Doh! Killed my party with a skill challenge

[5ekyu]

As much as I have fond memories of playing The Storyteller system back in the day, that sentence pretty much defines Mark Rein-Hagen’s oeuvre.

I loved our VtM games, but we knew then it was in spite of the math.

 

[Numidius]

"Skill" Challenges are great things. Formally defined skill challenges are the antithesis of creativity. Plus 4e style skill challenges by definition artificially exclude anything that isn't a skill - often a "success" can be had through consuming a resource (a spell slot, a one potion, etc.) at the least. And there are time when a "no roll needed" activity also can provide a success - either there is no reasonable way to fail, or it's something like characters remembering pertinent information. But most of all, never get in the way of player creativity.

Here's an example from my campaign, similar to the idea of an exploding dungeon. Having defeated the Frost Giant Vampiric Sorceress, her castle is collapsing around them. They way in they knew they had blocked up to prevent hordes of Frost Giant Zombies who were coming out of the melting walls, so they didn't know how to get out. Just that they had a very limited time and no teleportation magic.

The group ended up melting through a wall, finding a grand stairwell of ice, half the party sledding down on the warforged magic shield as a toboggan bouncing occasional Frost Giant Zombies out of the way as the rest of the party tried to run after.

Just parse that for a second. No way I would have come up with that in planning, you need to be flexible on what works and what doesn't. In this case clearing FGZombies was causing them damage as well, but they were freeing up space for those running down behind. Things like melting through the wall used up spells, the sledding was crazy skill use. Bouncing FGZ out of the way was attack rolls. The other half were making athletics checks to go as fast as they could on slippery, melting ice stairwells.

I wasn't counting failures, I was counting time. As the castle came tumbling down. Luckily the sled was fast - IF they didn't hit into anything.

They finally saw double doors with sunlight around the cracks and managed to turn the shield-sled and slam into it. Unfortunately it was a balcony several stories up which with their momentum they were going over.

This is because of how they were looking to get out, looking for windows or sunlight. None mentioned anything about trying to make sure to get down to ground level first. I gave them options to try to roll off up top if they wanted - the all declined.

The rest of the party came up, running through the horde of Frost Giant Zombies who had been piling up at the bottle of the stairs. The rogue, who had messed earlier, was last. In order from closest to furthers I had them dodging the FGZ and moving to jump out. Some focused on dodging because they didn't have far to go, others used spells or stuff for the final bit or to help take less damage from the jump off the balcony. Again, two parts going on - time to escape and avoiding damage on the way. Let player creativity run and figure otu how to adjudicate it.

All out but the last, the rogue. Who then promptly rolls a 1 on his acrobatics check to tumble out. And this was the last round before collapse.

At this point the challenge was over, with the rogue failing. But for epicness and one last shot I started another.

I set the scene - ice castle collapsing NOW, rogue on his back surrounded by Frost Giant Zombies. Everyone else three stories down off the balcony. Everyone but the rogue had a single action, to do in whatever order they wanted, to try to save him.

It ended up not going well. The wizard turned the rogue invisible impulsively to help deal with the Frost Giant Zombies without thinking about the others trying to over him. It was a great bit of inadvertent dialog at the table:

Fighter: We can't watch him die!
Wizard: I cast invisibility.

In the end, all but one character had gone and they hadn't saved the rogue, when the Sorcerer used a short-range transpose-self-and-another spell and teleported the rogue our - and himself in. Martyred himself to save the rogue.

Great moment around the table. But to get back to Challenges, think like this:

I started with a goal: Get out of the castle, which you could think as requiring a certain number of successes.
And problems:Countdown timer to castle destruction, and random damage/grappling from Frost Giant Zombies.

From there I left it up to them to describe what they wanted to do. It could be skill, or resource usage, or whatever. I evaluated how hard it was, and if it would help with either the goal or either of the problems. (For example, no one did anything like Wall of Ice to help delay the castle from crumbling, but that was a valid thing they could have done. Also the "number of successes" to get out varied by path. Try and get to the top and survive the collapse? Retreat the way they came (their own barrier to overcome, more FGZ, but a known route), look for a safe way out? Look for ANY way out? The idea of sledding down the stairs helped the first group move a lot faster - but those same melting stairs would have been a big delay if the rest of the party had to dodge FGZ - so it was only so helpful because the sledders were slamming into them (and taking damage doing so).

In other words, set up your environment, but then completely let the party try to resolve it and don't balk at creativity.

