Challenge the Players, Not the Characters' Stats

D'karr · Oct 9, 2008

justanobody said:
That is great for the DM as it is the DMG they would most often read. How about the players and something from the PHB?

Since the DM is the one "running" the skill challenge the instructions on how to run them are placed in the DMG, where they are needed.

The players will figure out how the skill challenge is going to be run from the DM. Each skill challenge is different and even the same skill challenge run by two different DMs might be run differently. Yes, they are that flexible. It is up to the DM to let the player's know what to expect.

justanobody · Oct 9, 2008

Yet the PHB says you only need a few dice rolls to pass or fail the challenge based on stats.

I know what DMs should or shouldn't do, but new players don't get that information from the PHB. It gives them the instructions for being a player, and those instructions say you need only to roll dice. That is challenging the stats.

justanobody · Oct 9, 2008

double post. delete

Freakohollik · Oct 9, 2008

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
Death is just one consequence of failure. Having to rest early because of bad tactics is another type of failure.

If you use Death too often, it cheapens its meaning. Easy Deaths is what made spells like Raise Dead so important over the editions. It turned character death just in another type of "rest early". (Sometimes "rest early to prepare the Raise Dead spell", sometimes "let's get home so we find another trustworthy-enough looking fellow".

You might say "resting early" is not a real failure, because the consequences for the player are minimal. But so is the death of a character. You just wait for the raise dead or roll up a new character. You can still continue playing the game (and this might be one of the bigger differences to other games - losing doesn't mean you have to stop playing.), you're just using a changed or different game piece.

Bad decisions can lead to earlier rest, it can lead to another complication, it can lead to a failure in an character/adventure goal, or it can lead to death.
All these are valid failures. An EL = PL encounter in 3E or its 4E equivalent is the kind of encounter where bad decisions should lead to an earlier rest. It is a failure because the players notice that they screwed up and that they have to do better. Of course, if they even lose a PC, they will know that they screwed up even worse , but that's not a requirement to make the player aware of failure or success.

These are good points. To have a meaningful failure that affects the players, something big has to happen ingame. Death is the most obvious answer to this, and it is what the game has been using. Its rare that adventures include other ways for meaningful failures. A lot of that pressure is in the DM.

Remathilis · Oct 9, 2008

Freakohollik said:
H
In a 1e adventure, if you do something stupid, you're dead. If you try and explore every room the dungeon, you're dead. If you often leap before you look, you're dead. The best way to survive 1e adventures is lots of caution, divination, henchmen, listening at doors, sending in henchmen, and so on. Luck is also very helpful. How to survive is not spelled out to you on your character sheet. You have to use your player skill to figure out a strategy to navigate the dungeon.

So the best way to survive a 1e Dungeon is to hire a small battalion of mercenaries, send them in to raid the dungeon and die searching for every last c.p., then have the survivors haul the treasure they found back to you so you could get the XP value for it?

Cadfan · Oct 9, 2008

Remathilis said:
So the best way to survive a 1e Dungeon is to hire a small battalion of mercenaries, send them in to raid the dungeon and die searching for every last c.p., then have the survivors haul the treasure they found back to you so you could get the XP value for it?

Yes, basically. A great many hazards were incredibly dangerous and the only way not to end up rolling a dice and hoping for a number that meant you didn't die was to convince/force someone/something else to walk down the Completely Innocuous Hallway while you waited behind a lead shield to see where the spinning blades come out of the walls.

Freakohollik · Oct 9, 2008

Remathilis said:
So the best way to survive a 1e Dungeon is to hire a small battalion of mercenaries, send them in to raid the dungeon and die searching for every last c.p., then have the survivors haul the treasure they found back to you so you could get the XP value for it?

Thats true in any edition. The best way to survive a dungeon is to not enter it.

jensun · Oct 9, 2008

justanobody said:
I could just draw for high card from a poker deck against the DM if that is all I wanted from an in game challenge.

You still actually need to describe what you are doing and play out the scene and the passage you quoted but didnt bold makes that clear.

It’s up to you to think of ways you can use your skills to meet the challenges you face.

justanobody · Oct 9, 2008

jensun said:
You still actually need to describe what you are doing and play out the scene and the passage you quoted but didnt bold makes that clear.

But it offers nothing to do that. It only offers ways to roll the dice to succeed. A DM could give a lengthy detailed account of what is seen and heard int he area for some skill challenge, and the players need only roll the dice to pass it all with no real effort. That is the problem with challenging the character stats. So again I ask why should the DM waste their time and effort if the player can avoid anything and rely solely on the character stats to resolve the challenge?

Hypersmurf · Oct 10, 2008

justanobody said:
A DM could give a lengthy detailed account of what is seen and heard int he area for some skill challenge, and the players need only roll the dice to pass it all with no real effort.

The players need only roll the dice to pass it all with no real fun.

Like you say, just rolling the dice to succeed isn't fun.

So why do you assume the players will do it, since they're playing to have fun as well?

It might not make a difference to the mechanics of the skill challenge, whether I say "Diplomacy check - 17!", or "I try to convince him we need to get in... Diplomacy check - 17!", or play out a scene where I put forward arguments and debate with the NPC over the urgency of letting us through, based on my check of 17.

But it makes a difference to the play experience. So why would I pick the option that leads to boredom, when I can instead pick the option that leads to fun?

"The player can avoid anything", you say. But as a player, I don't want to avoid everything... I want to experience it! I don't go to a movie, look at the poster, and go home; I go to the movie and watch it. I don't go to a D&D game, roll a die, and go home; I go to a D&D game and play the game.

-Hyp.

Challenge the Players, Not the Characters' Stats

D'karr

Adventurer

justanobody

Banned

justanobody

Banned

Freakohollik

First Post

Remathilis

Legend

Cadfan

First Post

Freakohollik

First Post

jensun

First Post

justanobody

Banned

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...

Similar Threads