D&D 4E Heavy Concrete Data on 4e's Skill Challenge System (long, lots of tables)

[Cadfan]

You know, I've been thinking- the typical likelihood of success in combat is 100%, with the possibility of failure only being present if particularly bad tactics are chosen. Why are skill challenges different? I may calibrate for even higher chances of success than we presently have.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

You know, I've been thinking- the typical likelihood of success in combat is 100%, with the possibility of failure only being present if particularly bad tactics are chosen. Why are skill challenges different? I may calibrate for even higher chances of success than we presently have.

Yes, but--

Slaughtergarde Magma Hurler aside, D&D combat isn't predicated on one designated person attacking every round and everyone else using Aid Another to turn an almost-guaranteed loss into an almost-guaranteed win.

If Skill Challenges offer each and every PC the diversity of choice and action that combat currently offers, then I am definitely on board for the PCs winning almost all the time.

 

[Spatula]

1) How often (percentage) should a party succeed at a Skill Challenge?

2) What should increasing/decreasing the complexity accomplish (other than requiring more rolls)? Should it increase/decrease the percentage of completion? Is it only for "fun" and to make the challenge last longer?

These two questions really get to the heart of the matter, as far as "fixing" the design goes. The DMG doesn't answer either one, so it's not easy to figure out what the proper behavior of a skill challenge is supposed to be. Everyone has their own answers and as a result, their own preferred solutions.

 

[Spatula]

One thing I've only seen mentioned once is the "DM's Friend." The Skill Challenge examples show that in certain circumstances the DM may give a +2 to a Skill check based on roleplaying, or bringing up a particularly relevant point.

Or a -2 penalty, which strangely never gets mentioned in these threads.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Or a -2 penalty, which strangely never gets mentioned in these threads.

Most likely because there's a huge range of other penalties already mentioned in the skill challenge section for inappropriate skills. Of those penalties the main one for inappropriate use of a skill is "increase the difficulty by 5", which is basically giving out a dms friend of -5...

Conversely there is no opposite provided - it never suggests rewarding a particularly appropriate or well-thought-out action with an easy check.

 

[HarbingerX]

These two questions really get to the heart of the matter, as far as "fixing" the design goes. The DMG doesn't answer either one, so it's not easy to figure out what the proper behavior of a skill challenge is supposed to be. Everyone has their own answers and as a result, their own preferred solutions.

Right. The skill challenge system seems out of place with the rest of the DMG. Reading the monster building and encounter building sections, you can see how the design focused first one 'desired outcome', then created math to support the desired outcome, then build a design that would make the math 'just work'. Reading the skill challenge section, the 'desired outcome' step is just missing. It reads as 'this design supports this cool back-and-forth of skill checks', but forgot to make it fit 'desired outcome'.

 

[two]

I called WotC customer service today and they said that yes, you can use Aid Another on skill challenges.

It would be great if somebody followed up on this and asked:

1) How many party members can use Aid Another if there is no time pressure? i.e. why won't there always be a +8 from Aid Another on all checks assuming a 5 PC party?

2) Is Aid Another possible when there is a time constraint?

 

[Ydars]

Whilst I LOVE the idea of skill challenges, there is either something in the design of the system behind them, or in the definition of that system (as written in the books) that is seriously flawed.

Has anyone also noticed that we haven't seen a single example of a skill challenge anywhere in the DMG that is actually stated; I mean we see plenty of text examples, but none of them have any actual DCs so that we can work out how the designers actually apply the skill challenge DCs themselves? The only examples I have seen of stated skill challenges are plainly almost impossible (like the 6th level effort in the expanded KoTS). I smell a section of the rules that has NEVER been playtested. Also, notice how, despite allegedly being a big part of 4E, there is no skill challenge in KoTS a published.

My guess is that the +5 to DCs on the skill/damage table in the DMG actually refers to the use of single skills in a situation like the one we are used to in 3.5E and NOT to skill challenges. It still doesn't fix some of the problems with the system though.

The answer to "how many people can aid another" is totally dependent upon the particular skill and the circumstances;

if the PCs are trying to lift a box up the side of the tower by pulling on a rope then concievably, the entire party could aid another whereas, if the same party are running a race through the streets after some bad guys, I don't really see how the efforts of one party member could summate with those of any other.

 

[Spatula]

Most likely because there's a huge range of other penalties already mentioned in the skill challenge section for inappropriate skills. Of those penalties the main one for inappropriate use of a skill is "increase the difficulty by 5", which is basically giving out a dms friend of -5...

No, I mean the DM's Best Friend is brought up in the skill challenge section, as ad hoc +2 or -2 to skill challenge checks. The +2 gets brought up a lot as "this is something built into the system that makes it work despite what the probabilities suggest" but the DM handing out -2 penalties (which the skill challenge rules tell you to do as well) is overlooked.

Also, notice how, despite allegedly being a big part of 4E, there is no skill challenge in KoTS a published.

There is a skill challenge in KotS. There are also traps, which use the same mechanic.

 

[Hussar]

Chiming in again. Again, not disputing the math.

Let me see if I have this right. And, please, type slowly when you correct me, because I'm innumerate.

We have a system that gives a range of success chances. At one end, you have a group that pretty much tries to go it alone, prima donna style, takes no advantages and winds up with a very low chance of success (25%?). On the other end, we have a group that works like a well oiled machine, takes every possible advantage and winds up with an almost guaranteed chance of success (100%, possibly more).

Is this really a bug? Isn't this a feature? You have a system designed specifically to reward cooperative play. If you want to succeed, you need to work together as a group (Aid Another, taking actions that don't contribute to Success/Fail but give bonuses to others) and your chances of success dramatically increase if you choose to work as a group.

Additionally, it seems to me that many of the bonuses - rituals, Aid Another etc. are mostly under the control of the players, not the DM. So, it's up to the players to come together, work as a group and solve skill challenges.

What am I missing?