I'd really like to know the motivations behind the sorcerer's final action to save the rogue.
Good example, btw. The countdown before collapse had been already established as a fixed number of rounds?

 

[Blue]

I'd really like to know the motivations behind the sorcerer's final action to save the rogue.
Good example, btw. The countdown before collapse had been already established as a fixed number of rounds?

The countdown was a fixed, but the party didn't know it. They could have spent actions to figure it out, used those on escaping.

As for motivation, part of it was how close the characters had been. But the other part is that the sorcerer's player thought it was a fantastic martyr death that made a great story and a fitting end for his character arc, while the rogue's player was earlier in their character arc with a lot unresolved, and would have the "I got killed by a 1" story instead of martyr-riffic bragging rights.

Everyone left the table satisfied.

 

[guachi]

All that does is teach them to not play if they can't think fast.

Fine by me.

I have a t-shirt that says "Roll the Damn Dice". By far the thing that drives me crazy more than anything is an indecisive player who isn't ready to declare his action on his turn and takes forever to roll his dice. It's probably the only thing another player could actually do that would actually get me to leave a game. It grinds the game to a halt, makes it boring, and then I check out.

 

[pming]

HIya!

I've been following the advice of Matt Colville from YouTube, and introduced a Skill Challenge to model the party's escape from an exploding dungeon. Using some of the guidelines from his video (and the 4e rules), I came up with the following skill challenge for five 6th level characters....

10 successes before 3 failures. DC 15 checks. Accepted skills included: Perception, Athletics, Acrobatics, Survival, Nature, (or others if you could make a convincing argument). Failure was 9 points of damage unless someone could negate the failed check with a successful check.

So the group didn't come close to the 10 successes. After setting up the conditions of the skill challenge, it became impossible to "walk it back" even as things were clearly going bad. However, after letting the dice fall where they may, I tried to be accommodating for letting the players bring in new characters or to bring back their previous characters with as little setbacks as possible.

I guess my question is ... do any of you think skill challenges are worth having? Do you have any rules of thumb when designing them?

No. Definitely a hard NO.

By having set up a "skill challenge" like you did, you are basically saying "Ok guys, we're going to completely ignore the fact that we are playing a roleplaying game, and we're going to just reduce the success/death of your characters to a small series of dice rolls. Basically, ignore everything you've done before with the PC's and we're just going to do some gambling. Hope you're feeling lucky!"

This is one reason why I've kept my "Old Skool" style these decades and decades. With an Old Skool style game, the Players are the ones that generally decide the success/fail of their PC's. The dice and skills come into play when it's at the "..hmm..." stage of DM'ing. By "...hmm...", I mean when something comes up where the DM and Players are all thinking..."Well, it could go either way, really. Not sure if that would work or not...hmm...". If the DM gets to a situation and hears what a Player wants his PC to do, and the DM thinks "Yup, sounds reasonable and doable", then the DM just narrates the PC's success. Same with the opposite.

IMNSHO, a "Skill Challenge" is an interesting idea for a GAME perspective. This is one of those things that I very rarely would use, and I would only use it in a completely non-life/death situation. I have used this to determine the results of a PC's night of gambling. Generally speaking, I had the Player make 6 rolls. DC started at 10 and upped by 2 each roll (10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20). The Player had to use his "Gambling" (Performance) skill, "Intimidation" (Intimidation) skill, and "Sense Motive" (Insight) skill each at least once. The results determined if the PC made money, broke even, or lost money.

Using a "skill challenge" this way was a nice method of letting the Player roll some dice (who doesn't like to do that?) with the results being used for primarily role-playing additions to the session and character. No life/death was at hand...just a few coins and the possibility of RP'ing seeds later (e.g., if the PC failed all but one...he might get a rep as an 'easy mark' for gambling, or maybe he'd get an uncomplimentary nick name from the locals like "Unlucky Pete" or something).

Skill Challenge to add a bit of RP'ing "story seeds"? Sure! Skill Challenge deciding the life/death of the entire group? No. Absolutely NO.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[TallIan]

All that does is teach them to not play if they can't think fast.

I would argue that it teaches them to think fast, or at least not to analyse everything to the nth degree before choosing a path.

I’m not looking to penalise people, so if someone is slow in thinking or to articulate their thoughts I’ll make allowances. It’s when someone starts to discuss the ifs ands and maybes of a situation that I’ll add the pressure.

