Skill challenges and you

[Lurks-no-More]

I've followed the arguments and discussions about the new skill challenge system (or what we know of it) on this forum, and I'm curious about the player-DM spread of the opinions. Are the players for this, and DMs against; or vice versa; or is it more or less balanced?

 

[Muminalver]

I'll deside when i have tested it for myself.. Right now it i'm not that sure but, how knows?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Well, honestly, I am both a player and a DM. But thinking about the rules, I am mostly thinking about how can I now throw situations at the players and let them figure out how to get out of them / solve them.

My current scenario:
"Okay guys, the Kobolds want the young woman, or will attack the village. Maybe you can beat them, maybe you can't. You understand that the woman is meant as a gift to appease an angry Dragon. The villagers have bad experience with the last dragon in this area. What do you do to solve the situation?"
Worst Possible Outcomes:
- Let the Kobolds have the woman. Dragon is now in debt to the Kobolds. Villagers are angry/sad for the woman, and now fear the Kobolds and the Dragon.
Best Possible Outcome:
- Kobolds and Village make a trade/mutual defense deal. Woman lives. Kobold Heroes and Adventurers go out to kill Dragon.
Lots of Space in Between, and possibly even something I didn't come up yet (or at least didnt' describe)

Possibility for players totally screwing this up by being unable to come up with anything: High.

 

[parvatiquinta]

As a DM, I've always liked the idea of encouraging the players to have an active role. I often find myself thinking "hey, I'm talking too much".
On the one hand, as a player I would like to have that freedom I'm willing to give my players; on the other, this also means I can sit back and relax while they do a share of the "work"

 

[Li Shenron]

As a player and DM, I like skill challenges.

In fact, I like them since I've read about them the first time: in the 3.0 PHB.

 

[Baka no Hentai]

I too am both a DM and a Player, and I am highly anticipating trying out the skill challenges as both!

As a DM, I hope that this will be a useful tool to help some of my newer "rpg challenged" players to connect a bit more with their characters. I know its not a magic bullet for that situation, but anything that gets them thinking about "What would my character do in this situation?" helps.

I also believe that it will help me make more compelling adventures. I know some of the critics will say that this could already be done in previous editions, but the fact that they will be providing cohesive examples and guidelines that I can build off of is a significant boon to inexperienced DM's like myself who simply may not have thought to do such things, or who may have thought to try but had no good ideas of how to implement it.

As a player, I am looking forward to the challenges my DM might come up with as a means for me to explore my character further

 

[hong]

One thing about the new approach to skills is that it might require more forethought and planning, or at least better improvisational skills within the context of the storyline, to DM.

Under the "task resolution" setup, you can pretty much handle events as they crop up. The PCs talk to the guards, fine, make a Diplomacy check (or run it freeform). They botch it, make a Str check to run away. Make a Hide check to hide. Make a Climb check to climb over the wall. And so on, until you eventually get tired, or the guards catch them, or whatever.

Under the "conflict resolution" setup, you have to consider possible events as part of an overarching conflict. Say they botch their conversation with the guards. What is the conflict now? Maybe it's to get away (the immediate conflict). Or maybe it's to get back on track with whatever they wanted to do in the first place (longer-term conflict). Deciding which is more appropriate may not be something that D&D DMs are familiar with.

 

[wedgeski]

I both play and DM, and I'm looking forward to this system from both points of view.

It's something we've tried in the past, but because the system wasn't formalised my players tended to fall back onto old stand-by's... and because they did that, I designed adventures which had a lot of conventional choices built in. In the new system, I just have to leave a hole, and the players will need to learn that they can exploit their characters' strengths by filling that hole in themselves.

I do worry about repetitive or outlandish suggestions from the players, but that's down to the group, not the rules, and the DM ultimately has the power to close down that kind of thing.

 

[Propheous_D]

I love the new way of doing it for one major reason. Players have a tendency to think that thier great ideas should all ways be allowed regardless of their characters limitations. I love seeing barbarians with 8 int be all "Well hello sir I was hoping we could elicit your help in this quest". I think that this not only allows a way for a player to work to his strengths it helps to remove the one man wonder were one clever person takes command of a party and everyone else just follows and doesn't bother trying to innovate.

IE:
PC: I know there is a sewer around here!
DM: Really why yes there is a sewer grate over there.
PC: Great we go down it!
DM: Sorry the sewer grate is only 1' by 1'
Other PC: Can I use my knowledge local to find a larger sewer?
DM: Why yes you can.
PC: Well I would have looked for a main sewer!
DM: Well you don't see one currently and since you took Acrobatics instead of knowledge local you never really paid attention to sewers as you past them before.

While this seems counter intuitive because I am shutting down one PC. Sometimes you need to make room for others in the party to feel participatory. Skill checks for these things can be a good way to promote a more diverse invovlement with a know it all player (Like myself hehe)

 

[Cadfan]

I'm a DM, and I like them.

I am operating under the assumption that they work something like this:

1. Regular "skill versus DC" type skill resolutions from 3e are still in.

2. Skill challenges are for larger scenarios, and for providing a structure into which you place the "skill versus DC" resolutions.

3. DM engagement in determining what "makes sense" is still just as strong as it was before.

4. Things like set skill DCs for all skills in the encounter (Like how we saw with DC 15, plus or minus 4) are intended to represent issues like "can I climb the wall faster than the guards," not "can I climb the wall at all," and the latter is still "skill versus DC." Essentially, the former is for opposed checks in the context of unopposed skills.

I wish we knew more about the 4e skill challenge system. Reports from the DDXP were contradictory on a lot of details.