• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Alternative Rules for Skill Challenges

Matthias

Explorer
For what it's worth, I like the notion of skill challenges, because there is only so much dramatic tension you can put into a single die roll. However, the implementation of 4E seemed to me unnecessarily complicated.

Here is a possible alternative method. Let's call them "dramatic skill checks".

Dramatic skill checks are intended to model tests of skill in certain high-tension situations, especially ones in which success or failure is not immediately known. Some good examples: a foot chase, a game of Chess or Go, an arm-wrestling match, navigating a maze or solving a puzzle under time constraints, attempting to manipulate an animal's attitude, and performing for an audience. Despite the name, these rules can also be used with ability checks, caster level checks, and so on.

A dramatic skill check consists of a series of individual skill checks using the same skill, made by the acting PC (or NPC), against a given DC; if this is an opposed check against another character, the opposing character also participates in the dramatic skill check. Dramatic skill checks are best used with any skill for which multiple retries are possible and overfailure (failing the prescribed DC by a certain minimum amount) does not impose a serious penalty on the character (such as falling due to an overfailed Climb check), and for situations in which the outcome is either total success or total failure, with no ties, "partial success," or mixed results possible.

To succeed on a dramatic skill check, a character must earn a certain number of points as determined by the GM, one point for each individual successful skill check. This minimum score is the Success Class (SC). One failure earns a negative point and cancels one success, so that the cumulative score might sway back and forth many times before the dramatic skill check is resolved.

Penalties from repetitive skill checks still apply. For example: penalties imposed on a retry due to a previous failure, and penalties that accumulate due to character fatigue or exhaustion.

Ordinarily, if the character earns enough negative points from failed checks to equal the SC of the dramatic skill check, then the character fails the entire dramatic skill check. Of course, the GM is free to define a separate "Failure Class" threshold for failing the dramatic skill check. If the GM wishes to use dramatic skill checks for skills that have dire consequences for overfailure, where an overfailed individual skill check would impose a penalty that makes it impossible for the character to continue, then overfailing an individual skill check could cause the character to automatically fail the dramatic skill check.

As a game mechanic, particularly when opposed checks are involved, dramatic skill checks function similarly to a "tug of war" in which the winner is the one who can bring the center of the rope across their finish line first.

The lowest possible Success Class for a dramatic skill check is 2. (In this sense, an ordinary skill check is simply a dramatic skill check with an SC of 1.) A Success Class of 3, 4, or even 5 points may be appropriate for increasing the tension of the situation. However, the GM should be mindful that if the acting PC or NPC has an odds of success approaching 50% against a given DC (i.e., the minimum roll on the d20 to succeed on the individual skill check falls within the range of 9-12), then the rate at which successes and failures with cancel each other out will be greater than normal.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

pemerton

Legend
[MENTION=3625]Matthias[/MENTION].

Thanks for the post - I like talking about and thinking about skill challenges and how to run them.

I have a worry about the system you describe - it's not clear to me how the individual checks correlate to interesting changes in the ingame situation, which the player can then interact with/leverage/etc in pursuit of his/her PC's goal.

You invoke the image of a tug-of-war - in a real tug of war we mostly just pull, and pull harder. In your system that tends to correlate to trying to roll high, and then trying to roll high again. How does the player get to engage the fiction?
 

Matthias

Explorer
In the context of, for example, a night spent gambling or a single game of chess, the narrative would follow the 'tug of war' in the sense that "the cards are starting to like you again" or "you made a brilliant combination just then, and took your enemy's queen". The Dramatic Skill Check isn't meant to represent a single isolated action such as leaping over a chasm or appraising a beautiful and possibly valuable piece of artwork. It should be used to encapsulate a continuous string of related actions, possibly repetitive behaviors, which do not by themselves count as a "success" for the acting PC. You might think of them as representing a non-combat encounter, where instead of two opponents laying the smack down, they are each trying to outmaneuver or outplay the other person...or else it is an encounter with some impersonal force or obstacle which must be overcome in steps or a little bit at a time, rather than all at once.

While I did not specifically mention Craft checks, a Dramatic Skill Check is similar in principle to the creation of some item which takes more than one day's work to complete (or more than one Craft skill check, at any rate). There is a measurement of progress in the standard rules for Craft checks (silver pieces). Consider how a good GM could narrate the process of reforging of Narsil/Anduril. Tolkien as a GM could have just said, "Okay, the elf NPC crafters make their Craft skill checks. <rolls> Yep, they all passed. Good job, crafter elves! Aragorn gets a new sword."

One could probably adapt these rules for Craft checks (and Spellcraft checks, if any) to draw out the drama of crafting some fancy gear or a magic item or something, if that's a significant part of a PC's backstory and if that's "his thing" to be an item crafter. I decided not to go there, but maybe someone else could.
 

Quickleaf

Legend
I'm thinking the same as [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] about this. What is *dramatic* about the system you propose? To me it falls prey to the same issue the original skill challenge system does - not tying the skill/ability/whatever checks to some kind of interesting narrative. Obviously a great DM doesn't need this, but a great system should provide it.
 

Warbringer

Explorer
Not to hijack, but this how I changed Skill Challenges to fit in my game.