 

[TallIan]

Oops, double post

 

[jgsugden]

Skill challenges are artifical structure where it isn't needed. They make a nice 'training wheel' for new DMs, but once you know what you're doing, youll likely find yourself having a more organic game without the fixed structure of a skill challenge.

Some reasons I do not like them:

1.) It is often possible to do something with magic or a character ability that would otherwise require a skill challenge. The PCs are in a chase calling for athletics skill checks - but the party is a wood else barbarian, a monk, and a wizard with misty step spells to spare. Why don't they use their cunning, natural speed, and spells to win the challenge?

2.) They annihilate the flow of a game. A very skilled DM can work them in without disrupting the flow if they have a lot of practice, but a DM that can do that will often still have a better experience not being restricted by the structure of a skill challenge.

 

[billd91]

I've been following the advice of Matt Colville from YouTube, and introduced a Skill Challenge to model the party's escape from an exploding dungeon. Using some of the guidelines from his video (and the 4e rules), I came up with the following skill challenge for five 6th level characters....

10 successes before 3 failures. DC 15 checks. Accepted skills included: Perception, Athletics, Acrobatics, Survival, Nature, (or others if you could make a convincing argument). Failure was 9 points of damage unless someone could negate the failed check with a successful check.

So the group didn't come close to the 10 successes. After setting up the conditions of the skill challenge, it became impossible to "walk it back" even as things were clearly going bad. However, after letting the dice fall where they may, I tried to be accommodating for letting the players bring in new characters or to bring back their previous characters with as little setbacks as possible.

I guess my question is ... do any of you think skill challenges are worth having? Do you have any rules of thumb when designing them?

The skill challenges as presented in the 4e rules, at least DMG1, are highly problematic. If the DC to achieve isn't set very low, the need to have x successes before a lower number of y failures diminishes the chances of success well below a single die roll. Trying to have 10 successes before 3 failures is like running a race in which one runner has to go 100 meters while his opponent only has to run 30. Good luck winning that one. If they're anywhere near the same speed (or the check is anywhere near the 50/50 mark), the 30 meter runner has a very strong advantage and will win way more often than not.

If you ask me, skill challenges are best used as ways to adjudicate various levels of success for the outcome of a series of PC actions or strategies - NOT to the point that failure means total destruction, as in the case of the exploding dungeon. The Star Wars Saga Edition supplement titled Galaxy of Intrigue had a pretty good example of one (as well as generally better treatment of skill challenges than 4e). In the example, PCs were trying to escape the spice mines of Kessel with some other prisoners. There are various ways they can make a check - consulting with other prisoners to plot the quickest way out, stealthily avoiding guards, disrupting communications from a small command post, and so on. A full victory with no failures meant they'd get to the landing platform and steal a freighter with all 10 fellow prisoners - each failure of a check reduced the ultimate success by whittling away fellow prisoners getting caught or lost to other factors. A failure of the whole challenge meant they had to fight their way through a tough encounter on the landing platform (success meant they got there before the opposition could). Failure of the whole challenge wouldn't be death and there were means of rating differing degrees of partial success should they manage to succeed overall but have some setbacks. It was a very good example of some place a skill challenge could give the GM some structure in deciding overall outcomes of the situation - particularly whether the PCs should have to fight on the platform or not to get away.

A better mechanic to handle something like a race against time (or the exploding dungeon) might have been a chase sequence. The "countdown" moves one space every round and the PCs have to manage a limited number of dashes, some ability/skill checks to get over/through some obstacles or face a delay, and maybe balance some options for taking damage in order to advance 2 spaces instead of 1.

 

[Quickleaf]

I've been following the advice of Matt Colville from YouTube, and introduced a Skill Challenge to model the party's escape from an exploding dungeon. Using some of the guidelines from his video (and the 4e rules), I came up with the following skill challenge for five 6th level characters....

10 successes before 3 failures. DC 15 checks. Accepted skills included: Perception, Athletics, Acrobatics, Survival, Nature, (or others if you could make a convincing argument). Failure was 9 points of damage unless someone could negate the failed check with a successful check.

So the group didn't come close to the 10 successes. After setting up the conditions of the skill challenge, it became impossible to "walk it back" even as things were clearly going bad. However, after letting the dice fall where they may, I tried to be accommodating for letting the players bring in new characters or to bring back their previous characters with as little setbacks as possible.

I guess my question is ... do any of you think skill challenges are worth having? Do you have any rules of thumb when designing them?

