Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8626428" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Skill challenges also work for these, but your example is much more ornate than I'm thinking of. These skirmishes would take the place of Wandering Monster table results, for example. Or, in the case of the infiltration, a Skill Challenge would normally be used for avoiding any combat at all, with (as you showed in your example) failed rolls resulting in damage, lost surges, etc., using the character's combat powers for qualitative bonuses and gaining an edge. A Skirmish would invert this process: skill rolls could potentially be used to gain a combat edge, whereas actual combat powers would take center stage. The use of a daily power could save an ally from suffering the consequences of a bad roll, for example, since that is a hefty price in this context. One key difference is that a Skirmish would have to go really, REALLY poorly to result in serious problems, because the whole point is that they are low-stakes conflicts in the moment but consequential in the long term. Old school play frequently throws fights at the players that are extremely unlikely to kill anyone or even beat them back, but which chip away at resources.The whole thing is super high concept because I lack the design chops to actually make it happen. It could very well end up that my aspirations are foolish, and that just a very minor extension of Skill Challenges to include more explicitly HP-and-AC combat would totally suffice. But where I'm standing right now, I think such rules would be better if they were distinct, even if there are similarities. (E.g.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8626428, member: 6790260"] Skill challenges also work for these, but your example is much more ornate than I'm thinking of. These skirmishes would take the place of Wandering Monster table results, for example. Or, in the case of the infiltration, a Skill Challenge would normally be used for avoiding any combat at all, with (as you showed in your example) failed rolls resulting in damage, lost surges, etc., using the character's combat powers for qualitative bonuses and gaining an edge. A Skirmish would invert this process: skill rolls could potentially be used to gain a combat edge, whereas actual combat powers would take center stage. The use of a daily power could save an ally from suffering the consequences of a bad roll, for example, since that is a hefty price in this context. One key difference is that a Skirmish would have to go really, REALLY poorly to result in serious problems, because the whole point is that they are low-stakes conflicts in the moment but consequential in the long term. Old school play frequently throws fights at the players that are extremely unlikely to kill anyone or even beat them back, but which chip away at resources. The whole thing is super high concept because I lack the design chops to actually make it happen. It could very well end up that my aspirations are foolish, and that just a very minor extension of Skill Challenges to include more explicitly HP-and-AC combat would totally suffice. But where I'm standing right now, I think such rules would be better if they were distinct, even if there are similarities. (E.g. [/QUOTE]

Verification