Excerpt: skill challenges

[Jasperak]

I think my issue stems from two things:

1. In any of my home games we WOULD role play a dynamic encounter like the above with the duke. The Skill Challenge system may work well for that with bonuses for good role-playing and catching the bit-and-pieces the DM throws out there in his responses. None of us would resort to just opposed rolls; I don't think.

2. With 4e becoming more of a tactical game, I guess I am more paranoid that the role-playing aspects are going out the window. I could foresee a Diplomat-type class that gains Encounter and Daily powers that would work in non-combat situations. I'm looking at you Bard PHB2. I miss the simplicity of BD&D and AD&D1e in this regard; it seems to take more power away from the DM to keep an adventure moving without having to hand wave away skill failures.

 

[heretic888]

Thats... uh... fine. However he wasn't asking about any of that. He was asking about this specific subsystem of 4e and getting a bunch of answers that amounted to 'Well, *I* wouldn't do it that way, so you can't.'

I just figured someone ought to address his actual question rather than wander off on tangents about personal preferences. And given the presentation, the answer is yes, you can ignore the RP aspect with this system. It isn't a commentary on whether its good, bad whether you could do it in 3e or while playing Tunnels and Trolls. Just an answer to whether or not the skill challenge system can reduce an RP encounter to a roll-off.

Hi Voss,

Oh, ok.

This subsystem does not force you to roleplay so, yes, it could just be a "roll-off".

In that regard, it is not unlike any other rule in 4E. Or any other rule in previous editions, either.

Laterz.

 

[heretic888]

2. With 4e becoming more of a tactical game, I guess I am more paranoid that the role-playing aspects are going out the window.

Hi Jasperak,

Well, look at it this way.

In 3E, all you had to mechanically represent non-combat encounters were opposed skill checks (Hide vs Spot, Move Silently vs Listen, Bluff vs Sense Motive, etc).

In 4E, you still have opposed skill checks AND you have skill challenges. From where I'm standing, this adds a level of depth and complexity to non-combat encounters that was heretofore non-existent in Dungeons & Dragons.

The great thing about this subsystem is that it is seemingly optional in nature. Nobody is forcing you to use skill challenges and you can excise them from your adventures without changing anything else. Groups that prefer simple opposed skill checks can keep playing that way. Groups that enjoy the added depth and social complexity that skill challenges provide can use those in addition to opposed skill checks.

Laterz.

 

[Lizard]

Thanks. I don't hate Skill Challenges so much as I am concerned with the ONE template that we saw from the INCREDIBLY SHORT excerpt, there was not a single sentence leading me to believe that there would be any benefit to actually role-playing the encounter instead of roll-playing it.

Can't speak for other people's tables, but at mine, for any game with social skills -- Hero, GURPS, BESM, D&D 3x, etc -- if anyone just says "I'm going to convince the Duke to help us" and rolls a die, he will get the Glare Of Doom and told to hang on a minute. Dice rolling is done to avoid simple DM fiat, not to avoid roleplaying. Saying "I roll diplomacy to convince the Duke" is as meaningless, to me, as "I use my combat skills to defeat the orcs". You play it out and roll to see the consequences of your choices.

If you roleplay well, I will give you a circumstance bonus, or a penalty if you're an idiot about it.

My players do things like Knowledge checks to know the proper mode of address for a particular ruler, or Gather Information checks to find out useful tidbits, which they then incorporate into roleplay.

 

[Voss]

I'm puzzled by the distinction between NPC and DMC. All NPCs are run by the DM, so...

As for the intimidate... I really dislike being told that a) something that isn't actually physically impossible is impossible. (can't turn myself inside out? Fine with that. This guy can't be talked to a certain way? Absurd)

b) autofail makes my teeth ache. Particularly in a world that has magic and divine intervention to back up the characters. Its a especially annoying when its an RP situation and the DM essentially fiats an option out because he feels like it. And having a handful of skilled adventurers leaning on you shouldn't be a situation that a random pissant duke can just ignore. If they're the ones being called in to deal with problems that they kingdom (and therefor the duke) can't, there should be a reason for it. If monster > kingdom and PCs potentially > monster, then PCs > kingdom.

Mostly though, we've been told before that the pages of the DMG suggest that the DM should get used to saying yes instead of no. The first example we get? Smack the players down with a big NO. And follow it up with a 'because we said so'.
Disappointing. Doubly so because its truly arbitrary. It smacks of a DM deciding he wants a certain flavor to the campaign and is preemptively fiating certain possibilities away because thats how the dialog in his head goes. It doesn't matter what the players might enjoy at all.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Thats... uh... fine. However he wasn't asking about any of that. He was asking about this specific subsystem of 4e and getting a bunch of answers that amounted to 'Well, *I* wouldn't do it that way, so you can't.'