In all instances there are skills that are applicable, useful or irrelevant. These have fixed DCs at 10, 12 and 15 respectively. The player uses the skill (or skills) and they need to achieve a set number of successes, or else fail. The player then narrates their characters actions, the DM the consequences for failure (in fail forward mentality). Each successful role of 5 higher than the traget number is an extra success. I also permit the players to use their actions as a dice pool (attack, defend, move all generate a dice), so in challenge situations they can spend muliple dice to achieve success.

Consider the rogue Jen ‘y’ far, climbing up a wall towards an open window into a mark’s house. The narrator tells her player that from below, she hears the city guard approaching (3rd level) just as the waxing moon breaks cover.

Cursing, the player decides that Jen ‘y’ far only has 2 options, try and hide, or finish the climb before guard sees her. Not wishing to take any chances of being seen, he decides that Jen ‘y’ far makes a desperate lunge for the window just 5 feet above her, grabbing the ledge with 1 hand and dragging herself through as she uses here free hand to pick the simple latch securing the window.


Jen ‘y’ far’s player wants to use as many actions as possible to perform the check. Thievery, Atheltics and Acrobatics are all applicable (our lucky little thief). The difficulty is set at four; the guards (3rd level) is routine (2), but they are a small group (+1) and the sudden burst of moonlight maks things harder (+1).

The narrator and the player decide that based on the description that Jen ‘y’ far’s escape is driven mostly by Acrobatics (2 dice), with a small contribution from Thievery (1 dice); Jen ‘y’ far has +6 in Thievery and +8 in Acrobatics. (5, 14, 19) adding for (9, 20, 25), no problem! Indeed she has 5 successes!!!

Note that while we technically failed the Thievery check, as we had a check for the scene, the whole maneuver succeeds, though the narrator deems she busted the lock in jamming it open.
 

pemerton

Legend
In the context of, for example, a night spent gambling or a single game of chess, the narrative would follow the 'tug of war' in the sense that "the cards are starting to like you again" or "you made a brilliant combination just then, and took your enemy's queen".
I understand how the narrative will follow - but I was more focusing on the play - as in, how does the player get to engage that narrative and leverage it?

At least as I run skill challenges (influenced by the complex resolution systems found in games like HeroWars/Quest, Maelstrom Storytelling and Burning Wheel, as well as the procedure stated in the 4e DMG), after each skill check is resolved the GM narrates the consequence, and further skill checks are framed in relation to this changed situation. So the players get to not just roll dice, but to shape the situation as it unfolds. This is less significant in a low-complexity skill challenge, but tends to matter in a high complexity one.
 

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)
To succeed on a dramatic skill check, a character must earn a certain number of points as determined by the GM, one point for each individual successful skill check. This minimum score is the Success Class (SC). One failure earns a negative point and cancels one success, so that the cumulative score might sway back and forth many times before the dramatic skill check is resolved.

Whether any system for complex skill checks or skill challenges uses the same skill or not, using this as a gauge of success already looks better than the skill challenges rule because it avoids failing because of a specific number of failures. I never saw much of a point between skill challenges needing x successes before y failures - there's no particular magic to the numbers. But I do see a point to counting up the number of 'net successes' after the event is over. The specific number of failures doesn't matter - what matters is whether they've succeeded or failed more and how much more.
 

pemerton

Legend
using this as a gauge of success already looks better than the skill challenges rule because it avoids failing because of a specific number of failures. I never saw much of a point between skill challenges needing x successes before y failures - there's no particular magic to the numbers. But I do see a point to counting up the number of 'net successes' after the event is over. The specific number of failures doesn't matter
Just as a point of clarification - the rationale for X successes before Y failures is to impose finality. It's both a pacing mechanic and a conflict resolution mechanic, which permits the GM to say either "OK, you got what you wanted" or "No, you failed to get what you wanted, and no more retries".

Whether one wants such a mechanic or not is of course a separate matter. I just wanted to indicate what its purpose is.
 

SkidAce

Legend
Supporter
Just as a point of clarification - the rationale for X successes before Y failures is to impose finality. It's both a pacing mechanic and a conflict resolution mechanic, which permits the GM to say either "OK, you got what you wanted" or "No, you failed to get what you wanted, and no more retries".

Whether one wants such a mechanic or not is of course a separate matter. I just wanted to indicate what its purpose is.

It also allows the players actions to determine the "fail forward" trigger instead of the DM.

I just ran a skill challenge where the framework called for six successes versus an evil bandit gang, or six success against the evil smugglers, or six failures by the PCs.

This was a simulation of trying to take control of a corrupt town (think Mos Eisley).

The players could have focused on one guild or the other, but chose the risk of lowering both nearly the same time. Spreading rumors, convince shady merchants to rebel, enlist the militia, incite fights between guilds, etc etc.

Back to the pacing thought. If a guild was "hit" with six successes against them, they were reduced in power, holed up in the city, and ripe for an actual adventurer raid scenario.

Here's my main point about the triggers, schedule events around number of success/failures. Evil guild has 4/6 checks against it. They start riots out of desperation.

Characters hit 3/6 failures against them? The guild that is in the most dire straits puts two and two together and starts coming after the characters.

Luckily for our players. The "final" score was "Bandits 5/6, Smugglers 6/6, Adventurers 3/6" At that point they decided to go full adventure mode and take out the smugglers wererat den. Once that's over, they could go after a weakened bandit gang.

Bam, control of the city, with difficulty of the adventure scenarios determined by player actions.
 


Remove ads

Top