official revision to skill challenge system

[Appleseeth]

I personally like the X rounds to get Y successes. It allows for more "flexibility" in how skill challenges are run, and also forces the untrained characters to do something, or else they may run out of time. The boulder coming towards the PCs isn't gonna exactly wait until the PCs manage to get 3 failures before 8 successes or whatever from a single character.
Maybe a mashup of the two different kinds of challenges is what is needed.
As far as DCs go, I like the progression, but I think the starting DC for a moderate challenge should be 17-18. Not out of reach of untrained characters, and no guaranteed success for a trained one. I'm not worried about my players min/maxing, because I will cockpunch them if they try anything like getting a +19 skill bonus. If you use a variety of skills in challenges, and allow for the use of a variety, then it shouldn't be a min/max problem, as the PCs will figure out that they suck at 99% of skill challenges.

 

[napoleonbuff]

1) I very much agree that in most circumstances time should be the key element for a skill challenge, not failures.

2) I like the idea that it's only a failure if it's 5 or more below, and agree that in most situations a failure should not impact the chance of the group's success but rather be a penalty of some sort (for instance, on a trap, a miss by 5+ could cause a needle to shoot out and stab the player for 1d4 damage, or if the players are on something trying to disable the trap, the something they are on could shake, forcing everyone to check acrobatics). In some instances I would even do away with the idea of a failure/penalty (just players struggling against the clock, such as trying to disarm a trap during a combat or a trap that is harming some if not all members of the party).

1 & 2 encourage player participation.

3) Why not as a counterpoint to the 5 below failure/penalty idea, have a 5 or 10 above bonus? Perhaps you'd get two successes, or the ability to counter one failure/penalty by another player, or an additional die roll, or a personal reward, etc (vary it based on the particular challenge, as with failures/penalties). This would encourage skill training and focus.

4) Would it help to compress the range between easy, moderate and hard (and you could perhaps add really hard!) -- perhaps base #s such as easy 7+, moderate 10+, hard 13+, really hard 16+ for all checks (this is before +5 for skill checks).

5) I also think skills could be linked sometimes, such as perception underground could be modified by dungeoneering (+1 for training, additional +1 for focus) when appropriate (e.g., use this for detecting secret doors/traps in a stone wall but not for finding a secret compartment in a desk); nature could do the same outdoors, and streetwise in a city; arcana training and focus could help similarly with a magical trap or a magic secret door; on and on.

 

[Runestar]

Something came to mind.

While participation in skill challenges was technically mandatory initially, couldn't a player just delay his action indefinitely, effectively removing himself from the skill challenge?

 

[Rechan]

So... are the errata'd skill challenges better? Are they worse? Should they be used?

I can't parse this easily.

 

[MarkB]

So... are the errata'd skill challenges better? Are they worse? Should they be used?

I can't parse this easily.

The general indication seems to be "somewhat better but still not great, and now they err on the side of success rather than failure, so at the very least you won't ruin your party's day by using one."

 

[two]

The whole thing has been a huge boondoggle.

It's really been a black eye to WOTC, because everyone seems to love the concept of a skill challenge. It makes sense, it sounds exciting, it should be fun.

We WANT it to be fun, and to work.

They just keep screwing up the execution.

If it was a small company, well, that's one thing. For a multi-million dollar company to fail so egregiously at one of the major "improvements" to the game (which they proudly promoted pre-release)... that's just weak.

 

[Jhaelen]

Well, looking at the theoretical range of skill modifiers shows, where the problem lies:
Worst case: Paladin with Dex 8 trying to be stealthy while wearing plate and a heavy shield:
At level 1: -5; at level 30: +11
Best case: Halfling with Dex 20 and Skill Focus (Stealth) trying to be stealthy:
At level 1: +15; at level 30: +34
In other words skill modifiers at any given level vary by as much as 20 to 23! Imho, that makes it pretty obvious why it's not really possible choose balanced DCs for skill checks.

To arrive at a more realistic range, I decided to create what I'd consider to be an average party:
[sblock]

Race		Class	Str	Con	Dex	Int	Wis	Cha	Trained	Skills											Armor Penalty:
Dwarf		Cleric	14	14	10	11	18	13	Diplomacy	Heal		Insight		Religion	-		-		Chain		-1
Dragonborn	Fighter	18	13	14	10	11	14	Athletics	Endurance	Intimidate	-		-		-		Hvy. Shield	-1
Halfling	Rogue	13	12	18	10	11	16	Acrobatics	Bluff		Intimidate	Stealth		Streetwise	Thievery	Leather	
Eladrin		Wizard	10	12	15	18	14	11	Arcana		History		Insight		Perception	Religion	-		Cloth	
Elf		Ranger	14	12	18	11	15	10	Acrobatics	Dungeons	Heal		Nature		Perception	-		Hide		-1

[/sblock]Note that these aren't really optimized. The only thing I made sure was that every skill is trained for at least a single character.

