Failure stakes for a travel Skill Challenge

The suggestions offered herein present an exciting way to implement "exploration pillar" elements in a player-facing, Story Now game structured around GM scene framing, a desideratum critics of such game principles in general and of 4E in particular claim is impossible or, at least, poorly handled. Further, these suggestions do so in a way that frames player engagement of the mechanics in an exciting way (for both player and PC) that allows all participants to play to see what happens.

When I have some spare time, I’ll throw together a quick play example with your group’s PCs to illustrate how I see this coming together.

A failed skill challenge while travelling might cost time.
The City Watch will happily check you over and let you in, during the day. Show up in the middle of the night, not so much. They might not be happy to see you the next morning, either, if they think you were loitering around or scouting for a known danger. And if anything bad happens to anybody in town your first day there, you are one of "round up the usual suspects".

The PCs get a distracting plotline to deal with.

Manbearcat said:

When I have some spare time, I’ll throw together a quick play example with your group’s PCs to illustrate how I see this coming together.

Click to expand...

'Twould be much appreciated. It's always useful getting other perspectives on what I'm trying to do in my game, especially from those with similar sensibilities and more experience with said elements!

Alright, so let us say the Perilous Journey is on the Kings Road from Fallcrest to Winterhaven. Roughly 50 miles, on Riding Horses, that is a day's travel skirting the northern wisps of The Cloak Wood and dead through the ruin-pocked moors of Gardbury Downs.

1) Everyone spends 1 Healing Surge.

2) Complexity 1, Level +1 SC (4 Medium DCs @ 13 and 1 Secondary Skill for +2)

3) Roles are sorted out as follows:

* The Cleric/Warlord will Quartermaster (folding Make Camp/Forage/Manage Provisions into one) as this involves steadying the nerves and fortitude of allies.

* The Ranger/Cleric will Navigate as (a) he knows the way, (b) can handle the horses if they get spooked, and (c) it allows multitasking to take inventory of the surrounding paranormal climate (aberrant or shadow).

* The Rogue will Scout Ahead as much of the character's life has been "head on a swivel", (s)he has a sixth sense for detecting danger and things amiss.

* The Warlock will anchor the Group Endurance Check of Take Watch with physical and arcane fortitude born on the back of his patron.

4) Resolution:

Quartermaster succeeds at their Diplomacy, Insight, or Heal

Navigator succeeds at their Nature

Scout succeeds at their Stealth

Despite the Warlock succeeding at their Endurance and an Endurance Secondary Skill to buff a low Endurance by the Rogue, the other 3 PCs fail.

So we have a Take Watch complication that needs to put some adversity into the collective face of the PCs.

This could be:

* An unnerving chill as a supernatural pall spreads through the camp. The horses spook and run off into the gloom.

* The sky crackles ominously as an explosive thunderstorm erupts out of nowhere. The campers better take shelter or risk a rush to their destination.

* One of the PCs taking watch hears the cry of a babe somewhere off in the dark. Maybe its a swaddled drow babe and a brief note in the language from her desperate mother, pleeing for someone to take it before its sacrificed to Lolth. She must have dropped it off recently...and her footfalls off into the darkness indicate speed...possibly pursuit?

Maybe its something more sinister.

---

Depending on what you might pick for a Danger/Discovery and how the PCs respond, things can go in many different directions, possibly ending in a snowball of Failures that cause the challenge itself to fail.

Manbearcat said:

Here is one way to organize it in 4e:

1) Every day of a Perilous Journey by default costs a cumulative 1 Healing Surge to each member that they cannot regain until the Perilous Journey ends.

2) Every day of Journey requires the completion of a C1 Skill Challenge (level being that of the Journey):

a) Quartermaster (folding Make Camp/Forage/Manage Provisions into one)
b) Navigate
c) Scout Ahead (Possibly Group Check)
d) Group Check of Take Watch

3) If all 4 are successful, then there are no complications (with Quartermaster success meaning the HS cost for the day does not apply) . You describe the day's journey in a travel montage and move on to resolve the next day's journey (should there be a next day) or you arrive at the destination.

