Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RavenSinger" data-source="post: 4524947" data-attributes="member: 213">Skill Challenges vs. Combat EncountersAgreed.  In a skill challenge, there must be a way for the story to continue even if the party "fails".  This point was lost on me for the first couple of times I designed challenges, because in the core books so much emphasis is put on skill challenges carrying the same weight as combat, and running like combat.  And the result was some extremely mediocre gameplay.  This misconeption is understandable because (I think) the authors of the core books wanted to give tools to DMs who run roleplay-heavy campaigns, and to play up the idea that encounters that involve a series of skill checks can be just as fun as a battle vs. the beastie of the week.  And I, for one, appreciate this effort. But this effort has lead to a misconception that skill challenge = combat encounter.  Certainly now in 4E there are more similarities between combat and skill challenge.  But what I have found, is that there are some essential differences between designing good skill challenges, and designing good combat encounters.I think a skill challenge is much more of a story telling device than a combat encounter.  It reminds me of the (very) few times I played in a White Wolf setting, where each character describes what they are going to do, and then the GM would "translate" that into a game mechanic which led to a rolling of dice to determine a result (be that success or failure or something in between).  Because the format of the encounter is less formal, I think that it is better if the potential results of such an encounter are also less formal.  So, in my games, I don't think you will ever come across a skill challenge that would result in any character death, though injury (loss of healing surges, mild to moderate poisoning, etc.) is possible.  Further, I don't think I would design a skill challenge that is at a "bottle neck" in the story line (i.e. you must succeed at the challenge otherwise there is no way for the story to continue), or have them be a climax of an adventure.  Skill challenges should be a chance for players to "open up their bag of tricks" to find possible solutions.  This is not to say there would not be serious consequences for a skill challenge failure, but the consequences are in what the next combat encounter will be, and/or the amount of key information a party has when they enter the next combat encounter.By contrast, I think combat encounters are much more formal, and are naturally much more of the board-game aspect to D&D (as opposed to the cooperative storytelling outlined above).  Combat has *many* more rules governing and defining specific actions and results (one of which is PC death).  Those rules are available to all, and should be understood by all.  Therefore, because there is more knowledge (and preparation) on the part of the players for the combat encounter situation, I feel much more at liberty to use all those rules to the best advantage of the party's enemies.  And if the result is PC death, then that is part of the game.So, IMHO, the consequences for failure at a skill challenge should not be as catostrophic as the consequences to failure at a combat encounter.  For me, the excitement of a skill challenge comes from being able to use your skills in new and exciting ways.  The excitement from a combat comes from the mortal peril your PC is in, and the potential to lose everything.My 1d4 cents,RS</blockquote>

Verification