. Give advantage with a medical kit.

[Nidgit]

My experience is, if you're good with a skill, you're going to find more ways to try and apply it. If I'm good at Sleight of Hand, you can bet that I'm going to be stealing things left and right, grabbing additional clues, and planting evidence whenever I can. If I'm good at Performance, I'm going to be acting a lot to cause distractions and substitute it for Deception or Persuasion where possible. It's all about making the most of what skills you're good at. And that's even before building around specific skills into your playstyle, like grapplers or knights on horseback.

Really, the trickiest stuff to use are knowledge-based skills like Nature, Religion, or History, since those are pretty DM-dependent. As a DM, the best way to accommodate those is to allow the players a choice of which skills to use when attempting to recall/identify something, then tailoring what information you give them to the specific skill they used.

For example, suppose the party attempts to identify a magical creature. You give them a choice of using Arcana or Nature. Anyone doing well with Arcana learns any magical abilities the creature has, and perhaps insight on its origins. Nature successes give better insight on habits and skills the creature might have, whether it's likely to be alone, and so on. Both successes also get an estimate of how dangerous the creature is and possibly its weaknesses.

On a related note, you usually don't need more than two people per party to be proficient in a skill. Diversifying your skills and taking 'suboptimal' ones gives your party more options and gives your character more flavor.

[Willie the Duck]

I don't think I understand the point.
There's definitely a point (not sure if it is a good point, but there certainly is one). There are good and bad implementations to skill 'value' distribution:

2e AD&D had about 15 'non-weapon proficiency' slots worth of outdoor survival skills, and all it did was make sure that, unless you couldn't live without one, everyone focused on some other skill(s) because your could be a scrivener, vinter, rattlesnake tamer, poisonmaker, gemsmith, arcane knowledge expert, world linguist at large, and concert composer, arranger, and all instruments player for the investment it took you to be a decent outdoorsperson.
Likewise in 3.0 you paid the same skill points (and could, for the same gp cost, buy magic items which boosted) either such winners as Diplomacy, Concentration, and Use Magic Device (any of which could literally make or break your character), or such fun ones as Innuendo, Intuit Direction, Read Lips, and Scry (which were so situational or superfluous that they didn't even make the jump to 3.5)
Pathfinder spent some time rolling up 3e skills such as Move Silently and Hide into Stealth, given that they weren't considered useful enough on their own.

So yeah, there's reason to wonder if all the skills ought to be equal in cost and value and/or if the implementation is good. Particularly in cases where things 'don't have' to be as they are, such as the perception/investigation split, or whether grappling needs to be rolled up into the athletics skill.

That said, forcing the thing won't work. If sleight of hand just doesn't come up as often as perception, what are we going to do? Try to roll more stuff into sleight of hand (or it into something else)? How would that work? So much of this might be immutable, but it could be worth exploring. Certainly for someone's house rules.

[GlenSmash!]

One of the easiest things I've seen done is for the DM to just call for straight Ability Checks, and let the player decide if any Skill proficiency applies.

It will only work if you trust your players, but on the upside it will speed game play up, and you may stop caring about stuff like this altogether.

[Man_Over_Game]

One of the easiest things I've seen done is for the DM to just call for straight Ability Checks, and let the player decide if any Skill proficiency applies.

It will only work if you trust your players, but on the upside it will speed game play up, and you may stop caring about stuff like this altogether.

I really like this idea. It also follows the 5E philosophy of "There are no skill checks, only Ability checks with a possible proficiency". Tack on the idea that if there's two relevant proficiencies that you persuade are relevant, you get Advantage (much like what Xanathar's suggests for overlapping skills/tools).

It also covers the issue of some skills applying to different modifiers than they're normally listed with (like Medicine being a Wisdom check).

It doesn't quite cover EVERY situation (Investigation does nothing against Stealth checks, where Perception does), but it would mitigate a lot of the issues, at least. Or perhaps having a "stealth detection" slot where you can choose a default skill to use in place of Perception that can be used to find hidden characters. A character with Investigation might deduce that a character who's hiding would only come from a select few locations, and would already be looking at those locations for an assailant, where someone with Perception would detect the assailant using more natural means. A bit of a homebrew solution, but I don't see too many problems with it.

[Tiadoppler]

I'd love it if the skills were better balanced. My (house)rule of thumb regarding skills:

Acrobatics: Pretty good. Balancing can be tough, especially when climbing into ruined underground cities, riding airships, or fighting in the rigging of a galleon. Campaign dependent. I also use it for modelling graceful motion (i.e. when infiltrating high society, dancing at a ball)

Animal Handling: Pretty bad. Campaign dependent. If you use a lot of mounts, pack animals, or attack spiders (or whatever) it could be necessary.

Arcana: Good. It gets use whenever there's a magic thing, but doesn't get the results of Identify or Detect Magic.

Athletics: Really good. Unless your campaign is sedentary and low-combat, each character should strongly consider proficiency in Athletics. Being able to pursue, or flee from, an enemy is important.

Deception: Really good. Adventurers tend to lie, a lot.

History: Bad, so I've expanded it to include "sociology" and things like etiquette, or figuring out who's the most important person in a room when everyone's dressed the same, or "where's the most important part of this city, given that you can only see an unlabelled map of the streets"

Insight: Good. It gets used whenever there's an NPC who talks for more than 30 seconds.

Intimidation: Neutral. Very situational, as it should be. Intimidation makes sense, as-is.

Investigation: Bad, because everyone uses Perception in place of it. I try to enforce Perception = noticing something, Investigation = learning what that thing means, but players don't expect that distinction.

Medicine: Bad, because healer's kits, and healing magic both exist. I try to add little things like rerolling hit dice healing during rests.

