How to portray long or challenging tasks in an interesting way

[Quickleaf]

If applicable:

PC Goals
NPC Goals
Environment

I basically try to put together something based on the situation and what the PC's have given me via roll playing and character personalities. I always try to say "yes" and tailor the game to the players. I can't really think of any specifics in hindsight, but I'll try to remember next time it comes up.

Yeah, I think a different framework is needed. I notice you mentioned it's hard "especially when you want the PCs to succeed." What if the first questions you asked beginning an improv scene were:

What are the stakes? What is at risk?
Is this scene worthy of "air time"?
What rules system might model this well?

While these first two questions can be answered on the fly, that last one bears a little more explanation. I'm not a big fan of "one size fits all" skill challenges; I think you need to tailor the rules to your specific scenario.

You list a couple in your OP:

Desert Trek - The overland travel skill challenges Ive seen published suck. Largely the issue is conceptual - they dont have interesting developments, and theres no urgency, and the consequences for failure are boring. Instead I would grab your random encounters list of choice and a simple hex map and run the PCs thru 30-45 minutes of exploration style adventuring. Having random terrain tables would be good too, IOW prepare to improvise.

Looking for a Hidden Encampment - Here I think a group skill check is the best choice. If the PCs fail they get ambushed by enemy scouts, fall into a trap, or spend a day searching to no avail. If they succeed they find they encampment and are undetected. Done.

Tracking an Enemy - Personally I like to run tracking scenarios as group skill checks with some kind of logic puzzle or dilemma incorporated into it, and possibly a complicating encounter. For example, the assassin was bloodied and fled into a field hospital - how do they track him now when there are multiple blood trails? Then once they have the assassin in their sights he pushes an apothecary over the edge of a bridge into rapids. It may dawn on the players that the assassins route is deliberate - he's gathering ingredients to make a lethal poison - making their tracking/chase even more urgent. If they fail maybe the assassin kills himself, or maybe he strikes a secondary target?

Researching in a Library - Dang it this part of my post got eaten. To sum up, I would normally just narrate this scene. However I once ran a scene in a cursed library that worked because (a) there was a looming undead threat on a timer, and (b) I prepared a codex puzzle before game. Again, preparing to improvise.

 

[pemerton]

A discussion of "scene framing" would be appropriate here.

If you want the PCs to succeed, and if you can't think of anything interesting to challenge them with, then it sounds like there may be no "scene" here to frame: just "say yes" and narrate things through to the interesting bits.

In a recent session, the group was moving down a long tunnel into a mining area. I didn't expect them to make such a big deal about the tunnel and it would just be something we'd breeze through. Next thing I know the group is preparing sun-rods, the assassin popped his stealth daily, and the group is prepping for something major, when all I had planned was a long twisting tunnel that I thought fit well into the environment/mood and hadn't planned on much passed that.

This looks like a case of the players deciding that it's a scene in spite of your preferences as a GM! And unless you're prepared to flat-out metagame ("No, don't spend that daily, there's nothing going on in this tunnel."), it can be a bit hard to avoid.

I ended up throwing some lame hazards at them

My default response to this sort of situation is a skill challenge. And my default tactic in a skill challenge is to narrate bad things happening to the PCs, that they can try and avoid via their skill checks (and other abilities, where appropriate). To be interesting, I think these bad things have to be more than just losing healing surges - in an environmental context, they can include losing gear, falling down pits (and so getting separated from the rest of the party), cave-ins, alerting other creatures to the party's presence, etc. And play off the players' skill checks - if they make successful Dungeoneering checks to identify tracks or spore, for example, they realise that there is a giant spider lurking nearby that they will have to avoid - so you seed the next check without having to come up with some new, unconnected complication.

I'd add - if you do split the party, be prepared to bring them all back together fairly quickly (in real time if not in game time) - the rest of the party find their way into the pit, for example, but not before the PC who fell has had to face off for a round or two against the spider that lives down there.

