Any New Info on Skill Encounters?

[UngeheuerLich]

the problem in 3.5 are maxed out skills vs untrained skills... it usually makes setting a "hard" DC difficult (at higher levels there is a too high difference).

 

[Ximenes088]

I'd agree that it's less useful in 3.5 at higher levels, where there's such a big spread between untrained and specialized skills. But since 4e won't have that spread and since my PCs are still low-level, I'm not having any problems with it.

 

[heirodule]

I'm going to try out this system in my Xen'drik game for crossing a desert.

It would seem to me that sometimes if you want the challenge to BE a challenge, you have to make the "easy" check base higher.

We're a 10th level party. They would ALL pass easy checks no problem and it would be kinda boring.

but so is tracking every day of travel and rolling 10 fortitude saves.

I also wonder how 3.5 magic will factor into this. "well we all have endure elements up, we create food and water every day" takes away much of the rationale for making the desert crossing a skill challenge at all. There's always getting lost, which is already a built-in Xen'drik function, so that's good. Perhaps 4e will take away more than just easy travel magic.

I'm imagining the players using skills thusly

Decipher Script on ancient runes on a rock that warn us of the dangers of the desert
Handle Animal my camel to push it through the night faster
Heal to treat some of the heat stroke and sunburn suffered
Know (nature) to find fresh water
Know (geography) to plot a better route
Ride to get the animals further along
Spot to find an oasis a long way off
Survival to protect against the hazards of the desert.
Fortitude to shrug off the heat

 

[Zimri]

The diplomacy a little more difficult to understand how the PC picks that. One suggestion was that an easy DC means corrupt guards. My reaction to that was, what if two people pick it and succeed, and a third PC tried is as well...that implies that in this chase we have three corrupt guards? In certain cities, that may be fine. Others, however, that makes little sense.

It's logical justification for such things that make PCs being able to pick easy, medium, or hard difficult for me to grasp as a concept and to play out and describe as a DM.

First of Jaer I like you, you are getting your point across in a style much more to my liking than some other posters in this thread. As is the case with many others we disagree on how nailed down and firmed up the city needs to be. And thats okay, as an example of this were I running a chase scene 1) If the streetwise roll would make a difference in the alley they chose I would always take the roll into consideration first 2) my world even if all mapped out isn't as static as perhaps yours is. Hmm rolled and succeeded on a medium or hard streetwise check to duck down this deadend to get away. The map says it is a dead end but he overheard street urchins talking about some loose stones/bricks/boards that they put in recently, or there is a clothesline overhead or some thrown out clothes he can use a disguise check to try to get past the guards.

As to the part I quoted Maybe the easy guard isn't corrupt, could be the easy guard is well easy and I have an 18 charisma, or the barmaid I saw him with last night did, she wasn't wearing a wedding band and he is, or I overheard him talking about needing money for xxx and I can help out, or hey that dancing girl in the seedy part of town looks ALOT like him bet he doesn't know that or if he does he doesn't want it getting out.

 

[Zimri]

Not every player is going to be a disruptive schmuck who thinks it's their rules-given right to take advantage of a system like this, but the design should protect you from them anyway.

Otherwise you end up wasting way too much time saying "no" to Holy Avengers.

You do realize that's exactly what I was saying my interpretation was, right?

Disruptive schmucks exist in every iteration of the game. If they are more disruptive than anyones particular table enjoys the dm and/or host has the same rule available as in every other iteration of the game "you are no longer welcome" There is no need to say NO it doesn't work like that -- at this table-- now quit it more than a few times.

 

[LEHaskell]

The diplomacy a little more difficult to understand how the PC picks that. One suggestion was that an easy DC means corrupt guards. My reaction to that was, what if two people pick it and succeed, and a third PC tried is as well...that implies that in this chase we have three corrupt guards? In certain cities, that may be fine. Others, however, that makes little sense.

One suggestion I would make for such a situation: if having three corrupt guards would be unlikely, then the DC should increase for each successive check. This might have the added benefit of discouraging "Me too!" checks from the players, giving them a reason to find their own solutions or to contribute their own skills to if they want to work together.

A question that occurred to me for those that ran or played the Escape from Sembia adventure. What were the consequences of FAILING the entire skill challenge? Because the party could split up, it seems narratively odd if the party's failure resulted in everyone being captured -- even the guy who made no failures. For example, the guy hiding in the shadows succeeds handily, but the guy running over the rooftops fails every attempt, causing the party to fail. Presumably, the result, success or failure, should impact the entire party in the same way, reuniting them. So, was everyone captured? Or was there some other penalty for failure?

 

[habaal]

I just returned from my 3.5 session. After reading the chase rules last night, I've decided to apply them. First of all, four of my players loved it, and where coming up with excellent uses for the skills. The other two players had a much harder time coming up with good ideas, and I found myself more than once suggesting solutions or adjusting some far fetched ideas thay had. All in all, I think their ideas were mostly rational, and I had a blast describing the action.
At the end I asked one player, who had his first session in 1.5 years, how was it; he replied it was cool but he'd rather have more straight-forward fights most of the time.

P.S- the players were chasing a dragon, and not vise versa. It worked perfectly and I made it ruin half the city before they cought it. Next session either them or the Wyrm will bite the dust

 

[Wolv0rine]

Handle Animal my camel to push it through the night faster

...

I don't believe you didn't realize what you typed, man.

(On-Topic -- this may actually be the first thing about 4E that I like. By the gods, it's about friggin' time.)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

the problem in 3.5 are maxed out skills vs untrained skills... it usually makes setting a "hard" DC difficult (at higher levels there is a too high difference).

Especially since it's also hard to determine what "specialised" actually is:
Max Ranks
Max Ranks + extremely good ability score
Max Ranks + Skill Focus
Max Ranks + SKill Enhancement Item +5 or higher?
Max Ranks + every synergy bonus you can get?
A combination of the above?

Compare a Fighter that is "specialised" on Intimidate (Max Ranks, Skill Focus (Intimidate), but Charisma 10) with a Rogue "specialised" on Intimidate (Max Ranks, Skill Focus (Intimidate), Bluff, Charisma 12 Circlet of Persuasion, Cloak of Charisma +2, Mogel-Item of Intimidate +5)

Even knowing the level doesn't help you.

 

[heirodule]

...

I don't believe you didn't realize what you typed, man.

bah!

Honi soit qui mal y pense!