Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Starfox" data-source="post: 6061811" data-attributes="member: 2303">There is another thing about skill challenges that annoys me as written. They make success unexceptional; you need to have 75% or better chance to succeed at each step to make it meaningful to try. The only significant rolls are failures, which creates negative reinforcement. Its not "Yay, success", it is "bah, failure" you hear around the table.What I did here is that I redesigned skill challenges. A skill challenge has a number of rounds, with bigger challenges having more rounds. Each round, only ONE success is needed, but the DC is high. For each player who has attempted this round's challenge before you, the DC decreases by 2. Players can spend action points to get extra tries on a skill challenge in a round where there have been no successes. This changes the "failure is exceptional" meme to a "success is exceptional" meme, while still making one of the secondary, less skilled character's contributions meaningful and helpful. The disadvantage with this system is that each round has a kind of "sudden death" mechanism in it - if the first character does succeed, no-one else gets to act. It is also sometimes tactically advantageous to have the most qualified character (who presumably has the greatest interest in the challenge) to wait until last to roll, which is counter-intuitive role-playing and can trivialize some challenges. But overall, I still liked it a lot better than the original system.<a href="http://hastur.net/wiki/Rules_%284E%29#Sudden_Death_Skill_Challenge_System" target="_blank">http://hastur.net/wiki/Rules_(4E)#Sudden_Death_Skill_Challenge_System</a>Looking over the rules I wrote back when I played 4E, I see that I tired to solve some of the above issues.</blockquote>

Verification