Does performance have a role? DM thinking.

[Entessa]

I was wondering what's the consensus about the skill performance. I tried to surf a bit on the .net to check what was the idea behind the skill, only to notice that many players have been relying on it simply to narrate a story or flavourful stuff, while leaving the "sheer" utility behind.

I'm wondering - If I use it for "utility", am I wrong thinking that it will just fall under intimidate/bluff/persuasion? Is it up to the DM?

[JNAProductions]

I was wondering what's the consensus about the skill performance. I tried to surf a bit on the .net to check what was the idea behind the skill, only to notice that many players have been relying on it simply to narrate a story or flavourful stuff, while leaving the "sheer" utility behind.

I'm wondering - If I use it for "utility", am I wrong thinking that it will just fall under intimidate/bluff/persuasion? Is it up to the DM?

It's up to the DM, ultimately.

And for me? I don't think it should be a skill at all. Cover it under tool proficiencies-instruments, singing, stuff like that.

[LudicSavant]

I was wondering what's the consensus about the skill performance. I tried to surf a bit on the .net to check what was the idea behind the skill, only to notice that many players have been relying on it simply to narrate a story or flavourful stuff, while leaving the "sheer" utility behind.

I'm wondering - If I use it for "utility", am I wrong thinking that it will just fall under intimidate/bluff/persuasion? Is it up to the DM?

Perhaps it might have been better if it was bought like a Tool Proficiency.

[Psyren]

It's up to the DM - but it's also up to you.

Remember, ability checks in 5e are ways you can apply your natural qualities to achieve a desired result. You decide the action you want to perform, and the DM decides if a check is necessary - but then the ball is back in your court to describe how you plan on achieving the result you want; and if you describe your action in such a way that your proficiency bonus can apply, the DM is encouraged to let it.

So if you're trying to influence someone's attitude or behavior, and the GM calls for a Charisma check, you can then ask if your Performance proficiency can apply if you employ your character's skill at performing in some way, like playing/singing them a song. There is no prohibition against Performance influencing someone's behavior, so it's up to you to advocate for being able to use it that way.


It's up to the DM, ultimately.

And for me? I don't think it should be a skill at all. Cover it under tool proficiencies-instruments, singing, stuff like that.


Perhaps it might have been better if it was bought like a Tool Proficiency.

I disagree, because not all performances use tools at all (e.g. dancing, singing, poetry.) So you'd be relegating all such characters to straight Charisma instead of Charisma + Proficiency.

Furthermore, if you're proficient in both performing and an instrument, show your GM the optional Xanathar's rule about getting advantage on the check if you have both a skill and a tool that apply to the same circumstance. This is one easy way that your Bard can truly excel at various things.

[LudicSavant]

I disagree, because not all performances use tools at all (e.g. dancing, singing, poetry.) So you'd be relegating all such characters to straight Charisma instead of Charisma + Proficiency.

Note that I said bought like a Tool proficiency. Not that it necessarily used a tool.

For example, one might be able to pick it up instead of a tool proficiency or language when customizing a background. Singers and dancers and poets will still be getting Charisma + proficiency, as always.

[Naanomi]

It has some practical overlap with deception in the 'master of disguise'/pretending to be someone else role, right?

[LudicSavant]

It has some practical overlap with deception in the 'master of disguise'/pretending to be someone else role, right?

Yes. For example, text from the Actor feat:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942152226489651240/unknown.png

Sadly, some DMs have a mentality that "if one skill does X, then another skill must NOT do X." Which doesn't seem to be the way the game was intended to work, and makes some skills a lot narrower than they ought to be.

For example, the Arcana skill can explicitly be used for locating and disarming any magical traps, even though other skills can also do that.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942151369295536210/unknown.png

If more DMs would properly embrace the notion that skills are supposed to be overlapping, then we'd have at a very minimum less problems with some skills being over-narrow.

[Willowhelm]

I don’t see it used or called for often but I think it’s perfectly fine as a proficiency.

