D&D 4E Running player commentary on PCat's 4E Campaign - Heroic tier (finished)

[Piratecat]

Is this a Daily? I'll have to search for that thread, as it's been a while since I read it.

Page 42 of the DMG; it's an at-will. I'm allowing expertise to apply to these sorts of impromptu attacks, since they'll already be penalized by no weapon proficiency bonus.

 

[Gargoyle]

Wow, not what I expected for your skill challenges, but it makes sense.

I've been going in the opposite direction, trying to disguise skill challenge's, not letting them know how many successes and failures they need or have, or even that they are in a skill challenge. So far it's been lackluster. I've been afraid of making my D&D game too "gamey" for fear that role playing will suffer, but that hasn't happened yet, so maybe the mini-game approach will be more fun without sacrificing role playing goodness.

My players and I love cut-scenes btw. The Star Wars RPG encourages them, so I started using them in all my RPG's a long time ago. I've found as a DM that they are a great way of revealing "DM knowledge only" events to players that are just too cool to keep secret. It helps that they are good at separating player knowledge from character knowledge.

 

[Gargoyle]

Thanks for the link, Joshua.

Incidentally, I've just given everyone an expertise feat for free. I'm also following RangerWickett's advice and asking them to add a "do something cool" card to their powers, so they remember that they can make use of impromptu stunts instead of just being limited by their powers.

Love the card idea. I really need to do that, if nothing else so that my wife doesn't feel that she has to use "Twin Strike" every round.

I'm on the fence on the Expertise debacle, not sure I want to give it for free, though I see the logic. I'm trying very hard not to implement any house rules in 4e, because I've been guilty of writing far too many house rules in the past, and my players are tired of that. I really wish a WoTC designer would comment on that subject...if they haven't already.

 

[jydog1]

Just devoured this whole thread - this is great stuff. Love the perspectives from both the GM and the players. Sure you don't want to move the game down to Northern Jersey?

 

[Piratecat]

I've been going in the opposite direction, trying to disguise skill challenge's, not letting them know how many successes and failures they need or have, or even that they are in a skill challenge. So far it's been lackluster. I've been afraid of making my D&D game too "gamey" for fear that role playing will suffer, but that hasn't happened yet, so maybe the mini-game approach will be more fun without sacrificing role playing goodness.

James, this exactly mirrors my own experience. I deliberately had them be transparent to the players, hidden behind plot, which meant that they weren't actually fun or exciting for anybody - including myself. Making them an explicit sort of mini-game turned out to be a blast. I'll admit to being surprised by this.

I'm on the fence on the Expertise debacle, not sure I want to give it for free, though I see the logic. I'm trying very hard not to implement any house rules in 4e, because I've been guilty of writing far too many house rules in the past.

Again, right there with ya. Several things changed my mind:

1. It was simple to add it into the Character Builder, so nobody had to remember the math.

2. It made things more fun for the players, instead of less fun. That's the big seller. Everybody likes it when daily powers hit, myself included.

3. There are finally enough cool, flavorful feat options available now that making players take a boring mechanics-feat to stay effective seemed sort of cheap.

4. If it turns out to be a horrible idea (which I don't think is likely), I can easily revoke it or transparently add a point or two to certain monster's defenses when I need to. It's pretty low risk house rule for me, with far more upside than downside.

Sure you don't want to move the game down to Northern Jersey?

Thanks! Ladies and gents, say hello to my friend, writing buddy, and co-sponsor of our weekly 100 Words writing challenges. You sure you wouldn't rather move up to Boston?

 

[Blackjack]

Making them an explicit sort of mini-game turned out to be a blast. I'll admit to being surprised by this.

Yeah, me too. I'm not ordinarily very "gamist" about stuff like this, and if you'd asked me prior to last session, I think I'd have said I'd have preferred the "transparent skill challenges". But the mini-game turned out to be really fun.

You sure you wouldn't rather move up to Boston?

What he said!

 

[Fallen Seraph]

James, this exactly mirrors my own experience. I deliberately had them be transparent to the players, hidden behind plot, which meant that they weren't actually fun or exciting for anybody - including myself. Making them an explicit sort of mini-game turned out to be a blast. I'll admit to being surprised by this.

Hmm... Same here, I had been running it as transparent, but I may give this mini-game format a try. I have been tempted to do so before for more out-there, and cinematic skill challenges. I wonder how it will play into my house rules for Skill Challenges too.

I think this may work well with a upcoming one I am thinking of where the PCs are chasing a monster through a city and it is really, REALLY dexterous, Aliens level dexterous.

 

[WizarDru]

And let me say that I'm thrilled that this is useful and fun for folks to read. Digital Matt, I'm particularly flattered that you made your first post for this thread. Thanks, Sagiro, for starting and updating it!

Thanks, all! I and my players appreciate it.

Kevin, if it's not too much trouble, could you post an example of one of the skill entries you used? Are they similar to the examples in the DMG or at Dungeon? I have a perfect situation for a skill challenge 'mini-game' in the next session, if I can draw up a map and type up the challenge before Saturday night. It sounds like it'll be the perfect conclusion to the adventure, if I can pull it off.

There will be pirates. No, there won't be ninjas.

 

[Piratecat]

Dru, they're in post #434. Following Fajitas's example, I tried to be specific as to what was a primary and secondary skill (where secondary skills don't affect failures or successes.) Next time I do it I will mark DC targets as easy, medium and hard (instead of giving specific numbers), I will ask players to describe how the skill advances their case instead of telling them, and I may increase the DC every time the same skill is used by the same person.

 

[Gargoyle]

James, this exactly mirrors my own experience. I deliberately had them be transparent to the players, hidden behind plot, which meant that they weren't actually fun or exciting for anybody - including myself. Making them an explicit sort of mini-game turned out to be a blast. I'll admit to being surprised by this.

Again, right there with ya. Several things changed my mind:

1. It was simple to add it into the Character Builder, so nobody had to remember the math.

2. It made things more fun for the players, instead of less fun. That's the big seller. Everybody likes it when daily powers hit, myself included.

3. There are finally enough cool, flavorful feat options available now that making players take a boring mechanics-feat to stay effective seemed sort of cheap.

4. If it turns out to be a horrible idea (which I don't think is likely), I can easily revoke it or transparently add a point or two to certain monster's defenses when I need to. It's pretty low risk house rule for me, with far more upside than downside.

#1 I hadn't thought about...you're right, it's easy to have them add another feat, and the math is done for them. #2 is the main reason I'm going to do it....I hate it when dailies miss. Would have been nice if they were all reliable, but that's a nice niche for the fighter to have.