Use the N successes vs 3 failure in a skill challenge as a pacing technique - escalate the stakes with each failure, and at 3 failures or N successes bring the thing to an end. This stops the scene dragging on without resolution. And in tunnels, I would say you shouldn't be afraid to force the thing to a conclusion - the whole things starts collapsing and a group Athletics check is needed, for example (and if they fail then it becomes group Acrobatics to end up on the right side of the falling rock; if they fail that then they're trapped until whatever it was that they were looking for finds them instead, so they have to beat it (or bargain with it) before they can get out).

In a desert, the final complication that pushes things to a climax could be running out of water: group Endurance, then (if they fail) group Healing, then if they fail they awake with their enemy (or the stranger they were looking for, or whatever) reviving them with water - now they are indebted to whoever they were looking for, and so the dynamic of the new scene is quite different from what the players were expecting and hoping for - but the game still goes on!

 

[Radiating Gnome]

My default response to this sort of situation is a skill challenge. And my default tactic in a skill challenge is to narrate bad things happening to the PCs, that they can try and avoid via their skill checks (and other abilities, where appropriate).

Same here. I'm a big fan of the skill challenge mechanic because the base mechanic gives you a good structure for doing things on the fly, yet you can invest a bunch of time in creating variations on skill challenges to create important scenes.

A lot of what you've described is challenges to represent travel of some sort -- either large or small scale travel (travel for days through the desert, travel for hours in the dark tunnel).

For a lot of those situations I use a quick handout I print a bunch of to try to structure a sort of elaborate challenge.

The big idea there is that each success in the challenge represents a certain amount of progress towards the destination -- that might be day, or ten minutes, or whatever you need.

With that one skill check, though, you add a bunch of other checks that the other PCs can make while one PC is doing the "navigation" check.

I typically look for primary skill checks in two other areas:
- Avoid/Overcome hazards
- Evade combat/negotiate with the locals, etc.

That gives me three skill checks that are required each round, and there's a consequence for each:
- Fail the navigation check, and you don't make progress in your travels
- Fail on the hazard check, and you suffer some sort of penalty as a result
- Fail on the combat check, and you have a minor combat encounter (possibly abstracted rather than played out)

I set the DCs for those to be appropriate for the region. Navigation when you're following a road might be easy, and the hazards are usually few and far between, but you make it very difficult to avoid encounters with the locals or evade pursuit. Avoid the roads and you make navigation much more difficult, and the hazards are more challenging, but it might be easier to lose your pursuers, and so on.

I flesh things out with assist checks (each of the primary skills can be assisted with another -- if you're using nature to navigate through a desert wilderness, endurance might be a good assist skill, or perception). And I identify some skills that might produce bonuses if the PCs invest in them instead (thievery might allow the PCs to make contact with a local who can give them an important rumor, or heal might allow them to identify a local herb, etc).

I've attached a PDF of the form I fill out for each region/path. I did it so there's a mini-sized circle for each PC to put his mini on for the check he's going to make in that period of time (only one each).

The next thing I like to do with these forms in hand is create a bunch of them. Each period of time can take the PCs through a different region with a different set of challenges/hazards/locals/rewards, etc. But you can also give them some choices for how they travel -- they could travel using the kingsroad, knowing they risk being identified by the cardinal's agents, or they could take game trails through the hills, which may take longer but you're safer there.

The ticking clock is almost always important, but one thing you can do if you don't have a good reason to force the PCs to rush is to play around with how much/often you allow them to rest. It's possible that, in days of traveling through a desert, the PCs will not be sleeping well, etc. Maybe there are just one or two oasis villages where the PCs can take an extended rest and get the full result.

Anyway, that's the mess I usually make. It does take some prep, but if you whip up a sheet or two for each region, the prep goes a long way.

-rg

 

[jshaft37]

First off, thanks for all the responses. A lot of different ways to look at these things, really gets the wheels turning in my brain and allows me to think differently than I normally would!

Another question, if I am hit with something that is unexpected but could potentially be boring, is it proper to take a quick break to prepare? If so, how long? If I knew for a fact it was going to be awesome, I'd be tempted to take as much time as I needed, even ending the session depending on circumstances. However, if its not a "main" quest point, I'm always wary about taking time to plan something boring.

