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: Please stop
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="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5465206" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Nah, actually that's the way of things. When you want to be good at specific things you pick the things to be good at. Other things you're probably not so good at. Some things you may even be downright poor at, though most heroes can at least fail with style. This is a core element of the game. It was a bit less central back in the days of rolling stats and you get nothing but the features of your class with few to no choices, but even then there were things you were good at and things you weren't.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There is a 'rule of cool' argument, but that is only one possible situation. Much more often the character simply wants to do something that requires some STR. Usually they'll do it poorly with a low STR. Beyond that maybe it isn't the wizard's place in the grand scheme of things to be lifting the rock. Maybe the barbarian should be doing that, or even the modestly strong bow ranger. It isn't ignoring the rules that makes the game great. It is knowing how and when to use them for best effect and when and how to ignore them or modify them.</p><p></p><p>In terms of raw skill checks I find that by far the best way to use them is to first ask the player what they are going to do in general. You now understand what action they are taking and why (just like they would announce the power they are using in combat). Once you've determined what skill or ability score should govern that situation you can ask for a check. The character may now narrate the results in keeping with what they tried to do and whether or not the check succeeded. Again this is just exactly how it is always done in combat. You don't describe chopping the orc's head off before you roll to hit do you? That deals with the issues surrounding "made a great speech and failed the check" because the player won't describe it that way. The DM may also supply some explanation the player can use.</p><p></p><p>In a skill challenge this can flow very naturally. The party face negotiates with the NPC, but a complication comes up, he's misunderstood what the NPC wants and his effort goes awry (failed check). This may create an opening for another character. Perhaps someone with some Insight can make a check "As I watch the bard negotiate with the wizard I try to ascertain his goals and attitude." Bingo. </p><p></p><p>SCs should always be dynamically evolving situations, not static barriers you bang on until you overcome them. A social SC should involve moving through a series of situations. Maybe with a more difficult one they involve dealing with different people. Simpler ones can just include an unexpected twist or two. Doing it in the style I'm suggesting I've had plenty of these sorts of SCs and they usually work pretty well.</p><p></p><p>For other types of situations SCs are generally very straightforward as long as again you make sure there is progress and an evolving situation with each check. The SC framework gives you a good quick way to gauge progress. Suppose the PCs need to navigate down a river in a boat. How many checks are required to succeed? Well, you can do this without an SC, but you're just doing the same thing, the party rolls a few times until the DM is satisfied they've done enough to succeed or mucked up badly enough to have failed. Nice to have a system for that which will give you an appropriate difficulty.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5465206, member: 82106"] Nah, actually that's the way of things. When you want to be good at specific things you pick the things to be good at. Other things you're probably not so good at. Some things you may even be downright poor at, though most heroes can at least fail with style. This is a core element of the game. It was a bit less central back in the days of rolling stats and you get nothing but the features of your class with few to no choices, but even then there were things you were good at and things you weren't. There is a 'rule of cool' argument, but that is only one possible situation. Much more often the character simply wants to do something that requires some STR. Usually they'll do it poorly with a low STR. Beyond that maybe it isn't the wizard's place in the grand scheme of things to be lifting the rock. Maybe the barbarian should be doing that, or even the modestly strong bow ranger. It isn't ignoring the rules that makes the game great. It is knowing how and when to use them for best effect and when and how to ignore them or modify them. In terms of raw skill checks I find that by far the best way to use them is to first ask the player what they are going to do in general. You now understand what action they are taking and why (just like they would announce the power they are using in combat). Once you've determined what skill or ability score should govern that situation you can ask for a check. The character may now narrate the results in keeping with what they tried to do and whether or not the check succeeded. Again this is just exactly how it is always done in combat. You don't describe chopping the orc's head off before you roll to hit do you? That deals with the issues surrounding "made a great speech and failed the check" because the player won't describe it that way. The DM may also supply some explanation the player can use. In a skill challenge this can flow very naturally. The party face negotiates with the NPC, but a complication comes up, he's misunderstood what the NPC wants and his effort goes awry (failed check). This may create an opening for another character. Perhaps someone with some Insight can make a check "As I watch the bard negotiate with the wizard I try to ascertain his goals and attitude." Bingo. SCs should always be dynamically evolving situations, not static barriers you bang on until you overcome them. A social SC should involve moving through a series of situations. Maybe with a more difficult one they involve dealing with different people. Simpler ones can just include an unexpected twist or two. Doing it in the style I'm suggesting I've had plenty of these sorts of SCs and they usually work pretty well. For other types of situations SCs are generally very straightforward as long as again you make sure there is progress and an evolving situation with each check. The SC framework gives you a good quick way to gauge progress. Suppose the PCs need to navigate down a river in a boat. How many checks are required to succeed? Well, you can do this without an SC, but you're just doing the same thing, the party rolls a few times until the DM is satisfied they've done enough to succeed or mucked up badly enough to have failed. Nice to have a system for that which will give you an appropriate difficulty. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Skill Challenges: Please stop
Top