D&D 4E JamesonCourage's First 4e Session

[Campbell]

One possible variant that I find works really well in time sensitive situations is to ditch the failures, and instead have a set number of rounds to reach the success threshold. Imagine a scenario where an antagonist has the knife to the throat of an NPC ally riding on the back of the wagon. The PCs are pursuing on horseback and have 3 "rounds" to reach 10 successes. Hard checks grant 2 successes, average checks 1, and easy checks provide some advantage to another PC's roll. You could use Athletics to stand atop your horse showing you're ready to jump as you get close as hard check to make the villain hesitate. You could try to talk him down with diplomacy as an average check for one success. Perhaps an easy Ride check would allow you get close close enough to threaten him with intimidate in the next round. You could use Arcana to force his arm back through sheer force of the mind granting another PC +5 to their next Intimidate check. You get the idea.

 

[Klaus]

Re: Power Strike: the daily power of a Thudering weapon is also maximized. Only damage that only occurs on a critical (like the property "Critical: +1d6 thunder damage per plus" of a Thundering weapon) is rolled.

So a +1 Thundering Warhammer deals 1d10+1 on a normal hit (2d10+1 if you spend Power Strike). On a critical hit, the weapon deals 11+1d6 thunder (21+1d6 if you spend Power Strike). If you use the daily power, it adds +1d8 on a normal hit and +8 on a critical hit.

 

[Manbearcat]

The player of the Warpriest hates skill challenges. I've assured him that they're not going anywhere, and lightly suggested he learn to like them, but he says he won't. I guess that's okay, since it's a preference thing. However, he wasn't really able to express what he disliked about them, though the player of the Fighter did interject to say that he liked them, and had fun with them. I'm kind of at a loss at what to do with this; the Warpriest player did play 3.X for a long time, and he really liked it, but he has also told me that he wouldn't want to play it again after 4e, even if he doesn't like aspects of it. Any insight? I know you have even less to go on than I do, but maybe a new take on skill challenges will help me.

Just wanted to take a run at this one right quick. I don't know what this player's specific issue is but there seems to be an undercurrent of dissatisfaction from players who are always looking at their deployable resources before considering the fiction (rather than the inverse). So many people are driven by tangible, visual elements before them that their creative juices are stunted when lacking such cues. Even for creative players (who are fiction first and have a deeply creative reservoir), visual cues can help. To that end, I have a prop technique for you that I use at my home table.

It is basically stolen from Fate Aspects and MHRP scene Distinctions. I keep flashcards to scrawl information on when I'm running a game. When I'm running a Skill Challenge, I will write a two/three word phrase that represents the thematic, evocative elements of the scene when I frame it ("Cold, Dark Night", "Buzzing Marketplace", "Simmering Rage", "Craggy, Dead Tundra", "Playing Children", etc). This gives players visual cues to consider first (fiction-first) to riff off of when considering the environment, the situation, and their response. As the challenge evolves, I'll add more and take some away (as fitting) until it revolves itself.

If that is this player's problem, this should help.

 

[JamesonCourage]

One possible variant that I find works really well in time sensitive situations is to ditch the failures, and instead have a set number of rounds to reach the success threshold. Imagine a scenario where an antagonist has the knife to the throat of an NPC ally riding on the back of the wagon. The PCs are pursuing on horseback and have 3 "rounds" to reach 10 successes. Hard checks grant 2 successes, average checks 1, and easy checks provide some advantage to another PC's roll. You could use Athletics to stand atop your horse showing you're ready to jump as you get close as hard check to make the villain hesitate. You could try to talk him down with diplomacy as an average check for one success. Perhaps an easy Ride check would allow you get close close enough to threaten him with intimidate in the next round. You could use Arcana to force his arm back through sheer force of the mind granting another PC +5 to their next Intimidate check. You get the idea.

I'm starting to like ideas like what you laid out here (XP sent your way). Thanks for going into such detail on it, it made it a lot more clear what you had in mind. I think I'll experiment with something like this and see how it goes. Maybe it'll feel more "organic" to my player, or something (since I'm not sure what he dislikes about the normal skill challenge), and thus more acceptable.

Re: Power Strike: the daily power of a Thudering weapon is also maximized. Only damage that only occurs on a critical (like the property "Critical: +1d6 thunder damage per plus" of a Thundering weapon) is rolled.

So a +1 Thundering Warhammer deals 1d10+1 on a normal hit (2d10+1 if you spend Power Strike). On a critical hit, the weapon deals 11+1d6 thunder (21+1d6 if you spend Power Strike). If you use the daily power, it adds +1d8 on a normal hit and +8 on a critical hit.

