Quickleaf
Legend
A while back I started an interesting thread about Hacking GUMSHOE for an investigative skill challenge that generated some interesting conversation. The link jumps to my finished product.
This time I'm looking at using the idea of "moves" from Dungeon World, in particular the idea of "soft" moves vs. "hard" moves as ways to gauge how the scene responds to what the players do.
Here's the basic setup for the challenge I'm working on:
The PCs want to steal a magic wolfskin from a knight living at the ducal estate of Bechaeux. They are going to come up with a plan. It may involve certain PCs moving away from the ducal estate at certain points, but for the most part the ducal estate is where the action happens.
On the players end I'm thinking of giving them 2 tools.
First, they'll have a list of advantages they can choose 4 from in advance as they plan their heist. These will be Backup Plan, Group Effort, Least Resistance, Long Shot, and Low-Hanging Fruit. They define what skills these apply to in advance; for example Least Resistance them to define a skill which cabe used to make a second check at DC 20 (rather than increasing to DC 29, as is the case in this skill challenge).
Second, they can spend action points to invoke "It's all part of the plan..." when they encounter a complication or something goes badly. I'm debating on ways to limit this so it doesn't take the teeth away from "hard fail" moves. I just really like the idea of action points having a use appropriate to the challenge.
On the DM's side, I am considering 3 design elements to help run the challenge and keep it interesting:
First, the ducal estate will have a write up includes a list of moves the estate can make when a PC fails a check. These will be a big deal, follow-thrus on the threat of being undercover/stealthy that dramatically change the situation and imperil the PC in question. I really want these to be big stakes without ending the challenge altogether or taking that PC out of the action entirely.
Second, there will be a list (maybe a table?) of complications that are essentially "soft" moves that drive the action. These will be about setting up conflicts, presenting consequences or requirements or challenges to overcome, or presenting tough choices. I'll use these when the PCs enter a new area, just whenever it seems appropriate in light of the PCs' actions, or when it feels like something needs to happen to give the PCs direction.
Third, there will be a success counter, allowing for developments (learning it's not just the wolfskin they need to steal) and for a "partial success" condition.
Anyhow, these are just my initial thoughts. Also, disclaimer: I've never played Dungeon Worl, I just like the ideas I've read of it (fail forwards, moves, fronts) and think they're very pertinent to running skill challenges (or their equivalent) in any version of D&D.
This time I'm looking at using the idea of "moves" from Dungeon World, in particular the idea of "soft" moves vs. "hard" moves as ways to gauge how the scene responds to what the players do.
Here's the basic setup for the challenge I'm working on:
The PCs want to steal a magic wolfskin from a knight living at the ducal estate of Bechaeux. They are going to come up with a plan. It may involve certain PCs moving away from the ducal estate at certain points, but for the most part the ducal estate is where the action happens.
On the players end I'm thinking of giving them 2 tools.
First, they'll have a list of advantages they can choose 4 from in advance as they plan their heist. These will be Backup Plan, Group Effort, Least Resistance, Long Shot, and Low-Hanging Fruit. They define what skills these apply to in advance; for example Least Resistance them to define a skill which cabe used to make a second check at DC 20 (rather than increasing to DC 29, as is the case in this skill challenge).
Second, they can spend action points to invoke "It's all part of the plan..." when they encounter a complication or something goes badly. I'm debating on ways to limit this so it doesn't take the teeth away from "hard fail" moves. I just really like the idea of action points having a use appropriate to the challenge.
On the DM's side, I am considering 3 design elements to help run the challenge and keep it interesting:
First, the ducal estate will have a write up includes a list of moves the estate can make when a PC fails a check. These will be a big deal, follow-thrus on the threat of being undercover/stealthy that dramatically change the situation and imperil the PC in question. I really want these to be big stakes without ending the challenge altogether or taking that PC out of the action entirely.
Second, there will be a list (maybe a table?) of complications that are essentially "soft" moves that drive the action. These will be about setting up conflicts, presenting consequences or requirements or challenges to overcome, or presenting tough choices. I'll use these when the PCs enter a new area, just whenever it seems appropriate in light of the PCs' actions, or when it feels like something needs to happen to give the PCs direction.
Third, there will be a success counter, allowing for developments (learning it's not just the wolfskin they need to steal) and for a "partial success" condition.
Anyhow, these are just my initial thoughts. Also, disclaimer: I've never played Dungeon Worl, I just like the ideas I've read of it (fail forwards, moves, fronts) and think they're very pertinent to running skill challenges (or their equivalent) in any version of D&D.
Last edited:
