Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 4388871" data-attributes="member: 704">I am very surprised that Wizards chose to go with such a significant revision to the challenge system.  I also wish that rather than suggesting you replace / add / remove words from existing text, that they had just given new text in its entirety.  Errata in this type for format is nearly useless to look up and reference when at the table.Now, I am not surprised that the skill challenge system still needs work.  I figured the existing system was workable until I read the fine print saying that the listed skill DC's were for ability checks, and should be increased for skill checks.  And what they are trying to create is difficult to get right.With combat, everyone has hit points, and everyone has a means to attack the enemies, or otherwise affect the outcome of combat.  There is risk, meaningful consequences, and everyone can be kept reasonably involved.The skill system needs to do much the same, but it has more to account for.  You want everyone at the table to meaningfully interact within the challenge.  You also want the difficulty to reasonably scale at all levels, and you need a way to have success or failure not hinge on a single role or a single player.The core assumption is that a skill challenge is meant to be just as dangerous as combat encounter.  Going for a 3 strikes setup in the skill challenge means that your players will not want to trust skill rolls for challenges that require a large number of successes to anyone who might fail the skill check.  Lowering the skill DC's will offset this somewhat, but regardless of the situation, players are very risk averse;  They will always take the option that gives the best chance of success.The skill system is on the right track, compared to previous editions.  Force everyone to make checks, and allow for a limited number of failures before the challenge is considered to end in defeat.  Here are the core problems:1)  What is a reasonable DC setting which is plausible for an untrained character, but not trivial for an over trained / optimized character?  Since the players always get a 1/2 level bonus, the DC needs to increase at roughly the same rate.  This then boils down to picking a number that an untrained character will typically need to roll on a d20 to succeed.2)  What is the best mechanism to force the less optimal characters to make any given skill check without making success unattainable, and without punishing a player for having an effective build?For the first answer, I think that a level appropriate DC scale puts the number needed for a non-optimal character somewhere between 13 and 15 on a d20.  Maybe higher once utility powers come into play.For the 2nd answer, I really do not know.  Letting the players chose who make any given roll at any time will result in an optimal character always being chosen.  Forcing everyone keeps everyone involved, but will create too many failures.  Random selection?  Maybe.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

Verification