Ah, gotcha. Good thing he rolled max on his 1d8, then. I'll run it this way from now on. Thanks for the clarification for me.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Just wanted to take a run at this one right quick. I don't know what this player's specific issue is but there seems to be an undercurrent of dissatisfaction from players who are always looking at their deployable resources before considering the fiction (rather than the inverse). So many people are driven by tangible, visual elements before them that their creative juices are stunted when lacking such cues. Even for creative players (who are fiction first and have a deeply creative reservoir), visual cues can help. To that end, I have a prop technique for you that I use at my home table.

It is basically stolen from Fate Aspects and MHRP scene Distinctions. I keep flashcards to scrawl information on when I'm running a game. When I'm running a Skill Challenge, I will write a two/three word phrase that represents the thematic, evocative elements of the scene when I frame it ("Cold, Dark Night", "Buzzing Marketplace", "Simmering Rage", "Craggy, Dead Tundra", "Playing Children", etc). This gives players visual cues to consider first (fiction-first) to riff off of when considering the environment, the situation, and their response. As the challenge evolves, I'll add more and take some away (as fitting) until it revolves itself.

If that is this player's problem, this should help.

I'm not sure what his problem is. He doesn't seem to have a problem engaging with stuff during the skill challenge, as he comes up with uses for his skills very easily (Religion checks to ask his goddess in help closing the Portal, Arcana checks to scan for magical traces that he can note / track, Heal checks to keep the party healthy / looking good / make sure they're not leaving a blood trail, Perception checks to keep an eye out for particular dangers tied to whatever is going on, etc.).

Whatever his problem is, it's fairly deep, though. He's said that "skill challenges are the part of 4e I hate most", and while it seems like he's more than willing to tolerate them to keep playing (he really likes the game / campaign), he doesn't seem to enjoy them afterwards. Sometimes I can see the him get lost in the really tense skill challenges, but he did make a comment in the middle of the cave-in escape skill challenge that he hated skill challenges, though it was just after he got dropped from some falling rocks. And, as I've noted before, he first brought up his issue with them after the investigation skill challenge, in which they rolled low a lot and nearly failed.

I think that it's possible that he simply doesn't like losing, or getting close to it. I've seen him tense up during the harder combats, but that's normal enough. If this is the problem, I know there's nothing I can do to resolve it; I'm not about to make things consistently easy. That's not fun for me, as I really like it when tension pops up, and then the players (hopefully) overcome the obstacle. I also don't mind them dominating at times, though. I like both, not just one.

I'll have to try to get a better feel for it. I don't think his problem is an inability to engage with the context of the current challenge. I've only got observations to go on, as he couldn't come up with an answer when I asked what he disliked about it. Maybe if I approach him again and tell him I want to know what it is so that I can see if I can work with it, that'll make it easier for him to share. For all I know, it's simply the forced narrative structure (not that he would use a phrase like that). If that's the case, there's no way for me to change skill challenges enough to really help his tastes that I can think of, as that would seemingly work directly against the point of skill challenges. I'll talk to him again and get back to you guys.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

One possible variant that I find works really well in time sensitive situations is to ditch the failures, and instead have a set number of rounds to reach the success threshold. (snip)

Thanks. That's a great idea.

Nice write-up again, [MENTION=6668292]JamesonCourage[/MENTION].

What about also giving opportunities to negate failures? That may help address the player's psychology that you have alluded to. Also, if you combine this with Campbell's idea of a time limit, negating failures is also costing actions so there is still a measure of tension there.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Nice write-up again, @JamesonCourage.

Thanks

What about also giving opportunities to negate failures? That may help address the player's psychology that you have alluded to. Also, if you combine this with Campbell's idea of a time limit, negating failures is also costing actions so there is still a measure of tension there.

I do let them negate failures with a successful use of an Advantage (which requires a skill check against a Hard DC, and doesn't contribute to the successes of the challenge). They've done it pretty routinely, and like that feature. This guy still dislikes skill challenges. The player of the Fighter explicitly likes them. I think the Wizard isn't sure yet, and I'm not sure where the Monk lands; she probably likes them afterwards, when the tension has died down.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

Cool. Got it.

I've only run a couple overtly in the last three or so years but they've worked out well but I've also used them as the hidden engine, if you like, behind a series of exploration/roleplaying encounters.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Cool. Got it.

I've only run a couple overtly in the last three or so years but they've worked out well but I've also used them as the hidden engine, if you like, behind a series of exploration/roleplaying encounters.

I prefer to put everything in the open, so that they can use their advantages / control the resource management aspect, but I do wonder how it'd be if I ran it behind the scenes.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

I prefer to put everything in the open, so that they can use their advantages / control the resource management aspect, but I do wonder how it'd be if I ran it behind the scenes.

I agree... and also don't agree.

I've used both depending on what I felt would work best at the time.