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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5694898" data-attributes="member: 82106">I think skills need to be conceptually 'light weight' and I think it would be a mistake to try to 'add dimensions' to them. They exist, in isolation, to provide a quick binary answer to a simple question, not to simulate the entire range of all possible results of a course of action. In cases where a simple action leads to complex results that is best left to narrative. If the player fails the skill check then something interesting happens, but something disadvantageous to the character. Jorgen the Bold leaps from the rigging of the enemy skyship and attempts to land on the deck of the airboat. He fails! OK, he's hanging from a rope dangling just above the open maw of the Sky Kraken, oh oh! The Bard tries to browbeat the Count, he fails his Intimidate check, the angry warlord crashes his fist down on the table, "By the Gods I will not be threatened by the likes of you! Prove yourself or get out of here!" Likewise success in these cases pretty much falls into the same mold, the narrative moves forward in a logical fashion.When you want to add more dimensions to the situation, then you ARE talking about skill challenges. That's exactly why they exist, and why the basic skill system doesn't need to take up that slack. Nor should it because critical issues shouldn't rest on a die roll. Notice even my second example really wouldn't happen in a stand-alone skill check. Skills just aren't meant to be that deep on their own. They work within the supporting context of the narrative and more extended mechanics. I just do not believe they should be made into some kind of more elaborate system that will then inevitably suffer from creating too much cognitive load and work against the basic quick paced flow of play where the check is surely some simple action taken on the spur of the moment, or perhaps comes up in the flow of routine exploration.I just don't see the 'intractable problem' personally. As soon as the players want to do anything that requires more complexity than a brief interaction with a guard, leaping some obstacle, etc you go immediately to SC land, or maybe a group check. Low complexity SCs are 4e gold. You have degrees of success naturally built in and all the variety required to make all sorts of different things happen. At least that is my experience. I think all this talk of other skill systems really boils down to a lot of people haven't sat down and just thought about how to use what they have enough. There is certainly a lot more explication that could be done on the finer points of using the system, but I'm going to say right now that I don't think a more complicated system will resolve any of the issues I see people come up with because they basically stem from poor/mis use of what they have and the same situations will come up with any skill system.</blockquote>

Verification