Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 6188195" data-attributes="member: 336">One of the "limiting" factors of skill challenges (SC) as described in the books is that they "assume" that the players will do X to achieve Y.  One of the greatest things about roleplaying is that it is not normally limiting in this fashion.  After all, there is a live DM that can actually make value judgements based on experience and the situation, rather than a CPU simply going off its programmed routine.As such, SCs need to feel as organic as if they were part of the naturally occurring action rather than a side trek mini-game.  I personally do not like to call attention to the metagame that is occurring behind the scenes during a SC.  The same way that I don't like calling attention to the metagame that is occurring during a combat.  Instead of saying how many hit points a creature has I describe the action as the characters, not the players, would experience it.  The bloodied condition (a metagame trigger) is great for knowing when the descriptions should change during a combat (he's heavily out of breath and clearly fatigued, bleeding from a multitude of cuts, etc.)  I like the descriptions from the players to be vivid, the more vivid the better.  I try to do the same, and I like reacting to them (their descriptions) organically rather than everything being a measured predetermined response.  Every success in a SC should trigger a description that moves the action forward and therefore shows progress.  Every fail in a SC should introduce a complication and be described as such, but the action keeps moving forward.  IMO, there are usually things that will "win" specific "sections" of a skill challenge.  They are the "success" conditions that might not even require a roll.  The same way that there are situations where some things should create automatic "fail" situations.  It has a lot to do with the context of the particular challenge.  But it has a lot riding on the presentation, which should always be from the POV of the characters not the players.In the instance of the "win" sections I'll provide an example.  There was a published skill challenge in an early Living Forgotten Realms (LFR) adventure which featured the PCs attempting to "fix" a greenhouse for an NPC in order to gain her favor, and consequently get information.  It was not a very inspiring SC but it serves the purpose of the example.  During the SC the characters are going to see what they can do to "fix" this greenhouse which is in disrepair.  Well there are some broken glass panes on the ceiling of this greenhouse, which under most circumstances immediately gets players attempting Athletics and Acrobatics to get to the top and fix this glass.  What if a character simply asks the NPC if she has a ladder? Nobody ever asks, which shows why the framework for SCs is so clunky.  The first problem with skill challenges is that they tend to immediately be approached from the metagame of "I only have X skill(s)".  If a character asked for a ladder I'd give him an auto-success for this part because it fits.  Under the base framework he might get a ladder, or not, depending on the DM. He'd still have to make Athletics checks, which is counterproductive to making the challenge feel organic.  It is similar to having someone make a perception check if they ask to look inside a drawer.  Why?  They asked the obvious question then give them the success.  Try to always frame skill challenges from the perspective of the characters and don't get hung up on the "skill" part of the name.  I've started to call these Encounter Challenges (EC) rather than SCs, because of how I want to perceive them and present them. A bad example of an auto-fail is the "intimidate" skill use in "The Negotiation" SC presented in the DMG p76.  Let's look at what the SC says: Intimidate: The NPC refuses to be intimidated by the PCs.  Each use of the skill earns a failure.That description presupposes that the PC is using the intimidate skill to intimidate the NPC into action. Let's look at what the Setup for the SC actually was:Setup: For the NPC to provide assistance, the PCs need to convince him or her of their trustworthiness and that their cause helps the NPC in some way.What if the player describes the following?  "I want to use intimidate.  I want to show the NPC that I'm so intimidating that sending me against his enemies would only serve his purposes by making them fear him".  In that instance I see no reason why the use of intimidate would be an automatic failure.  This is where I think SCs went astray, they tried to codify too much.  Give the DM some NPC motivations, some scene props, a worthwhile goal and let the DM improvise where needed as needed.I like to describe ECs more like action scenes in a movie.  If I can make the EC feel like I felt while watching the movie then I'm pretty pleased.  Unfortunately a lot of action movies have a single protagonist, and not an ensemble cast.  So I have to look at all the actions as if they were being performed by 4-6 characters instead of 1-2.  There are two things that are very important in an EC.  The ultimate goal but more importantly the consequences of the fail.  I think that the consequences of the fail are so important that they should be the first thing examined.If you look at a movie like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom you can see how to frame ECs and keep them exciting and organic.  As an example let's use the most obvious EC, the mine cart scene.  The obvious goal is to use the carts to escape from the mine.  However the "real goal" is to escape from the mines.  It does not matter if you use the carts, or not.  So what would be the consequence of failing on this challenge.  The most obvious answer is that they would not make it out of the mines.  After all they did not accomplish the "goal" which was to escape from the mines.  However, that is where most DMs fail to understand the framework.  If the PCs fail to make it out of the mines the adventure ends.  So the real goal is to make it as far as possible out of the mines.  The consequences of failing is that you are further away from the exit when the thing caves in (possibly taking more damage).  Most DMs would look at the scene and determine that it starts when the PCs are looking at the mine carts and jump in.  However, if you watch the movie you can see that the actual challenge really starts during a combat.  Short Round sees the Maharajah using the "voodoo" doll to hamper Indy, and goes after him.  When he "defeats" that part of the scene (releasing the Maharajah from the Black Sleep) he finds that they need to take the left tunnel (success?).  Climbing on someones back he gets to the cart (success?).  Indy grabs on to a rope and swings to the cart (success?). "Indy take the left tunnel.  No Indy you missed it! Left tunnel!" (failure?)  More enemies on carts gaining on you (complication?).  "Let go of brake, we need to outrun them" (failure?).  Cart tilts on edge (complication?) (lose a surge).  Throw lumber on track.  Hit overhead with shovel (great success?). Gravel dumps on enemies. Cart overturns, second cart hits it.  Change tracks decision (failure?)  Closed off track. Enemy cart next to yours they grab Shorty, one jumps on your cart with knife  (complication?) (lose a surge). If you've noticed we've already hit 3 fails.  End with a bang.  The cart jumps the chasm, the cultist overturn the water tower, water is chasing.  Try to brake, brake breaks. Use shoe (lose a surge).  Get out.  Water surges (lose a surge).If everything would have gone their way they would have made it out with minimal loss of resources (surges).  Since they failed they ended up deeper in the mines, and lost surges as they got out, and the water rushed out.  They then had to fight with the cultist before the bridge (with limited resources).  This is a fight with minions.  Then comes the fight on the bridge.  The fight on the bridge can even be another Encounter Challenge.  If they had beat the EC they could have avoided the fight with the minions before the bridge or even made it across the bridge before any encounter.As you can see there is a way to make Encounter Challenges way more than simple dice rolling festivals.  Presentation is the most important.  Roll dice only when it's necessary.  Don't make yourself a slave to the framework. I prefer to present everything from the characters POV.  Some DMs don't.  Try it and see how it works for you.Hope this helps.</blockquote>

Verification