Modeling the Duel as a Skill Challenge

[Lord Pendragon]

I'm considering starting up a campaign soon in which I'd like duels between individual warriors to play a significant roll. Having kept up with the running commentary on PCat's game, I am now thinking perhaps a skill challenge might be a fun way to run duels, so that the other members of the party can remain involved. However, I am still relatively new to 4e, so I am asking for help tweaking the idea so it works as well in practice as in theory.

Here's what I've come up with so far:

Skill challenge: Duel! (6 successes before 3 failures)

Primary skills (duelist only):
Any attack power (DC 15) – Strike your opponent!
Acrobatics (DC 15) – Trip up your opponent! (Usable only once, counts as 2 successes)
Endurance (DC 10) – Keep fighting!

Secondary skills:
Intimidate (DC 15) – Rattle the enemy (enemy receives a -2 to next attack)
Perception (DC 10) – Spot a weakness in the enemy’s fighting style (duelist gains +2 to next attack/skill roll)
Insight (DC 10) – Notice weakness in the enemy’s fighting style (duelist gains +2 to AC versus next attack)
Bluff (DC 15) – Distract the enemy with insults (enemy receives a -2 to next attack)

In this case, only the duelist would be able to grant successes toward the skill challenge, but the other party members would be able to contribute to that success. There's also a physical danger involved, since while the duelist's attacks aren't doing hit point damage, his foe's attacks are.

I'm not positive that's the best way to go about it. But I'm thinking if I allowed the duelist's damage to count towards his foe's hit points, the duelist would merely focus on that. This way he *can* attack, but he can also use other skills to generate successes and describe some fun stunts.

Thoughts?

 

[Neubert]

Is the duels to first blood, to the death or something else?
Since you are already working with a skill challenge, why not let the opponent hit the player when he gets a failure? That would seem the most natural, as when the skill challenge is lost, so would the duel be, right? Perhaps charge some HP or some surges depending on the amount of failures the player accumulated if you want there to be a drop in hit points from the duel.

Sorry that I can't be of more help with the mechanics, it looks good to me, but my experience is limited.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

These duals are basically until "check-mate," i.e. until one side yields. So beyond first blood, but not to the death. The opposing duelist will be attacking the PC duelist every round. Thus there are actually two ways to lose the duel, being reduced to 0 hp, or accumulating failures. That is why some of the non-duelist skill checks boost the duelist's AC or reduce the enemy's to-hit. As there are six players in the group, that means I'm looking at one primary skill check and five secondary skill checks each round. Enough I'd think that hit point loss will be rare.

I'm hoping some folks can provide ideas on how I might expand the system, or perhaps spot problems with it before I put it into play.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Hrm. I'm thinking of adding a Religion check...Pray for Divine Favor!

 

[LostSoul]

This is an interesting idea. Here's some brainstorming:

Each character announces an action for the round. Nothing's set in stone, it's all out in the open, and it can be changed at this point.

Other characters can lend aid by making their own checks.

Once all the actions are decided on, all characters make opposed checks. Any skill or attack can be used; if an appropriate power is used, add a +2 or +4 bonus (generally speaking, encounter and daily powers) to the roll.

Whoever succeeds, whatever he was trying to do succeeds (save killing the guy or ending the duel right there). He trips, disarms, makes him see stars, gains a better position, figures out a weakness, whatever. As a rule of thumb, success will give the loser a -2 penalty or give the winner +2 bonus to the next roll.

Special: If the actions declared are not opposed to each other, each character makes a roll against an appropriate DC. Success and failure are determined as normal.

Complexity: Since we're using opposed rolls, drop the normal complexity stuff. (The only way I can think of doing it without opposed rolls is to add in a "who narrates?" function.) Each character needs 4 successes, modified by the difference in level (eg. a 4th-level character vs. a 6th-level character needs 6 successes). Elites add +1 to the number of successes needed and solos add +2.

This goes for all characters involved; if someone who's just watching fails too much, he can no longer lend aid, he's unable to influence the duel.

XP is awarded as normal for defeating a character of that level. (ie. 250 for a 6th-level character.)

Doing the same action more than once: This is lame, give him a penalty. Goes for PCs or NPCs.

Action Points: Spend one and make two actions per round. Both are opposed by the same check. If more than one character spends an AP, the extra action is resolved in order of the check result.

eg. Three characters are involved; the rolls are 22, 18, and 9. If 22 spends an AP, he can roll right away vs DCs 18 & 9. If 18 spends an AP, he rolls after the 22 action is resolved, but before the 9, rolling against DCs 22 (or the result of the AP, if applicable) & 9. If 9 spends an AP, it's resolved last, against DCs 22 & 9 (or whatever the results of the APs were, if applicable).

Simple case:

PC wants to stab him in the sword arm
NPC wants to beat the PC back, force him off balance

PC wins: NPC is stabbed in the sword arm, taking a -2 penalty to future attack rolls.
NPC wins: PC is forced off balance, giving the NPC a +2 bonus to a follow-up attack.

More complex:

PC wants to enrage the NPC
NPC wants to beat the PC back, force him off balance

PC wins: NPC is enraged, giving the PC a +2 bonus to his next attack roll.
NPC wins: PC is forced off balance, giving the NPC a +2 bonus to a follow-up attack.

In this case, both could succeed and both could fail.

Extra Complex:

PC 1 wants to stab the NPC in the sword arm
NPC 2 wants to force the PC off-balance
PC 2 wants to spot a weakness and tell PC 1
NPC 2 wants to accuse PC 2 of cheating, getting the guards to throw him out

Who rolls against whom: PC 1 & 2 roll against NPC 1; NPC 2 rolls against a set difficulty.

PC 1 wins: NPC is stabbed in the sword arm.
PC 2 wins: He discovers a weakness and PC 1 gains a bonus.
NPC 1 wins vs PC 1 & 2: He covers his weakness and forces PC 1 off-balance
NPC 1 wins vs PC 1 but not 2: He does not cover his weakness but forces PC 1 off-balance
NPC 2 wins: Guards come to drag PC 2 away.
NPC 2 fails: Guards scoff at NPC 2 and tell him to shut up.

edit: With thanks to Sorcerer and The Shadow of Yesterday.