Nature: Bad, because most campaigns don't have a common use for it, and it overlaps with Survival a lot. I try to use it as a source of plant and animal knowledge, but it could still be combined with Survival pretty easily.

Perception: Amazing.

Performance: Bad, useful in campaigns with intrigue, speeches, or the occasional musical interlude.

Persuasion: Pretty good, but can be bypassed by good roleplaying.

Religion: Bad, campaigns rarely go into the distinctions between deities. Identifying celestial/abyssal creatures gets done with Arcana more often than not. Could be combined with Arcana without losing much.

Sleight of Hand: Good. It's got a niche and it doesn't overlap with other skills.

Stealth: Amazing.

Survival: Good. Campaign dependent - if you're in the wilderness, it's an important skill until you have magic that solves everything. I'm not sure it's that interesting at high levels.

TL;DR: I use...
Acrobatics for dancing and graceful movement (infiltrating high society)
History for sociology and identifying certain social structures (personal status, etiquette, etc.)
Investigation for actually understanding subtle clues (that have been spotted with Perception) and drawing conclusions from them
Medicine for rerolling hit dice during a rest

[Kane0]

I came to slightly different conclusions on some of these

Acrobatics: About right
Animal Handling: Sucks on it's own, roll it into Survival
Arcana: About right
Athletics: Could potentially be split into Athletics for swimming, climbing, etc and 'Brawn' for
Deception: About right
History: Merge with Religion and Nature to make 'Lore'
Insight: About right
Intimidation: You could potentially reduce the three speech skills to two: 'Aggressive' and 'Assertive', but I haven't done so yet
Investigation: About right, assuming you actually use it for traps instead of Perception
Medicine: Still underutilized, but I like to keep this one around
Nature: Merge with History and Religions to make 'Lore'
Perception: About right, assuming you don't overload it by using it for ALL THE traps and secrets
Performance: Too narrow, bin it. You have tool proficiencies you can use instead
Persuasion: About right, but could be partially merged with the other speech skills to have 2 instead of 3 of them
Religion: Merge with History and Nature to make 'Lore'
Sleight of Hand: Underwhelming on it's own, but merge it with Thieves tools to make 'Thievery'
Stealth: About right
Survival: About right with Animal Handling thrown in

[Jerrykhor]

Skills are very YMMV, since we are all speaking from experience here, I assume? No 2 DMs run skills the same.

Acrobatics: +2. Gets used fairly often
Animal Handling: -2. Pretty useless unless you're a ranger or druid. Mounted combat is not popular, and for some like paladin, they use Find Steed.
Arcana: +3. Very important skill unless you don't mind learning things the hard way. Less so if your campaign is low magic.
Athletics: +3. Not as interchangable with Acrobatics as most would assume.
Deception: +1. About right
History: 0. This is a skill you hope at least one member in the party has.
Insight: +1. Really depends on DM
Intimidation: -1. Somehow this skill always seem more valuable in theory than actual play.
Investigation: +2. You are severely underestimating the usefulness of this skill.
Medicine: -2. Usually only gets used by 1 member in the party.
Nature: -2. The problem with this skill is that it is tied to INT, which is a dump stat for the classes that use it (Rangers and Druids).
Perception: +3. Still the most important skill by a country mile
Performance: -3. I hardly even see Bards use this. Probably the most useless skill in the game.
Persuasion: +2. You rated it too low. Unless your party is made up of murderhobos who kill first and loot later, this skill would definitely see use. Lower rating if your campaign is mostly dungeon crawls.
Religion: -2. Same problem with Nature
Sleight of Hand: -1. I personally like this skill. Though it doesn't see much use, i wouldn't merge it with anything.
Stealth: +2. About right
Survival: 0. Used a lot in wilderness settings.

[sophontteks]

Insight can trump some pretty powerful spells. It can detect lies, reveal intentions, and explain unusual npc behavior. It can provide some additional information of a more unusual variety:
Does Creature X appear to think we are food?
Is the guard attracted to character X?
And finally it can work as a counter to basically all of the social skills.

Performance the worse skill in the game seems like a pretty odd choice for one of the best skills in the game. Have you played with a bard before? That's like, their skill.
- The most obvious use is to improve the parties favor among strangers by raising the attitude of those witnessing the performance.
- It's a great distraction tool.
- A war-like performance can coax a timid group into fighting when they would normally run.
- It works as an at-will calm emotions in all regards.
- It's a great cover for the party. We are just wandering performers, see?
- And, of course, its a great money-making tool.
- I've even used performance to scare an enemy. I've forced an NPC out of hiding by playing a song about brutally killing them. Oh, sure, I could just intimidate, but I'm getting so much more by taking expertise in performance.

Do the skills really need to be balanced or is this a case of just underestimating how certain skills can be used?

[Lord Vukodlak]

In my group medicine is commonly used for forensics identifying what killed someone were they sliced by a claw or a sword. Was their poison or disease involved.

[strangebloke]

SMH...

The skills being imbalanced is fine. I know that sounds like a classic "Nothing is wrong with 5e" statement, but the skills system is not and never was intended to be balanced.

And the thing is, because of the background system, you pretty much always have access to all the skills you'd actually be good at anyway, so yes, some skills get picked more often, but that's not really a problem. Or rather, it would be, except that your character is going to be part of a party.

Like lets say we have a character, and he picks animal handling over perception. Now, how likely is it that his failure to take perception results in the party getting surprised? Well, its actually pretty low, since likely two other people in the party would have had similar or better perception scores anyway, and in most usages of perception (IE, passive perception) only the highest modifier matters.

