Skill Challenges

[Kobold Boots]

Here's what I do now and it seems to work.

1. Advise the characters that they are in a situation that is a skill challenge.
2. It should be fairly obvious what's going on in the encounter and it shouldn't require much explanation. (e.g. a inn is burning down, a negotiation is going on, etc.)
3. Let the players roleplay their way through it.

4. The DM abstracts their actions to the appropriate skill for the player and calls for a skill roll.

5. You do not tell the players how many successes they need before how many failures. Doing so kills the tension at the table. As you have the floon you can certainly drop hints.. (e.g. wow that was a close one... the drop is quite severe and you need to be more careful..., the fire is smoldering lower, the diplomat seems pleased.. etc.)

Of course how they fail affects what happens at the end, but I think that all of the skill challenges threads I've read on the site have been both very helpful and unnecessarily complicated.

Thanks,
KB

 

[wlmartin]

Quote:
When each member has taken their actions I will let them know that an hour has passed, the group is starting to feel the toll of being lost and panic starts to creep in that they may never find their way out. (Roll endurance as a group, 50% need to pass and if they do it counts as a success)
Yep, fair enough. Alternately, call for this after the first failure, as despair starts to set in...

Good idea, and I would tweak it a bit so it still rolls Endurance once per turn but that upon each failure each player gets they must roll an Endurance check and if they fail they loose a Healing Surge.

What do you think?


Also I like your idea about not doing it as a standard type Skill Challenge but instead where the amount of successes they get has an effect on how well or poorly the next combat encounter is setup.

I have however written this already and apart from making the tweak suggested above, I am not waivering from it... although great idea for next time

If the party have a really good turn (gaining 3 or more successes in one hour), have them stumble on a hidden cache of treasure abandoned in the maze. Give them a bonus treasure parcel at this time.

If the party have a really bad turn (suffering 2 or more failures in one hour), have them run into 'wandering' monsters, facing them off against a fairly easy group of opponents. Primarily, this should serve to break up the tension, especially at a point when the players may be getting frustrated. (I wouldn't give out any treasure for this encounter... and perhaps not even any XP, since it's a 'punishment' for doing poorly in the Skill Challenge. What I would do though, if any player thinks to ask, is allow them to interrogate a captured enemy after the fight, and so add Intimidate to the list of Key Skills.)

I like this... I will implement the Treasure Idea, the monster idea sounds interesting but since this is the first encounter of the adventure I want their first encounter for combat to be right after this... want them thrown off balance by the maze and then throw straight into combat.

Although I do like this for the future

 

[wlmartin]

Here's what I do now and it seems to work.

5. You do not tell the players how many successes they need before how many failures. Doing so kills the tension at the table. As you have the floon you can certainly drop hints.. (e.g. wow that was a close one... the drop is quite severe and you need to be more careful..., the fire is smoldering lower, the diplomat seems pleased.. etc.)



Thanks,
KB

I think this one is key
Some DMs have said that informing players is the same as telling them they are facing minions and that can be a toss up decision for some DMs who do or do not like announcing that information

Narrating the success or failure sounds a good plan however

 

[Mengu]

Do you say "This is a skill challenge, 6 successes before 3 failures and you can use the following Key Skills"

Do you say "You have become stuck in a room that is closing in on you, what do you do?"

Or do you do something in between ??

There is more than one way to skin this cat. I wouldn't get stuck on any single way, so I do all of the above.

I run some skill challenges like investigative ones very organically. They usually see I'm recording successes, so they know they are in a skill challenge, but they can do whatever they want, I run it very open and free form, and keep my framework hidden.

Sometimes I railroad like there is no tomorrow. X happens, I need a skill roll for Y. This stuff works great for chase scenes, escape from a collapsing building, or scenes where events happen in a linear fashion, and PC's will be responding to events out of their control. I won't tell them how many successes they need in these scenarios,, but what skills to use are obvious.

Sometimes I tell them the entire framework of the skill challenge. I tell them what skills they can use, skill DC's, secondary skills that can help, how much time they have and successes they need, and even consequences of failure. Particularly in skill challenges I run during combat, I find that the transparency makes it more tactical and enjoyable.

 

[wlmartin]

I find that having some Key Skills in mind is a really good thing for me (since it helps me think about how the PCs might solve the Challenge), but that it's really important not to let them become a straightjacket when running the Challenge itself.

So, in the "maze" example, I might identify Dungeoneering and Arcana as the Key Skills during prep, but if I'm running it and a player says, "I want to use Acrobatics to run up the walls so I can get a good look up ahead", that should definitely allow them to accumulate a success... once.

I think that's also another key thing. With Skill Challenges, there is always a risk that the players will find themselves spamming one or two skills over and over again. This can obviously get a bit dull. When dealing with a larger Challenge then (one that will last more than a turn or two), I think it's important to group the Challenge into 'phases', each with their own conditions, a modified set of key skills, and different complications.

So, again in the "maze" example, I might declare that in Phase 1 the group are being chased by an overwhelming enemy force. So, each turn they have to make a group Athletics check, or lose a healing surge.

In Phase 2, then, they've lost their pursuit, but are now properly lost. Here, they have a group Endurance check to keep their composure.

