Skill challenge vs. acting it out

[elwynbdas]

I'm running a fresh campaign, 4th edition, with our 4th meeting coming up this weekend. All my players are D&D virgins. I've DM'ed a lot in the 80's and early 90's and the new version got me hooked again.

Now my question: The skill challenge looks interesting, but even though we've not tried it yet, I would prefer to limit it to rare occasions.

With the game so heavily focused on combat, I welcome any opportunity to act something out. In Keep on the Shadowfell and Thunderspire I can find a lot of skill challenges that could be acted out beautifully. I know that at least 2 of my players would welcome the opportunity.

Is there anything wrong with it? Can you guys give any advice on how to make sure it's still a challenge and doesn't lead to the characters always being successful? I realize the biggest problem is players being out of character. In the old times I would reward players who are good actors with more experience points, but 4E doesn't seem to encourage that.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Yeah, get them used to RP by playing through anything that can be RP'd. Save skill challenges for traps and non-combat physical challenges or use them to solve puzzles or move the plot along when they get stalled.

 

[baberg]

I've run a few small skill challenges for my group and have found that combining the two efforts is the best way to handle it. Reward the people who get into the spirit of things and make an effort to roleplay by lowering their DCs on-the-fly.

"I bluff the Duke into thinking there's goblins coming", DC 15 check

"Sire, surely you have heard the rumors of the vast goblin army amassing on the east border! This grave danger must be confronted and vanquished, lest your entire town fall to the goblin hordes! (OOC: I'm trying to bluff him)", DC 10 check

 

[Mouseferatu]

I've run a few small skill challenges for my group and have found that combining the two efforts is the best way to handle it. Reward the people who get into the spirit of things and make an effort to roleplay by lowering their DCs on-the-fly.

This. There's no "one vs. the other," IMO. You use the mechanics to augment the role-play, and to determine if the RP is successful. But I'd never skip the RP and just let the mechanics alone handle it.

 

[FireLance]

In addition to lowering the DCs, the DM could also rate the player's effort on a scale of 1 to 20 and use this score in place of a d20 roll.

 

[Taralan]

In addition to lowering the DCs, the DM could also rate the player's effort on a scale of 1 to 20 and use this score in place of a d20 roll.

I agree. I find that just reducing the DC is not enough in comparison with the randomness of the d20. A great RP bluff or negociation is too often transformed into a failure by a bad die role. A little randomness is good but D20 is too much. Instead of assigning a scale or reducing the DC you can also change the dice rolled depending on the quality of the RP.

Rolling for skills is good for the mental and physical skills, but should not be abused for the social skills IMHO.

 

[Gort]

In addition to lowering the DCs, the DM could also rate the player's effort on a scale of 1 to 20 and use this score in place of a d20 roll.

I'd hope that if you're doing this, you just flat-out remove the skills for bluff, diplomacy, and intimidate, along with the charisma stat. It'd be a complete waste for a shy player who isn't really comfortable doing a lot of roleplay-talking to try to play a suave noble knight or some such, when the GM is always going to award him between 1-5 for his feeble efforts, while the charisma 4 goat-boy next to him happens to be on some debate team and always gets 18-20 from the GM.

People like to roleplay characters that are unlike them in personality sometimes, you shouldn't penalise them because their own personality doesn't match it, same as you wouldn't penalise a fat slob who wanted to play Conan the Barbarian.

"I'm going to award that attack roll a 4 because you can only bench-press 120 pounds."

 

[MacMathan]

I am DMing KotS right now and I have found that we have RP-ed almost all of the skill challenges. I find that the two systems blend well together and I give modifiers based on the role-playing (usually +/-2)

That way someone with a real life 10 cha can still portray that 18 cha diplomaster.

 

[Gort]

I give modifiers based on the role-playing (usually +/-2)

That way someone with a real life 10 cha can still portray that 18 cha diplomaster.

Yeah, that's a good compromise. Good ol' DM's friend, the +2 bonus.

 

[FireLance]

I'd hope that if you're doing this, you just flat-out remove the skills for bluff, diplomacy, and intimidate, along with the charisma stat. It'd be a complete waste for a shy player who isn't really comfortable doing a lot of roleplay-talking to try to play a suave noble knight or some such, when the GM is always going to award him between 1-5 for his feeble efforts, while the charisma 4 goat-boy next to him happens to be on some debate team and always gets 18-20 from the GM.

People like to roleplay characters that are unlike them in personality sometimes, you shouldn't penalise them because their own personality doesn't match it, same as you wouldn't penalise a fat slob who wanted to play Conan the Barbarian.

I should have clarified that "score the player's effort" shouldn't be the only resolution mechanic, just one that the player could select if he chooses to. "Roll d20" should always remain one of the choices, for the reasons that you mentioned.

Of course, even with "score the player", the character's modifiers are also important. Even on a 20 (and if I was the DM, the player will have to really impress me to get 18+), Charisma 4 goat-boy gets a net result of 17 plus half level (assuming no other bonuses or penalties). The suave noble knight trained in Diplomacy with a 16 Charisma beats that result on an average roll.

Admittedly, this does advantage naturally charismatic players, but some DMs (including myself) see this as a feature, not a bug, as it allows player ability to affect the outcome of a challenge directly instead of indirectly, through his character creation choices.

There are ways to calibrate it for DMs who want to place more emphasis on character ability, but still want player ability to occasionally affect the outcome of an in-game challenge. One way is to limit the use of "score the player" to once per encounter, or to require the character to spend an action point.