So yeah, in all likelihood, he doesn't use his animal handling all that often. But then it comes up for whatever reason, and he's the only one who can reasonably be expected to step forward, whereas when it comes to watching camp, there's probably 2-3 people who can fill in. And this is of course ignoring a fighter who is mounted.

To reference your signature, perception isn't always the better choice, even if it generally is.

Now, in reality his proficiency matters less than someone else's +5 WIS but that's a problem with how untrained checks are always-allowed, not a problem with the individual usages for each of the skills. In my games I rule that untrained checks are at disadvantage for a lot of things (Arcana, Nature, Medicine, History, Religion, Animal Handling) I suppose you could consider this a buff of sorts but I truly just picked those options because they seemed the sort of thing that you'd genuinely need training or talent for. Everybody knows how to lie at least a little bit. Not everyone knows how to apply a bandage.

[Kane0]

Intimidation: -1. Somehow this skill always seem more valuable in theory than actual play.

Indeed. Flies, honey, vinegar

[Gilrad]

Aside from a few obvious cases of "these are skills that you can make a skill check to do something or learn something" like Athletics for grappling, or, most glaringly, perception for seeing things, I feel that taking the DMGs advice and throwing away the concept of skill checks and run everything as ability checks with a possibility for proficiency is the best way to handle the discrepancies of use.

Additionally, simply granting people proficiency if it's a task that they would obviously be proficient in (such as a wrestler PC identifying a specific style of wrestling though an int check) can blunt the importance of choosing the must-choose skills.


As for improving the use of int versus Wis checks, I always think of it like this: If the player wants to know any kind of detailed information, it's linked to int (though clearly obvious facts might go off passive int to avoid rolling over every detail to the setting), whereas wisdom is more vague hints such as "that music box stands out somehow" or the writing you see doesn't match the writing on the rest of the walls".

The only real thorn is perception. I think the best way to deal with it is to simply treat perception, insight, and investigation as three of the same flavor of skill so players at least have a bit of variety in their must-have narrative skills.

[Willie the Duck]

Additionally, simply granting people proficiency if it's a task that they would obviously be proficient in (such as a wrestler PC identifying a specific style of wrestling though an int check) can blunt the importance of choosing the must-choose skills.

Barbarians of Lemuria uses this model. You don't have specific skills, so much as a background or career. If you can convince your DM that this activity is something that someone of your background/career-type would do/be good at, you get that game's equivalent of proficiency bonus to your roll. It's pretty good for what it's designed to do, although just like 5e, it then just favors backgrounds that have touches of sentry, athlete, and sneak (in other words, the system can be gamed).

[BobZan]

I use Investigation and Passive Investigation to detect traps and secret passages in the games I DM. Increasing its uses and reducing Perception awesomeness (still awesome).

For Knowledges, most of the time, I use them passively to tell what the players know about a given situation, rarely let active roll. The game flows pretty well.

[Pex]

It's up to the DM. The DM has to make skills important. He does need to be careful of players trying too hard of wanting to make skills relevant to anything and everything, but player enthusiasm should be encouraged.

To improve Medicine:

Allow a roll to determine how many hit points an opponent has as a bonus action. For a roll of 20+ you can get the exact number but even on 15 you can know if it will take one or two hits to bring an opponent down or tell the paladin not to waste a smite on it because of overkill. On a successful check if you then attack and bring an opponent down to 1 or 2 hit points it actually drops to 0 hit points.

Use Medicine or Herbalism Tools to make healing potions and anti-toxins.

[Amdy_vill]

Sleight of Hand, -2 Besides stealing stuff, it's hard to justify this skill. No "confirmed" combat uses of it, things like Juggling would likely fall under Performance or a tool check. Beyond stealing, how do you use this?


as dm i have let players sleight of hand weapons, position and other thing like that out of the hands and the pockets of enemies. when the wizards runs out of spells and can't find his wands it becomes an easier fight

[Pelle]

It's up to the DM. The DM has to make skills important.

I would rather say it's up to the DM to allow skills to be important. I think it's mainly the player's responsibility to find opportunities to use their skills. After all, they are the ones who choose what kind of approach they want to take to overcome challenges. The DM should of course try to have varied encounters, but "this is the Handle Animal encounter, this is the Sleight of Hand encounter" is bad DMing IMO. In my experience, the types of encounters the party face and the whole campaign is very much shaped by their abilities, since they play to their strengths.

[Mith]

I would rather say it's up to the DM to allow skills to be important. I think it's mainly the player's responsibility to find opportunities to use their skills. After all, they are the ones who choose what kind of approach they want to take to overcome challenges. The DM should of course try to have varied encounters, but "this is the Handle Animal encounter, this is the Sleight of Hand encounter" is bad DMing IMO. In my experience, the types of encounters the party face and the whole campaign is very much shaped by their abilities, since they play to their strengths.

Agreed to this. It helps for the DM to know what skills the player has, since they can infer from when the player says "I do X", the character would work to their strengths and apply a their proficent skills if they can.