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

Are you doing that? Is the goal entertainment/distraction/something that isn’t persuasion, intimidation or deception… then it makes sense.

I’d probably call for it in conjunction with other things. Player A puts on a performance, the outcome changes the DC of the sleight of hand for player B to steal from the crowd.

Trying to ingratiate yourself with the locals? Performance check on how successful your small talk and tall tales and lewd jokes are (which might alter the DC of a persuasion check when you want them to help you) etc

I think it isn’t chosen much and so people jump straight to convincing the DM to use persuasion/intimidation/deception because that’s where they have the bonus.

It could just be a straight charisma check of course. And the whole issue with people starting from a skill proficiency and making a “skill check” (not a thing in the rules) vs a ability check with applicable proficiency bonuses is a whole other topic of course.

[LudicSavant]

I don’t see it used or called for often but I think it’s perfectly fine as a proficiency.

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

Are you doing that? Is the goal entertainment/distraction/something that isn’t persuasion, intimidation or deception… then it makes sense.

Why did you feel a need to add the "if the goal is something that isn't Persuasion, Intimidation, or Deception" requirement?

It could have just been "are you doing that? Then you can use Performance." It's totally fine of more than one skill qualifies you to add proficiency to a check (just like both Arcana or Thieves Tools could be used to disarm a magical trap).

[Psyren]

Note that I said bought like a Tool proficiency. Not that it necessarily used a tool.

For example, one might be able to pick it up instead of a tool proficiency or language when customizing a background. Singers and dancers and poets will still be getting Charisma + proficiency, as always.

Ah my mistake, I understand you now. But swapping a tool (and especially a language) for a skill is a bit of a strong trade I'd say. There's a reason even Tasha's doesn't allow that.



It could have just been "are you doing that? Then you can use Performance." It's totally fine of more than one skill qualifies you to add proficiency to a check (just like both Arcana or Thieves Tools could be used to disarm a magical trap).

Agreed - and someone with both Arcana and thief tool proficiency should be exceptional at disarming these (represented by the XGtE rule.)

[JNAProductions]

Ah my mistake, I understand you now. But swapping a tool (and especially a language) for a skill is a bit of a strong trade I'd say. There's a reason even Tasha's doesn't allow that.

The point of disagreement here, it seems to me, is whether or not Performance is worth having as a skill.

To me and Ludic, it's not commonly applicable enough for an adventurer to be a skill in its own right.

[LudicSavant]

Ah my mistake, I understand you now. But swapping a tool (and especially a language) for a skill is a bit of a strong trade I'd say. There's a reason even Tasha's doesn't allow that.

The question comes down to whether Performance is worth about as much as a skill like Perception or Arcana, or about as much as a skill like Thieves' Tools or Disguise Kit.

[Psyren]

The point of disagreement here, it seems to me, is whether or not Performance is worth having as a skill.

To me and Ludic, it's not commonly applicable enough for an adventurer to be a skill in its own right.

Eh, I don't see it as being any more niche in most campaigns than, say, Animal Handling or even Sleight of Hand. Would I take it on a non-bard character, probably not, but if I have it my DM and I are likely to find a use for it.

Where I often see Performance coming in handy is in place of or sometimes even in conjunction with the various face skills. I've bombed Persuasion and Deception skills before and used Performance to effectively get a reroll for instance. Sure that's DM-dependent, but almost all the skills are.


The question comes down to whether Performance is worth about as much as a skill like Perception or Arcana, or about as much as a skill like Thieves' Tools or Disguise Kit.

It's definitely not as useful as Perception or Arcana, but I could say the same about Medicine and Animal Handling. Not all the skills have to be equal in applicability.

[Yora]

I see the use of performance and of gambling not as something to give you specific mechanical benefits or to make money if you make a good roll, but as something that can provide you access and can leverage social pressure in public situations.
If a character makes a peformance and rolls high, it's a good opportunity to gain the attention of people important to the adventure, and then use that attention to gain access to people or places where the PCs are normally not invited. Performance can be used to manipulate crowds without making it look like you're agitating them, and as the character's performance gets cheered, antagonistic NPCs can't retaliate against them directly without looking bad themselves.

