All About Skill Challenges

[Rechan]

I'm finding the most challenging part of designing a skill challenge is incorporating combat into the scenario. The combat needs to be necessary, but not so lethal that the PCs feel they need to focus on it exclusively as opposed to making relevant skill checks.

This brings up another question. This is to the whole thread, not just you, Pendragon.

Can you give some advice on running a skill challenge and a combat together? Situations that would call for it (aside from Ye Olde Disable Trap*). Ways to get the PCs to focus on both, instead of just hurrying up with the combat?

*WHenever I've had players in the room with a trap, they will ask 'How many times do I need to roll thievery to disarm the trap?' 'Three.' The response is always: 'Screw that, hitting the trap and breaking it will be faster.' And usually it is faster. So, how to encourage skill usage over "Grog smash".

 

[Storminator]

WHenever I've had players in the room with a trap, they will ask 'How many times do I need to roll thievery to disarm the trap?' 'Three.' The response is always: 'Screw that, hitting the trap and breaking it will be faster.' And usually it is faster. So, how to encourage skill usage over "Grog smash".

I just thought of this, so it's a pretty raw idea: what if each success DID something? Example, a trap can attack 4 squares. The first Thievery check puts 2 squares out of its attack area. The second can either decrease its damage, its attack, or knock out another square. The 3rd check completely disables the trap.

I also think you can narrate each attempt, so it's not "using thievery" it's jamming a stick into the nozzle. This can then have an effect on the battle.

PS

 

[stonegod]

I have seen and designed several traps that have consequences if just smashed (damage the players) that don't happen when Thievery is used.

 

[darjr]

I have seen and designed several traps that have consequences if just smashed (damage the players) that don't happen when Thievery is used.

Yea. The exploding ones are the worst.

 

[FireLance]

Can you give some advice on running a skill challenge and a combat together? Situations that would call for it (aside from Ye Olde Disable Trap). Ways to get the PCs to focus on both, instead of just hurrying up with the combat?

One way to do this is to set it up so that completing the skill challenge changes the nature of the fight. Some ideas:

1. The party can convince one NPC they are fighting that the BBEG lied to him, which causes him to switch sides.

2. The party can gain allies by releasing prisoners, freeing a monster from a magical effect, or summoning an extraplanar being.

3. The party can remove a magical effect that hinders them or helps their enemies, or alter it so that it helps them instead of their enemies or hinders their enemies instead of them.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

My example would be something like a "ritual in process". The PCs storm in, and the want to end the ritual. The ambient energies created by the ritual can be manipulated, to stop the ritual, but also to direct its energy against enemies.

Each success allows you to make a type of magical attack. Each failure causes you to suffer damage yourself instead. If you fail the challenge, the ritual can't be stopped (or it is stopped, but with a nasty side effect), if you succeed the challenge, the ritual is interrupted.

As long as the enemy mage isn't dead, he can still complete the ritual. Each success gives you an extra round until he is finished, so you might either have ended the ritual totally, or you have enough time to kill him.

 

[Hussar]

Some fantastic stuff here. Thanks for this.

 

[timbannock]

Um...awesome.

I'm working on a big skill challenge for my blog right now and have really taken cues from Mearls' Ruling Skill Challenges articles and the podcast about Skill Challenges on the D&D site. I'll try to remember to post an update here when it's done and see how people like it. I tried to really strike a balance between "solid rules," "mini-game mentality," and "enough info to change it up and wing it easily."

It's not easy, but hopefully the end-result is fun!

 

[TarionzCousin]

Um...awesome.

I'm working on a big skill challenge for my blog right now and have really taken cues from Mearls' Ruling Skill Challenges articles and the podcast about Skill Challenges on the D&D site. I'll try to remember to post an update here when it's done and see how people like it. I tried to really strike a balance between "solid rules," "mini-game mentality," and "enough info to change it up and wing it easily."

It's not easy, but hopefully the end-result is fun!

Well, [MENTION=17913]neuronphaser[/MENTION], was it fun?

[sblock]

[/SBLOCK]

 

[Camelot]

Here's another topic for discussion - number of failures.

The errata has placed skill challenge failures at 3, always. Which gets rather ugly when you consider skill challenges with 12 (!) success requirements.

I personally think that's too few a safety net of failures.

The advantage mechanic from the Rules Compendium works beautifully. Basically, when a PC fails a check or makes a DC higher than the goal, they can spend an advantage to choose from the following list:

* A success against a Hard DC counts as 2 successes.

* A success against a Hard DC removes a failure instead of counting as a success.

* A success against an Easy DC counts as a success.

* A success against a Moderate DC counts as a success even though the character has already accumulated a success with this skill.

The players have 2 advantages in a complexity 3 challenge, 4 in a complexity 4, and 6 in a complexity 5. I've used the guidelines from the RC, and without telling my players that they were in a challenge, and it worked perfectly (even though they lost!).

Of course, when this post was written, there was no RC.