[clash]

I might score them a bit different but I think you are on the right track generalizing some and splitting some up to get the right balance of usage. Using your score system I would give each one a positive number from say 1-7 instead to make balancing easier. Ie:
Acrobatics, 4:
Animal Handling, 2:
Arcana, 6:
Athletics, 5
Deception, 5
History, 3
Insight, 3
Intimidation, 2
Investigation, 3
Medicine, 1
Nature, 1
Perception, 7
Performance, 3
Persuasion, 4
Religion, 2
Sleight of Hand, 2
Stealth, 7
Survival, 7

Then it becomes a matter of choosing your target number. I personally argue for perception being a bit on the high side but mostly right so lets aim for 6 +-1

Lets combine Acrobatics with Performance for and make it a dex skill, call it refined movement or something like that for 7

Roll up animal handling, Nature and Medicine into a wis nature skill give it at least a 5

Leave Arcana at 6

Athletics we will leave at 5 for now

Deception as well 5

Roll History and Religion together and call it just History for 5

Roll Insight and Investigation Together call it inspection or scrutiny for 6

Combine Intimidation and Persuasion and call it Assertiveness or Manipulation for 6

Perception still at 7

I agree on rolling sleight of hand into thievery

Stealth and Survival both at 7

Instead of having a variance of 7 this reduces it to a variance of 2 and gives a final skill list of 11 skills:

Dex(Controlled Movement)
Dex(Stealth)

Wis(Nature)
Wis(Perception)
Wis(Survival)

Int(Arcana)
Int(History)
Int(Scrutiny)

Str(Athletics)

Cha(Deception)
Cha(Manipulation)


To compensate for the lower number of skill take away one background skill.
It would still be nice to get more strength skills but it is what it is.

[SuperFerret]

I would rather say it's up to the DM to allow skills to be important. I think it's mainly the player's responsibility to find opportunities to use their skills. After all, they are the ones who choose what kind of approach they want to take to overcome challenges. The DM should of course try to have varied encounters, but "this is the Handle Animal encounter, this is the Sleight of Hand encounter" is bad DMing IMO. In my experience, the types of encounters the party face and the whole campaign is very much shaped by their abilities, since they play to their strengths.

I think the burden falls on both sides. A DM who leaves no opportunities for Animal Handling or the various Lore skills is doing a disservice to their player(s) who chose those skills. Meanwhile, a PC with Sleight of Hand, Acrobatics, and/or Investigation should be actively looking for opportunities to use those skills. To borrow an example, if you have Expertise in Sleight of Hand and you only poison someone's drink once in a full campaign, you're wasting your potential.

Some skills are proactive and some are reactive regarding their use. A good example is Deception vs. Insight. You can make use of Deception all you want, just tell lies constantly, but if nobody is telling you lies, you'll have few opportunities to use Insight. (Obviously a simplified example, but it's illustrative.)

[Man_Over_Game]

I think the burden falls on both sides. A DM who leaves no opportunities for Animal Handling or the various Lore skills is doing a disservice to their player(s) who chose those skills. Meanwhile, a PC with Sleight of Hand, Acrobatics, and/or Investigation should be actively looking for opportunities to use those skills. To borrow an example, if you have Expertise in Sleight of Hand and you only poison someone's drink once in a full campaign, you're wasting your potential.

Some skills are proactive and some are reactive regarding their use. A good example is Deception vs. Insight. You can make use of Deception all you want, just tell lies constantly, but if nobody is telling you lies, you'll have few opportunities to use Insight. (Obviously a simplified example, but it's illustrative.)

Even the most lucrative DM would have to ignore several RAW to make Expertise Animal Handling better than a level 1 Druid.

Sure, you have a pack animal. You lure away wolves from attacking you.

But now you're level 10. Can't you just...buy a better steed rather than spending several months training one? Most dangerous beasts (Dire wolves and the such) aren't going to be lured away by mundane means if they're trying to do more than feed.

What is the best case scenario for an adventurer to use Animal Handling at level 10? 15? Not anything worthwhile, not anything I can really think of, unless you're willing to be bending a few rules.

[KorvinStarmast]

I am with @strangebloke on this one. This appears to be a solution in search of a problem.

In a given campaign, and in a given adventure, different skills will be more useful at different times.

[Wildarm]

Even the most lucrative DM would have to ignore several RAW to make Expertise Animal Handling better than a level 1 Druid.

Sure, you have a pack animal. You lure away wolves from attacking you.

But now you're level 10. Can't you just...buy a better steed rather than spending several months training one? Most dangerous beasts (Dire wolves and the such) aren't going to be lured away by mundane means if they're trying to do more than feed.

What is the best case scenario for an adventurer to use Animal Handling at level 10? 15? Not anything worthwhile, not anything I can really think of, unless you're willing to be bending a few rules.

This is sort of handled already by proficiency bonus. DC to lure/scare away a pack of wolves - Maybe DC13. Dire Wolves DC20. Your scaling proficiency bonus at higher levels helps you achieve these fantastic feats of skill. TBH I feel the proficiency bonus doesn't scale fast enough for my liking to give the feeling that characters are epic in skill/knowledge. You usually need expertise and some feat or ability that provides advantage to come close to that feeling.

Otherwise, it still ends up being the RNG of the dice controlling your fate more than your characters mastery of a skill for DC20+ tasks. At least Lv10 characters can do DC10 things without a chance of failure the majority of the time. Rolling 1 is not an automatic failure for skills and you usually have +8/9 at that level for key skills. For higher DC actions you definitely want someone else assisting you for advantage. I guess that works into the group effort dynamic of D&D.

[some guy]

I'm thinking of changing Animal Handling, Medicine and Performance from Skills to Tool proficiencies. The only reason I haven't yet is because I'm too lazy to customize character sheets (except for when I'm a player, then I draw my own sheets, but when I'm a player I don't play with my house rules).

There are some other skills that I haven't seen used as much as the top tier ones, but nowhere near the the low frequency of these three skills.

[Dudewithknives]

I would put the performance skill at a -3, even further if it was possible?

You cant influence the crowd with it, that is persuasion.
You cant distract with it, that is deception.
You cant actually play music with it, that is a tool skill.


The only thing it does is entertain, like make a few gold in downtime, but even that is really just the entertainer background that does not even need performance to do it.
No class ability uses it, no spell uses it, hell, not even bards use it for anything anymore.

This skill will never be used, ever, unless your dm feels bad for you wasting a skill on it and makes up something.

