Any New Info on Skill Encounters?

[Colmarr]

You could then use Heraldry to know that this councilor has a long history of allying with the goblinoids for profit.

Is this a scoop? Is Heraldry confirmed as the 4e Knowledge (nobility)?

But that issue aside, I can understand Derren's position. He is (and correct me if I'm wrong) resistant to treating non-combat encounters with the same level of abstraction as combat encounters.

I personally don't feel that way. The 4e skill challenge system seems to be an abstraction. PCs say "I want to climb a wall", not I want to climb that wall". They say "I want to find a secret passage", not "I want to find a secret passage in Via Santorini". If the skill check is a success, then the PC gets a little closer to overall success. In the Escape from Sembia scenario, an explanation might be that each success allows the PCs to get slightly further ahead of the guards, that each success prolongs the chase and the guards begin to tire or that the guards begin to realise that maybe it's not in their best interest to catch this experienced adventurer after all...

I can handle that level of abstraction and assuming some level of fiat remains with the DM to determine what is and isn't an appropriate check for a given encounter (ie. no Bluff checks to assist with disarming a mechanical scythe trap), I heartily look forward to using this system.

Incidentally, and in case any is interested, I do expect that there will be a hard-wired element of fiat in skill challenges. The DMG will presumably not dictate that any skill can affect any challenge. In that regard, I think WotC were quite cunning in choosing a chase scene for their sample skill challenge, because it is one of the few challenges that any skill could viably assist.

 

[RigaMortus2]

The reason I think this will work for 4E and not 3E, is because it looks like WotC took pains in making sure your skills rise at an even keel. In other words, you can't min/max or inflate a skill too high, like you can in 3E. You can make a 2nd level character in 3E with a 30+ diplomacy check, which I suspect you can't in 4E. That kind of character would un rampant using this system.

Just some observations...

I like how you can influence the world as a player. There might not be a wall curtain drawn on the battle map, but using description along with a skill roll, you can assume there was one there all along and use it to climb out of danger.

I like the idea of describing what you want to have happen, the DM setting a secret difficulty number too it, then rolling for the outcome. I have to admit, it will take some getting used to for me, it is a different way to do things as we are used to with D&D.

 

[Stalker0]

The thing I love the most about this encounter idea is that it is so easily for the dm to create.

All I have to do is give the failure to success ratio, and then determine the DCs for easy, medium, and hard. I then leave it up to my players to come up with all the crazy ways the will try to succeed, and I simply arbitrate whether I allow them to make the skill check they want.

That's a lot cleaner than trying to figure out how hard a person can jump, how hard it is to climb wall X vs wall Y, etc.


My biggest worry with this is it creates a system where each player never has to roll one of his bad skills. The wizard is always getting knowledge rolls while the fighter makes athletics.

But overall, I like what I've heard so far.

 

[FadedC]

I suspect DMs will vary quite a bit in how much they let players "alter reality" with their skill attempts. For me personally if a player attempts to use perception during a chase scene to search for a secret door, and I don't think there is a really good reason why one might be there....then there will not be and the action will fail. Other Dms will create a door for him to find.

 

[Spatula]

You can make a 2nd level character in 3E with a 30+ diplomacy check, which I suspect you can't in 4E. That kind of character would un rampant using this system.

2nd level 4e PC: 20 Cha (+5), trained in diplomacy (+5), 2nd level (+1): +11 skill bonus, hits 30+ on a check on a roll of 19. It won't scale as fast as in 3e, but it's still very possible. I didn't even include Skill Focus (which is another +3 to +5) or racial bonuses (half-elves provide +1 to Diplomacy within 25').

The reason I think this will work for 4E and not 3E...

4e and 3e have the same basic skill system. What's been presented here is a particular way to design non-combat encounters; it has very little to do with the actual underlying skill rules. Which is to say, like 4e's trap design philosophy, it works fine in 3e, and will probably be stolen by enterprising 3e DMs. Or IOW, this isn't a 4e vs 3e thing.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

2nd level 4e PC: 20 Cha (+5), trained in diplomacy (+5), 2nd level (+1): +11 skill bonus, hits 30+ on a check on a roll of 19. It won't scale as fast as in 3e, but it's still very possible. I didn't even include Skill Focus (which is another +3 to +5) or racial bonuses (half-elves provide +1 to Diplomacy within 25').

Hmm, he wrote "check", but I think he wanted to say modifier. Which is probably a bit too high, but I think a total modifier of +20 is doable at 3rd level. (I think it's something like 6 ranks, +4 charisma, +4 synergy, +3 circlet of persuasion. That brings you to +17. Include a level of Warlock for Beguiling Influence, and you get +23. Roll 7 or less for a check result of 30, or take 10 for 33. I think there was even more cheese possible in 3rd edition, but I am a bit "out of the loop" here. I know that my Warlocks Diplomacy modifier kicks ass and I wasn't even able to max it. )

 

[vagabundo]

My biggest worry with this is it creates a system where each player never has to roll one of his bad skills. The wizard is always getting knowledge rolls while the fighter makes athletics.

I think your could go a little more detailed and force some pre-planned mini encounters in the system that may need some skills that the PCs are not great at.

But if you are character trying to escape a city you are probably going to play to your strenghts, whatever they are.

 

[Derren]

I think your could go a little more detailed and force some pre-planned mini encounters in the system that may need some skills that the PCs are not great at.

But if you are character trying to escape a city you are probably going to play to your strenghts, whatever they are.

In a fixed reality its not always possible to always use your strength and you might have to improvise. But in a fluid one, like the one 4E apparantly proposes, you can always use your best skills (not that there would be much difference in skills with everyone being good in all things automatically) because the realities is determined by what skills you use.

 

[hong]

In a fixed reality its not always possible to always use your strength and you might have to improvise. But in a fluid one, like the one 4E apparantly proposes, you can always use your best skills (not that there would be much difference in skills with everyone being good in all things automatically) because the realities is determined by what skills you use.

Reality is fixed. It just happens to be fixed by many people, not just one.

 

[D'karr]

Is this a scoop? Is Heraldry confirmed as the 4e Knowledge (nobility)?

No, this is not a scoop. The DM just used it as a generalized example to showcase the way a skill challenge might be used.

My biggest worry with this is it creates a system where each player never has to roll one of his bad skills. The wizard is always getting knowledge rolls while the fighter makes athletics.

I asked that question and our DM explained that it was entirely up to the DM to determine whether a specific skill use was applicable to ADVANCING the goal.

So in the example of the war council somebody that is really good at Athletics could have used that to impress the council with his strength but that would not advance the goal. That was another reason not to tell us how many successes are needed. It is harder to metagame the situation if all you know is that you need more successes than failures, but not an exact number.

And looking like fools with the council could also penalize you and make your successes harder to come by (circumstance penalty).