[4e Setting] No Age for Heroes

[Paka]

These are the Masked Mute tribe refugees, I presume?

No, I think Andy's character, who broke tradition with his tribe by speaking, is the only one but I could be wrong about that.

Scarred Lands, with its bleeding oceans and godswars seems a much more apt comparison to this setting than Midnight. I can see Scarred Lands and this world having definite parallels.

 

[Nellisir]

In short, saying that DM's should be flexible and allow players to be imaginative about which skills they use is cool, saying some skills are auto-failures is not so cool.

I'm a hero. If I want to try to intimidate the Duke, let me roll the dice and have my damned shot.

Idea: instead of auto-failure, failure at specific skills increases the requisite number of successes. IE, a 5-success challenge becomes a 6-success challenge. Adds an element of risk - everything is good if you succeed, but do it badly, and you make succeeding even harder than it was.

 

[proto128]

There's so much win here, it's like a perfect storm of gaming.

 

[Paka]

Idea: instead of auto-failure, failure at specific skills increases the requisite number of successes. IE, a 5-success challenge becomes a 6-success challenge. Adds an element of risk - everything is good if you succeed, but do it badly, and you make succeeding even harder than it was.

Saying to the DM, "I'd like to try to use Religion to appeal to the Duke's gods."

And having the DM say, "No, that doesn't make a whole lotta sense to me; we've established that the Duke doesn't pay much heed to the gods. There's no reason for him to listen to you talk about that. Choose another skill."

That is fine.

But I don't want to propose using a skill and have the response be, "Religion! No! Auto-fail on one of the Skill Challenges!"

It'd bug me. Your fix is better but it also draws it out more. I'd rather the DM just flat-out told me that it doesn't work so I can find another way to contribute.

 

[Nellisir]

But I don't want to propose using a skill and have the response be, "Religion! No! Auto-fail on one of the Skill Challenges!"

It'd bug me. Your fix is better but it also draws it out more. I'd rather the DM just flat-out told me that it doesn't work so I can find another way to contribute.

Honestly, were I DMing, I wouldn't use my fix either. I'd just raise the DC. Maybe you invoke his childhood prayers. Maybe you appeal to the fact that the Duchess is very religious, and he could curry a little favor with her by doing this "for the gods". Maybe you dredge up an ancient prophecy with uncanny similarity to current events, uncanny enough to sway him...slightly.

In short, I don't like auto-fail either.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Honestly, were I DMing, I wouldn't use my fix either. I'd just raise the DC. Maybe you invoke his childhood prayers. Maybe you appeal to the fact that the Duchess is very religious, and he could curry a little favor with her by doing this "for the gods". Maybe you dredge up an ancient prophecy with uncanny similarity to current events, uncanny enough to sway him...slightly.

In short, I don't like auto-fail either.

I recall being torn from the thread that popped up about the Duke example. On the one hand I don't like auto-fail; on the other hand, in the example given it really makes sense that it just wouldn't work in achieving the goal.

Of course adjusting the DC up could in effect create an auto-fail situation if none of the PCs have enough bonuses to reach it, but technically it isn't auto-fail, it is just extraordinarily unlikely to succeed.

Oh, and this campaign sounds fantastic. I really love it when the PCs and the campaign are well-integrated.

 

[Pseudointellectual]

Rechan,

The refugees are a mixture of Tieflings from the Bellatorias House fiefdom, Dragonborn hatchlings from the Varnassus Keep, and followers of the Raven Queen's from the Consort's Reliquary, as well as a few other tagalongs. I'm expecting this population to grow as people are displaced from other areas and looking for a safe place to call home.

 

[redcard]

This looks awesome.

As for the Duke thing, I'm cool with it being an autofail. In my opinion, I read skill challenges like this:

The closer you get to failure, the more negative the target gets to your desire.

The closer you get to success, the more postivie the target gets to your desire.

So when you try to intimidate the Duke the first time, It's an autofail and the Duke responds "I will not .." as he does.

If , at that point, someone else tried Intimidate again, the attitude of the Duke would be ramped up. Perhaps he'd threaten the party back with imprisonment or charges if they continued to try to intimidate him. Maybe he'd ask that person to leave the room.

The first one should be an autofail. The second one should be a spike to the forehead and an autofail. If they try it a third time, eh..

 

[Aria Silverhands]

But I don't want to propose using a skill and have the response be, "Religion! No! Auto-fail on one of the Skill Challenges!

Auto-fail has a place, imo. Especially when the goal of the encounter is to "gain the duke's trust". You simply don't intimidate people to gain their trust. It's counter-productive.

 

[Paka]

Auto-fail has a place, imo. Especially when the goal of the encounter is to "gain the duke's trust". You simply don't intimidate people to gain their trust. It's counter-productive.

I am all for the DM saying, "C'mon, Judd, you are trying to earn the duke's trust; try another skill. This one won't work for this skill challenge."

I just don't dig, "You want to try to intimidate him? Okay. roll...FAIL! You can't intimidate the duke!"

If you want to find a reason in the fiction why intimidate works, you can. Perhaps, for example, the Duke likes your spunk and wants adventurers working for him who are willing to get in a noble's face before the whole court.

IMPORTANT NOTE:

I really don't want this thread to be about auto-fails in skill challenges when it should be about Bret's awesome setting. If anyone wants to continue discussing auto-fail in skill challenges, let's take it to another thread.

Thanks.