I have a player who wants their Rogue to have a Poisoner’s Kit, Herbalism Tool, and Alchemist’s Supplies (All defined as Tools in PHB and XGE)
Question:
Does a character need to be proficient in a tool to be able to USE the tool? I'm pretty sure the answer is "No" based on what I've read in PHB and XGE, but wanted to ask in case there was a small nugget I've overlooked in the books.
Is it just a matter that proficiency in a Tool allows you to add the bonus but regardless that the character still gets all the features listed in the tool description (more specifically in XGE) without proficiency?
No, proficiency isn’t needed to use tools, but you might consider incompetent use of poisons, alchemical ingredients, or certain herbs might be problematic.
Presuming that the Rogue player is wanting to have a grab bag of tricks to pull out depending on the current situation I’d let them, but maybe demand rolling with disadvantage in a critical situation (time-critical, under pressure, big problems if you got the herb mix or poison dose wrong etc). Spending time and money during downtime periods to get training in them would be a good way to represent gaining proficiency with extended use.
Proficiency with a tool allows you to add your proficiency bonus to any ability check
If you couldn't use the tools without it, the rules would say, "Proficiency with a tool allows you to use the tool and add..." or something.
It's your call whether to be more restrictive or not. For instance, Colville requires proficiency with a skill to enable you to roll for it. I find this somewhat problematic, although I understand his reasons for it, because I feel like, proficient or not, it should still be *possible* to use certain skills like perception, insight, and even investigation. Other skills like history or arcana are a little more of an issue, as not everyone can just happen to know some details about the way magic works, even if they've never cast a spell, or the like.
Anyway, it's your call...
I think for me, the larger the party, the stricter I'd be with requiring proficiency to even make a roll. My original party (to which we've now added one person) was 4 PCs, and one player hardly ever is able to make it. So with only 3 PCs, they can't cover all the skills or very many tools, so it doesn't make sense to be this restrictive. If I were running a game like Critical Role with 7 PCs though, I'd make them have proficiency to roll for anything, since *someone* will be able to do it in a party that large.
You do have to be proficient with the tool to use it to make anything. But using it in general, no.
You can craft nonmagical objects, including adventuring equipment and works of art. You must be proficient with tools related to the object you are trying to create (typically artisan's tools).
As a general rule no, characters do not need proficiency, but that also means they don't get to add their bonus and so they are going to have a harder time making something. Also as I DM I might rule that if they fail, they have probably ruined/wasted the materials and need to purchase new stuff. That's of course up to the DM.
There is one exception. Page 103 of DMG says that to open a lock you need to have thieves tools and proficiency to open a locked door. I take the call out there that you need both to imply that in the case of all other tools proficiency is not required, but it helps.
As a general rule no, characters do not need proficiency, but that also means they don't get to add their bonus and so they are going to have a harder time making something.
I quoted the specific rule from the PHB that says you need proficiency to craft something (it is under downtime). You don't need proficiency to make an ability check with the tool though, like... IDK... Sawing a table leg off?
Thanks for the feedback. I'm to read I was on the right track and I DID over look the Profienicy in regards to Crafting which eliminates the goal of the Rogue who wanted to brew poisons and potions.
For example, I don't think anyone can use a sextant without proficiency. If you don't know what you are doing then its a useless tool.
I consider proficiency to include an amount of formal study. Proficient people know the theoretical underpinnings and all of the correct terms. Someone with no proficiency in woodworker's tools could make a chair, but only someone proficient would know that the joints are mitred and be able to consider the relative strengths of mitred joints vs dovetail joints and so on. Anyone can chuck a piece of meat on a fire, but only people proficient in cook's tools know about the Maillard reaction and why it is important when cooking steaks.
When not proficient you can use an alchemist's kit to mix up a recipe, if you already have the recipe. I don't think, however, that you can use the kit to identify an existing concoction, because you don't have the training needed to know the processes of identifiying mixtures.