4) If there are any failures, then you deploy a role-related complication (whichever seems most fitting; most grave, most relevant, most exciting) that the PCs must deal with. If the PCs reach 4 Successes in handling their complications at any point, the day's journey is complete, describe the change in gamestate and proceed to (3) above.

5) If the PCs fail the challenge of any given day, the consequences could be myriad:

* Next day's SC increases in level (with attendant fictional positioning)
* Healing Surge for travel increases
* Some sort of significant travel obstacle or setback emerges (weather, geographical, inhabitants, something exogenous, some relevant Character Theme problem is made manifest)
* Attack by the Condition/Disease Track
* Perhaps the journey was more arduous/misjudged and will require another C1 SC to resolve (begin at step 1).

Click to expand...

I like how organized and presented this is.

Manbearcat said:

3) Roles are sorted out as follows:

* The Cleric/Warlord will Quartermaster (folding Make Camp/Forage/Manage Provisions into one) as this involves steadying the nerves and fortitude of allies.

* The Ranger/Cleric will Navigate as (a) he knows the way, (b) can handle the horses if they get spooked, and (c) it allows multitasking to take inventory of the surrounding paranormal climate (aberrant or shadow).

* The Rogue will Scout Ahead as much of the character's life has been "head on a swivel", (s)he has a sixth sense for detecting danger and things amiss.

* The Warlock will anchor the Group Endurance Check of Take Watch with physical and arcane fortitude born on the back of his patron.

4) Resolution:

Quartermaster succeeds at their Diplomacy, Insight, or Heal

Navigator succeeds at their Nature

Scout succeeds at their Stealth

Despite the Warlock succeeding at their Endurance and an Endurance Secondary Skill to buff a low Endurance by the Rogue, the other 3 PCs fail.

So we have a Take Watch complication that needs to put some adversity into the collective face of the PCs.

Click to expand...

Excellent! And probably not too different from how this might actually play out at our table.

I've been giving thought to how character Skills might be applied to the roles, Quartermaster, Navigate, Scout Ahead, and Take Watch (or its variant here, which I like very much). I don't like to limit player creativity (one of many problems with prescripted SCs, in my opinion), but I do hope to avoid situations like "Intimidating the grass." (I don't think this is a real risk in my group, but....)

Quartermaster: Dungeoneering (underground), Endurance, Heal, Nature (outdoors) seem obvious choices to me. I am intrigued by your inclusion of Diplomacy and Insight in the example. (This is not to argue against them but rather to invite further discussion of how you see their utility playing out.)

Navigate: Arcana (tapping into ley lines), Dungeoneering (underground), Insight, Nature (outdoors), Perception seem like the go-to Skills here.

Scout Ahead: Acrobatics, Athletics, Dungeoneering (underground), Endurance, Insight, Nature (outdoors), Perception, Stealth, seem candidates here.

Take Watch: Arcana (magical wards), Endurance, Perception, Religion (consecrate grounds) would be a good fit here.

Thoughts? Again, I would like to leave as much room for player creativity as possible but also would like to present options to help spark that creativity.

darkbard said:

I am intrigued by your inclusion of Diplomacy and Insight in the example. (This is not to argue against them but rather to invite further discussion of how you see their utility playing out.)

Click to expand...

In this scenario, a Quartermaster would be serving as more than just as a logistical manager (of provisions and campsite). S/he would be managing the crew, intuiting their individual moods/needs, and providing accordingly (a more hospitable - cozier, prettier view - spot on the knoll, a favored stew, a bigger portion, a kind word, perhaps a passage of a book to read).

Thoughts? Again, I would like to leave as much room for player creativity as possible but also would like to present options to help spark that creativity.

Click to expand...

That all looks good to me. So long as the player's declarations are coherent with the framing of the journey, everything should work fine.