[Pelle]

Heh, the highlight and climax of my last session was a Performance check. Two pcs performed with their shtick (a storytelling enhanced with acrobatics act), and were accepted to stay at the enemy (temporary) HQ, gathering important intel for the heist next session...

[Dudewithknives]

Heh, the highlight and climax of my last session was a Performance check. Two pcs performed with their shtick (a storytelling enhanced with acrobatics act), and were accepted to stay at the enemy (temporary) HQ, gathering important intel for the heist next session...

If you are using the skill to get people to like you then it is a persuasion check.

[Man_Over_Game]

If you are using the skill to get people to like you then it is a persuasion check.

I'll be honest, if someone in my games said, "I'm gonna put on a show for them, using storytelling, dancing, acting, and performing talented physical tricks. I roll Persuasion", I'd definitely raise an eyebrow.

[Dudewithknives]

I'll be honest, if someone in my games said, "I'm gonna put on a show for them, using storytelling, dancing, acting, and performing talented physical tricks. I roll Persuasion", I'd definitely raise an eyebrow.

Just making a performance like that is performance like you say, however when you try to make them like you better or change their attitude it becomes persuasion.

[Ganymede]

Just making a performance like that is performance like you say, however when you try to make them like you better or change their attitude it becomes persuasion.

Merely wishing to "change someone's attitude" is not enough to make it a Persuasion check; virtually any skill/tool could be used to change someone's attitude given the right circumstances. You might be able to get people to like you by cooking them a great dinner, impressing them with a dominating arm wrestling match, recalling interesting trivia, lying about a noble pedigree, etc.

Persuasion is using tact, social graces, or good nature to change someone's attitude.

[Dudewithknives]

Merely wishing to "change someone's attitude" is not enough to make it a Persuasion check; virtually any skill/tool could be used to change someone's attitude given the right circumstances. You might be able to get people to like you by cooking them a great dinner, impressing them with a dominating arm wrestling match, recalling interesting trivia, lying about a noble pedigree, etc.

Persuasion is using tact, social graces, or good nature to change someone's attitude.

Inspiring a crowd is a specific use of the persuasion skill listed in the book.

Performance is to entertain, nothing more. If the gm lets Mocs warm up to you or like you more that is just the dm rping the group not using a skill.

[Pex]

This is sort of handled already by proficiency bonus. DC to lure/scare away a pack of wolves - Maybe DC13. Dire Wolves DC20. Your scaling proficiency bonus at higher levels helps you achieve these fantastic feats of skill. TBH I feel the proficiency bonus doesn't scale fast enough for my liking to give the feeling that characters are epic in skill/knowledge. You usually need expertise and some feat or ability that provides advantage to come close to that feeling.

Otherwise, it still ends up being the RNG of the dice controlling your fate more than your characters mastery of a skill for DC20+ tasks. At least Lv10 characters can do DC10 things without a chance of failure the majority of the time. Rolling 1 is not an automatic failure for skills and you usually have +8/9 at that level for key skills. For higher DC actions you definitely want someone else assisting you for advantage. I guess that works into the group effort dynamic of D&D.

Or you need to adjust the DCs you're assigning. You might think something is DC 20 when it's appropriate to be DC 15.

[Ganymede]

Inspiring a crowd is a specific use of the persuasion skill listed in the book.

Yeah, it is, but in the context of inspiring "a group of people with tact, social graces, or good nature." Those words were not an accident; they are a direct quote of the Persuasion entry.

[Dudewithknives]

Yeah, it is, but in the context of inspiring "a group of people with tact, social graces, or good nature." Those words were not an accident; they are a direct quote of the Persuasion entry.

No, that is not a quote from the entry, that is 2 different lines put together and quoted.

The quote is:

Performance. Your Charisma (Performance) check
determines how well you can delight an audience with
music, dance, acting, storytelling, or some other form of
entertainment.

Persuasion. When you attempt to influence someone
or a group o f people with tact, social graces, or good
nature, the DM might ask you to make a Charisma
(Persuasion) check. Typically, you use persuasion when
acting in good faith, to foster friendships, make cordial
requests, or exhibit proper etiquette. Examples of
persuading others include convincing a chamberlain to
let your party see the king, negotiating peace between
warring tribes, or inspiring a crowd o f townsfolk.


You can entertain people and make them happy with performance.
If you use it to make the crowd happy and then ask to stay, that is persuasion.
If you use a performance to try to get a group on your side, or to get them to let you stay under false pretense, that could be persuasion or deception depending on how you play it.
If the group asks you to stay because they liked your performance, that is the GM roleplaying an NPC.

[Ganymede]

"a group of people with tact, social graces, or good nature."


No, that is not a quote from the entry, that is 2 different lines put together and quoted.

The quote is:

["]a group o f people with tact, social graces, or good
nature["]


This is the kind of stuff that makes me hate this forum. Have a good day.

[Trustypeaches]

I think the issue with medicine is that it has such an incredible limited entry and suggested uses, probably an attempt to balance that it has actual in-combat use.

A Wisdom (Medicine) check lets you try to stabilize a dying companion or diagnose an illness.
If you treat proficiency in Medicine as a general knowledge and understanding of the subject of Medicine, however, it's logical uses become a lot more broad. For example...

When players examine the body of a deceased or sickly creature, an understanding of Medicine will aid in determining the nature of its wounds or cause of death. They may even potentially be familiar with potential sources of such ailments, based on their readings or personal experience.

