Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 4990677" data-attributes="member: 3424">1. The implementation of skill challenges. I would have preferred a variety of failure conditions instead of the standard &quot;failed skill check is a failure&quot; and &quot;three failures means failed skill challenge&quot;. WotC has come up with several variations to skill challenges, including &quot;everybody makes the same skill check; a failure occurs if more than half the party fails&quot;, &quot;a failure on this skill check does not count as a failure for the purpose of the skill challenge&quot;, &quot;this skill can only score a maximum of X successes during this skill challenge&quot;, etc. but we still do not have guidelines on how these variations should change the XP award for the skill challenge.2. The incentive to increase just two ability scores, so that many characters end up just increasing two ability scores by +8 over the course of their careers, while the other four ability scores increase by just +2. I am personally considering a house rule that at 8th, 18th and 28th levels, a character increases four ability scores by +1 instead of just two.3. The PCs' non-AC defenses seem too easy to hit. I think there is scope for another type of item that functions pretty much like heavy armor in 4e: basically adding a flat value instead of an ability score modifier to a non-AC defense.4. Ambiguous wording. I know that complete consistency is close to impossible and that the DM is supposed to interpret to suit the needs of his campaign, but it would still be nice to have some of the more common problem areas cleared up.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 4990677, member: 3424"] 1. The implementation of skill challenges. I would have preferred a variety of failure conditions instead of the standard "failed skill check is a failure" and "three failures means failed skill challenge". WotC has come up with several variations to skill challenges, including "everybody makes the same skill check; a failure occurs if more than half the party fails", "a failure on this skill check does not count as a failure for the purpose of the skill challenge", "this skill can only score a maximum of X successes during this skill challenge", etc. but we still do not have guidelines on how these variations should change the XP award for the skill challenge. 2. The incentive to increase just two ability scores, so that many characters end up just increasing two ability scores by +8 over the course of their careers, while the other four ability scores increase by just +2. I am personally considering a house rule that at 8th, 18th and 28th levels, a character increases four ability scores by +1 instead of just two. 3. The PCs' non-AC defenses seem too easy to hit. I think there is scope for another type of item that functions pretty much like heavy armor in 4e: basically adding a flat value instead of an ability score modifier to a non-AC defense. 4. Ambiguous wording. I know that complete consistency is close to impossible and that the DM is supposed to interpret to suit the needs of his campaign, but it would still be nice to have some of the more common problem areas cleared up. [/QUOTE]

Verification