Alright, so back to this:

One of the PCs taking watch hears the cry of a babe somewhere off in the dark. Maybe its a swaddled drow babe and a brief note in the language from her desperate mother, pleaing for someone to take it before its sacrificed to Lolth. She must have dropped it off recently...and her footfalls off into the darkness indicate speed...possibly pursuit?

Click to expand...

So we're at 3:1 (Successes/Failures) in the SC.

The PC keeping watch has heard a babe crying somewhere off in the dark. Let's say its the Drow Cleric of Sehanine. She also hears her a female's voice in her native tongue whispering a sad, hurried farewell and I love you. Footfalls then rush off in a direction away from camp.

She rouses the camp quickly and convinces them to rush toward the sound. Upon their arrival at the Drow babe with a brand on its forehead signifying its imminent, fell purpose. Within the span of a brief read of the note, they hear a collection of eerie, inhuman footfalls off in the distance moving steadily on their position. Almost...scurrying...

So now we're at a decision-point.

Do they pick up the babe and run off to their camp, get on their horses and ride (Group Athletics)?

Do they stand their ground and face what comes, protecting the babe (which would be a Minion...the point of the combat would be to protect it from being taken or killed)?

Some sort of ruse to misdirect the pursuit (Bluff, Nature, Arcana for a Glamor - assuming they have one, Religion for a Prayer - assuming they have something applicable...it depends)?

Something else?

There has been much excellent discussion (and practical ideas that came out of that discussion) already, but I want to return to this a little more if anyone is still interested:

AbdulAlhazred said:

Actually, rereading the thread opener, I DO find that the assumption is that the journey will end successfully, and that was in fact the default assumption in the analysis which took place on page 1. Now, [MENTION=1282]darkbard[/MENTION] phrased it as an assumption "I presume a "fail forward" ethos, and so simply not arriving at their destination or getting lost is off the table." This was the core of my original analysis.

Now, when I responded to [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION], I thought I was going a bit on a tangent by applying a more classic story now, play to see what happens kind of a process to elucidate how it might contrast with the "party must reach Winterhaven" sort of starter post assumption. Admittedly this assumed that there was some degree of 'script' (IE maybe they were playing out KotS or something like that) vs simply "the players set this as their goal." In the later case, then play to see what happens could allow for either "play to see how they get there" or it could allow for "play to see IF they get there."

Click to expand...

Over the years several of us have debated the merits of setting clear outcomes of success and failure--what is at stake--before the PCs begin declaring actions in an SC (or similar mechanic). I remember [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] stating that he believes adhering strictly to defined stakes in certain circumstances can work against the kind of play he is interested in, and I certainly opined that I struggle in the tension between setting clear stakes like this (how else can the PCs know what is at stake and how to leverage PC options if the goalposts move?) and allowing PC action declarations to morph the fiction beyond those original stakes, which is really the overarching philosophy of Story Now play.

Earlier in this thread I claimed Story Now play and "fail forward" are not inherently at odds (and I believe this to be self-evident), but [MENTION=82106]AbdulAlhazred[/MENTION]'s comments above suggest to me that there is a line that can be crossed where one of these play goals can infringe upon the other. In the context of this thread, this has taken the following form: "fail forward" presumes that the PCs will meet their goal (travel to destination X) so that play does not grind to a halt, even if they fail the SC, but a failure brings consequences set by the GM; Story Now play presumes the very real possibility that PC actions and their outcomes mean even their very arrival at their desired destination is malleable, so long as play does not grind to a halt; instead they are presented with interesting complications, the resolution of which all players involved are invested in "playing to see what happens."

So in this case, I need to revise my OP to allow for the possibility that not reaching their destination is a possible outcome of failing the SC, so long as the complications that account for this are at least as interesting as reaching the destination. Earlier, I was thinking too narrowly about how to implement "fail forward" in this instance, I think. (And, of course, this has been what much of the discussion in this thread has involved anyway!)

Anywho, mostly just thinking aloud here, but also curious if anyone wants to chime in further on this point.