Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Skill Challenges: How Much Have They Improved?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 5198930" data-attributes="member: 3424"><p>It's true that there isn't a very mechanical system for running skill challenges, unlike the combat system and the system for making specific simple skill checks, e.g. opening a lock, jumping across a chasm, etc. I think it is because non-combat challenges are by their very nature more open-ended and possibly more complex as well. Even a specific example of a skill challenge is just that: a specific example. A DM who wants to make use of it will usually have change it to suit the specifics of their adventure, or alter the specifics of their adventure to suit the challenge.</p><p></p><p>Sure. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> </p><p></p><p>Presumably, the player said that because he wanted the guard to go away. In this case, success means that the guard leaves. </p><p></p><p>What I would do is to add an automatic success or failure, possibly more than one successes or failures if it was a particularly good or bad action. If the DM thinks that it is not reasonable for the skill challenge to remain unresolved after the action, then he should declare that the skill challenge is resolved. (Such occurances should be uncommon, of course, and usually mean that the players did something that the DM did not expect.)</p><p></p><p>Ideally, before the DM presents the players with a challenge, he should have at least one solution (and preferably more) in mind. The skills that are useful ought to flow naturally from the solution that he has in mind.</p><p></p><p>There are a few ways to handle this. The player may describe his action and state which skill he is using, the player may describe his action and the DM decides which skill the player is using based on that description and calls for that skill check. (On a personal note, I prefer the former approach.) Occasionally, the player may propose a course of action that the DM had not originally thought about. If the DM decides that the approach is viable, he may allow the player to use make a skill check to earn a success or gain some other benefit.</p><p></p><p>This is actually a very broad question and goes to the core of what it means to be a DM since one of the most basic responsibilities of being a DM is to answer the question, "What happens next?" Usually, the answer would be the most logical thing to happen, but occasionally, the DM might say that the most interesting (not necessarily logical, but ideally still plausible) thing happens instead.</p><p></p><p>For simple skill checks, a successful check usually means that the player's stated action is carried out successfully. In skill challenges, each successful check should convey a sense of progress, until the final successful check which overcomes the challenge.</p><p></p><p>The DM should decide whether the proposed action will contribute to the skill challenge or not. As successful skill check that does not help advance the skill challenge should not earn any successes for the purpose of the skill challenge.</p><p></p><p>Ideally, it should be based on the situation in the game world. The DM may deem certain approaches to be more effective than others and use skill check modifiers to reward players who take those approaches. Ideally, the DM should allow the players the opportunity to discover these in the course of the game. For example, the DM may decide that the Duke is particularly susceptible to flattery, and that players who specifically mention that they flatter the Duke gain a bonus to Diplomacy checks. The players may discover this if they have won the confidence of the Duke's chief advisor, with a successful Streetwise check to learn rumors about the Duke, or with a successful Insight check after meeting the Duke in person.</p><p></p><p>There is essentially no difference between them. It is simply a way of saying that a Modereately difficult skill check for a 1st-level character should be Easy for a 7th-level character. As for choosing an Easy DC over a Hard one, the DM should assess how likely the character's action is to succeed, or in the context of a skill challenge, how likely it is for the character's action to contribute to overcoming the skill challenge. If you think of the likelihood as a continuum from certain to succeed - likely to succeed - may succeed - unlikely to succeed - certain to fail, this translates into automatic success - Easy DC - Moderate DC - Hard DC - automatic failure.</p><p></p><p>How does he decide what level monsters to use? Same thing. </p><p></p><p>As mentioned earlier, given the open-ended and complex nature of non-combat challenges, I am not sure that it is possible to provide simple rules for creating good skill challenges. Perhaps, when it comes to skill challenges, only the bare bones structure can be provided, in much the same way that when it comes to creating new monsters, only the basic statistics (defenses, damage, etc.) are given. Adding flavor, twists and interactivity to skill challenges may be something that has to be left to the individual DM.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 5198930, member: 3424"] It's true that there isn't a very mechanical system for running skill challenges, unlike the combat system and the system for making specific simple skill checks, e.g. opening a lock, jumping across a chasm, etc. I think it is because non-combat challenges are by their very nature more open-ended and possibly more complex as well. Even a specific example of a skill challenge is just that: a specific example. A DM who wants to make use of it will usually have change it to suit the specifics of their adventure, or alter the specifics of their adventure to suit the challenge. Sure. :) Presumably, the player said that because he wanted the guard to go away. In this case, success means that the guard leaves. What I would do is to add an automatic success or failure, possibly more than one successes or failures if it was a particularly good or bad action. If the DM thinks that it is not reasonable for the skill challenge to remain unresolved after the action, then he should declare that the skill challenge is resolved. (Such occurances should be uncommon, of course, and usually mean that the players did something that the DM did not expect.) Ideally, before the DM presents the players with a challenge, he should have at least one solution (and preferably more) in mind. The skills that are useful ought to flow naturally from the solution that he has in mind. There are a few ways to handle this. The player may describe his action and state which skill he is using, the player may describe his action and the DM decides which skill the player is using based on that description and calls for that skill check. (On a personal note, I prefer the former approach.) Occasionally, the player may propose a course of action that the DM had not originally thought about. If the DM decides that the approach is viable, he may allow the player to use make a skill check to earn a success or gain some other benefit. This is actually a very broad question and goes to the core of what it means to be a DM since one of the most basic responsibilities of being a DM is to answer the question, "What happens next?" Usually, the answer would be the most logical thing to happen, but occasionally, the DM might say that the most interesting (not necessarily logical, but ideally still plausible) thing happens instead. For simple skill checks, a successful check usually means that the player's stated action is carried out successfully. In skill challenges, each successful check should convey a sense of progress, until the final successful check which overcomes the challenge. The DM should decide whether the proposed action will contribute to the skill challenge or not. As successful skill check that does not help advance the skill challenge should not earn any successes for the purpose of the skill challenge. Ideally, it should be based on the situation in the game world. The DM may deem certain approaches to be more effective than others and use skill check modifiers to reward players who take those approaches. Ideally, the DM should allow the players the opportunity to discover these in the course of the game. For example, the DM may decide that the Duke is particularly susceptible to flattery, and that players who specifically mention that they flatter the Duke gain a bonus to Diplomacy checks. The players may discover this if they have won the confidence of the Duke's chief advisor, with a successful Streetwise check to learn rumors about the Duke, or with a successful Insight check after meeting the Duke in person. There is essentially no difference between them. It is simply a way of saying that a Modereately difficult skill check for a 1st-level character should be Easy for a 7th-level character. As for choosing an Easy DC over a Hard one, the DM should assess how likely the character's action is to succeed, or in the context of a skill challenge, how likely it is for the character's action to contribute to overcoming the skill challenge. If you think of the likelihood as a continuum from certain to succeed - likely to succeed - may succeed - unlikely to succeed - certain to fail, this translates into automatic success - Easy DC - Moderate DC - Hard DC - automatic failure. How does he decide what level monsters to use? Same thing. As mentioned earlier, given the open-ended and complex nature of non-combat challenges, I am not sure that it is possible to provide simple rules for creating good skill challenges. Perhaps, when it comes to skill challenges, only the bare bones structure can be provided, in much the same way that when it comes to creating new monsters, only the basic statistics (defenses, damage, etc.) are given. Adding flavor, twists and interactivity to skill challenges may be something that has to be left to the individual DM. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Skill Challenges: How Much Have They Improved?
Top