It's a niche skill that only might come up in certain types of campaign, and not very often even there. But in thoae cases it can be very memorable and quite impactful.

(For gambling, you can try to use it to get others into your debt and extort certain favors to not not expose them, or to deliberately goad antagonists into mistakes, again while maintaining the appearance of nothing nefarious going on. James Bond does it all the time.)

[sithlordnergal]

Why did you feel a need to add the "if the goal is something that isn't Persuasion, Intimidation, or Deception" requirement?

It could have just been "are you doing that? Then you can use Performance." It's totally fine of more than one skill qualifies you to add proficiency to a check (just like both Arcana or Thieves Tools could be used to disarm a magical trap).

Ehh, I can't really see how Performance can be used to make a persuasion check. Maybe you could do it if you're playing a famous performer, and you're dealing with a crowd that knows you...maybe. But outside of that one situation I just can't see it. Performance just has nothing to do with intimidating or persuading people.

[LudicSavant]

Performance just has nothing to do with intimidating or persuading people.

Consider this in light of stuff like, say, page 27 of the DMG:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942196608521633802/unknown.png
(*snip, for length*)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942196732408762438/unknown.png
(*snip*)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942197304713175070/unknown.png

[sithlordnergal]

Consider this in light of stuff like, say, page 27 of the DMG:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942196608521633802/unknown.png
(*snip, for length*)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942196732408762438/unknown.png
(*snip*)
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/841980415115919381/942197304713175070/unknown.png

That would fall under my "Maybe you could do it if you're playing a famous performer, and you're dealing with a crowd that knows you...maybe" exception. Outside of that one exception though? Not really gonna be useful for most players.

[Townopolis]

Eh, I don't see it as being any more niche in most campaigns than, say, Animal Handling or even Sleight of Hand. Would I take it on a non-bard character, probably not, but if I have it my DM and I are likely to find a use for it.

...

It's definitely not as useful as Perception or Arcana, but I could say the same about Medicine and Animal Handling. Not all the skills have to be equal in applicability.

I agree with most of this, but not the last line.

I've come to accept that, outside games I'm running, Animal Handling, History, Medicine, Nature, Performance, and Sleight-of-Hand are all completely useless. Sleight-of-Hand bearing special mention for it's seemingly universal function of getting you 5gp on a success and a fresh character sheet on a failure. And then, as all handbooks indicate, Perception is worth more than any ability score you aren't keying features off of. Arcana, Athletics, Deception, Investigation, Persuasion, and Stealth are the other "good" skills, and the rest are okay.

And I dislike this status quo a great deal.

Anyway, I've found Performance to be the hardest to make useful myself. I think what others have said about allowing broad overlap between proficiencies is a great start, and beyond that I lean into using it to imprecisely influence large crowds, gain access to restricted areas (by getting yourself invited as entertainment), and I've toyed with maybe even using it to grant your entire party advantage on Charisma checks for a short while after your set, but that hasn't come up yet.

[Willowhelm]

Why did you feel a need to add the "if the goal is something that isn't Persuasion, Intimidation, or Deception" requirement?

It could have just been "are you doing that? Then you can use Performance." It's totally fine of more than one skill qualifies you to add proficiency to a check (just like both Arcana or Thieves Tools could be used to disarm a magical trap).

I was trying to explicitly say that there are cases for performance that are NOT covered by those other skills. Hence there is a reason for performance to exist along side those skills. (But also I was falling victim to the same flawed thinking you’ve highlighted elsewhere in the thread.)

I don’t disagree with your argument about more than one skill qualifying. I’m also in the camp that allows for STR(intimidation) checks etc.

[BW022]

I was wondering what's the consensus about the skill performance. I tried to surf a bit on the .net to check what was the idea behind the skill, only to notice that many players have been relying on it simply to narrate a story or flavourful stuff, while leaving the "sheer" utility behind.