I just figured someone ought to address his actual question rather than wander off on tangents about personal preferences. And given the presentation, the answer is yes, you can ignore the RP aspect with this system. It isn't a commentary on whether its good, bad whether you could do it in 3e or while playing Tunnels and Trolls. Just an answer to whether or not the skill challenge system can reduce an RP encounter to a roll-off.

I'm aware, but you had already answered his question so there seemed no point in my doing so as well. I was just pointing out that there has never been a rule in D&D (to the best of my knowledge) to prevent an RP situation being reduced to a roll or series of rolls. It seemed to me to be relevant to the topic in question.

To paraphrase, this was my point:
Q: Is there any rule requiring me to role play during skill challenges?
A: Nope, D&D has never had any rules requiring role play, and will probably continue thusly.

 

[Benimoto]

Try your punishment at an RPGA event.

Huh? I play RPGA events pretty regularly, and players losing XP for roleplaying badly is something that happens. In many instances, roleplaying XP forms 10-20% of the adventure XP and the GM is well within his rights to dock it for stuff like that.-

In the newer systems, where the DM fills out a little form at the end of the adventure there is a part where the DM is asked to rate the group's roleplaying, effectively on a scale of 1-5. That result will determine your roleplaying experience.

I realize that you had a bad experience at an RPGA event. I've had some too, but I've also had many more fun experiences. The RPGA are (mostly) not a bunch of roleplay-free rules junkie robots, I promise.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

DM: The duke sits at the head of his banquet table. Gesturing with a wine glass, he bids you to sit. "I’m told you have news from the borderlands."

Rogue: "Yes, your Grace. The borderlands prosper under your wise rule."

DM calls for a Diplomacy check. The rogue fails.

...

Cleric: Can I make an Intuition check to see what might encourage him to help us?

DM: Sure. Roll.

Cleric makes the Intuition check.

DM: You get the sense he's very proud of his rangers. If you praise them, he'll be more inclined to listen to you. (If the cleric had failed, the DM might have told him the Duke appreciates independence and would be impressed if the PCs acted superior to the rangers.) Also, you're pretty sure trying to intimidate this guy would backfire badly.

Cleric: "Your rangers are famous for their skills, your Grace. We would like to show you that we are worthy to serve alongside them."
(Et cetera.)

You pretty much got it exactly.

 

[Jasperak]

I'm puzzled by the distinction between NPC and DMC. All NPCs are run by the DM, so...

As for the intimidate... I really dislike being told that a) something that isn't actually physically impossible is impossible. (can't turn myself inside out? Fine with that. This guy can't be talked to a certain way? Absurd)

b) autofail makes my teeth ache. Particularly in a world that has magic and divine intervention to back up the characters. Its a especially annoying when its an RP situation and the DM essentially fiats an option out because he feels like it. And having a handful of skilled adventurers leaning on you shouldn't be a situation that a random pissant duke can just ignore. If they're the ones being called in to deal with problems that they kingdom (and therefor the duke) can't, there should be a reason for it. If monster > kingdom and PCs potentially > monster, then PCs > kingdom.

Mostly though, we've been told before that the pages of the DMG suggest that the DM should get used to saying yes instead of no. The first example we get? Smack the players down with a big NO. And follow it up with a 'because we said so'.
Disappointing.

While I was a bit of an ass about it, I think some kind of social-encounter flowchart is what we will see in the rest of the chapter. Use one skill to unlock the use of other skills. In this case Intimidate would not be unlocked, and the players would either intuit that or the DM would flat out say so. I agree this is a very poor example that slaps any role-players in the face.

What I didn't see though is a mechanism that rewards the PCs for their success. In a combat encounter the more successful rolls you make, the less combatants you face, thereby making the encounter easier. With this excerpt all I see are a series of opposed rolls that have nothing to do with each other except to unlock other skill uses. Although I wonder what use that is going to be if my character is trained in Diplomacy and Bluff but not History or Acrobatics, should any of those other skills become unlocked.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Huh? I play RPGA events pretty regularly, and players losing XP for roleplaying badly is something that happens. In many instances, roleplaying XP forms 10-20% of the adventure XP and the GM is well within his rights to dock it for stuff like that.

Must not have been playing Living Greyhawk then. Don't get me wrong, I love LG and I'm a Triad member and everything. However, XP in LG is almost always listed:

Defeat Encounter 1: 780 XP

Defeat Encounter 2: 900 XP

Defeat Encounter 3: 1200 XP

Optional Roleplaying Reward: 50 XP