Researching in a Library - Dang it this part of my post got eaten. To sum up, I would normally just narrate this scene. However I once ran a scene in a cursed library that worked because (a) there was a looming undead threat on a timer, and (b) I prepared a codex puzzle before game. Again, preparing to improvise.

If a PC decides they want to research a cave system that supposedly holds ancient dwarven ruins, how do you decide whether or not the information is in the library, and how much information they find. This is a very good example of what I am struggling with. I will obviously say yes, and I want them to gather information so the player's get more interested in the upcoming quest. "Oh the this is the Dwarven Civilization that supposedly discovered the 'foundation stone' aka the thing we're trying to put back together, awesome!"

I may be tempted to make this a skill challenge/series of three checks, and give more or less information depending on their success, but I have a hard time NOT giving them the information. I suppose in hindsight, I probably should give them the biggest and best piece automatically. Then give them small pieces after that. 1. The foundation Stone was discovered there. 2. The lowest depths are filled with Noxious Gasses. 3. Legend states that a plague killed off the dwarves. But probably tell them in reverse order, giving them the "big reveal".

If you want the PCs to succeed, and if you can't think of anything interesting to challenge them with, then it sounds like there may be no "scene" here to frame: just "say yes" and narrate things through to the interesting bits.

This is what I do the vast majority of the time, and I always say yes. Sometimes I'd like to play out of the scene more and give the Player's the ability to show their Character's personality in a that isn't overwhelmed by creatures, explosions, etc. I'm always surprised at what the character's can do left to their own devices, but the risk of having the scenario fall flat makes me leery not to just skip such scenes.

My default response to this sort of situation is a skill challenge. And my default tactic in a skill challenge is to narrate bad things happening to the PCs, that they can try and avoid via their skill checks (and other abilities, where appropriate). To be interesting, I think these bad things have to be more than just losing healing surges - in an environmental context, they can include losing gear, falling down pits (and so getting separated from the rest of the party), cave-ins, alerting other creatures to the party's presence, etc. And play off the players' skill checks - if they make successful Dungeoneering checks to identify tracks or spore, for example, they realise that there is a giant spider lurking nearby that they will have to avoid - so you seed the next check without having to come up with some new, unconnected complication.

When I said "hazards" above, this is actually kind of what I did. I abstracted mining carts coming at them in a narrow passage (since they were headed to a mine), as well as a pitfall and the carts track went over a wide canyon. It was ok, but not great. That's what leads me to believe its best to skip these scenarios, because maybe even at your best, it might only be "pretty good".

Same here. I'm a big fan of the skill challenge mechanic because the base mechanic gives you a good structure for doing things on the fly, yet you can invest a bunch of time in creating variations on skill challenges to create important scenes.

A lot of what you've described is challenges to represent travel of some sort -- either large or small scale travel (travel for days through the desert, travel for hours in the dark tunnel).

In another post, I said that travel challenges were probably a bad example, but I'd almost certainly just do a quick narration and be on my way. If I wanted to point out the environment more, I'd probably do an RP or Combat encounter along the way.

As far as the tunnel, I meant for it to be a 5 minute walk (about 1000' in the dark), and I just wanted to attempt to play off the PC's actions.

The ticking clock is almost always important, but one thing you can do if you don't have a good reason to force the PCs to rush is to play around with how much/often you allow them to rest. It's possible that, in days of traveling through a desert, the PCs will not be sleeping well, etc. Maybe there are just one or two oasis villages where the PCs can take an extended rest and get the full result.

This is the underlying principal I need to do better. I seem to set up scenarios and forget to harp on the crucial time component. When I think of it, its late and seems forced.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

Another trick I've been playing with a lot lately has been to use skill challenge mechanics to handle unusual magic -- basically Story magic (freeform ritual magic), rather than combat magic.

So, my PCs encounter a lot of magical effects that they need skill challenges to overcome. I try to flesh them out with a lot of description, for one thing, but I also try to tie other skills into the magic where there seems like a potentially good fit.

So, for example, the PCs are in a Drow fortress and come across an arcane barrier the Drow have thrown up. They need to try to unravel the magic of the barrier so they can move on.

