Challenge the Players, Not the Characters' Stats

[justanobody]

Sadly not all players will want to do that, and 4th allows for those other players to enjoy it. It is a roleplaying game, than CAN leave OUT as much roleplaying as possible.

Hopes are that those people will be drawn to 4th because they don't have to try to break through those boundries and can play without them even existing to allow more people to play. That is my understanding, even if I don't fully agree with the methods in doing so.

So while we may prefer people to do more than roll, that is all they really need to do, and a system is in place that spells it out unlike ever before. A boon for some and a bane for others it seems.

 

[Hypersmurf]

So while we may prefer people to do more than roll, that is all they really need to do, and a system is in place that spells it out unlike ever before.

Except that what the system actually spells out is "You need to do more than just roll". 4E states that. In all those places everyone has been pointing out to you for several pages now.

-Hyp.

 

[justanobody]

Except that what the system actually spells out is "You need to do more than just roll". 4E states that. In all those places everyone has been pointing out to you for several pages now.

-Hyp.

DMG page 42....paraphrased....

If the players find something un-fun, then don't force them to do it as written, and do what would be more fun for them.

Ergo: Players that only want to roll a series of skill checks with little else to pass the challenge should be allowed to.

There ARE people out there that do not like the heavy/any "RP" parts of an RPG including but not limited to D&D in its various incarnations.

 

[RFisher]

Well, for what it is worth, when I do use the typical skill-based system, I don’t care for dropping hints based on rolls or giving “roleplaying” modifiers to die rolls.

I expect the player to roleplay the setup. Good or bad—I don’t care. Awkward third-person narration just as acceptable as brilliant, eloquent in-character exchanges.

Then the dice are rolled. The awkward third-person narrative may succeed as if eloquent. The eloquent in-character exchange may fail as if awkward.

Then we roleplay the outcome.

I guess if the name of the game is going to be “challenge the character”, perhaps I go whole hog. (^_^)

 

[Hypersmurf]

DMG page 42....paraphrased....

If the players find something un-fun, then don't force them to do it as written, and do what would be more fun for them.

Isn't that good advice, though?

How can converting un-fun to fun ever be a bad thing for a game?

Now, I don't understand why someone would find 'just rolling a die' to actually be fun, and I think that if you have multiple players at the table with wildly divergent and contradictory ideas of what is fun, you'll be hard-pressed to satisfy everyone.

But do you object to the principle of "Do what will make people have fun, even if it means changing the rules"? (In this instance, changing the rule that you can't just roll the die in a skill challenge, since the 4E rules do in fact require you to do more than just roll the die in a skill challenge unless the DM changes them.)

-Hyp.

 

[justanobody]

No, I am just saying that that allows for someone who doesn't like puzzles and such to just roll their way past them without having to fuss with anything more that which skill to roll for.

As a DM, that is why I would prefer to challenge the players because then you really have nothing to solely rely on on the character sheet for someone to just...

PC X: I passed my skill checks so we beat this challenge and can get on to the next thing.

While the DM is still talking, or the other players are trying to figure out this puzzle of sorts in the challenge.

It all boils back down to the idea that because some don't want to is good to include something to allow them to not have to and roll if that is all they want for these skill challenges, but they should rely on the other players during challenges just as they do during combats and such.

The DM is tasked with making sure the challenges fit both the story and the players enjoyment, so there is likely something that can work for both at the same time, and enough of them to accommodate all the players to have fun without resorting to the minimalist rolling method.

Everyone can get the same spotlight over time with challenges. even the shy person may be sparked interest in some kind of challenge and not need the rolls.

So when challenging the stats, why care if someone wants to just roll the checks with little extra effort?

If you want to not have to worry about the minimalistic method, then challenge the players in a way that they can succeed as a group using each of their strengths.

Again, as a player I would prefer to be challenged rather than Fumble the thief be challenged. Fumble has enough problems of his own I have to deal with than to worry about the numbers on his sheet all the time.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No, I am just saying that that allows for someone who doesn't like puzzles and such to just roll their way past them without having to fuss with anything more that which skill to roll for.

Sure. And if someone thinks that missing with his attacks is un-fun, then p42 means the DM is obliged to declare that he hits all the time.

If someone thinks that using his dailies every round is fun, but not using his dailies every round is not, p42 gives the DM no option but to accommodate him.

Sure, the PHB says that you can only use your dailies once per day, but it doesn't really mean it, because of p42.

As a DM, that is why I would prefer to challenge the players because then you really have nothing to solely rely on on the character sheet for someone to just...

PC X: I passed my skill checks so we beat this challenge and can get on to the next thing.

Right, because anything else would be un-fun, so the DM has to allow it.

So when challenging the stats, why care if someone wants to just roll the checks with little extra effort?

If you want to not have to worry about the minimalistic method, then challenge the players in a way that they can succeed as a group using each of their strengths.

What do you do if you want to challenge the players, but someone doesn't want to go to the effort of using his strengths?

-Hyp.

 

[justanobody]

Sure. And if someone thinks that missing with his attacks is un-fun, then p42 means the DM is obliged to declare that he hits all the time.

Now you are just being silly.

You know good and well that the difference in your examples is that 42 is used to circumvent the rules, while mine with skill challenges was to use the rules, and allow varying types of players to have greater access tot he game and enjoy more parts of it rather than trying to plug 42 in as a cheat code for God mode.

Character name: IDDQD

 

[Hypersmurf]

Now you are just being silly.

You know good and well that the difference in your examples is that 42 is used to circumvent the rules, while mine with skill challenges was to use the rules...

No, your example with skill challenges was to circumvent the rule that the player must describe how he is using his skill!

The rule says you must describe the ways in which you use your skill.

You're saying that due to p42, a player might have less un-fun if he doesn't describe the ways in which he uses his skill, despite the rule requiring him to describe the ways in which he uses his skill.

Which is fine... until you suggest that p42 means the 4E rules don't require you to describe the ways in which you use your skill. It doesn't. It means the DM might choose to - as you put it - circumvent that rule.

-Hyp.

 

[pemerton]

If you want to not have to worry about the minimalistic method, then challenge the players in a way that they can succeed as a group using each of their strengths.

If by "minimalistic method" you mean "skill challenge mechanics" then I don't think "minimalistic method" is a very good label.

Your posts suggest that you don't really have a sense of how skill challenges are intended to play. But it may be that you do have that sense, but are taking a different line in your posts for some sorts of "devil's advocate" reason.

Putting to one side HowandWhy99's views about the difference between roleplaying and storytelling, skill challenges are not an alternative to roleplaying. They are a particular sort of mechanical device for supporting roleplaying and player participation in the game. They have their origins in the design of various indie games such as HeroWars. These are not "minimalist" games in which players just roll dice - they are games that most people would regard as the antithesis to hack-and-slash. Skill challenges live in the same design space - not as an alternative to roleplaying, but as a mechanic to support a particular sort of roleplaying, in which the player exercises a greater degree of narrative control than has been typical in earlier editions of D&D (see eg the discussion upthread of "fact introduction").