Example: “The town crier had received a foul, blackened wound that you recognize to be the result of necrotic damage. (good roll) The lack of puncture or signs of other physical damage, however, suggest the attack was magical in its delivery, a wound you’ve read is often caused by Ghosts and other spectral undead”
"The peasants feverish sweat and rotted fingernails are indicative of an infection, as well as some clear malnutrition"
A hero proficient in Medicine may be better able to gauge the potential adverse (or beneficial) medical effects of various actions, magics, environmental conditions, etc. This can be exceptionally broad, with both narrative and mechanical uses:

Examples:
"We'll want to be careful to cover our wounds when exploring the undead ruins, as they're more likely to get infected"
"A drop from that height would probably be lethal"
"If we continue traveling through the night, we'll probably be exhausted tomorrow"
"You'll probably be able to hold your breath for about one minute in the cold water"
"Drinking that cask of century old ale should be fine"
Heroes proficient with medicine may be more familiar with various diseases, illnesses, or even magical effects as well as the curatives necessary to reverse them: how to cure a creature petrified by a basilisk, for example.
They may also notice symptoms and medical problems more quickly in general than others: a feverish sweat, a rotted fingernail, a subtle involuntary twitch.
These are all situational and could arguably be covered by other skills, but a general understanding of health, physiology, etc are all very useful things to have as an adventurer, even if its a DM's job to demonstrate that.

Really, the most obvious way to make Medicine useful is to implement some kind of disease / injury system that interacts with the skill. Injuries that are too complex to be cured instantly through typical magic. After his foot is coated in lava during a scuffle with Duergar, the rogue struggles to move nimbly and has reduced movement speed and disadvantage on Stealth checks until someone can treat it properly. Or maybe you get an injury if you fail a CON save after falling unconscious and being stabilized.

These systems can often be cumbersome and unfun, however, so take caution.

[Trustypeaches]

Also in regards to Performance, it can be used when you are attempting to impersonate someone or pretend to be someone you are not.

One may consider your ability to lie convincingly (deception) to be distinct from your ability to convincingly act like someone else (performance). Both skills are referenced in the Actor feat, notably.

[Finger6842]

This is a very different discussion at our table. Almost every skill is used, players initiate an attempt, often attempting to include a couple skills, and the DM adjudicates it. Sometimes we get advantage, or disadvantage (/frown) based on the stated case. It often relates to how much teamwork we display. We, as a party, do a lot of Performance related things during downtime, specifically to improve our access and reputation. Of course there are many others but to provide a few specific examples our DM has actually used.


Handling a beast or plant during an Awaken attempt can use several skills.
Proficiency in Animal Handling or Nature MIGHT provide advantage on the Awakened beast staying around when you are done.
Animal Handling, Athletics, Insight, Nature, Performance, Slight of Hand can all be used in different ways to prevent bad things from happening during the attempt.



Tired of waking up in jail after a good drunk? Of course the only way out is to agree to protect the village or find the missing mayor?
OR
Meet a bunch of strangers in a tavern...
Players want to discover things and chase those specific things. And thus the party Reputation, Lore, and Rumor mills become relevant.

Heard a tale about gloves that give you great strength? Use investigation to find resources that may help you locate the object. Use Arcana to find information in the wizard hall, use persuasion, deception, intimidation or stealth to gain access to the hall in the first place. Use Nature to find the location of the Ruins based on the location description in the tale, use History to find out who may know more about it or find a book in the library. Find more information at the local temple using Religion or Performance skills.

The best part, when you get to mysterious Phandelver there's no guarantee that any particular item is actually there. What you do have is hope and no feeling you were railroaded.



As a Bard I love the Performance skill but then so does my DM. Oddly, I think our Rogue uses it more.
The Rogue does a lot of Knife throwing. She uses the act for infiltration, moneymaking, fun and a LOT of bets.
Insight and/or investigation help her find a likely audience.
Athletics, Sleight of Hand and Performance help her with the actual act.
I might provide some illusion type assistance on the down low and between the two of us, it's a very successful tactic.
Now toss in the Wizard and Cleric, who will happily assist just for kicks, and many of these events can be interesting. Guidance, Thaumaturgy, Light, Mending, Minor Illusion, Prestidigitation, ETC can all create "advantageous" situations.

The Cleric likes to use our performances, dedicated to his deity, as a form of tithe.
This has the brilliant side effect of improving our reputation as a group, which in turn gets us access to more information etc for other endeavors.



Acrobatics, +3
Animal Handling, +1
Arcana, +2
Athletics, +3
Deception, +1
History, +2
Insight, +3
Intimidation, -1
Investigation, +3
Medicine, 0 (because of a house rule (+1 to all heal dice) this skill is more valuable at our table +1)
Nature, +2
Perception, +10 (Undisputed King of Skills :)
Performance, +2
Persuasion, +3
Religion, +2
Sleight of Hand, +1
Stealth, +3
Survival, +3


The end result is that players have to find ways to be creative that help their agenda while DM's have to be flexible but still find balance. Our group routinely uses most of the skills, even when we're not proficient in them. Sometimes we use the help action if multiple people can provide the best chance for success. I have used a performance to give the Rogue advantage on Slight of Hand to pickpocket a Ruffian or two, great fun, even when you fail...bar fight anyone?

[sophontteks]

Inspiring a crowd is a specific use of the persuasion skill listed in the book.

Performance is to entertain, nothing more. If the gm lets Mocs warm up to you or like you more that is just the dm rping the group not using a skill.
There are 4 skills that can change someone's attitude, and they all have significant overlap. Its all a matter of how you are doing it which determines which skill is used. Nothing supports this idea you have that performance is only used for entertainment, and even if it did, entertaining people is inspiring them. You are inspiring them to be happy. And you can inspire them ti be sad, angry, peaceful, violent, etc.

The descriptions of the skills are intentionally vague to allow a large amount of creativity. If through all of this creative freedom the most you think the skill can do is entertain, the skill is not the problem.

[Ganymede]

Also in regards to Performance, it can be used when you are attempting to impersonate someone or pretend to be someone you are not.

