Combat is different

[bert1000]

A lot of the tension here IMO, is the desire for a lot of groups (including mine) to challange both the player and character in an encounter.

In combat, most systems challenge both the player (tactics) and character (abilities/powers) and assume the player is doing his/her best at the tactics, regardless of the characters' ability.

In non-combat situations it widely differs. Some groups challenge the players only and let the players speeches, choice of where to search, etc. be the major determinate of success or failure. Others challenge only the character. There really aren't that many tactical choices, and success or failure is resolved through dice only. (some groups do a good job and have fun acting out the results of the die role though!).

What I think you are searching for is to have some balance like combat where player skill and character ability are both important determinates of success/failure.

This is tough, but skill challenges are heading in the right direction. The key in my mind is to put enough tactical choices into the skill challenge. Some of that comes from trying to figure out how to use a "good" skill in the challenge.

Anyone else find ways to put more tactical decisions for the players into skill challenges?

 

[PeelSeel2]

I do not 'get' how skill challenges work, so I am trying them how I interpret them to work.

Our last session, they had a random encounter. Instead of everyone making perception rolls to get 1 result (you notice them), I had them all make perception rolls to see how well they noticed them. Depending on how many of them made the DC determined how badly surprised or not surprised they where. 8 characters all made the DC of 15, so I said they had the enemy at a total disadvantage at the beginning of the encounter. The enemy had stopped to take a break on their march. The characters decided on a plan, and positioned themselves for an ambush and sent two characters in to negotiate. They talked with them effectively and continued on with info and no combat. Worked out good.

 

[Evil DM]

In non-combat situations it widely differs. Some groups challenge the players only and let the players speeches, choice of where to search, etc. be the major determinate of success or failure. Others challenge only the character. There really aren't that many tactical choices, and success or failure is resolved through dice only. (some groups do a good job and have fun acting out the results of the die role though!).

My friend.
The last sentence, sadly only in brackets, is in my opionen the one and only true way to handle it.

As for in combat, after moving your miniature for a tactical well placed position, you act totaly as a character. Refering to the numbers on your sheet.

So why not in social interaction too? If your character opens his mouth, you can determine as a player what he says - but the numbers (diplomacy, bluff, intimidate, etc) tell you how he says it.
Maybe your character stands in front of a duke and wanna say:
Greetings to you nobleman, I am proud that you have time for my humble self - or something similar.
Now you roll etiquett for your character. Ups a 2.
So it goes like
C'mon you &§%) don't you have better to do than steling my precious time?

Yeah, it is an extreme example but I think you know what I mean.

So before your character participates in a certain social interaction, the player should check his record sheet if his character is able to handle it.

Like in combat where you have to decide if you behave like a frontliner or prefere the secure distance. The numbers on your record sheet (AC, Attack bonus, etc.) may give you hint what is the better choice.

Cheers, Evil DM.

 

[Fifth Element]

jumping over the pit-
running start? with friends- why not tie off a rope? Have a grappling hook? How's the footing look on the other side? Can an ally catch the fool before they leap to their doom? Can they spot a something to grab on the way down and actually grab it?

This doesn't change the fact that the challenge will (generally) ultimately be overcome based on the result of a single die roll. How many die rolls are in a single combat? Dozens, at least. I think that's closer to the OP's point.

 

[JDJblatherings]

This doesn't change the fact that the challenge will (generally) ultimately be overcome based on the result of a single die roll.

That's like saying every combat is resolved by the last to hit roll.

If one wanted to resolve the jump scenario with dice all the points I raised (and more) could easily involve a half dozen plus dice rolling opportunities.

why not tie off a rope? <- use a roll if DM and players are maniacs

Have a grappling hook? <- an exercise in resource management/equipment selection. Do you haggle when you buy goods? if so a dice roll.

How's the footing look on the other side? <- careful planning and a perception check

Can an ally catch the fool before they leap to their doom? <- Initiative and or grapple attack.

JUMP. <- the acrobatics/jump roll.

If there is a safety-line and they miss the jump and someone is holding the rope-> str check to not get the rope yanked free.

Can they spot something to grab on the way down and actually grab it? <- perception check and acrobatics.

Safety line attached? <- Pull the guy up, in a hurry make a STR check.

Safety line not attached but managed to catch a hold on the way down? <- Then there is a climb check to get out.

The less abstract one gets the more opportunities there are to roll or role ones way through a situation.

Combat has picky rules...who, when, where, with what, how much? You have action (attacks), defenses, impact of actions (damage and effects), mitigation of impact and maneuver.
There are scores and rules to cover all of that.

In a jump we still have maneuver, action,defense, impact of actions and mitigation of impact. We just have to use scores and abilities that are not all spelled out in a chapter spent on jumping.