D&D 5E Is there any 5e love for skill challenges??

[dave2008]

If I were a DM when playing 4th, I might have found it OK as something to balance the combat, but back then I was a player only and I dreaded the time when the DM stated "OK. We're going to have a skill challenge." This wasn't because I needed more combat. (You got plenty of that) It just didn't feel right to me. So, no. Not really my thing. No love here.

If that was how your DM handled skill challenges then no wonder. Ideally, when run well, skill challenges are pretty seamless.

 

[dave2008]

But the thing is, I don’t think the game is well-served by thinking about encounters in terms of “combat encounters” and “non-combat encounters.” Ironically, now that I have the DMing skills to run skill challenges effectively, I also have less need of the type of framework they provide.

Just wanted to point out skill challenges need not be exclusive of combat. We ran skill challenges as part of a combat encounter frequently.

 

[dave2008]

I guess it really depends on how you define it. I have nothing against the idea of resolving a significant problem, or even an entire quest, through just skill checks. Based on my limited experience with skill challenges in 4E, though, framing it as a skill challenge causes more trouble than it's worth.

The big issue, at least as far as I saw it, was that there wasn't a very strong link between the check being made and what was happening within the narrative. Like, outside of a skill challenge, you can just try to do a thing, and depending on your check result you will either succeed or fail. Inside of a skill challenge, it depends on what your long-term goal for the skill challenge is supposed to be, and the check result just provides some measure of abstract progress toward that goal, but it doesn't necessarily correspond to anything on its own.

I'm prepared for people to tell me that we were doing it wrong, because it honestly seemed like we were missing out on something, but I have no clue what it might be. I guess my question to you is, what's the benefit to framing a task as a skill challenge with a formal goal, rather than just resolving each component action as it happens?

A skill challenge should resolve components has they happen and thus provide a clear cause and effect. The only difference, IMHO, between a skill challenge and just a string of skill checks is that a skill challenge builds to a larger result.

 

[dave2008]

The concept of skill challenges is fine, but I have yet to see an implementation of them that doesn't suck. Either 1-2 PCs dominate the challenge, or you force characters to engage in the challenge, even if they have no reason to. The latter option is particularly painful for less social players (called Watchers in 4E), because they are supposed to engage in the narrative, which they are not comfortable with.

That is too bad for you and not my experience. Of course I tended to run in combat skill challenges. Did you ever run an in combat skill challenge?

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

I would recommend The Skill Challenge Handbook for Pathfinder. It's really a manual in constructing 4E skill challenges in a codified (and cool) way, but for the Pathfinder system. I've been tinkering with a conversion for 5E, but real life has put a stop to that for now. Basically, it's primarily DC's that needs adjusting.
Here's a link for the book http://www.rpgnow.com/product/211041/Skill-Challenge-Handbook?term=skill+chall&test_epoch=0 and here's a link for an informative review: http://endzeitgeist.com/skill-challenge-handbook/

 

[Ilbranteloth]

I’m a big fan of the 4e mechanic of skill challenges, I use them regularly in my 5e game to move the story and let the players discribe their characters. Anyone else?? I’m a little surprised they faded away!

No, and don't really have an interest. The main reason is that I want the rules/mechanics to enter the game as little as possible. That is, I want the majority of time at the table to be the players, through their characters, doing something, instead of engaging the rules directly.

Being an old AD&D guy, this comes naturally to me. Tell me what you want to do and how, and I'll figure out if you're successful. The rules are important in helping with that adjudication, but adding additional die rolls isn't the answer in my book most of the time. I get that as a mechanic it can be used to add suspense, but I feel like we're drawn out of the world into this world to play a game.

The PCs actions, combined with their stats, gives me everything I need to know about whether they can succeed or not, and in most cases a roll isn't necessary at all. There are very, very few times where multiple rolls are necessary.

I get the appeal, though, especially if you have players who like to optimize.

 

[5ekyu]

I tend to approach this in 5e by adapting the death save three way into a broader general use for almost any non-combat time scale effort - and for quite a few of those.

Example in play - character has a new mystery macguffin with ties to distant past.
Wants to find out more about it.
However, as always, asking questions can be problematic, doing searches can be problematic and as always others will want the item to and may take notice...

