Is there any major drawback to allowing Expertise with tools?

[Sir_Chivalry]

Hello, I've got a rogue PC in my game who's going with the Ghallanda Halfling from Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron, and they wanted to know if they could get Expertise in brewer's and cook's tools (as the subrace focuses a lot on those two tool kits). I'm thinking of allowing it

Am I setting myself up for anything nasty or broken?

[Man_Over_Game]

Hello, I've got a rogue PC in my game who's going with the Ghallanda Halfling from Wayfinder's Guide to Eberron, and they wanted to know if they could get Expertise in brewer's and cook's tools (as the subrace focuses a lot on those two tool kits). I'm thinking of allowing it

Am I setting myself up for anything nasty or broken?

On the contrary, tools are generally considered worse than skills. There's very little that Cook's Tools can do that something as simple as Prestidigitation or some other food-modification spell couldn't do. If you're at all worried, read up on Xanathar's list of possible tool uses, and see if anything stands out in your campaign.

Generally, as a DM, it'll be your job to figure out how to make that choice TOO good than it is to think it'll get there naturally. Anything overpowered already has some sort of restriction or warning label associated with it (like stacking Concentration spells).

[JNAProductions]

I highly doubt anything will break. If anything, if they're trading Expertise in a skill for Expertise in a tool, they're probably gonna feel like they're LESS powerful.

In other words, go for it. Assign some small cost to it, but nothing substantial, or give all other players similar, minor boons.

[Chronos]

The player is going to try to find some way to solve every problem using cooking and/or brewing. This is a good thing. If you think the player is likely to think of creative ways to do that, let them. If you don't think they're likely to think of clever ways to use them, that's when you might want to steer them to something else (but still allow it if they insist).

[Man_Over_Game]

The player is going to try to find some way to solve every problem using cooking and/or brewing. This is a good thing. If you think the player is likely to think of creative ways to do that, let them. If you don't think they're likely to think of clever ways to use them, that's when you might want to steer them to something else (but still allow it if they insist).

Me, I try to solve all of my problems using Cantrips.

Shape Water + Prestidigitation = Snow Cones, baby! Get 'em while they're (not) hot! (which is about 1 hour)

[Naanomi]

I virtually never have rolls with tools to begin with, instead allowing them to grant Advantage to other skill/attribute rolls when applicable. Apart from thieves’ Skills and maybe... navigation? Vehicle skills? Disguise Kit (and that is usually a Deception or Performance skill check)... I’m hard pressed to think when I would require a roll for expertise to matter mechanically

[ImproperJustice]

For what it’s worth, I have a Sorceror with Chef’s Tools proficiency and a pretty cool GM.
You can get a pretty decent amount of info sometimes by examining the kitchenware of an enemy base.
Who their trade partners or latest victims might be, a rough estimate on the number of people in the base, power structures and hierarchies within the base, etc....

[Sigreid]

Well, a hospitality marked halfling may be hoping to get hold of a Bag of Bounty and be able to produce Exquisite meals pretty much on demand.

[Keravath]

Keep in mind though that ONLY a rogue can take expertise in thieves tools. The description of expertise particularly calls out thieves tools as an option that isn’t mentioned for any of the other classes that can have expertise.

[Sigreid]

I also have a half elf with Prodigy that took expertise in a gaming set. He gambles for money in his down time.

[Naanomi]

Keep in mind though that ONLY a rogue can take expertise in thieves tools. The description of expertise particularly calls out thieves tools as an option that isn’t mentioned for any of the other classes that can have expertise.
There are a few UA feats that also explored the concept for other tools as well

[Chronos]

Quoth superninja109:

What's wrong with being clever?
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I said that if you think he will be clever, that's good.

[ImproperJustice]

Keep in mind though that ONLY a rogue can take expertise in thieves tools. The description of expertise particularly calls out thieves tools as an option that isn’t mentioned for any of the other classes that can have expertise.

Just to expand the subject, if you allow the current rendition of UA artificer, they have expertise with all tools they are proficient in.

Additionaly, it’s kinda crazy but humans, half-elves, and half-orcs can all grab Prodigy and gain expertise in a tool set.

[Jophiel]

Sort of along the same lines, I have a homebrew game world in the making where there (a) aren't a ton of native races/cultures to have languages and (b) is a little more grounded than stock 5e D&D so language skills like "Celestial" aren't appropriate. I can logically break "Common" into 2-3 different human tongues but I was toying with the idea of letting players trade in two language skills for a tool proficiency to help prevent everyone from speaking most of the possible tongues. You'd only get to do this once but it gave something back instead of just hard capping the languages you can know.

Anyone see a problem with this?

[Chronos]

As it is, the game places the same value on one language or one tool proficiency. If anything, trading two languages for a tool is shortchanging the players.

[Jophiel]

As it is, the game places the same value on one language or one tool proficiency. If anything, trading two languages for a tool is shortchanging the players.
True enough. I don't mind "shortchanging" the players since it would be optional and I think most players place more weight on a tool proficiency than a language. Up to them.