Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Colmarr" data-source="post: 4090458" data-attributes="member: 59182">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 &quot;I want to climb a wall&quot;, not I want to climb that wall&quot;. They say &quot;I want to find a secret passage&quot;, not &quot;I want to find a secret passage in Via Santorini&quot;. 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.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Colmarr, post: 4090458, member: 59182"] 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 [U]that[/U] wall". They say "I want to find a secret passage", not "I want to find a secret passage [U]in Via Santorini[/U]". 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 [U]could[/U] viably assist. [/QUOTE]

Verification