Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6159978" data-attributes="member: 6696971">It is difficult, to be sure, but I think if you construct a framework of sturdy and unified constants, you have a better chance of evaluating the variables (especially as system experience gathers).For instance, in 4e, you have conflict resolution in the arenas of (1) tactical combat resolution and (2) non-combat (skill challenges) resolution.  What are our constants?  1)  Encounter XP rewards and results within the fiction (framing your PC within that challenge).2)  # of successful contests versus # of failed contests ultimately dictating resolution.With the two of those schemes in play, we have a reasonable opportunity to evaluate the potency of build choices based on how 2 affects 1.  However, there are a lot of variables when evaluating PC build choices as well.  In combat, you have a lot of built-in opportunities/synergies to force-multiply and to wipe out your own tactical disadvantage or enemy advantage/momentum.  In Skill Challenges, the stock foundation is not constructed in this way.  Therefore, the cost of a single failure is more weighty.  Accordingly, the value of an individual force-multiplier (Cat's Grace giving + 2 to all Dex Skills until the next extended rest), the value of turning a weakness into a strength (Secrets of the City allowing you to make a Streetwise check for various checks), and the value of loss mitigation (Fast Talk allowing a reroll of a failed Bluff/Diplomacy/Intimidate check as another Bluff check) becomes more weighty.There are other variables in the evaluation of course, including how often the GM frames conflict resolution as Skill Challenges versus combat.  If you're looking at a ratio that swings wildly in one direction or another, then the value of investing in a PC build resource to further the success of that specific arena is perturbed (possibly to the point of err...pointlessness).  Whether the modality of most 4e groups tend toward combat primarily or more even distribution, I don't know.  My testimony is much more akin to @<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?42582-pemerton" target="_blank">pemerton</a> 's in that I run a pretty even distribution and my players have strong confidence in the relative potency of their investment in non-combat resolution resources and, given those things, they do so regularly.</blockquote>

Verification