Stalker0's Obsidian Skill Challenge System (Update: Version 1.1) Now with PDF!!

[Dayspire]

This needs to go right back up to the top, so that it is seen by many others.

 

[mcnathan80]

So it seems as if there is no "aid other" actions in this new system. I can kind of see the point (it is too important to get thso e victories to waste time helping someone succeed on theirs", but what if someone wanted to succeed on a simple DC 10 to give some one else a +2 just to make sure they get it? Would that break the system?

 

[Stalker0]

So it seems as if there is no "aid other" actions in this new system. I can kind of see the point (it is too important to get thso e victories to waste time helping someone succeed on theirs", but what if someone wanted to succeed on a simple DC 10 to give some one else a +2 just to make sure they get it? Would that break the system?

In the new system, mechanically all actions are treated the same. However, flavor wise you can describe it however you want. If you want to say your aiding another person, then do so, but your roll never changes. I did this for several reasons:

1) Make the mechanics more invisible. I wanted to remove modifiers and bonuses that would get the players thinking mechanically. I wanted them to know exactly what to roll in a skill challenge everytime, so there's no confusion, no questions to be asked, they can roll and get on with the challenge.

2) Aid isn't mechanically viable in this system. Because its based on the number of rolls, there are few situations where a person giving up their chance to roll a success in order to give a person a +2 is beneficial, even if the +2 bonus is automatic. I could make a bigger number or change some other things, but it wouldn't be aid another.


So it would break the math, in the wrong direction. Because there's no real mathematical incentive to use aid, it is basically a "bad" idea for players to use it, because they are hurting their chances by doing so.

 

[Cirex]

Just posting to appreciate your work. I've been following your threads about this matter for a while, since those super low success chances were a bit troublesome in my opinion, so, thanks for doing this.

My players will appreciate it too!

 

[Vermonter]

Overall great job! I'm definitely using this system over your previous attempt to fix the WOTC version.

I do have a few comments/complaints and then some questions:

1> First, you keep saying that there is no Aid Another in this system. I think that is the wrong answer. The right answer is to say that it is still a valid action and then point out to players it is almost always less productive than directly helping yourself by taking a skill check. The more that the rules are consistent with other 4E rules the better, and leaving it in as a valid (but poor) choice is consistent.

2> For the same reason I'm not fond of the critical success re-roll rule. How much does it break things to just give 2 successes on a natural 20? Overall, are you willing to share your math (spreadsheet?).

3> I really like the "party leader" style challenge variant someone else mentioned, where you need more successes, but that player counts for 2 successes (3 on a critical success) when the hit the DC. I'd love to see it as a formal variant.

4> Great prison break example, really evocative and I like the way the outcome of each segment feeds the next. I understand that going beyond a +1 to -1 range can make the math swing a bit, but it feels a bit wimpy after all that 'work'. I'm thinking that full success in segment 1 and 2 could give +2 bonus, failure could cost a healing surge from all players and the DC for segments 2 and 3 could be +1 higher than for stage 1. Just another way to make the math the same as you had, but also penalize the players for failure. I might go a bit tougher and make segment 3 one higher DC than segment 2.

5> I like the action point for a re-roll mechanism and was brainstorming other elements that could 'cost' players resources during a challenge. I liked one idea I saw somewhere that had ongoing background checks between each 'round' of the challenge itself. For example if the challenge was a long wilderness journey the challenge checks determine overall success, but everyone still has to make an endurance check between each of the three rounds or arrive with one less healing surge than normal. This maintains the team play, but also differentiates a bit between characters. Our GM did this to us in a Star Wars adventure where background radiation was effecting us and it was very evocative.

5> I think XP should be 1/2 for partial success and full for success.

That's it, not a lot of questions I guess. Just thinking about how much changing things impacts the math, mostly with critical successes even simpler, and allowing a leader roll for certain challenges.

 

[LargeGoblin]

This seems awesome, but I'd like to see more examples and more tactical options. I think more tactical options lead to skill challenges being more fun for the players. I'm not too worried about complexity. If players can learn combat rules, surely they can learn skill challenge rules.

 

[Zelc]

I like how there's a sliding scale of success-failure, just like a combat encounter. Here's a thought about partial successes. Maybe when the party attains a partial success, they enter the skill challenge a second time. In the first two segments of this follow-up challenge, they must spend a healing surge if they want to make a roll. In the last segment, they must spend a daily power if they want to make a roll. Success in this second skill challenge means their focus and persistence paid off, and they achieved a success in the whole thing. Failure can mean they keep a partial success. Alternatively, you could eliminate the partial success conclusion and have only successes and failures; if they choose not to participate in the follow-up skill challenge, it's like retreating from battle; they fail the challenge. Would something like this work?

 

[doctorhook]

Stalker0,

I'm intrigued by this system, and I'm seriously considering using it in my game! However, I am slightly hesitant.

You see, I just bought a new car, then traded it in for a better car, and now, I have the option of trading it in for a potentially even better car! I've been waiting for a new car for a while, and now, all of a sudden, I have a chance to trade in my newest before I really even have a chance to try it out. People are starting to think I'm crazy, changing cars every week.

4E's skill challenge system was my first new car; I replaced it with your previous skill challenge system. Now, you again offer me another, better car/skill challenge system, one that promises to be the best so far. I don't if I should stay or go.

