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

[Stalker0]

Isn't that pretty much saying that in the most optimal scenario, the party is "taking 20", to use a 3eism?

Exactly....so why am I doing a skill challenge and not just one check?

 

[Stalker0]

Shameless plug.. the new version of my skill challenge system is ready here:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=230567

 

[gribble]

Aid another is a good tactic. We have a system that is rewarding teamwork.

I respectfully disagree. A system that rewarded teamwork would reward a party that found ways to use their individual strengths in unique ways to solve a problem.

What you're proposing is: identify the character with the highest modifier for a primary skill in the challenge. This character rolls and everyone else assists them. I.e.: it isn't what I'd call good teamwork - it's a brain-dead "we win" button.

This is compounded by the fact that a party which doesn't exploit this "we win" button will most likely fail miserably. I don't see this as a masterpiece of design that rewards teamwork - I see it as a broken mechanic with an obvious exploit...

 

[fanboy2000]

Absolutely incorrect.

The others make checks to help the lead character, in effect aiding that character, but their checks provide neither a success nor a failure toward resolving the challenge.

This is not Aid Another. Rather, it is the same as the use of the Perception skill check option listed in the Urban Chase. It duplicates the Aid Another actions mechanics, mostly, but it is a skill check.

Aid Another is a skill check. Actually, what we've been calling Aid Another isn't called Aid Another in the RAW, it's called Cooperation. And Cooperation is a skill check, according to the RAW.

Cooperation
In some situations, you and your allies can work together to use a skill; you allies can help you make a skill check by making a check themselves. Each ally who gets a result of 10 or higher gives you a +2 bonus to your check. Up to four allies can help you, for a maximum bonus of +8. If you have a choice, let the character in your group who has the highest base skill check bonus take the lead, while the other characters cooperate to give bonuses to the check. See "Aid Another," page 287, for how to cooperate in combat.

Emphasis mine.

What the DMG is saying that you can cooperate for a skill check in a skill challenge, but the successes and failures of the skill checks don't count as successes of failures for purposes of winning or losing a skill challenge.

Without trying to sound offensive, I doubt they know what they're talking about. That's not what the RAW say.

Cooperation is a skill check to help another person who is also making a skill check. The portion of the DMG you quoted says you can make a skill check to help someone who is making a skill check. But that skill check doesn't count as a success or failure for purposes of resolving the skill challenge.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I have a question:

The PWR for a 1st level party on the first page is listed as 7.3%, or 0.073.

It seems that if I follow your working from the other thread:

p(5 wins) = 0.5 ^ 5 = 0.03125
p(4 wins, 1 loss in any order) = 0.5^5 * 5c4 = 0.03125 * 5 = 0.15625

Totalled up I get 0.1875, or 18.75%.

Did I mess something up there? It seems most likely that you've assumed that one or more characters are using their bad skill levels, which isn't what's stated in the assumptions.

 

[gribble]

What the DMG is saying that you can cooperate for a skill check in a skill challenge, but the successes and failures of the skill checks don't count as successes of failures for purposes of winning or losing a skill challenge.

Cooperation is a skill check to help another person who is also making a skill check.

Interesting... This implies pretty heavily that up to four other characters can make skill checks "for free" as part of the acting characters check (as long as it's possible to "cooperate" for the skill check).
This puts skill checks (in general) and specifically skill challenges in a whole new light... particularly at mid to high levels where every skill check will effectively have a inherent +8 cooperation bonus.

 

[Lurker37]

I don't see this as a masterpiece of design that rewards teamwork - I see it as a broken mechanic with an obvious exploit...

Sadly, gribble, that's what I fear members of my gaming group will think as well. I was hoping to use skill challenges to sell them on 4e. It looks like they might be quietly swept under the rug until this is resolved.

 

[fanboy2000]

Interesting... This implies pretty heavily that up to four other characters can make skill checks "for free" as part of the acting characters check (as long as it's possible to "cooperate" for the skill check).
This puts skill checks (in general) and specifically skill challenges in a whole new light... particularly at mid to high levels where every skill check will effectively have a inherent +8 cooperation bonus.

I've been playing like this for years. More accurately, my players have always cooperated (aid another in 3e and 3.5) for important skill checks. It's as natural as casting magic missile and swinging a sword to them. It's so obvious, I assumed 3e's and 3.5's skill system was designed to be played like that. That this exists in 4e isn't surprising to me.

 

[gonesailing]

I've got no problem with aid another. If a player wants to aid another, I will ask "How?". If the answer doesn't make sense then no it won't be allowed.
The issue is really that the aid another mechanic becomes almost MANDATORY for success.

 

[Iron Sky]

Here's an idea I was toying around with. I haven't done statistics since my college statistics course 7 years ago, so I'm not sure on the probabilities, but this seems more like what I'm looking for. The basic formula is:
<deleted>
Edit: I just realized that my fancy equation I originally came up with boils down to increasing the number of failures required by 1 for all complexities.

This makes all skill challenges a bit easier but now higher complexity challenges also have a wider spread of successes/failures to reflect their increased difficulty.

Version 1, +1 Failure allowed

Complexity  Successes  Failures
1           4          3
2           6          4
3           8          5
4           10         6
5           12         7

Alternately, you could increase the # failures by two across the board if Version 1 doesn't do enough.

Version 2, +2 Failures allowed

Complexity  Successes  Failures
1           4          4
2           6          5
3           8          6
4           10         7
5           12         8