One may consider your ability to lie convincingly (deception) to be distinct from your ability to convincingly act like someone else (performance). Both skills are referenced in the Actor feat, notably.

Yeah, the Actor feat really muddies the water because it mentions both Deception and Performance being used to impersonate someone.

[Man_Over_Game]

Yeah, the Actor feat really muddies the water because it mentions both Deception and Performance being used to impersonate someone.

One is used as a criminal profession, as in pretending to be something you're not to deceive others. The other is used for an artist's profession, actively expressing a false identity for the entertainment of others.

One uses planning, psychology, and habits. The other uses vibrancy, overacting, to draw powerful emotions.

I could see both being used to distract a guard, but Deception would be to compel the guards to reach their own conclusion ("There's someone hurt in the alley, down thataways. They looked hurt real bad), where Performance would be to force those emotions dramatically (Guards! Come quick! There is violence! Oh, the violence! What will come of us!?).

Or, simplified, being real vs. being obvious.

-----------------

There's a lot of overlap with skills. I don't think there's anything wrong with that inherently. But some cover a lot more ground than others, and some can't hold an identity of their own. Perception and Investigation have a decent amount of overlap, but Investigation also competes with things like Survival (tracking), History (Knowledge), and Thieves' Tools (Dealing with devices/traps). Perception, on the other hand, covers what you see and what you can sense, and not much else really falls into this domain other than this one skill. That's probably why 3.5 and older editions had several skills used just to detect someone.

[sophontteks]

Oops wrong person disregard :P

[Prince Vine]

For Sleight of Hand I always use it to hide weaponry and other cobtraband on my person in formal settings. My last wizard specifically had extra knives hidden that way for emergency booming blades.

[Pelle]

Inspiring a crowd is a specific use of the persuasion skill listed in the book.

Performance is to entertain, nothing more. If the gm lets Mocs warm up to you or like you more that is just the dm rping the group not using a skill.

The Performance check in question was about delivering a great show, which they did. The direct consequence of performing good was they were allowed to stay longer at the inn for an encore, which allowed them to observe the room of their target. The check wasn't about being liked personally or changing attitude, it was about providing value to a customer. The direct consequence of delivering a bad show would be being politely escorted to the door. Considering the consequences of the check as just rp is a narrow view, none of what happened would be possible without a sucessful check.

[Dudewithknives]

The Performance check in question was about delivering a great show, which they did. The direct consequence of performing good was they were allowed to stay longer at the inn for an encore, which allowed them to observe the room of their target. The check wasn't about being liked personally or changing attitude, it was about providing value to a customer. The direct consequence of delivering a bad show would be being politely escorted to the door. Considering the consequences of the check as just rp is a narrow view, none of what happened would be possible without a sucessful check.

That was totally up to the dm role playing an box, he could have easily just said that they tip you well and move on.

The skill just entertains, nothing more. It does not even directly change an attitude other than from dm rp.

The dm was just being nice.

[sophontteks]

That was totally up to the dm role playing an box, he could have easily just said that they tip you well and move on.

The skill just entertains, nothing more. It does not even directly change an attitude other than from dm rp.

The dm was just being nice.
This is just, like, your opinion man. It's baseless.

At any rate I'd tell the author. He's giving misguided advice about performance being used for inspirational speeches.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/12/21/theodenaragornwilliamwallace-persuasion-or-performance-check/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwiiwMeb2LXeAhXohOAKHQmXDXAQFjAAegQIBhAB&usg=AOvVaw15AT9C7W6WmSR_WUXnBWer&ampcf=1

Poor guy is here saying that performance can literally be used to inspire people, and we know that can't be true because this skill is clearly only meant to be fluff.

[Pelle]

That was totally up to the dm role playing an box, he could have easily just said that they tip you well and move on.

The skill just entertains, nothing more. It does not even directly change an attitude other than from dm rp.

The dm was just being nice.

Look, the stakes were clear to everyone before the roll. When an npc wants quality entertainment, Performance is the skill to have. As I said, changing attitudes was not relevant to situation, being able to provide an entertainment service was. Very few other avenues would have had a valid chance to succeed here. With your attitude, no wonder you don't see the potential value of this and other skills.

Yes, I am nice, but that's beside the point. Having certain skills gives you opportunities you wouldn't otherwise have. If you are in a situation where having a skill helps you reach your goal, that skill is valuable, although possibly situational.

[Trustypeaches]

That was totally up to the dm role playing an box, he could have easily just said that they tip you well and move on.

The skill just entertains, nothing more. It does not even directly change an attitude other than from dm rp.

The dm was just being nice.This is pedantic

Every skill is capable of changing attitude if used at the right time.

[Dudewithknives]

This is pedantic

Every skill is capable of changing attitude if used at the right time.

No, they are not.

You may role play a situation of the skill use and get a positive result of it.

You may come up to a group of thugs and roll some great athletics to pick up table and rip it in half and scare the thugs.

The DM may allow that, but that is not what the skill is supposed to do, that would be intimidate.

Using a skill to do the job of another skill is common but is really just hand holding by the dm to let people do something they are not qualfied for.

[sophontteks]

No, they are not.

You may role play a situation of the skill use and get a positive result of it.

You may come up to a group of thugs and roll some great athletics to pick up table and rip it in half and scare the thugs.

The DM may allow that, but that is not what the skill is supposed to do, that would be intimidate.

Using a skill to do the job of another skill is common but is really just hand holding by the dm to let people do something they are not qualfied for.
Lifting a table to scare someone would be an intimidation (strength) check. Its covered in the rules.

