Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Morrus" data-source="post: 5530575" data-attributes="member: 1">Here's my input:&nbsp;<a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/304555-task-based-skill-challenges-yet-another-sc-system-new-post.html" target="_blank">http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/304555-task-based-skill-challenges-yet-another-sc-system-new-post.html</a>I think it's great for a 4E skill challenge. I just don't like 4E skill challenges and think there's no reason we can't write a better system from scratch.&nbsp;My issue with it is telling the PCs they haven't put together enough clues. Who says? It seems arbitrary and abstract.&nbsp; It's why I don't like the SC structure - what is a &quot;success&quot;? And requires the DM to really think on his feet to come up with enough clues which are vague enough that a player doesn't pounce on them and say &quot;Seriously? I don't know it's the suspicious guy in the rebel uniform hook hand and the broken jaw who's pointing a gun at the king because I only got 5 successes instead of 6?&quot;&nbsp;And surely a time-limited thing logically just requires the task cmpleted before the time runs out.&nbsp; &quot;Before X failures&quot; has always seemed abstract and bizarre to be.&nbsp; Surely &quot;Within 3 rounds&quot; replaces that logically?&nbsp; Failure is not doing it in that time; partial success is actually identifying a percentage of the bad guys within that time but not all of them.&nbsp; What *are* &quot;failures&quot; - in this context, just delays, surely?&nbsp; Nothing succeeded in that round; now you're closer to the deadline.&nbsp;I friggin' hate &quot;before X failures&quot; because it makes no sense!&nbsp; It's gamism taken too far, in my opinion.&nbsp; It's an artificially forced point structure which doesn't match the situation.&nbsp;I do like that you haven't described PC actions for them in response to skill checks, which is what 90% of skill challenges seem to do.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Morrus, post: 5530575, member: 1"] Here's my input: [URL]http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-discussion/304555-task-based-skill-challenges-yet-another-sc-system-new-post.html[/URL] I think it's great for a 4E skill challenge. I just don't like 4E skill challenges and think there's no reason we can't write a better system from scratch. My issue with it is telling the PCs they haven't put together enough clues. Who says? It seems arbitrary and abstract. It's why I don't like the SC structure - what [I]is[/I] a "success"? And requires the DM to really think on his feet to come up with enough clues which are vague enough that a player doesn't pounce on them and say "Seriously? I don't know it's the suspicious guy in the rebel uniform hook hand and the broken jaw who's pointing a gun at the king because I only got 5 successes instead of 6?" And surely a time-limited thing logically just requires the task cmpleted before the time runs out. "Before X failures" has always seemed abstract and bizarre to be. Surely "Within 3 rounds" replaces that logically? Failure is not doing it in that time; partial success is actually identifying a percentage of the bad guys within that time but not all of them. What *are* "failures" - in this context, just delays, surely? Nothing succeeded in that round; now you're closer to the deadline. I friggin' hate "before X failures" because it makes no sense! It's gamism taken too far, in my opinion. It's an artificially forced point structure which doesn't match the situation. I do like that you haven't described PC actions for them in response to skill checks, which is what 90% of skill challenges seem to do. [/QUOTE]

Verification