Excerpt: skill challenges

[cferejohn]

Dating myself here, but if anyone remembers the original release of Gamma World (a TSR post-apocolytic RPG), there were three different flow charts for figuring out weapons or other technological doo-dads. The more complicated the weapon, the more complicated the chart. In each step you rolled a die and depending on the result you went one way or the other on the chart. It could end with success, breaking the doo-dad, or having the doo-dad explode.

This reminds me of a somewhat more flexible version of that, especially with the idea of some skill checks opening up other ones. I could even see this concept amortized over an entire adventure where the characters had to have 4 "successes" before 2 "failures" where successes could be things like defeating a certain monster, destroying a certain relic of unholy might, etc.

Anyway, just coffeehousing. Looking forward to it!

 

[ForbidenMaster]

I actually like the version that folks here were bandying about. It wasn't "Roll a random skill..." it was, "Do a little roleplaying and convince me that your skill is relevant to the challenge." I liked that. It strongly encouraged players to be engaged and creative.

I also specifically don't like what others have said here they do like: That some skills earn you automatic failures.

It's the problem of absolutes, again. You're telling me it is IMPOSSIBLE for my character to ever Intimidate the Duke? Just a flat out failure? Bad designers! Bad! It may be a semantic thing, but it's important. Crank the DC up by 5 or 10 points, but don't tell me it's literally impossible.

Overall Skill Challenges are a huge win. One of the best and biggest steps forward for the game, IMO.

Its not that you can intimidate the duke, its that intimidating him wont get you to your goal. Whether he calls the guard and has you locked up, or he is such a whim that if you intimidate him he will flee and lock himself in his mansion. In the end its not that you didnt succede in intimidating him, its that intimidating him doesnt compleate your task.

But then again thats only for the example given. What it if in your campaign your PCs found out that the duke was stealing from the local taxes and fudging the numbers before sending them off to the kingdom? Then the PC might hold it over his head, intimidating him into helping the PCs (you could even make the discovery a quest and then if the PCs succeed they now have an easy DC where before they would only have medium and hard DCs).

Remember, this is your campaign, but the concept of skills that will be a total failure if tried does makes sence, and IMO its a great mechanic.

 

[VannATLC]

Ok, I'm daft. I don't get it.

How does a skill challenge actually play out?

Also, this looks really complex. Not something I could just whip up on the fly. So far, I'm not keen on it.

I'd like to know the first part as well, as regards the second..

You're not *supposed* to whip it up on the fly.

You're not supposed to whip up combat on the fly either.

Maybe you, personally, can, but that's not the intent, and planning gives better results, most cases.

Good combat challenges are no less complex than this.

 

[GSHamster]

This system seems very "wingable". The example given is what I'd like to see a module provide, so that you get some direction how things will evolve.

However, for my own adventures, I think I'd just leave it very open, and see what skills the players come up with.

 

[Rechan]

For me, it's about GM Fiat. Maybe as GM, I envision the Duke as not the type that responds positively to being intimidated. Sure, you can intimidate him, but instead of being afraid, he responds via anger (even if it might be suicidal).

That's my read of it. Similar to how flattery and "buttering up" a pious, humble monk gets you no where.

Intimidation hurts you because This Duke doesn't take intimidation kindly. It makes him less likely to help you out.

In a different situation, with say, talking to a Dragon, bluff may be out, because that dragon is just too dang sharp for your lies.

Or another situation, where you try to bribe a guard, and he, being a Strong Lawful Individual, takes that as a grave offense to the oath he gave as an upholder of the law.

 

[baberg]

This to me is a major issue with it too. I can see it being very difficult to intimidate a Duke surrounded by his guards, but I like to leave the option open. That's probably how I'll be running things.

It all depends on how the challenge is setup. In this example we're really given no details - maybe the Duke is actually a level 20 Warlord and knows that he could wipe the floor with the party. Maybe the Duke is a wimpy noble who's never been confronted in his life and thus reacts so negatively to criticism or threats as to be one step away from calling his guards.

I think I will have some auto-fail skills, but only if it's very clear that it won't work to the PCs (the description earlier of a Nature check always failing if the NPC is clearly urban). I think I'd allow a natural 20 to be a "no bet" situation where it's neither a success nor a failure, mostly because I think most players would say "But I rolled a natural 20!" when I say "The Duke calls in his guards and bellows at you" in this example.

Oh, and as for the non-primary skills? If my PCs come up with a good reason for why Acrobatics or Singing would help, I'd allow it with a moderately hard DC level, decreasing the DC if the PCs roleplaying and reasoning was especially good. If he just says "I use Acrobatics to, um, impress the Duke" then he's getting a failure and ridiculed by the NPC.

 

[hbarsquared]

I also specifically don't like what others have said here they do like: That some skills earn you automatic failures.

