Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Breezly" data-source="post: 4675657" data-attributes="member: 12847">Rel, I am not so sure this works for all challenges.&nbsp; In your example, and story hour, I think this works well as an abstract way to get through an 'unstructured' challenge.&nbsp; The players are scrambling to get through a maze of tunnels that you do not need to map out.&nbsp; However, for other more structured challenges, I like the method, and examples, I have seen in the PHB and published articles where success and failure is measured and results can influence the next roll.&nbsp; As an example, say you had a level one skill challenge to get through a forest.&nbsp; With the 4 success before three failure method you would have at most 7 rolls, with possible successes and failures impacting the following rolls, thus likely reducing the amount.&nbsp; This gives the DM a pretty finite structure to work with.&nbsp; Using your example, you could have any number of rolls and have the party lost forever.&nbsp; I exaggerate, but to use your example where 3 is the target number:&nbsp; Success(1), Success(2), Failure(1), Success(2), Failure(1), Success(2), Failure(1), Failure(0), Success(1), Success(2)...etc.At this point, you could possible be caught in a loop and lose the players.&nbsp; DM experience will probably steer you away from this, but I just wanted to point out a possible flaw.To the OP, I try to tell the Skill Challenge as part of the story, not so much announcing it, but try to weave it through.&nbsp; &quot;You are walking through the woods and notice a worn path.&nbsp; (Success).&nbsp; As you wander, you slip into a sinkhole (Failure), You notice a break in the trees and this shortens the journey (Success), etc.&nbsp; But, as some have mentioned, it can depend upon your mood how flowery and descriptive you get.--Breezly</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Breezly, post: 4675657, member: 12847"] Rel, I am not so sure this works for all challenges. In your example, and story hour, I think this works well as an abstract way to get through an 'unstructured' challenge. The players are scrambling to get through a maze of tunnels that you do not need to map out. However, for other more structured challenges, I like the method, and examples, I have seen in the PHB and published articles where success and failure is measured and results can influence the next roll. As an example, say you had a level one skill challenge to get through a forest. With the 4 success before three failure method you would have at most 7 rolls, with possible successes and failures impacting the following rolls, thus likely reducing the amount. This gives the DM a pretty finite structure to work with. Using your example, you could have any number of rolls and have the party lost forever. I exaggerate, but to use your example where 3 is the target number: Success(1), Success(2), Failure(1), Success(2), Failure(1), Success(2), Failure(1), Failure(0), Success(1), Success(2)...etc. At this point, you could possible be caught in a loop and lose the players. DM experience will probably steer you away from this, but I just wanted to point out a possible flaw. To the OP, I try to tell the Skill Challenge as part of the story, not so much announcing it, but try to weave it through. "You are walking through the woods and notice a worn path. (Success). As you wander, you slip into a sinkhole (Failure), You notice a break in the trees and this shortens the journey (Success), etc. But, as some have mentioned, it can depend upon your mood how flowery and descriptive you get. --Breezly [/QUOTE]

Verification