Proficiancy, Skills, Feats and ASI

[paladinn]

I've been working on more of an OSR-level game, hoping to drop in a few mechanics from 5e and other D&D manifestations. I really like the simplicity and straightforwardness of the proficiency system; but I have a few (at least) questions about how/best to drop it into an OSR framework.

1. I like the concept of bounded accuracy; and I know how the +2-6 proficiency bonus works for 5e. If the power level of the game were capped at mostly +3 bonuses for attributes and (rare) magic items, is +2-6 still a good range for proficiency bonus, or is it OP? Regardless, it's way better than +20 for 20th level fighters!

2. I know that the proficiency bonus applies to proficient saves, attribute checks, attack roles , etc. I'm assuming it also applies to skills. If a character is proficient in a skill, and said skill is related to a given attribute, what is the point of the skill? And if the skill is to be meaningful, should there be a greater bonus for the skill than for the attribute?

3. One of the criticisms of 5e is that while characters with proficiency in a stat improve greatly in saves related to that stat, they don't really improve in any other saves. So a 20th level character without Con proficiency doesn't save any better than a 1st level character. I've seen treatments that allow 1/2 proficiency bonus for non-proficient saves. Is this worth adopting?

4. In keeping with the skills topic above, if I were to adopt the PF2 model of skills (+1,2 or 3, on top of other bonuses), how often should a skill increase be given? Should this be an ASI-alternative, similar to how feats work now (if allowed)? Should a weapon-focus skill be an option, to grant slightly greater ability with a given weapon? I know "feats" are being used for bigger purposes overall.

Thanks for any suggestions. Please have mercy on a poor grognard!

[ForeverFlame]

2. I know that the proficiency bonus applies to proficient saves, attribute checks, attack roles , etc. I'm assuming it also applies to skills. If a character is proficient in a skill, and said skill is related to a given attribute, what is the point of the skill? And if the skill is to be meaningful, should there be a greater bonus for the skill than for the attribute?

There already is. Even if your main stat is in the skill, the bonus for skill proficiency is about the same as the ability score bonus. For skills that aren't your main stat, the proficiency bonus very often is higher than the attribute.

4. In keeping with the skills topic above, if I were to adopt the PF2 model of skills (+1,2 or 3, on top of other bonuses), how often should a skill increase be given? Should this be an ASI-alternative, similar to how feats work now (if allowed)? Should a weapon-focus skill be an option, to grant slightly greater ability with a given weapon? I know "feats" are being used for bigger purposes overall.

You should probably keep the PF2 frequency of skills, AKA one at 1st level and every even level afterwards, with rogues getting more, and being able to stack skill bonuses a certain amount at certain levels. Expertise should double that bonus.

[Greywander]

2. I know that the proficiency bonus applies to proficient saves, attribute checks, attack roles , etc. I'm assuming it also applies to skills. If a character is proficient in a skill, and said skill is related to a given attribute, what is the point of the skill? And if the skill is to be meaningful, should there be a greater bonus for the skill than for the attribute?

Just to be clear, in 5e there are no skill checks. There are only ability checks, attack rolls, and saving throws. That's it. Also, you never get proficiency with an ability score, the closest thing would be proficiency with a saving throw, but that only applies to saving throws with that ability score, not to ability checks.

When you make an ability check, the first thing is usually to determine which ability score you are using, and add your ability score modifier to your roll. If you are proficient with a relevant skill, then you can also add your proficiency bonus to the ability check. This is the point of skills. However, there are some ability checks that don't use a skill, such as initiative rolls. Generally speaking, ability checks by default don't add your proficiency bonus, and skills are an exception to that rule. This also applies to tool proficiencies, which can be thought of like B-grade skills that didn't make the cut or are just too specific to merit listing them all out on your character sheet.

In practice, though, a lot of people use "ability check" and "skill check" interchangeably, and most people also seem to approach ability checks by picking a skill first, with the ability score being based on the skill, rather than the other way around.

I don't really know enough about OSR or PF2 to comment any further, I just wanted to clear this up.

[Nifft]

1. I like the concept of bounded accuracy; and I know how the +2-6 proficiency bonus works for 5e. If the power level of the game were capped at mostly +3 bonuses for attributes and (rare) magic items, is +2-6 still a good range for proficiency bonus, or is it OP? Regardless, it's way better than +20 for 20th level fighters!

Note that the magic item +3 is not well accounted for in 5e. Magic items are optional, and the game works fine without them.

(IMHO magic items shouldn't give any bonus to accuracy. Damage and special effects are more than sufficient.)

2. I know that the proficiency bonus applies to proficient saves, attribute checks, attack roles , etc. I'm assuming it also applies to skills. If a character is proficient in a skill, and said skill is related to a given attribute, what is the point of the skill? And if the skill is to be meaningful, should there be a greater bonus for the skill than for the attribute?

A skill check is just an ability check + your proficiency bonus.

Attribute checks don't have proficiency added (by default, but there are ways).

3. One of the criticisms of 5e is that while characters with proficiency in a stat improve greatly in saves related to that stat, they don't really improve in any other saves. So a 20th level character without Con proficiency doesn't save any better than a 1st level character. I've seen treatments that allow 1/2 proficiency bonus for non-proficient saves. Is this worth adopting?

Make this decision later. Look at the numbers and figure out what the expected success rate would be, and if it's not enough then think about tweaks like this one.

4. In keeping with the skills topic above, if I were to adopt the PF2 model of skills (+1,2 or 3, on top of other bonuses), how often should a skill increase be given? Should this be an ASI-alternative, similar to how feats work now (if allowed)? Should a weapon-focus skill be an option, to grant slightly greater ability with a given weapon? I know "feats" are being used for bigger purposes overall.

Weapon Focus is a bad idea if:
- Bounded Accuracy is your goal (which it sounds like it is); the +1 is meaningful and becomes expected, this becomes a feat tax
- The DM rolls for treasure. If you get random treasure, you should be able to use whatever magic weapon from that random treasure, especially if magic weapons are rare and you can't make your own.