The primary skill is Arcana, but I tend to look for ways to unlock other skills that might contribute. There might be something specific about the spellcaster that the PC could exploit if they've met him -- insight could be valuable. Or maybe the spells is maintained by some bound spirit -- once contact is made through arcana, diplomacy or bluff or even intimidate might be useful to try to convince the spirit to relent a little.

One thing I think that is vital -- and the examples in this thread are terrific illustrations of -- is that you don't want the scene to be simple skill checks. Narration and description and character interaction with the story elements are much more important than the individual skill checks.

Almost as important is the need for player choice and tension. If the players don't have a choice about what checks to make, you're creating a dull challenge.

So, back to my example of the arcane barrier -- when I whipped that up for my game session, I wanted Arcana to be the primary skill involved (religion would have worked, too, but our group has no divine PCs) and most of the other options seemed silly. But what I *could* do was give them some choices about how they used their arcane training.

I gave them the option to try to overpower the barrier with raw arcane force (a single skill check with a really high DC) or to try to unravel the barrier piece by piece, with a skill challenge involving many arcana checks (and some related skills). All failed checks would blast the party with pretty intense flaming backlash from the spell.

[In the game, my players decided to try to overpower it, burned some resources to do it, and succeeded. It was over in a few minutes, and we moved on.]

 

[LostSoul]

This is a very good example of what I am struggling with.[/B] I will obviously say yes, and I want them to gather information so the player's get more interested in the upcoming quest. "Oh the this is the Dwarven Civilization that supposedly discovered the 'foundation stone' aka the thing we're trying to put back together, awesome!"

There are two basic approaches, I think. The first is to prep some backstory - that is, before you start the session, you decide what's in the cave system. Pretty standard.

The second - and I think this is the one you want to use, since you're doing a lot of improv/low-prep play - is to decide what's there on the fly based on the outcome of die rolls. This isn't so standard; generally I've heard it called "no-myth" play.

Let's look at how this would play out and then try to divine some principles from that.

1. The players decide that their PCs are going into the cave system to look for the ancient dwarven ruins.

2. You declare - or start running, at least - a skill challenge. You improv the scene: "You stand at the mouth of the cave entrance. Dwarven runes carved in shaking hands adorn the walls, reading 'Turn back ye who still have taste for ale.' Bones and broken weapons are scattered around, all dwarven. So what do you do?"

3. The players respond with some actions of their own - popping sun rods, spending Daily stealth powers, maybe a ritual or two, whatever. Let's say that their action is: Taking marching order, with the Dungeoneering Ranger at the front guiding the way through the cave system, the wizard at his side with a Light spell on his staff recalling bits and pieces of dwarven History to help guide them through the cave system and towards the ancient ruins.

It's very important here that you get the players to describe their characters in motion, that is, taking actions in the game world. "I roll Dungeoneering." "I Aid Another with History." That should be avoided at all costs.

4. You apply the skill challenge procedure. Is this a check? Does it count towards the total number of successes needed, or is it a complimentary check? Is it an auto-success, or an auto-failure perhaps?

5. Success or failure is determined. You use this as a springboard for the next "scene". Remember, you have no idea what's in there or not, and you don't really care. You just want to make it awesome.

At least one way of hitting "awesome" is to focus on the situation the PCs find themselves in. That is: the interaction between the setting and the PCs themselves. A cave system that may or may not lead to dwarven ruins; a warning sign from dwarves at its entrance; broken dwarven bodies and weapons; a ranger used to plumbing the depths of the underworld; a wizard who has read every book and legend he could get his hands on.

Then we have the success or failure of the PC's action. How do all of these interact?

Success (+ aid another success): "You head deep into the depths of the earth, the ranger leading you through twisting caverns that would dizzy an everyday spelunker. Finally the wizard spots a rune carved into the side of the cavern - a way-rune, pointing south. However, the rune for "poison" is also next to it..."
Success (+ aid another failure): "The ranger leads you through a maze of twisting caverns, all alike. Finally he spots some stone masonry work - of dwarven make? Possibly - but to be sure would require close investigation, and something stirs in the darkness..."
Failure (+ aid another success): "The ranger leads you through a twisting maze of caverns for hours. The wizard identifies the pattern as a dwarven trap-maze: caverns full of traps that act as a back door to a fortress. Hopefully all the traps have been set off..."
Failure (+ aid another failure): "The ranger leads you through a twisting maze of caverns for hours. No signs of dwarven architecture can be found. Up ahead you see a faint glow and notice that the air has become thick with a sweet odour."