I'm wondering - If I use it for "utility", am I wrong thinking that it will just fall under intimidate/bluff/persuasion? Is it up to the DM?

I think you just have to accept that some skills in 5e (and D&D in general) aren't as useful. This should be expected as player characters are adventurers involved in combat and not farmers, or laundry workers, or shepherds, etc. Yes, some skills are "fluff" in they don't affect combat, typical exploration, or are so situational they don't come up often. This is fine. Trying to balance all skills is boring.

Main uses for performance in a typical campaign would be:

1. Earning money. Street performer or someone working a tavern. Of course killing orcs typically earns more, so unless you are in a gritty campaign, it's not critical.
2. Distractions. Start singing or telling stories to a tavern and maybe the don't notice the rogue sneaking in the back office.
3. Infiltration. Travel as performers to get into a party or as a disguise.
4. Seduction. Dancing, poetry, and singing often works.
5. Gaining influence. People like entertainers, good stories, etc. it might help in gathering information, a place to stay, being welcomed back, etc. In some cases, it might work in place of a diplomacy check or give you advantage on it.

This said, it is situational.

However, just because something isn't good, doesn't mean it shouldn't exist in the rules. Such skills often become memorable when they do come up as they are unusual.

[Entessa]

Thanks to all of you. I've read each post and searched on other avenues what's the consensus about Performance. I've found only one post that felt to me insightful out of this place, and really made me realize that it's the DM that has to decide how to use performance.

The post is this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/9s3y5b/5e_performance_whats_the_point/e8lz23r/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

A transcript, in case the user deletes it:
The way I play it is that unless the "opponents" have a REASON to be suspicious/doubtful of your intentions, your performance skill can be used in place of any of the 3 main charisma checks.

Say you're pretending to be a mental invalid or a little old lady selling apples from a basket. Would this be a deception check? It COULD be, but unless the person who you need to fool has seen you act in a way that conflicts with that, then whether they believe you or not should hinge on how effectively you play your role. Think about it; do YOU question every single person you see on the street; "You there, bank clerk! Are you really a bank clerk, or are you just posing as one in order to get me to hand you my credit card?! CONVINCE ME!"

Same thing for Intimidation. If you put on a show with the intention of convincing an interrogation target you're a madman who is going to fillet him like a fish, track down his family, and force them to eat his corpse before burning them to ash, unless he tells you what you want to know, then as long as you're "in character" what reason does he have to believe you wont do those things?

At the very least, if it cant' be used in place of, perhaps use it as a semi-advantage system: If they use their performance to successfully put on an "air of conviviality" then they can get advantages to deception/persuasion rolls. Using it to create an atmosphere of danger would let them get advantage for intimidation, if successful. If a deception check is botched, then the ruse is lost, but if the performance check wouldn't have that same level of risk, they can still try to make the deception check if the performance doesn't go well, they just don't have the advantage.

[Psyren]

Personally I'd be fine with "if you are proficient in Performance + {face skill} and performing can in some way enhance the thing you're trying to accomplish with said face skill, you get advantage on the check."

Some examples:

- If you're trying to fool someone via an impersonation, and you're proficient in both Deception and Performance (say, acting), you get advantage.
- If you're trying to rally a crowd, and you're proficient in both Persuasion and Performance (a stirring ballad or poem), you get advantage.
- If you're trying to provoke an enemy in a fight with a pointed insult, and you're proficient in both Intimidation and Performance (comedy/joking), you get advantage. (I'd oppose that one with their Insight check or a Wisdom save, whichever is better, and if they fail their next attack has disadvantage.)

If you're proficient in not just the two skills but also a relevant tool, e.g. a Disguise Kit + Deception + Performance, or Persuasion + Performance + musical instrument - not only would I grant advantage, I would consider either turning it to super-advantage (roll 3x similar to Elven Accuracy), or else advantage + a skill floor (rolls lower than 9 are treated as 9.)