Anyone can smear poison frog venom on their arrows, but only someone with proficiency in a poisoner's kit has the training and discipline to avoid licking their fingers afterwards.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Setup:
I have a player who wants their Rogue to have a Poisoner’s Kit, Herbalism Tool, and Alchemist’s Supplies (All defined as Tools in PHB and XGE)
Question:
Does a character need to be proficient in a tool to be able to USE the tool? I'm pretty sure the answer is "No" based on what I've read in PHB and XGE, but wanted to ask in case there was a small nugget I've overlooked in the books.
Is it just a matter that proficiency in a Tool allows you to add the bonus but regardless that the character still gets all the features listed in the tool description (more specifically in XGE) without proficiency?
No, proficiency isn’t needed to use tools, but you might consider incompetent use of poisons, alchemical ingredients, or certain herbs might be problematic.
Presuming that the Rogue player is wanting to have a grab bag of tricks to pull out depending on the current situation I’d let them, but maybe demand rolling with disadvantage in a critical situation (time-critical, under pressure, big problems if you got the herb mix or poison dose wrong etc). Spending time and money during downtime periods to get training in them would be a good way to represent gaining proficiency with extended use.
No, you don't have to. The rules say this:
If you couldn't use the tools without it, the rules would say, "Proficiency with a tool allows you to use the tool and add..." or something.
It's your call whether to be more restrictive or not. For instance, Colville requires proficiency with a skill to enable you to roll for it. I find this somewhat problematic, although I understand his reasons for it, because I feel like, proficient or not, it should still be *possible* to use certain skills like perception, insight, and even investigation. Other skills like history or arcana are a little more of an issue, as not everyone can just happen to know some details about the way magic works, even if they've never cast a spell, or the like.
Anyway, it's your call...
I think for me, the larger the party, the stricter I'd be with requiring proficiency to even make a roll. My original party (to which we've now added one person) was 4 PCs, and one player hardly ever is able to make it. So with only 3 PCs, they can't cover all the skills or very many tools, so it doesn't make sense to be this restrictive. If I were running a game like Critical Role with 7 PCs though, I'd make them have proficiency to roll for anything, since *someone* will be able to do it in a party that large.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
You do have to be proficient with the tool to use it to make anything. But using it in general, no.
As a general rule no, characters do not need proficiency, but that also means they don't get to add their bonus and so they are going to have a harder time making something. Also as I DM I might rule that if they fail, they have probably ruined/wasted the materials and need to purchase new stuff. That's of course up to the DM.
There is one exception. Page 103 of DMG says that to open a lock you need to have thieves tools and proficiency to open a locked door. I take the call out there that you need both to imply that in the case of all other tools proficiency is not required, but it helps.
I quoted the specific rule from the PHB that says you need proficiency to craft something (it is under downtime). You don't need proficiency to make an ability check with the tool though, like... IDK... Sawing a table leg off?
I would not try any thing made by a non-prof. herbalist or use anything made by a non-prof. alchemist or poisoner
Thanks for the feedback. I'm to read I was on the right track and I DID over look the Profienicy in regards to Crafting which eliminates the goal of the Rogue who wanted to brew poisons and potions.
Oops, I misread what you posted. Yes it seems you do need proficiency.
It depends on the tool and the task.
For example, I don't think anyone can use a sextant without proficiency. If you don't know what you are doing then its a useless tool.
I consider proficiency to include an amount of formal study. Proficient people know the theoretical underpinnings and all of the correct terms. Someone with no proficiency in woodworker's tools could make a chair, but only someone proficient would know that the joints are mitred and be able to consider the relative strengths of mitred joints vs dovetail joints and so on. Anyone can chuck a piece of meat on a fire, but only people proficient in cook's tools know about the Maillard reaction and why it is important when cooking steaks.
When not proficient you can use an alchemist's kit to mix up a recipe, if you already have the recipe. I don't think, however, that you can use the kit to identify an existing concoction, because you don't have the training needed to know the processes of identifiying mixtures.
Anyone can smear poison frog venom on their arrows, but only someone with proficiency in a poisoner's kit has the training and discipline to avoid licking their fingers afterwards.