For a skill challenge it is safe to assume that only those character that are best at a given skill will participate (the rest will probably use Aid Another).
So, the next table shows this party's best skill modifier over 30 levels:
[sblock]

Trained		Level								
Skills		2	5	8	11	14	17	20	23	26	29
Acrobatics	12	13	16	17	20	21	23	25	27	29
Arcana		12	13	16	17	20	21	23	25	27	29
Athletics	 9	10	13	14	17	18	20	22	24	26
Bluff		 9	10	13	14	17	18	20	22	24	26
Diplomacy	 7	 8	10	12	14	15	17	18	20	21
Dungeons	 8	 9	11	13	15	16	18	20	22	24
Endurance	 6	 7	 9	11	13	14	16	17	19	20
Heal		10	11	14	15	18	19	21	23	25	27
History		12	13	16	17	20	21	23	25	27	29
Insight		10	11	14	15	18	19	21	23	25	27
Intimidate	10	11	13	15	17	18	20	22	24	26
Nature		10	11	13	15	17	18	20	21	23	24
Perception	10	11	13	14	16	17	19	21	23	25
Religion	10	11	14	15	18	19	21	23	25	27
Stealth		10	11	14	15	18	19	21	23	25	27
Streetwise	 9	10	13	14	17	18	20	22	24	26
Thievery	12	13	16	17	20	21	23	25	27	29
Average		9,88	11,06	13,88	15,35	18,18	19,35	21,53	23,53	25,71	27,71

[/sblock]Note that these skill modifiers don't include bonuses from feats, powers or items.

Compared to the suggested skill DCs, you'll get the following probabilities to succeed in a single skill check:
[sblock]

%	2	5	8	11	14	17	20	23	26	29	Average
Easy	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%
Medium	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%
Hard	79,41%	75,29%	79,41%	76,76%	80,88%	76,76%	77,65%	77,65%	78,53%	78,53%	78,09%

[/sblock]

If all of the DCs are increased by 5, you'll get this:
[sblock]

%	2	5	8	11	14	17	20	23	26	29	Average
Easy	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%	100,00%
Medium	79,41%	75,29%	79,41%	76,76%	80,88%	76,76%	77,65%	77,65%	78,53%	78,53%	78,09%
Hard	54,41%	50,29%	54,41%	51,76%	55,88%	51,76%	52,65%	52,65%	53,53%	53,53%	53,09%

[/sblock]

If all of the DCs are increased by 10 you'll get this:
[sblock]

%	2	5	8	11	14	17	20	23	26	29	Average
Easy	79,41%	75,29%	84,41%	81,76%	90,88%	86,76%	92,65%	92,65%	98,53%	98,53%	88,09%
Medium	54,41%	50,29%	54,41%	51,76%	55,88%	51,76%	52,65%	52,65%	53,53%	53,53%	53,09%
Hard	29,41%	25,29%	29,41%	26,76%	30,88%	26,76%	27,65%	27,65%	28,53%	28,53%	28,09%

[/sblock]It's now fairly easy to compare these results to the chances to succeed at a given skill challenge (taking Aid Another into account as appropriate).

To me, it seems the new DCs have been chosen to allow everyone to have a chance to succeed with every skill at every level:
- Easy DC:
Someone untrained will have an above average chance to succeed (even if handicapped).
Someone trained will succeed automatically (unless handicapped).
- Medium DC:
Someone untrained will have an average chance to succeed (lower if handicapped).
Someone trained will have a very good chance to succeed (above average, if handicapped).
- Hard DC:
Someone untrained will have a low chance to succeed (no chance if handicapped).
Someone trained will have an above average chance to succeed (even if handicapped).

If you agree with this intention the DCs are okay to use for single skill checks.

For skill challenges to be meaningful, however, it's not possible to use the same DCs:
- Even if every skill check is using the Hard DC and noone is using Aid Another, a Complexitiy 5 skill challenge will succeed with an average chance of 48,86%.
- If every skill check is assisted by one character, the chance goes up to 83,33%
- If every skill check is assisted by two characters, the chance goes up to 99,85%

 

[Stalker0]

In your analysis, keep in mind as well that for a skill challenge, players are expected to use their best skills. So while the paladin has a nasty stealth check, he probably won't be using it for the challenge. Which makes the challenge much easier....in fact it jumps it into the 95% range in many cases.

 

[drothgery]

If it was a small company, well, that's one thing. For a multi-million dollar company to fail so egregiously at one of the major "improvements" to the game (which they proudly promoted pre-release)... that's just weak.

Hasbro is a multi-billion dollar company (market cap is ~$5 billion). WotC is a very, very small part of Hasbro, and the tabletop RPG business is maybe a third of WotC. On its own it is a small to mid-sized company (as opposed to the typical RPG company, which is a one or two person operation).

 

[two]

Hasbro is a multi-billion dollar company (market cap is ~$5 billion). WotC is a very, very small part of Hasbro, and the tabletop RPG business is maybe a third of WotC. On its own it is a small to mid-sized company (as opposed to the typical RPG company, which is a one or two person operation).

Right. 1-2 person (or 5) vs. a small to mid sized company. A huge disparity.