Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5460130" data-attributes="member: 87792">And by doing so they are locking you into a socio-economic model.&nbsp; I want most of my socio-economics (and for that matter my ecologies) to be in my world books, not in my core rules.&nbsp; Because they are going to be very different from world to world.&nbsp; The more tightly my game rules are integrated with the socioeconomics of the default setting, the more they get in the way of trying to build any other system.&nbsp; To use a trivial example, I'd expect the costs for hiring a warband on Athas to be entirely different from those for hiring one in the Realms.&nbsp;&nbsp;3e gives you a skill system.&nbsp; 4e gives you a skill system and a skill challenge system.&nbsp; Skill challenges aren't always applicable.&nbsp;&nbsp;As Pmerton has mentioned, 4e has Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Insight (which is simply Sense Motive by another name).&nbsp; And skill checks are still alive and kicking.&nbsp; It's simply that 4e has skill challenges as well as skill checks; a skill check is for resolution of a pass-fail situation whereas a skill challenge is for a more complex scene long situation.&nbsp;Indeed.&nbsp; It's a very flexible tool.&nbsp;&nbsp;You're comparing apples with oranges here.&nbsp; It's trivial to look at your character sheet and guess how effective your character is at persuasion.&nbsp; What's your charisma?&nbsp; Which skills do you have trained?&nbsp; Do you have any relevant utility powers?&nbsp; What your character sheet won't tell you is how resistant NPCs are to what you're trying to persuade them of/to do - whether they have insight trained, and a whole range of other factors.&nbsp;&nbsp;1: Demigod has a definition in 3e.&nbsp; Divine rank 0.2: That doesn't really help the poor fighter who's still going to get taken to the cleaners in 3e.&nbsp;&nbsp;Indeed.&nbsp; It is so not easy that in my third session of DMing D&amp;D ever, the PCs came up with a slightly insane plan involving hiding a young dragon in a fake plague cart to transport it across the city.&nbsp; I took a mouthful of my drink to buy time - and by the time I'd swallowed I had the skill challenge scetched out firmly enough in my head to be able to run it without trouble (and no, I didn't turn it into a dice rolling fest or ever mention the words &quot;skill challenge&quot;).&nbsp;Once you've grasped what they are good for, skill challenges are easy to improvise with and a superb tool to use to improvise for off the wall PC plans.&nbsp; The guidance for doing this is, alas, poor.&nbsp;&nbsp;That's not a skill challenge.&nbsp; That's an acrobatics check in 4e and a balance check in 3e.&nbsp;A skill challenge on the same bridge would be &quot;As they approach the narrow and rickety walkway you crossed on the way in, the hostages you rescued huddle together in terror, both convinced they'll fall if they try to cross it.&quot;&nbsp; It's a short scene in its own right, not a simple pass/fail check.&nbsp;&nbsp;You're going beyond that and into outright denying obvious ones.&nbsp; As for instance in the skills example above where 4e has exactly the same skills as 3e (bar a rename) and somehow you think this makes 3e better able to deal with things.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 5460130, member: 87792"] And by doing so they are locking you into a socio-economic model. I want most of my socio-economics (and for that matter my ecologies) to be in my world books, not in my core rules. Because they are going to be very different from world to world. The more tightly my game rules are integrated with the socioeconomics of the default setting, the more they get in the way of trying to build any other system. To use a trivial example, I'd expect the costs for hiring a warband on Athas to be [I]entirely[/I] different from those for hiring one in the Realms. 3e gives you a skill system. 4e gives you a skill system and a skill challenge system. Skill challenges aren't always applicable. As Pmerton has mentioned, 4e has Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, and Insight (which is simply Sense Motive by another name). And skill checks are still alive and kicking. It's simply that 4e has skill challenges as well as skill checks; a skill check is for resolution of a pass-fail situation whereas a skill challenge is for a more complex scene long situation. Indeed. It's a very flexible tool. You're comparing apples with oranges here. It's [I]trivial[/I] to look at your character sheet and guess how effective your character is at persuasion. What's your charisma? Which skills do you have trained? Do you have any relevant utility powers? What your character sheet won't tell you is how resistant NPCs are to what you're trying to persuade them of/to do - whether they have insight trained, and a whole range of other factors. 1: Demigod has a definition in 3e. Divine rank 0. 2: That doesn't really help the poor fighter who's still going to get taken to the cleaners in 3e. Indeed. It is so not easy that in my third session of DMing D&D [I]ever[/I], the PCs came up with a slightly insane plan involving hiding a young dragon in a fake plague cart to transport it across the city. I took a mouthful of my drink to buy time - and by the time I'd swallowed I had the skill challenge scetched out firmly enough in my head to be able to run it without trouble (and no, I didn't turn it into a dice rolling fest or ever mention the words "skill challenge"). Once you've grasped what they are good for, skill challenges are easy to improvise with and a superb tool to use to improvise for off the wall PC plans. The guidance for doing this is, alas, poor. That's not a skill challenge. That's an acrobatics check in 4e and a balance check in 3e. A skill challenge on the same bridge would be "As they approach the narrow and rickety walkway you crossed on the way in, the hostages you rescued huddle together in terror, both convinced they'll fall if they try to cross it." It's a short scene in its own right, not a simple pass/fail check. You're going beyond that and into outright denying obvious ones. As for instance in the skills example above where 4e has [I]exactly[/I] the same skills as 3e (bar a rename) and somehow you think this makes 3e better able to deal with things. [/QUOTE]

Verification