Skill Challenge DCs

[Skywalker]

It leaves the problem of dealing with skill challenges that aren't in any way combat-related, though.

I don't see why time can't be an issue outside of combat. For example:

- The PCs are trapped in a room that's filling with water.
- The PCs investigate a plot to assassinate a prince before the assassination takes place.
- The PCs try and revive a dying man before he passes into the beyond.
- The PCs must track down their prey before the weather washes away traces of their passage.

Skill Challenges should be called for when situations are tense. A DM should spend as much time designing a Skill Challenge and making it exciting as they do a Combat Encounter.

Also, time is not the only way to add pressure. What about adding in choices where you can gamble greater success for greater risk? What about where you can choose to take a failure for some positive end?

For example, in a "Creep Up to the Moathouse" Skill Challenge I created for Hommlet, I allowed Nature successes to be used toward the Skill Challenge or to reduce the number of Giant Frogs alerted by the PCs passage (which were a seperate threat). The outcome became a juggle of:

- Sneaking up on the Moathouse sans Giant Frogs
- Sneaking up on the Moathouse being beset by Giant Frogs
- Alerting the bandits in the Moathouse sans Giant Frogs
- Alerting the bandits in the Moathouse beset by Giant Frogs

There is a lot more room in SKill Challenges than in combat. DOn't expect it to fill itself. Be creative.

 

[Kestrel]

Is there a thread of sample Skill Challenges? (I don't have Search so can't check). It would cool to have a place where folks here can post their samples for others to use.

 

[Skywalker]

Is there a thread of sample Skill Challenges? (I don't have Search so can't check). It would cool to have a place where folks here can post their samples for others to use.

This site is pretty awesome: At Will | Inspiration, Techniques, and More for D&D 4th Edition.

 

[sfedi]

I totally agree with Skywalker's view.

I'm trying to make mini games or mini game templates so that I can use with Skill Challenges.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Hmmmm, interesting. OK, there are a few things that need to be cleared up here which may make this discussion more useful.

1) Aid Another is not a rule which you are supposed to be using for normal skill checks in an SC. Reread the skill challenge rules and note the section at the top of page 75 "Group Skill Checks", this is the only mechanic in which Aid Another is mentioned as being an option by default. If you're allowing AA on all SC rolls and then complaining about 100% chance of success, this would be a significant part of the problem.

2) The skill challenge rules are pretty unclear about "sitting out" of skill checks in an SC, especially after all the errata that did away with the whole initiative/rounds terminology. Still, nothing anywhere in the SC rules states that a player can forgo taking any action.

3) The probability of success/failure issue for skill challenges is a non-issue. There MUST be a low probability of failure for low complexity below level SCs, and even equal level SCs need to be pretty reliably passed. Why? Well, if the simplest SC you can make is mechanically one with even a 10% chance of failure then the SC system is unusable for a wide variety of challenges. If you want a 50% chance of success SC, then make one, and guess what? It will be complexity 5 and level +5, and thats exactly what it should be. Raising the DCs in the misguided theory that what should be simple should be hard is just short sighted. The mechanics need to support both hard and easy.

So now that that's cleared up, pray continue...

 

[Kestrel]

This site is pretty awesome: At Will | Inspiration, Techniques, and More for D&D 4th Edition.

Thanks for the link! Great site!

 

[keterys]

1) Aid Another is not a rule which you are supposed to be using for normal skill checks in an SC. Reread the skill challenge rules and note the section at the top of page 75 "Group Skill Checks", this is the only mechanic in which Aid Another is mentioned as being an option by default. If you're allowing AA on all SC rolls and then complaining about 100% chance of success, this would be a significant part of the problem.

While I agree with limiting and disallowing aid another in skill challenges, the normal rules for skills allow them, and skill challenges do not contain languages disallowing them.

2) The skill challenge rules are pretty unclear about "sitting out" of skill checks in an SC, especially after all the errata that did away with the whole initiative/rounds terminology. Still, nothing anywhere in the SC rules states that a player can forgo taking any action.

They removed the language forcing players to act, which means that they may now forgoe taking an action. In some skill challenges this is a bad idea, of course, but many skill challenges are actually written in such a way that 'Everyone waits while the best person rolls out the skill challenge, possibly aid another-ing them' is a practical and expedient solution. And not good skill challenge design, or fun.

3) The probability of success/failure issue for skill challenges is a non-issue. There MUST be a low probability of failure for low complexity below level SCs, and even equal level SCs need to be pretty reliably passed. Why? Well, if the simplest SC you can make is mechanically one with even a 10% chance of failure then the SC system is unusable for a wide variety of challenges. If you want a 50% chance of success SC, then make one, and guess what? It will be complexity 5 and level +5, and thats exactly what it should be. Raising the DCs in the misguided theory that what should be simple should be hard is just short sighted. The mechanics need to support both hard and easy.

Skill Challenges under your theory are worth XP far greater than their difficulty and usage of resources would indicate. For example, your n+5 complexity 5 skill challenge with a 50% chance of failure would be worth twice the xp of a n+1 combat, cost no dailies, no action points, often cost no surges, etc.

Whereas a combat of n+5 would frequently threaten death of one or more PCs, sometimes be a TPK, burn many dailies, many action points, lots of surges, etc.

So now that that's cleared up, pray continue...

Indeed.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Exactly. In fact, I want more failures because to me, these are just complications. If the party fails 3 times, I place an obstacle in the PCs' way (like a combat challenge or something deterimental to the overall goal) and then if they are successful removing the obstacle, they continue on the same challenge with the previous successes still tallied. If they fail again, they deal with another complication, maybe tougher this time. Continue on until they reach the goal.

Complexity is really about how long its going to take to get to the ultimate goal, and how many obstacles they will have to deal with on the way. DCs control how hard it is to reach the goal without complications.

The thing to keep in mind with this method is the overall goal and the rewards for success. If the PC's experience a failure and get XP for the resulting combat and the XP for completing the goal is static then you will have PC's lining up to flub skill challenges because failure provides more XP. If XP is subtracted from the goal for each failure instead then there is good motivation to succeed.

 

[Kestrel]

The thing to keep in mind with this method is the overall goal and the rewards for success. If the PC's experience a failure and get XP for the resulting combat and the XP for completing the goal is static then you will have PC's lining up to flub skill challenges because failure provides more XP. If XP is subtracted from the goal for each failure instead then there is good motivation to succeed.

Well, I don't actually tally experience. PCs level at a regular pace during the game (usually every few sessions), based on story or when the players indicate they are ready.

I'm new to using the skill challenges, but my hope is that the PCs will want to reach the goal without failure because its what they are after. The obstacles are just minor bumps along the road to getting there.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

The thing to keep in mind with this method is the overall goal and the rewards for success. If the PC's experience a failure and get XP for the resulting combat and the XP for completing the goal is static then you will have PC's lining up to flub skill challenges because failure provides more XP. If XP is subtracted from the goal for each failure instead then there is good motivation to succeed.

Indeed. The combat should not yield more XP than was lost in failing the skill challenge. Maybe give the same XP as for the challenge, but make the encounter harder. This way, the players might get the "fun" of another combat, but they still have to pay all the resource cost for combat. Of course, there might be none effectively if they have time for an extended rest, so this technique doesn't work in every situation.