The basic premise of creating a structured way to handle a non-combat challenge is totally sound.

However, the execution is not. The basic maths don't work, as expressed upthread. But more importantly, the premise may be flawed.

My basic rules of design for using "skill" challenges in my games are threefold:

1. Understand the situation fully, determine whether a "skill" challenge is the best method to handle it, and begin by defining the stakes & consequences for failure.
2. There is no one size fits all "skill" challenge. Instead thing about the specifics of your scenario and design toward that.
3. Don't fixate on the "skill" part of "skill" challenges. Instead focus on creating holistic scenarios which can be resolved through multiple avenues including roleplaying, expending other resources (spell, hit dice, class features, Inspiration), specialized gear, creative ideas, etc. This is why I put the "skill" part in parentheses.

You can see a recent example I crafted for an upcoming session in my Tomb of Annihilation campaign: https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?834513-5e-Help-with-a-travel-skill-challenge

To apply these principles to your specific scenario.....

The Exploding Dungeon

Step 1: Knowing nothing beyond "exploding dungeon", I'd suggest clarifying the stakes first. Do you want it to be possible for a PC to die? All the PCs? I'd consider how much of the "exploding dungeon" was coming from what I wanted to introduce vs. consequences to decisions the players previously made. And I'd consider how much foreshadowing of the possibility for the explosion I'd done. IF this were a consequences for a previous decision where things went pear-shaped AND I'd done plenty of foreshadowing... only then would I consider death as a possible consequence.

Alternative consequences for failing the challenge completely might include the party getting separated, losing a NPC henchman/companion or an animal companion/familiar, suffering an enduring wound that only heals with downtime or the regeneration spell, losing precious items like spellbooks, becoming trapped in a very deadly dungeon that collapses on top of them, getting blasted by a magical explosion into another plane, losing Hit Dice prior to a dungeon where long resting isn't possible...

After deciding that, I'd consider how much "screen time" should be devoted to this challenge. Could it feasibly be resolved with a single action/check by a player in the party...for example, a high-level PC casting teleport or Otiluke's resilient sphere? Then it's handled and done. Or is it a small dungeon with the players rushing to get out and reach a rival who stole the Ruby of Xalmectur, likely leading to a new scene? In that case, a group Athletics check or a Constitution save might be sufficient, applying some damage and/or delaying those PCs affected before the combat with their rival.

Assuming that I think it merits a more detailed scene with meaningful choices for the players, I'd then proceed to the next step..

Step 2: Now you want to devise the mechanical structure for the challenge. I like to involve all the players, and one way of doing that is requiring each of them to engage with the challenge in some way. Another option might be to establish stages with stakes at each stage – for example, a collapsing stone bridge, a passage of collapsing statues, and a narrow squeeze to the exit. Another option would be a "time limit" expressed by placing a maximum limit on the number of actions/checks could work before the explosion.

One important note. In this case, I'd probably avoid the 3 failures rule... it's hard to imagine the players actions making their predicament worse...which is what the 3 failures rule emulates best.

All of this goes back to the narrative. "An exploding dungeon." Ok, what else? What specifically is causing this dungeon to explode? Is this a fiery gunpowder explosion? A collapsing mine? What sort of structural elements would fail and how do you imagine them failing? How are the dungeon inhabitants likely to respond?

And where does the conflict lie? Maybe the conflict isn't "can they escape in time"... Maybe the main conflict is getting chased by a monster while cave-in or explosion hazards are secondary? Maybe the conflict is "do they escape with the McGuffin or is it lost in the mad dash out, falling down into the darkness below"?

Step 3: The last step is imagining potential solutions to the extent that those can help you adjust your design toward the capabilities of the players and their PCs. You don't want lists of "accepted" or "likely" skills here (e.g. DC 15 Perception, Athletics, Acrobatics, Survival, Nature). That's the player's job. You want to detail challenges. For your scenario these might things like (1) evading falling debris, (2) ascending a sloped floor, (3) crossing crumbling stone stairs, (4) toppling statues, (5) erupting pockets of gas, and (6) a water-filled escape tunnel.

What's important to consider at this stage is are whether the challenges suit your party & the stakes you've set. For example, with #2 and #3, are you prepared to let PCs failing here fall down into the darkness and suffer those consequences (e.g. separation from the party)? Alternately, #6 would be a non-risk for a party of amphibious or otherwise water-breathing PCs.

And that's my basic approach!