I'll take JCs call on performance over yours and wouldn't refer to his own interpetation of the skill as hand-holding. A performance is an entertaining act, but nowhere does it say how this entertaining act can influence people. I've already listed several ways such an act can be used in my first post.

[Dudewithknives]

Lifting a table to scare someone would be an intimidation (strength) check. Its covered in the rules.

I'll take JCs call on performance over yours and wouldn't refer to his own interpetation of the skill as hand-holding. A performance is an entertaining act, but nowhere does it say how this entertaining act can influence people. I've already listed several ways such an act can be used in my first post.

Your first line is exactly my point.

That is not athletics, that is someone trying to use atletics to justify using it for intimidate.
Same with using performance to make someone like you better.
That is covered by persuasion, it is in the rules.

The example of the performance geing done very well and the NPC inviting them in because they liked them is not a result of what the skill does in the book it is a result of the DM being rather generous and giving you a good RP reward for it.

[sophontteks]

Your first line is exactly my point.

That is not athletics, that is someone trying to use atletics to justify using it for intimidate.
Same with using performance to make someone like you better.
That is covered by persuasion, it is in the rules.

The example of the performance geing done very well and the NPC inviting them in because they liked them is not a result of what the skill does in the book it is a result of the DM being rather generous and giving you a good RP reward for it.
The actual definition of persuasion is different from yours...

"Persuasion is used when trying to convince others your way. It is distinct from Deception and Intimidation because it's not through lies or threats, but convincing arguments, tact, social graces, and good nature. It's used when acting in good, honest faith. Situations that call for persuasion include convincing guards to let you speak to a noble, settling disputes between warring groups, or inspiring crowds into action."

Its a speaking skill. They go on to explain why its distinct from other social skills, because they can all be used to similiar effect, influencing others, but this relies upon tact, convincing agruments, and social graces. If you are not using such things to influence others, its not a persuasion check.

Persuasion- convincing arguements and social graces
Intimidation- threats and shows of force.
Deception- lies and bluffs
Performance- acts and performances

Stating that a player influencing a person through a performance requires persuasion is misguided. You aren't using social graces or a convincing arguement, so why are you using this skill. All charisma skills influence people.

And JC explained that very thing in the link I shared. An inspiring speech in itself can be a performance check if you aren't trying to make an arguement. Its performance that shows your ability to make an impressive emotional speech that inspires people to fight. You aren't convincing them logically, your speech is a performance designed to fire them up.

[Pelle]

The example of the performance geing done very well and the NPC inviting them in because they liked them is not a result of what the skill does in the book it is a result of the DM being rather generous and giving you a good RP reward for it.

That's like saying the DM is generous when the NPC drinks the glass of wine that the PC dropped poison in using Sleigth of Hand. That was the DM being nice, the skill 'only' allowed you to put something into something unseen, no special value there. Thieves' Tools 'only' opens a lock, there's no value in that, the DM is only being generous if there's something imortant secured behind it. Stealth 'only' allows you to not be seen by the guard on watch. The consequence of not being seen might be that you avoid fighting lots of people, but the skill 'only' allowed you not to be detected by that one guard, so it's not really valuable.

You can't just look at the discrete result of the check itself when evaluating the value of a skill. You also need to consider the consequences that stems from that success.

[Trustypeaches]

No, they are not.

You may role play a situation of the skill use and get a positive result of it.

You may come up to a group of thugs and roll some great athletics to pick up table and rip it in half and scare the thugs.

The DM may allow that, but that is not what the skill is supposed to do, that would be intimidate.

Using a skill to do the job of another skill is common but is really just hand holding by the dm to let people do something they are not qualfied for.For most skills, the potential results of a roll are not explicitly stated in the rules.

Nowhere in the description for Sleight of Hand does it say that failing a check has any negative consequence beyond failing the task. So if the target of that failed Sleight of Hand check catches the player or becomes more hostile to them, is that an unreasonable outcome?

The same logic for negative outcomes applies to positive ones; a great performance may make the innskeep let you stay for free to draw in more customers, giving medical treatment to the mayor’s ailing child may improve his attitude towards you, getting caught by an NPC trying to stealth behind him may make them distrust the party.

It’s up to the DM to determine how the world and it’s characters reacts to player’s actions, including skill checks.

[BoxANT]

We house ruled History & Nature, but only slightly.

History, also includes knowledge of legal matters, contracts, local policies, etc.

Nature, is expanded to include natural philosophy (ie. physics, chemistry, etc).


Small change, but does flesh them both out and give them more applications.

[djreynolds]

You could toss a bonus to akin skills, for instance proficiency in athletics and acrobatics grants you advantage on your rolls.

You could take away the associated ability score.

The thing that D&D forgets is all of our attributes improve. We get stronger and smarter. And this poorly represented with a generic proficiency bonus.

I like to hand out partial backgrounds and skills as rewards to players.

For instance, I granted all players after surviving level 6 in OotA, the outlander background but only in the underdark

[Kane0]

Medicine can become much more important if lingering injuries are introduced

[Nidgit]

Nature, is expanded to include natural philosophy (ie. physics, chemistry, etc).
I like this rule a lot! It makes it kind of a natural counterpart to Arcana.

[BoxANT]

I like this rule a lot! It makes it kind of a natural counterpart to Arcana.


Pretty much. Nature covers the material world. History the world of man. Religion the spiritual world. Arcana the world of psyche.

[PhoenixPhyre]

As a note: the DMG is explicit in telling DMs to let players suggest alternate proficiencies for a check, and to generally accept them if they have a decent explanation of how it will help.

This isn't 3e, the stated uses are not comprehensive, not are they exclusive or restrictive. They're the default proficiencies for those tasks. Different ability scores and proficiencies are totally allowed for checks, even by a highly restricted (and unfun) reading of the text.