This to me is a major issue with it too. I can see it being very difficult to intimidate a Duke surrounded by his guards, but I like to leave the option open. That's probably how I'll be running things.

Seriously, there is nothing to take issue with. This was one example, provided as a template. As a DM, you don't need to have Intimidate be an automatic failure, the template is a suggestion.

While at the same time it allows some DMs to say, "Hm, I would like certain skills to result in automatic failures to add a degree of complexity/challenge to the encounter."

I would much rather an example suggest that you can have skills result in automatic failure than to imply that all skills are equally valid and must have an attainable DC.

 

[Torchlyte]

I actually like the version that folks here were bandying about. It wasn't "Roll a random skill..." it was, "Do a little roleplaying and convince me that your skill is relevant to the challenge." I liked that. It strongly encouraged players to be engaged and creative.

I also specifically don't like what others have said here they do like: That some skills earn you automatic failures.

It's the problem of absolutes, again. You're telling me it is IMPOSSIBLE for my character to ever Intimidate the Duke? Just a flat out failure? Bad designers! Bad! It may be a semantic thing, but it's important. Crank the DC up by 5 or 10 points, but don't tell me it's literally impossible.

Overall Skill Challenges are a huge win. One of the best and biggest steps forward for the game, IMO.

I agree, except for the 'huge win' part. I think this is a very bad example to give DMs because it involves cooking up what PCs can or can't do ahead of time. I would probably play skill challenges more openly, because this whole "you can't intimidate the Duke" thing screams railroad to me.

 

[Rechan]

I'm willing to bet there's a chart in the DMG that looks something like the 3e CR/EL chart. Level + Complexity = Easy/Moderate/Hard DCs. That way all you have to do is cross-reference and you have your numbers there instead of pulling them out of your butt.

 

[Klaus]

Although I have loved the concept of skill challenges, up to now, I am unfortunately a bit disappointed in the preview. The "overview" portion said nothing new (besides the fact that we have a "CHAPTER" devoted to skill challenges; yay!), and the example was a lot more constraining than peoples' experiences.

I am hoping that the "choose your skill, roleplay your action, roll check, DM adjudicates" is still a primary method in skill challenges.

With that said...

I like some of the mechanics introduced in the "Template." I like the idea of having particular skills cause automatic failures, when used sparingly, and when used in conjunction with the DC spectrum (easy, moderate, hard). I like successful skills "opening up" other skills. From a DM perspective.

For instance, if the DM makes sure when presenting this noble NPC as one unswayed by intimidation, it would make sense for the use of Intimidate to result in an automatic failure. (Just as if you had a challenge where an NPC is portrayed as extremely urbanized: a Nature check should also result in failure).

Or, when a character has a successful Diplomacy check, the DM can then roleplay the NPC as having an obviously link with the History skill - perhaps this is a hint of the "free skill check when succeeding on a Hard DC?

Anyway, my appetite was whetted a long time ago, and the Skill Challenges CHAPTER will be the first page to which I turn when I get my hands on the books.

It's easy to reverse this Encounter Challenge for a less-than-steady type, and include some "good cop, bad cop" mechanics.

This skill challenge covers attempts to gain a favor or assistance from a local fence or other criminal figure. The challenge might take only as long as a normal conversation, or it could stretch on for days as the characters perform tasks to force the NPC’s hand.

Setup: For the NPC to provide assistance, the PCs need to convince him or her of their ruthlessness and might and that not helping their cause might hurt the NPC in some way.

Level: Equal to the level of the party.

Complexity: 3 (requires 8 successes before 4 failures).

Primary Skills: Bluff, Diplomacy, Insight, Intimidate, Streetwise.

Bluff (moderate DCs): You try to convince the NPC of your far-reaching criminal connections, or connections within law-enforcement that could be brought against him. If you are using criminal connections as an incentive, you may substitute Bluff with Streetwise.

Diplomacy (moderate DCs): You entreat the NPC for aid in your quest, saying how this might earn him profit, or protection from rivals. This is available only after one character has gained a success using the Insight skill. A character with Intimidate can help another character's Diplomacy.

Insight (moderate DCs): You empathize with the NPC and use that knowledge to encourage assistance. A successful use of Insight opens the Diplomacy skill for use.

Intimidate (easy DCs): You threaten the NPCs wealth, connections or life. If you earn a single failure with Intimidate, all other DCs increase by one category, and the NPC will probably double-cross you after the deed is done. A character with Diplomacy can help another character's Intimidate.

Success: The NPC agrees to provide reasonable assistance to the characters. This could include treasure.

Failure: The characters are forced to act without the NPC’s assistance. They encounter more trouble, which is probably sent by the NPC out of anger or antagonism.