[Tanarii]

It's the most useless skill and should have been discarded. It's only in for Bards to eat up a skill slot pointlessly.

[Phhase]

I actually find Acrobatics to be more pointless than Performance. Performance I interpret as what one would use to fake something to the public or attract attention, kind of like Persuasion but on a more general, mass scale rather than 1 to 1. So anything to to with acting or being theatrical or putting on a show of sorts.

Acrobatics I too often find is replaced with either Athletics or a Dex Save. Literally the only thing it lets you do that something else can't is, as per the title, circus acrobatics.

[Psyren]

Acrobatics does at least have the listed use of keeping Dex-based characters from being pre-emptively hosed by grapples (a tactic which lots of monsters use.) It's bigger use in prior editions was a free Disengage but that one is now entirely down to table variation.

But a lot of the arguments against Performance that I'm seeing boil down to "Performance is useless because my DM doesn't let me make it useful." Which, fair enough if that's your experience, but if that's the case just don't take it. Tasha's made it easier than ever before to dump a skill proficiency that isn't doing anything for you in favor of one that will. If Performance checks never come up and you want to show your character can sing or dance really well, just write "sings and dances really well" in your backstory and move on with your life, I promise the game won't self-destruct if you do.

[BoutsofInsanity]

Short answer. Yes.

Longer Answer - Skills overlap in Dungeons and Dragons. It's one of 5e's best features. The game works by

Player describes what they want to do and how they want to do it.

The DM calls for an Ability Check.

At this point the DM and Player should decide on what skill to use. Note, you don't have to use the listed Ability Score. You can use any. Performance Strength for example.

-----------------------------
It's dynamic and flexible. Further, not all skills have to be super useful in every campaign. Not all subclasses are super useful in every campaign. The Assassin Rogue for example has a plethora of features that are extremely powerful in a political or highwayman style campaign. Not so much in a dungeon crawl.

Performance is going to do the same in many styles of games. Performance can be used for all sorts of the following.


Distracting the enemy
Giving an oral argument or persuasive argument to incite a crowd. Performative speeches or music.
In the Bee Movie that Lawyer who was all dramatic? That's performance.
Giving a concert or playing an instrument.
Strongman competition but showboating
Style Points


What's cool is that a lot of these can be handled by various other skills. Which means there are multiple ways to solve problems. Performance's purpose is to be flexible and showy. That's what makes it cool and useful.

Source* Am a bard with expertise in performance and use it all the time.

[Tanarii]

Performance is going to do the same in many styles of games. Performance can be used for all sorts of the following.


Distracting the enemy
Giving an oral argument or persuasive argument to incite a crowd. Performative speeches or music.
In the Bee Movie that Lawyer who was all dramatic? That's performance.
Giving a concert or playing an instrument.
Strongman competition but showboating
Style Points


Performance only applies when determining how well a PC delights an audience with entertainment. Most of the time, there's no point in a check, entertaining an audience isn't something that should be critical enough to warrant it. Of the things you're listing, the first three wouldn't apply because they aren't trying to delight an audience, and the rest really shouldn't need a check in the first place. Maybe the strongman competition, if the outcome is important enough to warrant it being an encounter.

[Psyren]

Most of the time, there's no point in a check, entertaining an audience isn't something that should be critical enough to warrant it.

If that's the case at your table, don't take Performance, it's really that simple. There's nothing wrong with seeing the skill differently.

The issue comes in when you think every other playgroup should view it the same way yours does, or believe it should be "discarded" as a proficiency.

[stoutstien]

Honestly the skill list could be whittled down to five or six without much trouble. The division between intimidation performance persuasion and deception is tiny and what's worse they're defined by their execution which isn't exactly observable from an in-game perspective.

[Amechra]

I think one of the issues with 5e's skill system is that all skills are priced identically, despite some skills being far more useful than others. On the one end, you have Perception (which might as well be a 7th saving throw), and on the other end you have "flavor" skills like Medicine and Performance.