As DM I have no idea where any of this is going to lead. I let the situation lead, changed by every PC action or die roll.

I think what's important here is that you're not use the dice to resolve the success or failure of the character's specific action but instead the reason why they were taking that action - the intent or goal behind it all.

7. Just keep repeating until the skill challenge is finished; once finished, resolve it and frame the new situation that the PCs find themselves in.

So, some thoughts about what I just wrote:
* You don't need to prep much of anything
* Make sure that the players describe the actions their PCs are taking
* Keep the situation firmly in mind - how the PCs and the setting interact
* Each check should change the situation in some interesting way
* Resolve character intent with the dice, not specific actions
* When the skill challenge is finished, wrap it up and move on to something new

 

[jshaft37]

That sounds like a good idea for exploration.

But I was looking for input regarding the research in the library. I had the ruins planned and that went great. Where it feel a bit flat was before they went, the wizard decided he wanted to research in the library. My response was "Ok, but you may only spend a few hours since someone else is looking for the entrance". Then I had the internal struggle to decide to just tell the wizard what he found in the library or to have him roll. I ended up just telling him based on the time he spent.

But I could have said, this library doesn't have any information. Or he needs to find a library that specializes in dwarven history. Or if I had him roll a check for each hour and he rolled 3 1's, should I just not tell him anything? In a meta-way, I want him to find some information, because it adds depth to the game.

To be clear, I'm talking about things that aren't related to quests, NPCs, PCs, etc. I'm mostly talking about ancillary stuff, things that could also be omitted. After this thread, I probably won't feel as bad about skipping this stuff in the future, but I was just looking for ideas to make these type of things interesting.

 

[LostSoul]

Oh, okay.

Well, the easiest way to deal with that is to make each check have consequences related to his goal; he wants to get information, so on a failed check give him some false information. Or give him a penalty to a future check because of this false information. Or maybe something out of the blue: "Oh, you just learned that there's a demon bound in the ruins." Uh-oh. Or maybe introduce an NPC group that's also looking to explore the ruins.

On a success you can give him a bonus to a future check. You could ask him, "So what magic item did you just learn is within the ruins?" Or "You learned something about a monster; you get an auto-success on one future monster knowledge check." Or even an auto-success on a skill challenge check.

I guess what I'd do is ask the player what his goal or intent is, and then build on that - complications for failure, advantages for success.

A quick table of complications or advantages as an aid for improv could help. Like...
* Time issues - it takes too long, another task must be rushed
* NPC issues - you attract unwanted NPC attention, your actions upset an otherwise unrelated NPC
* etc.

There might be something out there on the internet like that.

 

[Quickleaf]

I may be tempted to make this a skill challenge/series of three checks, and give more or less information depending on their success, but I have a hard time NOT giving them the information. I suppose in hindsight, I probably should give them the biggest and best piece automatically. Then give them small pieces after that. 1. The foundation Stone was discovered there. 2. The lowest depths are filled with Noxious Gasses. 3. Legend states that a plague killed off the dwarves. But probably tell them in reverse order, giving them the "big reveal".

That could work, so long as those 3 points are optional info. If any of those are necessary to move the adventure forward then no check is needed. For me such a scene wouldn't last anymore than 10 maybe 20 minutes max, because there's no conflict.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

Sometimes, when we're doing notice/investigation checks, I ask the party for skill checks to determine who the person is that notices the bit of information. For the story to work, someoone probably needs to get the information, I just want to see who gets it.

If I've had time to do my homework, I usually scribble out the information on a scrap of paper I can hand the players so he/she can read it and share it -- so the die roll just determines who I hand it to.

Other times I share information with the PCs who are trained in the right skill -- no skill checks involved.

In the end, I don't think any system is wrong unless your players aren't having a good time. So, try all kinds of stuff, and see what you like the feel of.

-rg