D&D 4E Heavy Concrete Data on 4e's Skill Challenge System (long, lots of tables)
- Thread starter Stalker0
- Start date
Hopefully an admission of the problems, in the context of errata issued by Mearls, et al, will be the nail in this coffin. The only question that I see remaining is if the official WotC fix can measure up to Stalker0's new system.Wulf Ratbane said:
Wow, gotta love the way you entirely didn't read the post and just looked for support of your position.
All he actually said is that the text doesn't properly convey the intention behind the system, not that the system is broken. Some of us have intelligence and comprehension enough to realise intent vs blunt rules interpretation. Which is the only way the premise of this thread makes sense.
Olgar Shiverstone
Legend
Wulf Ratbane said:
I'd prefer they try the rules system out for a while first before they publish it.
silentounce
First Post
saitir said:
I think your sarcasm detector is broken.
Read his comment in reference to the part of your post above after you "chuckled". Especially, the last sentence.
You probably still won't get it.
Here, I decided to quote it to make it easier for you:
"*chuckles* And now I wait to be told I'm delusional and missed the point. But I always trust real experience, actual understanding of rules intent (or in this case RAW) rather than people getting neurotic over rules sytems that they haven't played extensivley (Or at all in some cases). The rules have been out officially for just over a week now. How much to we really know about usage? Before you dump and rewrite a rule system, actually try it out for a while first."
Last edited:
Nail
First Post
What I'd like to know - what I think a lot of people would like to know - is "what was the intent" as the designers saw it. For example:Wulf Ratbane said:
- No really: should most PCs roll an Aid Another check when their initiative comes up, instead of an attempt at a success or failure?
- Why do the preview adventures use a such a different system than what's in the DMG? What was "learned" that caused the shift?
- Should the DM be giving out lots of +2 modifiers? What is the design reason behind this?
- Is the intention that PCs use their "encounter powers" regularly during these challanges? Are we going to see lots of future utility powers that affect skill checks?
Spatula said:
Yeah, all those hidden messages that are encoded in a funky secret language called 'english'. You should learn it sometime. Oh, and learn to take the rules as a whole rather than isolating parts from others and screaming 'but if I have to allow my players to roleplay, that means the system is broken'!
Plain english reading of the skill challenges results in them not working very well. As there is no stated intent behind the challenge system presented in the DMG (other than "non-combat encounters that use skills"), perhaps you can teach us your mind reading tricks. Or spell out the hidden messages for us illiterate clods.saitir said:
Spatula said:
The example skill challenge as a sample for us to learn from presented in DMG pg 77 is absolutely brutal too. A single +2 circumstance bonus to one of the player's checks, and one check that was an autofail because the player chose the wrong skill (intimidate) to use.