If I had to make Performance worth taking, I'd say that it's the go-to skill for groups of people. You want to give an inspiring speech? Performance. You want to convince a crowd not to hang your party Rogue for stealing their prize mule? Performance. Want to start and/or guide a riot? Performance. The skill is all about you knowing how to handle hecklers and play to a crowd, after all.

[Tanarii]

Yeah, it'd be a good skill if it was Oratory or whatever the Warhammer name is for the "manipulate groups to get what you want" skill. But roll to delight an audience isn't important unless your DM goes out of their way to make it important and check-worthy.

Medicine does have a fairly important use in stabilizing downed players. It's just that it's massively overshadowed by magic. Again, looking at warhammer or other games where magical healing is rare, first aid and surgery become critical skills.

[Amechra]

Yeah, it'd be a good skill if it was Oratory or whatever the Warhammer name is for the "manipulate groups to get what you want" skill. But roll to delight an audience isn't important unless your DM goes out of their way to make it important and check-worthy.

Medicine does have a fairly important use in stabilizing downed players. It's just that it's massively overshadowed by magic. Again, looking at warhammer or other games where magical healing is rare, first aid and surgery become critical skills.

I'm glad that both of our brains went to the same game. :p

The problem with Medicine is that it's also wholly overshadowed by Healer's Kits, which let people stabilize a downed player without a check (or any proficiency, really), and which turn into an actual healing option if you took the Healer feat. Heck, they didn't even keep the whole "if you tend to someone who's sick, they can use your Wisdom (Medicine) bonus instead of their Constitution save bonus when making their saves vs. disease" thing from 3e. It would have taken them, like, a sentence to offer that as an option when they were talking about diseases.

[Townopolis]

We're getting off-topic here, and this isn't RAW, but.

Allow players to roll medicine and then, if they fail, spend a kit charge to stabilize anyway.
During a long rest, 1 medic/patient can roll medicine to treat disease. This check is against the save DC and is in addition to the patient's own save. Failed medicine checks don't worsen the disease but successes do count for recovery.
As an action, you can attempt to treat one poison effect someone is suffering. Roll medicine against the poison's save DC. On a success, it's gone.

[Gignere]

I actually find Acrobatics to be more pointless than Performance. Performance I interpret as what one would use to fake something to the public or attract attention, kind of like Persuasion but on a more general, mass scale rather than 1 to 1. So anything to to with acting or being theatrical or putting on a show of sorts.

Acrobatics I too often find is replaced with either Athletics or a Dex Save. Literally the only thing it lets you do that something else can't is, as per the title, circus acrobatics.

You can use it to get advantage against huge or bigger creature by using the option DMG rules of climbing on a larger creature.

[Sorinth]

The two biggest "mechanical" aspects I would say are causing a distraction and making friends. For example making a scene to get a couple guards to come over allowing a team member to sneak into the place they were guarding. And there are plenty of situations where getting chummy with people by putting on a good show will have benefits. For example, you are trying to gather some info/rumors at a tavern, why not put on a little performance, you should get more/better info after the show when talking to fans.

I see a lot of the DM has to go out of their way to make performance useful, when really the onus is on is also on the player to propose ways performance would help a situation.

[Bobthewizard]

Eh, I don't see it as being any more niche in most campaigns than, say, Animal Handling or even Sleight of Hand...

It's definitely not as useful as Perception or Arcana, but I could say the same about Medicine and Animal Handling. Not all the skills have to be equal in applicability.

It's funny that you used these examples. As I was reading through the thread and saw Ludic's suggestion, I immediately thought animal handling should be the same way. I think that medicine could also be bought like a tool. I'd leave sleight of hand as a skill, but I call for sleight of hand checks a lot as a DM.

[Naanomi]

If we really wanted to pare down the skill system, Nature, Survival, and Animal Handling could be combined, Deception and Sleight of Hand as well... Acrobatics and Athletics... With different governing stats of course for the various skill rolls

Medicine and performance could be tool skills of sorts. Sing tool, dancing tool, oratory tool, etc... Probably would need to be renamed though