The news about future D&D releases has led to some discussions about resolving non-combat challenges. I'm one of those who sees skill challenges as the core 4e mechanic for resolving these things, but am wondering about what others think.
The following is a fairly typical criticism of skill challenges:
Do characters contribute uniquely to skill challenges? Yes, in my experience, both because (i) they often have different skills, and (ii) even when they have overlapping skills they often use them in different ways (this is especially true for social skills).
Do characters do significant things in skill challenges? Yes - they perform impressive physical feats, or they make significant concessions or extract significant concessions in negotiations.
Do they make significant choices? Yes - they take risks, and make trade offs. Again, this is particularly evident in social contexts.
Do they use resources? Yes - following the guidelines in DMG 2, plus other ideas that are very common in online discussions of skill challenges, they expend powers, action points, ritual ingredients etc.
If you are using skill challenges solely as described in the first DMG, and have no familiarity with the mechanics that inspired them (eg conflict resolution systems in games like HeroQuest, Burning Wheel etc) then I could see how they might seem to have some of the flaws that the quote attributes to them. But post-DMG 2, or for anyone who is familiar with the play advice from those other games, I don't really see how they could look like this.
What I would like to see is a development of the skill challenge mechanics or guidelines to better integrate with the combat system, to help smooth over the transition from abstract, high-level resolution to tactically detailed, low-level resolution.
As to backgrounds/non-combat skills etc, I hope that this is done in a way that fits into the Utility and Skill Power framework and skill challenge mechanic, rather than introducing a further subsytem that is hard to integrate with the ones we already have.
The following is a fairly typical criticism of skill challenges:
But this description of the skill challenge system doesn't fit my own experience. Nor does it match the description in the rulebooks. I'm not sure where it's coming from.Really, a "better Skill Challenge system" would go a long way toward solving this. One where characters could contribute uniquely, do significant things, make significant choices, and spend significant resources to acquire success, a skill challenge system that encourages expansion and use, rather than one basically designed to get past the boring parts, tell you if you win or not, and get back to the "real game."
Do characters contribute uniquely to skill challenges? Yes, in my experience, both because (i) they often have different skills, and (ii) even when they have overlapping skills they often use them in different ways (this is especially true for social skills).
Do characters do significant things in skill challenges? Yes - they perform impressive physical feats, or they make significant concessions or extract significant concessions in negotiations.
Do they make significant choices? Yes - they take risks, and make trade offs. Again, this is particularly evident in social contexts.
Do they use resources? Yes - following the guidelines in DMG 2, plus other ideas that are very common in online discussions of skill challenges, they expend powers, action points, ritual ingredients etc.
If you are using skill challenges solely as described in the first DMG, and have no familiarity with the mechanics that inspired them (eg conflict resolution systems in games like HeroQuest, Burning Wheel etc) then I could see how they might seem to have some of the flaws that the quote attributes to them. But post-DMG 2, or for anyone who is familiar with the play advice from those other games, I don't really see how they could look like this.
What I would like to see is a development of the skill challenge mechanics or guidelines to better integrate with the combat system, to help smooth over the transition from abstract, high-level resolution to tactically detailed, low-level resolution.
As to backgrounds/non-combat skills etc, I hope that this is done in a way that fits into the Utility and Skill Power framework and skill challenge mechanic, rather than introducing a further subsytem that is hard to integrate with the ones we already have.