Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aexalon" data-source="post: 4126053" data-attributes="member: 16283">Using Har's excellent example as demonstration material, I don't see how you could reduce all the rolls made to one single roll.First of all, notice how it's not one character making these checks, but multiple. The example has a ranger, a wizard, a rogue and a paladin all (attempting to) contributing to the challenge at hand.Then notice how subsequent players attempt skill checks of a type they think have a reasonable chance of being deemed viable by the DM, by responding to the effect of earlier successes (or failures). The wizard tries to negotiate with the dryad, whose very presence is the consequence of the extraordinary success of the ranger.Not reduce this one, to one single percentage, you can.As for the WHY (as opposed to the HOW), I suppose this is where 4E's new narrativist urges are showing through. Something I wholeheartedly approve of.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aexalon, post: 4126053, member: 16283"] Using Har's excellent example as demonstration material, I don't see how you could reduce all the rolls made to one single roll. First of all, notice how it's not one character making these checks, but multiple. The example has a ranger, a wizard, a rogue and a paladin all (attempting to) contributing to the challenge at hand. Then notice how subsequent players attempt skill checks of a type they think have a reasonable chance of being deemed viable by the DM, by responding to the effect of earlier successes (or failures). The wizard tries to negotiate with the dryad, whose very presence is the consequence of the extraordinary success of the ranger. Not reduce this one, to one single percentage, you can. As for the WHY (as opposed to the HOW), I suppose this is where 4E's new narrativist urges are showing through. Something I wholeheartedly approve of. [/QUOTE]

Verification