And in Phase 3, they now feel palpably that the end is in sight, but the perils are that much greater - any failed Arcana check attracts the attentions of the Great Eye as they approach, and increase the number of enemies waiting for the party at the end of the maze...

I like the phase thing and think it is something covered a little in the DMG2. This one is designed to be a short teaser but if it was a longer one I would love to design one that had phases including combat to make them feel like it was all part of an elaborate mini-adventure

 

[delericho]

I like this... I will implement the Treasure Idea, the monster idea sounds interesting but since this is the first encounter of the adventure I want their first encounter for combat to be right after this... want them thrown off balance by the maze and then throw straight into combat.

I agree - given what you've just said, I'd definitely omit the combat mid-maze.

 

[wlmartin]

Overall I love the idea of Skill Challenges

WotC have created a mechanic for what some DMs were doing anyway but were often doing poorly.

It is much like the "Deck of Many Things" - it doesnt grant a reward but instead creates an opportunity for a quest that leads to a reward.

Before Skill Challenges when there was a bridge with a Troll guarding it, you either beat the Troll up or you throw a few Diplomacy or Bluff skill checks at it and see if that works.

Now with the advent of a Skill Challenge, you can take that encounter and turn it into something tangible.

The group have branching options to parlay with the Troll (certain options that only exist when conversation branches are opened, much like RPG conversations in computer games)

The group can Roleplay their arses off in trying to find a way for the Troll to let them pass, a success could result in them passing, a failure could be a combat... a MASSIVE success could result in them learning a secret about an upcoming encounter and a MASSIVE failure could result in the battle being more unbalanced (he wolf whistles and his friends come to join in)

Overall the mechanic of a Skill Challenge gives DM that extra option that even if it was being followed before, often it was more the DM addlibbing and parlaying with the PLAYERS rather than the Troll parlaying with the PCs... now although the PLAYERS are integral in the RP element of their actions, the PCs are vital to the process.

A PC with no decent skills apart from Endurance and Athletics may suffer in an exchange of Witt and Rapour during a Dialog Challenge but that is the right way for it to go... the Bard would do better but then he would fair poorer in a challenge involving brute strength.

Before however in older editions, the same situation could come up and if the DM had enough interaction with the PLAYERS and since the PCs couldnt really interact themselves (ie they had no skills that applied to such interactions) it was very 2dimensional.


Yay WotC - I may moan about some of the things you do but you really did well when you made Skill Challenges!!

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, given that the maze in essence isn't a super reactive or interactive type of challenge I wouldn't drag out the number of checks too much. I'd expect players to come up with ideas like leaving 'breadcrumbs' and such things. You can always work in a few other skills too, like Arcana lets the wizard get a read on the confusing magic that makes it hard to navigate the maze. You could also give them a few surprises, like the magic messes with breadcrumbs! The more 'active' the maze is the better. Tension could be enhanced by describing strange sounds, maybe the maze creates some paranoia and the PCs start to feel like they're being followed. Shadows move at the edge of their vision, mysterious sounds of moving masonry make them start to think maybe the walls shift, etc. The more group checks they fail the more it weighs on them.

 

[delericho]

A PC with no decent skills apart from Endurance and Athletics may suffer in an exchange of Witt and Rapour during a Dialog Challenge but that is the right way for it to go... the Bard would do better but then he would fair poorer in a challenge involving brute strength.

To be honest, I think that's a combination of two problems* in 4e:

1) The inflation of ability scores, and the massive bonus given by Skill Training means that the difference between a specialist and a non-specialist is just too great.

2) Some classes just get too few skill choices. Since the classes are now balanced on combat ability, there's no huge reason to give the Rogue many more skills than the Fighter. Indeed, I might well argue for giving every class 5 skill choices!

* I should note that although I label them "problems", they're hardly disasterous. In this case, it just means that some characters contribute less to Skill Challenges than they otherwise might. It's not ideal... but it's hardly game-breaking!

Yay WotC - I may moan about some of the things you do but you really did well when you made Skill Challenges!!

Eh. I agree with you about the concept - probably the single best idea in 4e. Unfortunately, I can't agree with you on the implementation. It's just too much of a missed opportunity. (The fixes in DMG2 and, especially, Galaxy of Intruige (SWSE) help, but there's still a good way to go before I'd call it a 'good' system.)

 

[wlmartin]

I do think that if more DMs used Skill Challenges
(or more PrePub'd adventures included them) then there would be more of a requirement in players to think about taking Skill Focus Feat instead of that nifty +2 damage feat.

If DMs have only 1 Combat Encounter with Undead and 5 Combat Encounters with Demons, 16% of the time you are fighting undead, 83% demons.

... now give those players the choice of Feats and Utility Powers - are they going to take ones that can hurt demons over Undead.

If DMs have only 1 Skill Encounter and 5 Combat Encounters , 16% of the time you are in a Skill Encounter, 83% fighting.

Now --- same choice in front of the PCs and it is doubtful they will pick something that helps them beat a skill challenge.

I am not saying that players should be up against skill challenges half the time, but increasing the massive chasm of difference in time spent on skill challenges would encourage the players to start focusing on skills as much as their damage rolls.

You know you are bring good RP to the table when players are picking Skill Feats over Weapon Feats