Why are skill challenges "broken"?

[Schmoe]

I've read in several places that the math behind skill challenges is broken. Some have claimed that WotC confirmed this. Can someone please enlighten me as to why they are broken?

 

[Zelc]

Simply put, it's way too difficult to actually succeed on a skill check (or trivially easy if you allow Aid Another). See this and this for all the gory math. I recommend Stalker0's Obsidian Skill Challenge instead.

EDIT: I linked the wrong math thread . Fixed.

 

[Schmoe]

Great, thanks! I guess I didn't think enough about skill challenges when I scanned over them in the DMG, but it does seem painfully obvious now. I've bookmarked Stalker0's version for future reference

 

[Starbuck_II]

I've read in several places that the math behind skill challenges is broken. Some have claimed that WotC confirmed this. Can someone please enlighten me as to why they are broken?

Other than Math, there are no posts that show WotC confirmed it. I find that claim dubious.

Statistics can be made to prove anything. Even that the world isn't round (it isn't; it is oval, but you get what I mean).

Look at his first example of math:
Total Outcome: Adding both of these scenarios together gives us: .2508 = 25.08% win rate. So basically with my party taking on the easiest possible challenge, they have only a 1 in 4 chance of succeeding.
That is using meduim difficulty.
But not all difficulties are supposed to be meduim.
Every listed skill challenge has some meduim, some easy and few hard skill DCs.

The only time that the % success is really bad is Level 1 characters attempting complexity 5 challenges. 7.17%, about 1 in 14.

But that is a complexity way above their level. I hardly think that argument was fair.

 

[Stalker0]

Other than Math, there are no posts that show WotC confirmed it. I find that claim dubious.

Statistics can be made to prove anything. Even that the world isn't round (it isn't; it is oval, but you get what I mean).

Look at his first example of math:
Total Outcome: Adding both of these scenarios together gives us: .2508 = 25.08% win rate. So basically with my party taking on the easiest possible challenge, they have only a 1 in 4 chance of succeeding.
That is using meduim difficulty.
But not all difficulties are supposed to be meduim.
Every listed skill challenge has some meduim, some easy and few hard skill DCs.

The only time that the % success is really bad is Level 1 characters attempting complexity 5 challenges. 7.17%, about 1 in 14.

But that is a complexity way above their level. I hardly think that argument was fair.

A complexity 5 skill challenge is designed to represent the same level of exertion as 5 monsters. In essence, a complexity 5 skill challenge is the same as a standard 5 monster combat. This is backed up both by the skill challenge description and the amount of experience the party obtains from that challenge.

And while there are some challenges that have some easy and hard skills, there are also several that have straight up medium DCs. And of course, there's the question of whether players should know if certain skills or easy or hard going in. A player who chooses a hard skill without knowing actually causes a huge increase in the failure rate for the party.

 

[ac_noj]

Other than Math, there are no posts that show WotC confirmed it. I find that claim dubious.

No, the whole skill challenge system is really messed up. I just can't make sense of how it's supposed to work.

There's two ways players can go about it.

1) They are all making their own skill checks:
If it's based on skills that the players aren't strong in then they have a low chance of success, and if it's based on skills that they are strong then their chance for success actually improves as the complexity goes up. The result is more XP for an easier challenge.

2) They are all using Aid Another to help the one player with a high skill relivent to the challenge:
Aid Another is too easy and it always succeeds after level 21. YOU CANNOT FAIL IT from 21 onwards because all your skills are at least 10. So the player with the strong skill gets a big plus and almost always succeeds....and again, the higher the complexity the more likely the players are to succeed.

I've made up my own house rules for Skill Challenges, and so far they've worked well:
During Skill Challenges the DC of Aid another is 10+half level, and a failed attempt results in a -2 penatly for the person you're trying to aid.
The Complexity for long Skill Challenges is always 3, and the DC is 15+half level. The Complexity for short Skill Challenges is always 1, and the DC is 13+half level.
If you want to increase of decrease the difficulty of the challenge, increase or decrease the DC. 1 point either way is worth 2 levels.

With the skills my players have they have a 70% chance of success on long challenges (gaining XP for 3 standard monsters) and an 80% chance of success for short challenges (gaining XP for 1 standard monster). Considering how easy it is to kill 1 to 3 standard monsters, it seems fair.

 

[Runestar]

Other than Math, there are no posts that show WotC confirmed it. I find that claim dubious.

It was in fact covered by Mearls.

Q: There’s a big thread on ENWorld about the math behind skill challenges. There’s been experience that shows that they work, but the math to prove that they are broken seems solid.
A: Skill challenges are interesting, since they are not reflected in the written rules as they were intended. They started as more “combat” with initiative, etc., but eventually moved them to be more free form. They were intended as more of a framework, not strictly mechanical. When planning a non-combat encounter, try to come up with options, different ways to play out while not stopping the game. (i.e. don’t build in a roadblock if they don’t succeed at the skill challenge.)
They want to address different ways to handle it without errata-ing. That might make it into a future DMG. Here are ways to do things differently, not “these rules are different.”

You can read it, and other queries here.

http://www.critical-hits.com/2008/0...hing-you-wanted-to-know-about-fourth-edition/

 

[Scud.NZ]

Totally agree with you ac_noj. I couldn't make sense of it either.

I see you have house rules of your own, but take a look at the Obsidian System mentioned earlier. To my mind it is explained very well [though download the pdf, it's easier on the eye], and it feels right. I've started developing some skill challenges of my own using it, which I am going to try out in the next week or so (we only play for 2-3 hours per week). It's a very easy format to follow and makes prep. work for my group much quicker.

 

[BASHMAN]

Other than Math, there are no posts that show WotC confirmed it. I find that claim dubious.

Ummm. There is this post where Kieth Baker frantically tries to defend skill challenges as not being broken. "See kids, all you have to do is have your tanker paladin spend all his feats on skills, and you up your odds of success!"

It was actually reading this that convinced me they were broken in the first place. It reminds me of a woman defending a bad boyfriend, "You don't know skill challenges like I know them. When its just us, they're great!". Sad.

 

[Tervin]

It is possible to play skill challenges by the DMG rules and get good results, if you adjust the DCs extremely carefully. When you calculate your own DCs, you need make sure to look for the sweet spot, where roleplaying bonuses and clever choices actually will be the things that can push the challenge as a whole from being 30%-50% chance of success into 70%-90% territory.

I had an explaining post with a link to an Excel sheet in one of those threads. Now with a bit more time and testing I can say that my method works - but it is more work than most DMs would want to put into it, and it uses game philosophy that doesn't fit with 4E as a whole.