So it works like this.

Assign difficulty

First roll is LORE (or equivalent) to represent what the character knows or can remember. this roll may have advantage if it ties directly to their family race etc. That one is usually quick.

Subsequent rolls are for different skills depending on options chosen... persuasion for "consult experts" investigation for "do my own research" those will have significant time elements.

As always, you accumulate failures and successes and first to three finishes the challenge.

When appropriate i add in a story element for each, particularly failure.

A big flavor thing i tend to do is this - if appropriate, when you gain a fail in a given "skill" you get disadvantage until you change the circumstances.

So, say your first investigate roll in "Thistown Library" fails... to continue to roll investigate research there is at disadvantage. You have hit a wall, exhausted their resources...

But if you change the task by going "OK so i guess i do have to go talk to Sage Knowsits" and you travel to him and switch to persuasion checks - disadvantage goes away. OR if you decide "We're gonna need a bigger library." and head off to "Amity City" to visit their "Grand Hall of Known Stuff" then again, after gaining permission (or not - where did i put that Rogue) you get a new set of Investigate checks that are disadvamtage free free.

So, not only do failures move you closer to "failure" they add story challenge to you.

Obviously, only used when it is a good flavor thing for the game and moves around the plots. But i find it useful for social combat, knowledge research in general as well as for crafting anything beyond mundane gear or maybe sometimes even then "nope nope nope these hides are just not up to snuff... sure you can likely work through it anyway... or you can go bring in your own hides or maybe go to "KillVille Station" and talk to Uma who knows how to treat these hides."

Expansive use of the death save "three wins dance" was a no-brainer as soon as i saw it.

 

[Coroc]

My last epic battle as a dm mainly was a series of arcana skill challenges and saving throws to keep an artifact working as intended. So the Party could have been optimized for dpr (it was not, i got Players interested in more than 1 aspect of the game) and it would not have helped them at all because they were opposed by a force outnumbering them 30 to 1

 

[Sunseeker]

Give me any way to challenge the players outside of putting monsters in front of them to hit and I'm down.

I think skill challenges are great, but are a lot harder to run and can feel like lots of DM effort for very little player action and a rather quick resolution.

 

[iserith]

At it's heart, a skill challenge is just a series of tests that make up a broader challenge. Each test can be something like an objection from an NPC or an obstacle in the environment.

Some of the core resolution mechanics in D&D 5e make it somewhat unsuitable for 4e-type skill challenges. For one, it's not an expectation that player ask to make checks in D&D 5e (nor should they want to in my view). Rather, they just state a fictional goal and approach and shoot for automatic success since the DM must first decide on uncertainty before calling for a check. Remove that uncertainty by way of describing what you want to do and you get an automatic success. It's unwise as I see it to push to make a skill check since the fickle d20 is nobody's friend.

Even so, the basic structure still works more or less as long as you allow for automatic success or automatic failure on each of the individual tests, based on what the players describe the characters as attempting to do. You just need to decide on the difficulty of the challenge - the number of successes to overcome the challenge before a set number of failures. The higher the number of successes relative to the number of failures sets the difficulty. You'll then need to set up objections or obstacles equal to the number of successes required plus the number of failures minus one. Those are the discrete tests you must present as part of the broader challenge. You can decide on the DC when the players have stated their goal and approach for each test. The victory and defeat conditions should be clear at the outset so the PCs can orient themselves properly and aim for a win and strive to avoid a loss. Generally speaking, I prefer success at a cost or success with a setback for the defeat condition.

Based on the circumstances, you may sketch out some ways the characters can get reliably get advantage when they want it. I often tie that to spending a resource - a bribe of gold to an NPC, a hit die to push just a little bit harder than usual, or something like that. Plus of course Inspiration. That will help them offset the difficulty of the challenge and is similar to the Advantages in a D&D 4e challenge.

And that's basically it. Presenting it still follows the basic conversation of the game: The DM describes the environment (the objection or obstacle). The players describe what they want to do. The DM narrates the result of the adventurers' actions. Repeat, until you come to a resolution.

Here's a social interaction challenge structure that may work for you as well.