Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="two" data-source="post: 4390359" data-attributes="member: 9002">An obvious ideaI'm sure this has been tried and put into somebody's home rules skill challenge system.&nbsp; But I'll throw it out there anyway, just to be redundant.It's clear to me, at least, that skill challenges should include everyone at the party, whenever possible.&nbsp; The idea is for the party to pick one PC for the main skill roll; the other PC's can or can not make supporting skill rolls which might or might not give a bonus to this main skill roll.The mechanics should be plain and up front; the roleplaying and cleverness are associated (generally) with the support roles.The main skill roll is the one that counts for sucess/failure.&nbsp; The supporting rolls do not. So a really bad skill PC can try to help the chosen PC make the main skill roll.&nbsp; If he succeeds, he might grant a +2 to the main skill roll.&nbsp; If he fails, he grants +0.&nbsp; If he fumbles, fails really badly, he gives a -1 to the main roll, let's say.&nbsp; If he succeeds wildly, perhaps +3 or +4.For example, to use a boring example, the party killed a bunch of goblins and are in a goblin library looking for information about a evil grue.&nbsp; It's a skill challenge, which the GM makes clear.&quot;find information about the evil grue.&quot;One of the PC's has a knowledge check of +10 and will be doing the &quot;main&quot; roll for the first part of the challenge.&nbsp; Other party members will try to help this PC search for knowledge about the grue.The fighter PC has crap skills.&nbsp; He uses his brains a little, though, and goes back and finds a captured goblin who worked in the library.&nbsp; He intimidates the goblin into supplying some information about grues.&nbsp; Skill check made, gives a +2 bonus to the skill check.&nbsp; The Cleric tries to ask his god for advice or something, GM knows this is impossible but lets him roll.&nbsp; A +0 results. Ranger searches library for tracks; nothing really possible, +0.&nbsp; Whatever.&nbsp; The point is the &quot;aid another&quot; mechanic should be where the other PC's get involved to help the main roll.&nbsp; You can't just let the PC's help; they have to be clever and justify it and make a skill roll.&nbsp; But failure does not screw the skill challenge; it just does not help the main skill roll.So whatever, after the party works on it, the wizard with +10 knowledge has been given an additional +3. He rolls and succeeds.&nbsp; The party celebrates.&nbsp; The wizard remembers that grues are also knows as Bints and filed under &quot;b&quot;.&nbsp; They go and find nothing under &quot;B&quot; for bints - strangely.Part 2 of the skill challenge involves searching/investigating around the B stack for hidden or strangely moved books.&nbsp; Rogue does the main roll; wizard and everyone else helps.&nbsp; Etc. Etc.&nbsp; yes, a stupid example.&nbsp; I just wanted to get it out there.What this allows is the DC's of the skill challenge to be set to the typical &quot;high end&quot; for a party, while at the same time allowing other party members to participate in a real way without leading to insta-failure.You know? Does this make sense or did I just explain it horribly?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="two, post: 4390359, member: 9002"] [b]An obvious idea[/b] I'm sure this has been tried and put into somebody's home rules skill challenge system. But I'll throw it out there anyway, just to be redundant. It's clear to me, at least, that skill challenges should include everyone at the party, whenever possible. The idea is for the party to pick one PC for the main skill roll; the other PC's can or can not make supporting skill rolls which might or might not give a bonus to this main skill roll. The mechanics should be plain and up front; the roleplaying and cleverness are associated (generally) with the support roles. The main skill roll is the one that counts for sucess/failure. The supporting rolls do not. So a really bad skill PC can try to help the chosen PC make the main skill roll. If he succeeds, he might grant a +2 to the main skill roll. If he fails, he grants +0. If he fumbles, fails really badly, he gives a -1 to the main roll, let's say. If he succeeds wildly, perhaps +3 or +4. For example, to use a boring example, the party killed a bunch of goblins and are in a goblin library looking for information about a evil grue. It's a skill challenge, which the GM makes clear. "find information about the evil grue." One of the PC's has a knowledge check of +10 and will be doing the "main" roll for the first part of the challenge. Other party members will try to help this PC search for knowledge about the grue. The fighter PC has crap skills. He uses his brains a little, though, and goes back and finds a captured goblin who worked in the library. He intimidates the goblin into supplying some information about grues. Skill check made, gives a +2 bonus to the skill check. The Cleric tries to ask his god for advice or something, GM knows this is impossible but lets him roll. A +0 results. Ranger searches library for tracks; nothing really possible, +0. Whatever. The point is the "aid another" mechanic should be where the other PC's get involved to help the main roll. You can't just let the PC's help; they have to be clever and justify it and make a skill roll. But failure does not screw the skill challenge; it just does not help the main skill roll. So whatever, after the party works on it, the wizard with +10 knowledge has been given an additional +3. He rolls and succeeds. The party celebrates. The wizard remembers that grues are also knows as Bints and filed under "b". They go and find nothing under "B" for bints - strangely. Part 2 of the skill challenge involves searching/investigating around the B stack for hidden or strangely moved books. Rogue does the main roll; wizard and everyone else helps. Etc. Etc. yes, a stupid example. I just wanted to get it out there. What this allows is the DC's of the skill challenge to be set to the typical "high end" for a party, while at the same time allowing other party members to participate in a real way without leading to insta-failure. You know? Does this make sense or did I just explain it horribly? [/QUOTE]

Verification