Morandir Nailo
First Post
Yeah yeah, another crazy skill challenge post - sorry! This just popped into my head and definitely needs fleshing out (I'm sure you more math-minded folks will also want to run your computer simulations), but I figured I'd post it anyway.
Anyway, it seems to me that the biggest problem with skill challenges as presented is that they're binary: you either succeed in convincing the Duke, or you don't; or, the trap is disarmed, or goes off. There's no room for partial success, and if the first three players fail their rolls, then that's it - the other guys don't even get a chance to mitigate the situation.
Instead, you could have a track, like a disease, which the DM puts together when designing the skill challenge. You'd have a neutral slot, and then one or more slots in each direction, depending on how hard you wanted complete success to be. Start at the neutral position, and each success or failure pushes you in the appropriate direction on the track. Whatever position you end up on after everyone has made their rolls is the end result. It could be a complete success or complete failure, but it could also be somewhere in between. If at the end of the "round" you're in the neutral position, you go another round; talks have hit a stalemate and must continue.
You would then have two DCs: one for success (moving to the right along the track), and one to maintain current status. Failing that, you move to the left. This could add another layer, as you could raise or lower the "maintain" number to make the challenge easier or more difficult.
I'll try to provide an example (I'm making this up as I go though):
My PCs are going to be exploring some catacombs soon, and I've decided to add a skill challenge. In one tomb they'll encounter a small creature examining a sarcophagus. He will be more than willing to let the PCs open the sarcophagus, but when it becomes apparent that they cannot, he'll offer to help - for an exorbitant share of whatever loot they find. The goal then is to convince him to help in exchange for a more reasonable share.
Success means he'll do so for a reasonable share; failure means he leaves, and the PCs get no treasure. The twist is that the creature has with him the means to open the sarcophagus: a block and tackle setup which he has stashed behind the sarcophagus for the time being, while he examines the carvings. If they convince him to help, he'll bring it out and use it; if they don't, he'll show it to them as he teleports away.
So, I set up a five-step track. In the middle of course is neutral. The ends are complete success (he brings out his gear and shares like a good boy), or complete failure (he takes his gear and leaves). In between, I have partial successes. On the failure side, I have him attack because negotiations break down; they get the treasure, but have to fight him (and he's a tough little SOB). On the success side I have him help, but as the sarcophagus opens he snatches the most valuable-looking bit of loot and teleports away; the PCs don't have to waste resources, but they get a smaller share of the treasure. So the track looks like:
Teleport<>Attack<>Neutral<>Theft<>Full Cooperation
I want this to be fairly easy, so I'll set a DC of 20 for success and 16 to maintain. This means that a trained character will need a 10 (assuming 4 stat, 5 trained, 1 level - PCs are lvl 2) to move things in the right direction, and will keep things from getting worse on a 6. A character using an untrained skill will need a 15 and 11, respectively. (making these numbers up here, based on the numbers needed to stave off Filth Fever, as per the MM Rat entry).
The PCs then make their rolls as normal, with the predetermined results.
...that turned out to be longer than I thought it would be! So, anyone have any thoughts? Does this even make sense? And (most importantly), does anyone feel like doing the math to see if this would work?
Mor
Anyway, it seems to me that the biggest problem with skill challenges as presented is that they're binary: you either succeed in convincing the Duke, or you don't; or, the trap is disarmed, or goes off. There's no room for partial success, and if the first three players fail their rolls, then that's it - the other guys don't even get a chance to mitigate the situation.
Instead, you could have a track, like a disease, which the DM puts together when designing the skill challenge. You'd have a neutral slot, and then one or more slots in each direction, depending on how hard you wanted complete success to be. Start at the neutral position, and each success or failure pushes you in the appropriate direction on the track. Whatever position you end up on after everyone has made their rolls is the end result. It could be a complete success or complete failure, but it could also be somewhere in between. If at the end of the "round" you're in the neutral position, you go another round; talks have hit a stalemate and must continue.
You would then have two DCs: one for success (moving to the right along the track), and one to maintain current status. Failing that, you move to the left. This could add another layer, as you could raise or lower the "maintain" number to make the challenge easier or more difficult.
I'll try to provide an example (I'm making this up as I go though):
My PCs are going to be exploring some catacombs soon, and I've decided to add a skill challenge. In one tomb they'll encounter a small creature examining a sarcophagus. He will be more than willing to let the PCs open the sarcophagus, but when it becomes apparent that they cannot, he'll offer to help - for an exorbitant share of whatever loot they find. The goal then is to convince him to help in exchange for a more reasonable share.
Success means he'll do so for a reasonable share; failure means he leaves, and the PCs get no treasure. The twist is that the creature has with him the means to open the sarcophagus: a block and tackle setup which he has stashed behind the sarcophagus for the time being, while he examines the carvings. If they convince him to help, he'll bring it out and use it; if they don't, he'll show it to them as he teleports away.
So, I set up a five-step track. In the middle of course is neutral. The ends are complete success (he brings out his gear and shares like a good boy), or complete failure (he takes his gear and leaves). In between, I have partial successes. On the failure side, I have him attack because negotiations break down; they get the treasure, but have to fight him (and he's a tough little SOB). On the success side I have him help, but as the sarcophagus opens he snatches the most valuable-looking bit of loot and teleports away; the PCs don't have to waste resources, but they get a smaller share of the treasure. So the track looks like:
Teleport<>Attack<>Neutral<>Theft<>Full Cooperation
I want this to be fairly easy, so I'll set a DC of 20 for success and 16 to maintain. This means that a trained character will need a 10 (assuming 4 stat, 5 trained, 1 level - PCs are lvl 2) to move things in the right direction, and will keep things from getting worse on a 6. A character using an untrained skill will need a 15 and 11, respectively. (making these numbers up here, based on the numbers needed to stave off Filth Fever, as per the MM Rat entry).
The PCs then make their rolls as normal, with the predetermined results.
...that turned out to be longer than I thought it would be! So, anyone have any thoughts? Does this even make sense? And (most importantly), does anyone feel like doing the math to see if this would work?
Mor
