Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4135228" data-attributes="member: 4937">For me, absolutely.&nbsp; I imagine that there are some less competitive people out there that feel otherwise, but as far as I'm concerned a game that doesn't challenge player skill in particular ways is utterly boring.I think in practice unless D&amp;D has granted sufficient narrative control that players can create things that weren't there before, that you'll find that this hasn't changed one bit.In your example, you defined the challenge as 'Climb this wall to be welcomed into the manhood of the Bear Tribe'.&nbsp; Assuming that is something you want to do, then a climb check is explicitly useful whether this is 3e or 4e.&nbsp; The DM has defined climbing the wall as useful, and now a climb check can help you climb the wall.&nbsp; Hense, you know that a climb check is useful, and since the results of the skill check are clearly defined you know X number of successful skill checks will get you to the top of the wall.&nbsp; In 4e the same scenario runs in the exact same way - you know X skill checks will get you to the top of the wall and you know that this is useful.&nbsp; Being a 'skill challenge' doesn't change anything except to the extent that the DM may or may not allow different skills (perception, nature, etc.) to count for some number of the successes needed to climb the wall (though it would be really wierd if no climb checks were needed to get to the top).&nbsp; But then again, the 3e DM may or may not have ran the scenario where successfully spotting or finding the easiest path aided the ascent depending on how much detail he put into the scenario and how willing he was to except player propositions like, &quot;Can I spot an easier way up the cliff?&quot;.&nbsp; So again, nothing has changed.It has been very nice talking to you.&nbsp; Thanks for the information.&nbsp; However, this conversation seems to be breaking down.&nbsp; You seem to insist on drawing distinctions that don't seem to me to be real.&nbsp; We are repeating ourselves to each other, and it seems unlikely either of us will learn anything further from the other one.I very much doubt you'll do away with DM fiat, but keep living the dream.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 4135228, member: 4937"] For me, absolutely. I imagine that there are some less competitive people out there that feel otherwise, but as far as I'm concerned a game that doesn't challenge player skill in particular ways is utterly boring. I think in practice unless D&D has granted sufficient narrative control that players can create things that weren't there before, that you'll find that this hasn't changed one bit. In your example, you defined the challenge as 'Climb this wall to be welcomed into the manhood of the Bear Tribe'. Assuming that is something you want to do, then a climb check is explicitly useful whether this is 3e or 4e. The DM has defined climbing the wall as useful, and now a climb check can help you climb the wall. Hense, you know that a climb check is useful, and since the results of the skill check are clearly defined you know X number of successful skill checks will get you to the top of the wall. In 4e the same scenario runs in the exact same way - you know X skill checks will get you to the top of the wall and you know that this is useful. Being a 'skill challenge' doesn't change anything except to the extent that the DM may or may not allow different skills (perception, nature, etc.) to count for some number of the successes needed to climb the wall (though it would be really wierd if no climb checks were needed to get to the top). But then again, the 3e DM may or may not have ran the scenario where successfully spotting or finding the easiest path aided the ascent depending on how much detail he put into the scenario and how willing he was to except player propositions like, "Can I spot an easier way up the cliff?". So again, nothing has changed. It has been very nice talking to you. Thanks for the information. However, this conversation seems to be breaking down. You seem to insist on drawing distinctions that don't seem to me to be real. We are repeating ourselves to each other, and it seems unlikely either of us will learn anything further from the other one. I very much doubt you'll do away with DM fiat, but keep living the dream. [/QUOTE]

Verification