Give it to me straight, Stalk. Why should I, a devoted fan of your previous skill challenge system, adopt obsidian? Is there any major disadvantages to obsidian? Please don't mince words; I prefer to make an informed decision.

Thanks (again) for your patience, Stalker0.

Sincerely,
Kyle

PS: I'm pretty sure the movie you were thinking of is "The Incredibles" not "Inevitables".

 

[Stalker0]

2> For the same reason I'm not fond of the critical success re-roll rule. How much does it break things to just give 2 successes on a natural 20? Overall, are you willing to share your math (spreadsheet?).

3> I really like the "party leader" style challenge variant someone else mentioned, where you need more successes, but that player counts for 2 successes (3 on a critical success) when the hit the DC. I'd love to see it as a formal variant.

4> Great prison break example, really evocative and I like the way the outcome of each segment feeds the next. I understand that going beyond a +1 to -1 range can make the math swing a bit, but it feels a bit wimpy after all that 'work'. I'm thinking that full success in segment 1 and 2 could give +2 bonus, failure could cost a healing surge from all players and the DC for segments 2 and 3 could be +1 higher than for stage 1. Just another way to make the math the same as you had, but also penalize the players for failure. I might go a bit tougher and make segment 3 one higher DC than segment 2.

5> I think XP should be 1/2 for partial success and full for success.

You'll get your way on number 2. I was already looking for some tweaks to fix a few trouble spots in the system, and ran the model with a 2 success critical idea. It actually came out very well, it smooths some of scaling even more, and allowed me to change the 2 player victory/p.victory numbers which were always a little off for my taste. This has been added to version 1.1, which is now up!

As for aid another and leadership ideas, I am doing work on a variety of variants for those who "want more". However, I'm only going to officially add variants that are very solid and that work well with the system as a whole. For example, aid another as normally written does not work. However, I have a new idea for it that might, we shall see what the number reveal!!

For multiple challenges, a +1/-1 DC is actually a decent change, +10/-10% overall. Considering it is to every single person's roll, that can be a fairly big impact.

I like how there's a sliding scale of success-failure, just like a combat encounter. Here's a thought about partial successes. Maybe when the party attains a partial success, they enter the skill challenge a second time.

As the DM, you are free to work with partial successes however you please. They are a backbone mechanic to give the DM the ability to give his players a win but keep the adventure moving in that direction. How the DM decides the bonuses for victory and partial victory are up to him. Your idea is a perfect one for some partial successes. Let your imagination run free!

This seems awesome, but I'd like to see more examples and more tactical options.

Hehe, I can never win. People said my last system was too complex, and this one too simple. I am working on a few additional options, but just so you know I have no plans to add a huge list of player abilities. The point of this system is that it is simple, the mechanics are secondary to the actions of the player.

Give it to me straight, Stalk. Why should I, a devoted fan of your previous skill challenge system, adopt obsidian? Is there any major disadvantages to obsidian? Please don't mince words; I prefer to make an informed decision.

I would never beat around the bush Doc Hook. Here is a general comparison between the two systems:

Original
1) More gradual length to the system, able to accommodate slightly larger or shorter skill challenges.
2) More player options
3) More in line with original system, good for those who don't want a significant change from the original.
4) Players are encouraged to use their best skills in nearly every encounter, and to use aid another.*
5) More mechanical

Obsidian
1) Sturdier math, able to take DM's tweaking on the fly better.
2) Cleaner and easier to learn overall.
3) Players are encouraged to use certain skills for certain challenges, even if they aren't very good in that skill.*
3) Mechanics are further in the background, more "invisible".

You'll note I (*) one point on each list. This is the core philosophy difference between the two systems.

From a mechanical point of view, Obsidian is better. Its math is sturdier, scales better, and can take the occasional DM, "what the heck, let's try...THIS" more than the original. But as you'll note, many people in this thread want more options with Obsidian, because they like that in the original. Its hard to get the rock solid math and provide more options, they tend to work against each other. Also, the other disadvantage to Obsidian is that its length is "set". For a 5 player group, its 15 rolls everytime. That's a fair number of rolls, which doesn't support the quicky skill challenge as well.

The bottom line is what system would fit your party's playstyle better. If they prefer a skill challenge to be more "roleplaying", then use Obsidian. If they prefer it to be more like combat with tactical options and the like, use the original.

 

[LargeGoblin]

Hehe, I can never win. People said my last system was too complex, and this one too simple. I am working on a few additional options, but just so you know I have no plans to add a huge list of player abilities. The point of this system is that it is simple, the mechanics are secondary to the actions of the player.

I didn't mean to imply that the system wasn't awesome. I am looking forward to the new abilities, and it's not like this system has less tactical options than the original skill challenge system. Keep up the good work.

On a related note, and to all readers, what would be a good formula for determining a bribe amount for PCs of a given level going into a social challenge or a good "buy good help" for a research challenge or the like? I like the idea of having money help PCs solve problems in other ways than buying a shinier sword or new belt. Maybe something like the lowest value treasure parcel for the PCs' level? I'm also trying to think of exactly how to have this affect the outcome. I was thinking of maybe a bonus to the skill checks or one free success. Is this too much?