Skill Checks: Who Should Run Them?

[Prestidigitalis]

Yeah, but DMs who are just saying "this is a skill challenge" are not really doing a very good job of using the SC system. That same DM might be good at running a fun combat encounter, but a DM that is bad at those won't make them very exciting either.

True, but I think most current DMs have a lot of experience running combats through multiple editions of D&D, and as a result are pretty good at it. Skill challenges are basically a new thing that a lot of DMs know they ought to include (like they should be eating more vegetables) but haven't really figured out yet.

One thing I'd love to see from WotC is videos demonstrating real live sessions run by the best DMs, and set up to highlight different aspects of the game. Skill challenges would be at the top of the list.

 

[Nullzone]

True, but I think most current DMs have a lot of experience running combats through multiple editions of D&D, and as a result are pretty good at it. Skill challenges are basically a new thing that a lot of DMs know they ought to include (like they should be eating more vegetables) but haven't really figured out yet.

One thing I'd love to see from WotC is videos demonstrating real live sessions run by the best DMs, and set up to highlight different aspects of the game. Skill challenges would be at the top of the list.

I'm not entirely sure if they even have it figured out, to be honest. The Penny Arcade podcasted games led by Chris Perkins all sound really obtuse and droll when it comes to the skill challenge parts. The only times it's interesting come when one of the players doesn't already have one of the skills needed and gets creative with one that he does have, like using Arcana to fake an Intimidate or Bluff.

I know most of those were created early in the 4e lifespan but you'd think they'd have a good idea of what they're doing with it since they wrote it, heh.

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I run Stalker0's Obsideon Skill Challenge rules, and always start with "This is a skill challenge...."

I also give a short recap of the skill challenge rules, which goes something like this:

You have 3 turns in this challenge and each passing skill check counts for a success. Depending on the number of successes you get will change how the story continues. Failures may or may not have a cost associated with them.
Each turn every player gets a turn to describe thier action. I choose which skill fits the action the best and may alter the DC based on the description or other factors.

I also have a variant I run that I call "lethal Obsideon" where failures deal healing surges or hit point damage, an abstraction of not avoiding skirmishes that are not worth playing out in full combat mode or dealing with a trap. In this version the players can 'bid' extra actions to try to pass the challenge quickly at the risk of extra damage.

My players have started to get used to these processes and no longer grimace when the skill challenge comes up... actually its the part of the game where they are the most engaged!


To the OP, I could see rolling the dice myself in order to maintain some mystery over the mechanics, ala the RPG paradox article recently posted... but my particular players enjoy rolling the dice too much to take this from them. YMMV.

Prestidigitalis.. technically skill challenges are a new thing, as far as a formalized mechanic in the rule book. But I have been running 'complex skill checks' since 1e. But yes, a 'this is what really cool looks like' would be a nice reference {as long as it doesn't engender jealousy over how my dm can't be like that dm....}

 

[Sunseeker]

So far, my DMs have simply prevented me from rolling until I have sufficiently role-played my skill-check. This presses me to ensure I role play as much as roll-play, and I still get to keep my dice.

As a DM, I try to avoid taking away my players dice as much as possible, generally the more they're rolling, the more fun they seem to have.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

True, but I think most current DMs have a lot of experience running combats through multiple editions of D&D, and as a result are pretty good at it. Skill challenges are basically a new thing that a lot of DMs know they ought to include (like they should be eating more vegetables) but haven't really figured out yet.

One thing I'd love to see from WotC is videos demonstrating real live sessions run by the best DMs, and set up to highlight different aspects of the game. Skill challenges would be at the top of the list.

Yeah. Combat encounters are also generally a lot more 'static', they have a limited set of elements that are generally present during the entire encounter (or appear under well defined circumstances, etc in more advanced cases). That means the problem space for the DM is much smaller. Even a totally new DM with no previous experience CAN make a good combat encounter, even if just by simple chance.

Making a good SC is USUALLY going to involve more complex elements and be capable of resolving in a variety of ways. At best it is no simpler than a combat, and worst it can be a LOT trickier.

So I think it is a combination of inexperience and SCs just being a lot harder to pull off well. Honestly I think a LOT of pre-4e adventures pretty much had the same issues, they just didn't have a name for what we were trying to do.

 

[DracoSuave]

The only time a DM should roll for the players (in secret), ideally, is when the players are unaware of a skill-use in play.

Other than that, there's no reason to conceal dice.

Mr. Dieroller should comprimise a bit, and not allow his strategizing of the game system to break immersion (cause, no, gaming a game system is not a horrid roleplaying sin.) while Mr. Roleplaying-or-bust should take the stick out of his arse, and learn the valuable roleplaying skill of how to use the numbers he is rolling to inform his roleplay.

 

[Anathos]

Mr. Roleplaying-or-bust should take the stick out of his arse, and learn the valuable roleplaying skill of how to use the numbers he is rolling to inform his roleplay.

Indeed, the character receives feedback on how difficult a task was to achieve (and likely has an intuitive understanding of that difficulty before the attempt) that the player doesn't receive. Allowing the players to know the check DC is a reasonable technique for imparting that kind of information, and knowing the difficulty of an attempted task makes it easier to respond in the manner that the character would.

 

[Cerebral Paladin]

I'm sure there are groups for whom this is a good approach, but in general I don't like it. First, rolling the skill checks is fun for the players--taking that away from them will, all else being equal, make the game less fun.

Second, while there is room to use this well for fudging/handling impossible attempts without directly saying "no," I think it's more likely than not to make matters worse. It can be used to cover fudging that's contrary to the norms of the gaming group--I don't want my character to succeed or fail based on GM fiat when ostensibly making a skill check dependent on character skill. And it would make me suspicious that all of the dice rolling is a cover for GM fiat. GM fiat can be a perfectly good resolution system (see Amber DRPG for an example). But GM fiat pretending to be a DC, dice, and skill modifier system strikes me as likely to produce toxic player-GM interactions.

Third, this seems likely to slow things down, which again is likely to be a bad thing.

Fourth, I don't view figuring out the DCs as being inherently bad or contrary to immersion or whatever. That's how the game encodes difficulty. Sure, there may be a little aspect of "I want to think of it as a slick wall, with some natural crevices but without good hand and foot holes, not as a DC 25 wall." But I find the opposite problem is more common--I've gotten a description that I can picture, my character should know roughly how hard it is for her to climb the wall, but I can't use the description and my character's Athletics (or Climb, or whatever) to figure out how hard it is. In that environment, having a skill check where a player says "wow, if we keep trying that we're going to fail badly" based on calculating the DC isn't a bad thing for immersion, because the characters could likely reach the same conclusion.

So yeah... done well and in an environment with iron-clad trust, this could make for a more immersive game that might be more fun. But for most groups most of the time, I think this will be negative.

 

[Azlith]

I don't think any one has mentioned the issue of class features, feats, and powers that affect skill checks. Should the GM decide when those get activated too? Is that fair? Does he now have to keep track of any applicable player abilities and ask on every potential roll?