Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Pedantic" data-source="post: 9213436" data-attributes="member: 6690965"><p>The primary thing skill challenges did was remove the design incentive to write an action complete skill system. Instead of expecting the rules to lay out a procedure for all the actions a party might take when trying to get in to a castle, they offered a framework all action declarations could be fed into. If you strip them of their narrative context, skill challenges are a terrible game; select your highest skill and try to roll well. If the GM is completely transparent, you might be able to make a calculation that a skill other than your highest skill offers more success.</p><p></p><p>Eventually, you get some rudimentary game conceits, like allowing resource expenditure of a power/ritual/surge to grant a success, or serving as a cost on failure, which then get handed off to the GM. Interestingly I have never seen a compelling argument for what benefit this serves over a specified action system; instead, SC's seem to be an answer to a different kind of system, wherein players announce an action, and a GM must immediate resolve a game design task in figuring out the action's scope and an appropriate DC, essentially the modern state of 5e. The design task presented by SCs is certainly easier and provides less latitude to (through malice or incompetence) create an untenable situation for players, but I don't fundamentally think the gameplay provided by either of them is particularly good.</p><p></p><p>In many ways, framing skill resolution as a choice between those two models is the enduring legacy of skill challenges, and my biggest frustration with them. I think the best and most interesting game skills (and frankly, all non-combat options) should offer is in setting a goal, and then picking from a list of available actions what will most readily achieve it, with an option to tactically reassess as the situation changes round by round. Skill challenges are a container that prevents you from needing to actually write down all those actions and a resolution system capable of parsing them; their introduction and rejection means D&D almost certainly will not try to do so again.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Pedantic, post: 9213436, member: 6690965"] The primary thing skill challenges did was remove the design incentive to write an action complete skill system. Instead of expecting the rules to lay out a procedure for all the actions a party might take when trying to get in to a castle, they offered a framework all action declarations could be fed into. If you strip them of their narrative context, skill challenges are a terrible game; select your highest skill and try to roll well. If the GM is completely transparent, you might be able to make a calculation that a skill other than your highest skill offers more success. Eventually, you get some rudimentary game conceits, like allowing resource expenditure of a power/ritual/surge to grant a success, or serving as a cost on failure, which then get handed off to the GM. Interestingly I have never seen a compelling argument for what benefit this serves over a specified action system; instead, SC's seem to be an answer to a different kind of system, wherein players announce an action, and a GM must immediate resolve a game design task in figuring out the action's scope and an appropriate DC, essentially the modern state of 5e. The design task presented by SCs is certainly easier and provides less latitude to (through malice or incompetence) create an untenable situation for players, but I don't fundamentally think the gameplay provided by either of them is particularly good. In many ways, framing skill resolution as a choice between those two models is the enduring legacy of skill challenges, and my biggest frustration with them. I think the best and most interesting game skills (and frankly, all non-combat options) should offer is in setting a goal, and then picking from a list of available actions what will most readily achieve it, with an option to tactically reassess as the situation changes round by round. Skill challenges are a container that prevents you from needing to actually write down all those actions and a resolution system capable of parsing them; their introduction and rejection means D&D almost certainly will not try to do so again. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Ben Riggs' "What the Heck Happened with 4th Edition?" seminar at Gen Con 2023
Top