D&D 4E Heavy Concrete Data on 4e's Skill Challenge System (long, lots of tables)

[Eldorian]

If you trust the numbers, that is indeed what they indicate. But there is one very good reason why the numbers aren't relevant; the glaringly low event sample which the numbers address.

What the hell? Event sample? His isn't taking samplings. He's running stuff with the abstract assumption that the dice are fair and random, and then making conclusions based on well accepted theory of probability.

 

[Skywalker]

The table only shows the effects of 4 people attempting to aid the first person, so your not wrong. As to your question, the system mentions in aid another a +8 is the limit, so there's no reason the scenario I mentioned can't happen. Further, by mid heroic tier, party members start autopassing aid another rolls, so if they are willing to aid, why wouldn't they all try to aid 1 person?

Aid Another is one of the first rules I fixed in my new system, to prevent this kind of abuse.

I have come across a number of situations where the max Aid Another is not used.

The common examples we have encountered so far are:

1. Skill Challenges in Combat Encounters. Often PCs are pressed by Combat and are unable to engage in Aiding or even Skill Challenges.

2. Time Pressure. I have seen Skill Challenges where in order to be able to use their Skill in the Skill Challenge, the PC can't Aid Another. The normal restrictions to Aid Another still apply. For example, infilitrating a camp. One group creates a diversion, while another sneaks into a camp and may not assist.

3. Other Limits. I have seen Skill Challenges where some Skills are restricted as to how many PCs may Aid Another i.e. only 2 PCs may Aid Another when breaking down a door.

As such, I would love to see the stats for having just 1 or 2 PCs Aiding, rather than just the extremes.

 

[Mezzer]

What the hell? Event sample? His isn't taking samplings. He's running stuff with the abstract assumption that the dice are fair and random, and then making conclusions based on well accepted theory of probability.

Succeeding at a complexity 1 challenge involves a maximum of 5 rolls; succeeding at a complexity 5 challenge involves a maximum 17 rolls. While probability theory is useful in large scale, unless you have hundreds of skill challenges going on, the math will simply be irrelevant and won't reflect your outcomes. The terminology I used may have been misleading, sorry about that.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I have come across a number of situations where the max Aid Another is not used.

The common examples we have encountered so far are:

1. Skill Challenges in Combat Encounters. Often PCs are pressed by Combat and are unable to engage in Aiding or even Skill Challenges.

2. Time Pressure. I have seen Skill Challenges where in order to be able to use their Skill in the Skill Challenge, the PC can't Aid Another. The normal restrictions to Aid Another still apply. For example, infilitrating a camp. One group creates a diversion, while another sneaks into a camp and may not assist.

3. Limits. I have seen Skill Challenges where some Skills are restricted as to how many PCs may Aid i.e. breaking down a door.

As such, I would love to see the stats for having just 1 or 2 PCs Aiding, rather than just the extremes.

Well, the chart for decreasing the DCs by 5 is equivalent to 2.5 successful Aid Anothers, so you can look at that one and it'll turn out the same.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Succeeding at a complexity 1 challenge involves a maximum of 5 rolls; succeeding at a complexity 5 challenge involves a maximum 17 rolls. While probability theory is useful in large scale, unless you have hundreds of skill challenges going on, the math will simply be irrelevant and won't reflect your outcomes. The terminology I used may have been misleading, sorry about that.

I'm stunned.

Again.

You are really flushing them out of the woodwork with these threads, Stalker. I'd say it's a lost cause, quite frankly.

 

[Skywalker]

Well, the chart for decreasing the DCs by 5 is equivalent to 2.5 successful Aid Anothers, so you can look at that one and it'll turn out the same.

Good point. So the range is 60% at 1st level (80% with Aid Another) increasing to 100% at Epic level assuming Attributes are at +4.

That doesn't seem that far out compared to success in combat encounters.

Is there any chance of a chart if the Attributes were +2. When I looked through the pregens, their average Attribute for the group's best skills was +2.5, so +2 may provide some interesting additional data.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I'm stunned.

Again.

You are really flushing them out of the woodwork with these threads, Stalker. I'd say it's a lost cause, quite frankly.

If anything, this is good proof for why it is so crucial that WotC give us a statistically-sound system in the DMG to begin with. One thing I've learned in a Cognitive Architectures class I took is that Probability is a fascinating topic for how it is perceived and analysed by the human mind--we have these built-in gut instincts about probability that are almost-always wrong and a strong built-in tendency to ignore counter-intuitive but correct results. It's something that casinos and other people who make their living off of probability can use to manipulate people.

 

[Eldorian]

I'd say it's a lost cause, quite frankly.

I'm inclined to agree, unfortunately. Hopefully, he can convince the powers that be, as they're the only ones whose opinions actually matter in this case, anyways =P

 

[IceBear]

Just look at the skill challenge added via web enhancement for Keep on the Shadowfell. It's nearly impossible to win with the playtest characters.

I honestly don't know why they even released that web enhancement because right from the moment I read it (without doing any of this fancy math) it was obvious it was a complete longshot, hail Mary, type event for a desperate group. Heck, it's a level 6 skill challenge for a level 3 party, it's already a done deal before any dice are rolled.

The actual skill challenge with the undead knight was much more reasonable (ie, they intend for the groups to succeed, unlike the last one where they do not). My group isn't at that point yet - did most groups fail that one?

 

[Mezzer]

I'm stunned.

Again.

You are really flushing them out of the woodwork with these threads, Stalker. I'd say it's a lost cause, quite frankly.

*sigh* All I'm saying is that people should take these calculations with the proverbial grain of salt, what's hard to understand about that?

Not all people will give the math, and what its saying an in depth look, and some might not know how the math behind all of it. Taking the 7th level entry as an example, a person might jump to the conclusion that the system is completely worthless without considering that assessment in depth. So all I'm saying is, take it with a grain of salt.

It's something that casinos and other people who make their living off of probability can use to manipulate people.

This works both ways, and should be considered as such, and is kinda part of my whole point.