What Do Skill Ranks *Mean*?

[Devin Parker]

Hello, everyone; first post here, so forgive me if this has already been answered. I didn't see it addressed anywhere.

When giving skill ranks to characters/NPCs, how do you know how many ranks to give to reflect a certain level of proficiency?

A lot of RPGs will give you some idea of scale; for example, they might have a skill scale of 1-10, and thus say that a skill rating of 1 means Hobbyist, 5 means Reasonably Experienced Professional, and 10 means Master Practitioner.

Is there a similar way to think of skill ranks in D&D? I have a good idea now of what level to make a character to reflect his experience, but not skills...

 

[javcs]

Welcome to the Boards!

To answer your question, there's no rule, but I'd say, if it's something he specializes in, max ranks, something he has a hobby of, maybe half-max, something dabbled in occasionally, 1/4 max or less.
This, would have to be adjusted for level and specific cases, but, it's a decent guideline that I use when doing NPC stat-blocks.

 

[Delta]

I'll say this: Remember in D&D the most important thing is the character's level. Most NPC's in the game are statted up by picking level, then dumping max ranks (level+3) into a certain selection of skills -- that's how it's done in the DMG NPC's, for example.

 

[phindar]

At the same time, a 20th level character with a 1 skill in woodworking isn't going to be any better at it than anybody else. A good measure might be to look at the DCs for the skills. If 15 is Average Difficulty, a character with 5 ranks will succeed about half the time. (Also, ranks are less important than the total skill modifier, as a character with an 18 stat and 1 rank will have the same chance of success as character with 5 ranks.)

As a general rule, I go with 5 for a practioner, 10 for competant professional, 15 for master and so on.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

See this article I found while surfing the net a few days ago: http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html

Essentially the author says that there isn't anyone in the real world above level 5 or so. Somewhere around 5th level you can make a d&d character who could beat the world record for jumping, or make a masterwork weapon or make a DC 30 on a knowledge check. Therefore somewhere around 8 ranks is world class skill level for a gifted individual.

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

IMHO, it isn't so much the Skills it is the BONUS one has on the skill. How you get it doesn't matter nearly as much. With a +5 bonus, taking 10 you make the "average" check. Something that requires a "master artisan" would require a +10, taking 10 to make a MW item. A +15 or +20 bonus to a skill check would be "Doctoral Level" mastery of that skill in a sense.

+25 or higher - now that is the sort of thing legends are made of.

 

[Hedgemage]

I think what the OP is asking is how many skill ranks does it take to be "proficient" in a skill.
The problem is that some skills are more demanding that others due to game mechanics, so this means that 5 ranks in skill A would not be an equal level of proficiency in skill B.
Also, how the skills are used makes a big difference.

Take, for example, Open Lock.
For a Rogue character, it is often necessary to keep this skill maxed out so that the character can deal with devices appropriate to his class level. Whereas a town's locksmith could probably get away with 5-10 ranks, plus equipment and ability score bonuses. Why? Because the locksmith can always take 20 (no penalties for failure), and most likely won't need to deal with "amazing" rank locks ever.

Another example is the Ride skill. 5 ranks is enough for pretty much anyone who doesn't specialize in mounted combat. In fact, unless a character is particularly clumsy, one can get by in non-combat situations (those everyday rides about town) without ANY ranks.
Some skills, as I mentioned before, need a lot of ranks to be very effective. Jump, for example, requires quite a bit of devotion if a character wants to try anything even remotely 'cinematic' or above the human norm.

So, back to your original question. Most pre-written adventures and encounters assume that if a skill is involved that the PC with the appropriate skill should have max ranks in it. This is typical of challenges involving Open Locks, Diplomacy, Disable Device, Search, Spot, Listen, Hide, Move Silently, and others.

For townsfolk-type NPCs, I generally go with a 5, 10, 15 rule. 5 being a general worker/apprentice, 10 being a person who makes a decent living off of that skill, and 15 being a supreme master of such.

In my own characters, if I'm using skills to define things that the character should know because of his background, I generally put 5 ranks into things. So, if I have a character who grew up as a barbarian tribesman, he gets 5 ranks in Survival, or if he was raised in a fishing village, he gets 5 ranks in Profession (Fisherman). Of course, this is all dependent on having enough skill points to spread around because of race/class/intelligence.

Without getting too sidetracked, in my gaming group, we give everyone across the board 2 more skill points per level (8 more at 1st) simply because we all engage in putting points into background skills to represent the character's pre-adventuring career, upbringing, or culture.

 

[Eloi]

5-10 ranks spans a lot of ground between "passable" and "competent professional", and as you approach 12 (and 15) ranks, you leave behind the regular trained Joes and advance into the respected and frequently deferred-to honored masters. And above them, the Masters.

Skill-rank magic items can allow a Journeyman to diligently follow in the Master's footsteps for established projects, and allow said Master to do some traveling.

It's just barely possible that one of the "peasants" that a group might free from captivity might actually be a really talented cobbler or fletcher who got bushwacked. And when you free Master Leopold, it tends to be the talk of the shop for a very, very long time.

 

[Piratecat]

The 21st level loremaster wanted to know something incredibly obscure in my last game. "Okay," I said, "roll your knowledge: planes."

"71."

I think I choked a little - and then I told him everything he wanted to know, along with an additional secret. Yeek.

In comparison, I generally agree with previous posters; 5 ranks = competent, 10 is highly competent, 15 is master.

 

[phindar]

Taking a moment to spearate ranks from total bonus:

I think of ranks in a skill as formal training, and bonuses from stats, feats, and synergies as natural aptitude.