4e Fan Creations and House RulesWorking on variant powers? Statting up a PC race or your version of a monster? Creating or converting an adventure? Put it here!
A good question. I would handle it a couple of possible ways:
1) Let the players decide, everyone just picks an order and goes with it.
2) Normal initiative rolls. Seems a little out of place, but everyone knows what to do.
3) Everyone rolls the primary skill. If the challenge has diplomacy as the primary skill, everyone rolls a quick diplomacy check to determine what order people go.
The problem with players going in a set order is that player 3 might not be able to come up with something on the spot to fix what player 2 said, whereas the next player in line has a great idea.
On the other hand, this simply serves to postprones the problem, as at some point the player has to act.
It did feel a little weird when I was running a social skill challenge, because after the first couple of players had acted (the ones who are more "outspoken" in character), a few players was left that took longer to come up with what to do/say.
I would argue that it is easier to go first, so the best option might be to direct who speaks first, and ensure it is the people that like to stay in the background. This might also lead to some complicated situations for the more "outspoken" players to fix (and hence, challenging them).
I've had challenges where I allow the players to roll as soon as they declare instead of rolling all at once at the end of the segment. A player who incorporates a previous player's success or failure often gets a +2 bonus for teamwork and/or creativity. Thus, there is some incentive to let fellow players go first, OR if you are going first, to do something that fellow players will be able to build off of. It seems to work about as well as rolling all at once.
I don't know how much any of you follow what Wizards publishes, but they seem to have made some progress in understanding what exactly a skill challenge is and how to implement it in games.
For example, they've recently moved towards using a series of low complexity skill challenges instead of one high complexity one.
So I ask, is this system still better than the (many times revised) core system?
The only thing I can say for the DMG system is that there are times when you can hang some concrete narrative on the three failures. Basically though with Obsidian you have 3 rounds of the challenge to do things with.
Even after the big patch there are still math issues with the DMG system too. So why not use something that has simpler and more reliable math?
Overall I've developed my encounter building to the point where I can confidently build encounters of either combat or skill challenge type and have them work equally well. In a way skill challenges are really nice to use a lot because failing them generally isn't lethal. Failing significant combat encounters usually initiates a TPK. At best it usually means an awkward extended rest or DM cheese (exodus knife!).
Now, skill challenges CAN kill characters and can certainly beat up the party or even thwart them entirely. I would do it rarely, but if you don't make SC as first class encounters then you will end up with a lot of heavily combat oped characters running around. Even the more RP oriented players will go with combat options if those are the only ones that REALLY matter in the long run.
This is kind of a side-issue, but one of the reasons I prefer Obsidian is that it's free. I would need to pay for a DDI subscription in order to read about all the latest and greatest enhancements to the core system. Even with the errata the info presented in the DMG is not enough to make it work for me.
But the main reason I like it is that the 3-round structure prevents having some characters make all the checks while others sit on their hands, which was my main complaint with the core system.
I don't know how much any of you follow what Wizards publishes, but they seem to have made some progress in understanding what exactly a skill challenge is and how to implement it in games.
For example, they've recently moved towards using a series of low complexity skill challenges instead of one high complexity one.
So I ask, is this system still better than the (many times revised) core system?
I'm curious to read more feedback on this question as well.
o I ask, is this system still better than the (many times revised) core system?
Yes, yes.. and definately yes.
I like that every player can be encouraged to act despite the sort of encounter it is.
__________________
"Words take on strange and wonderful powers when they are written down.
Context and intonation disappear, and the words sit in a void to be construed according to the mood, intelligence and socio-political leanings of the reader."
--- Siri Agrell
So, I have been using Obsidian for my last two modules that I DMed and the mechanics have gone very well and the DCs are fair for the party's level. The roleplaying, not so much, a skill challenge framework still feels a little artificial, but that is an issue to resolve with my group and not a problem of the system.
Where I have a question, is with combat skill challenges where there is a penalty for failure. A good example would be disabling the magic crossbow turret trap from the DMG where if you fail the skill challenge to deactivate the control panel, it blows up on you. How would I resolve this with the Obsidian system?
Wow man, not only is this system better by the math and more interesting/rewarding than the skill challenges in DMG, but its way easier to read/run. Thank you, it is being used.
Building a larger challenge:
I have one quibble with this system: the first challenges seem pointless to me.
Lets take the example of a three part challenge
If the players succeed or fail the first challenge, it has no bearing on the final challenge directly. They get -1 to the second challenge which slightly alters the probability that they will succeed that, which would then directly alter how the third challenge goes.
If you use a four part challenge, the first one seems even less important.
Finally, if they players succeed the first two skill challenges in a four-part challenge, then fail the third, they end up with a penalty on the final challenge, all their hard work and success was for nothing!
Another solution is that the success/failure penalty is that each success/failure in the initial skill challenges gives bonuses/penalties to the final one. This gives the players the feeling that all their hard work is paying off and all their mistakes are coming back to bite them in the final epic showdown. Lets say we have a string of 4 challenges. The players might get -1 to checks in the final challenge because they failed to impress the duke in the first challenge, but get to use intimidate as a primary skill because they learned something about the dukes enemies, and they require 1 less success in this challenge because they gained the favor of the duke's daughter during the third challenge and she comes to their aid.
I think this would give the players a better feeling of accomplishment because everything they did up to this point effects their success. Since players are probably slated to succeed at most skill challenges, they will probably have more bonuses than penalties at the end which is okay, because you want them to eventually succeed during the final epic challenge anyways.
Where I have a question, is with combat skill challenges where there is a penalty for failure. A good example would be disabling the magic crossbow turret trap from the DMG where if you fail the skill challenge to deactivate the control panel, it blows up on you. How would I resolve this with the Obsidian system?
The premise of Obsidian is that wasting your actions is the failure, not actually failing. In Obsidian, if your party is engaged in combat and the rogue tries to disable the trap hitting everyone, then that's an action he could have been killing his enemy. If he fails, he doesn't disable the trap, but he doesn't make things worse. If he fails and it causes the party to be harmed, the rogue now has two reasons to never try disabling a trap in combat.
Building a larger challenge:
I have one quibble with this system: the first challenges seem pointless to me.
The idea of the challenge is that each challenge builds off each other. If I pass the first challenge, the second challenge is easier (meaning I'm more likely to pass) which could give me another bonus for the final challenge.
Further if I fail the challenge, it makes it harder to pass the second, and if I fail that one, then I'll have problems on the final challenge.
That said, the golden rule is use the system as a framework. Feel free to try a complex skill challenge that has compounded results. Just note that every +1/-1 can actually have a pretty decent effect.
Any chance you can include several examples, or heck, even a full template, of what your skill challenges look like?
Negotion skill challenge
Gather Info skill challenge
etc.
__________________ It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it -Upton Sinclair
Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand. -Albert Einstein
Alignment is what you are when no one is watching. -Yakoska, fellow D&D player.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
