Skill-linked monsters (defeated by skill checks)

[eriktheguy]

Thanks El Madi
As a matter of fact, I did intend for the monsters to be killable with attacks or skill checks, but didn't make that very clear in the OP.

And yes, I agree its best to describe the monsters to the players in a way that forces them to come up with the skills on their own, rather than telling them outright that these monsters can be killed by skill checks. In the same way I also don't tell players when a skill challenge is starting.

I actually don't run the best skill challenges. I've tried core and Stalker0's, but in general I find the framework to rigid and forced. I've planned a lot of skill challenges that left the players feeling frustrated ("We just intimidated this guy twice and we still don't get the information?") or me feeling dissatisfied. I'm going to try some more open skill challenges in the future that go by DM intuition rather than successes/failures.

 

[Iron Sky]

You could spice up some elite/solo fights with skill links too, just instead of killing them outright, it does bloodied damage for elites or 1 surge damage for solos. Maybe only let the PCs do it once for elites and 2-3 times for solos.

For example, the solo purple worm is chasing the group down a tunnel. Instead of attacking it directly, the barbarian hits a supporting column of the roof(Athletics) and brings the ceiling down on the beast. It plows its way out shortly after, but far more battered than it was.

Or, say an elite elemental has just emerged from a portal and still has a tether of energy going back to the portal where it draws power from the other side. An arcana check severs the tether and takes the elemental to bloodied instantly.

Heck, you could let the PCs use these skills with any monster if they come up with a cool way to use the skill (and/or make an appropriate minor action Knowledge check to spot the weakness) to do a surge worth of damage in one go. Kinda like [MENTION=2]Piratecat[/MENTION]s "Do something cool" power cards he gives his players, but tied directly to skills.

This is going onto my mental pile of stuff to chew over as I work on my campaign this week... there is some massive potential here and I think you've scratched the surface, but there could be more. Like, a Shadow of the Colossus style super-solo that can only be defeated using 6 or 8 of these powers(a skill challenge monster?)

*Leaves the thread, deep in thought*

 

[Saeviomagy]

You could spice up some elite/solo fights with skill links too, just instead of killing them outright, it does bloodied damage for elites or 1 surge damage for solos. Maybe only let the PCs do it once for elites and 2-3 times for solos.

For example, the solo purple worm is chasing the group down a tunnel. Instead of attacking it directly, the barbarian hits a supporting column of the roof(Athletics) and brings the ceiling down on the beast. It plows its way out shortly after, but far more battered than it was.

Or, say an elite elemental has just emerged from a portal and still has a tether of energy going back to the portal where it draws power from the other side. An arcana check severs the tether and takes the elemental to bloodied instantly.

Heck, you could let the PCs use these skills with any monster if they come up with a cool way to use the skill (and/or make an appropriate minor action Knowledge check to spot the weakness) to do a surge worth of damage in one go. Kinda like [MENTION=2]Piratecat[/MENTION]s "Do something cool" power cards he gives his players, but tied directly to skills.

This is going onto my mental pile of stuff to chew over as I work on my campaign this week... there is some massive potential here and I think you've scratched the surface, but there could be more. Like, a Shadow of the Colossus style super-solo that can only be defeated using 6 or 8 of these powers(a skill challenge monster?)

*Leaves the thread, deep in thought*

Well this stuff is sort of like the basic rules for doing damaging stunts in the DMG, except that the scenario is being dictated by the DM and the damage is being boosted as a sort of reward for picking up on in-game stuff. It also fits in with terrain powers to some degree.

 

[eriktheguy]

The more I look at it, the more I want to use less rules and more DM fiat when running skill-linked monsters. I want to allow more leeway on the players' parts to come up with reasons to use skills and try to say "no" less. At the same time I don't want players to turn to skill checks as soon as they run out of encounter powers. If defeating monsters with skills is too easy you will never see another at-will again.

In general it should be one standard action to kill a group of minions, a standard monster, bloody an elite, 1/4 damage to a solo. This is still much better action economy than most dailies give. Making skill linked monsters count for 1/2 exp evens this out and makes using a skill about as powerful as a daily.

Against normal monsters this is much more powerful than against skill-linked monsters, simply because the action economy is so attractive that players will look for lame excuses to just use their powers and never use at-wills again. "You said it was dark right? Can't I just kill him with a stealth check?", "It's an elemental? I'll just unsummon it with arcana."

So here's my solution. When a player wants to try to defeat monsters with a skill check they tell you. They spend a standard action and explain what they are trying to do, which skill they are using, and why it should work. You determine based on their explanation which category below their attempt falls into.

Condition: Player makes skill check against skill based monster, or comes up with an excellent reason to use a different skill against a skill-linked monster, or comes up with an excellent reason to use a skill against a normal monster. "We killed the summoner, so the elemental should be easier to banish now, I try to unsummon it with arcana.", "You said the mercenaries can be scared with intimidate? I worked with them for a few months awhile back, so I want to trick them with Bluff instead."
Effect: Kill minions in 5x5 area, kill standard, 1/2 damage to elite, 1/4 damage to solo

Condition: Player uses the wrong skill against a skill based monster but it is still reasonable, or player comes up with a very good reason to use a skill against a normal monster.
Effect: Kill minions in 3x3 area, 1/2 damage to standard, 1/4 damage to elite, 1/8 damage to solo.

Condition: Player comes up with a reason to use a skill that you deem implausible.
Effect: None, but on a successful skill check the player wastes only a minor action rather than a standard one.

In general, anything less than a great argument should be unable to convince you to allow the skill usage. In order to stick by the 'don't be a sinker' ideology of 4e, they can always make a skill check to realize their folly and save their standard action (losing only a minor instead). As a rule, you should drop a hint or two each time they use a skill. If they use an ineffective skill, let them know why it didn't work and what else might work better. If they use the wrong skill against a skill based monsters, let them know that there might be a better way to do it.

What are excellent and very good reasons to use a skill against a monster? An excellent reason is one that has you thinking "that's so obvious, I should have made this a skill linked monster in the first place." A very good reason is one that is less obvious, but convincing enough to impress you more than usual.

 

[the-golem]

In this instance, that orc could have been a "skill-based" orc, and an acrobatics roll would probably have worked for that particular monster. I like this idea, but I'm considering just letting a successfull skill check augment a traditional attack role. I play with some really creative people, but most of them are pretty new to 4E, and I'd rather not throw them a curveball.

This scenario actually happened in the last game. We were in a flooding room, and the current outcrop we were on had a set of stairs that led up to a "bridge" (it had since been rotted out, but the bridge sections turned into floating platforms). The marauding ranger of the group had set up a triggered action on his previous turn, but the daring Paladin moved into his path, up to the edge of the platform, blocking his triggered action. On his turn, the ranger "ran full tilt towards the enemy, used the paladin's back as a springboard, and in during his spiraling twist-flip, deftly swiped at the orc, and landed soundly on the floating platform behind him. Mechanically, the ranger moved through the paladins square, "over" the orc, and onto the other side, flanking him. (Technically, it probably shouldn't be allowed, but we're a cinematic-oriented group.)

Having thought about it, especially because the ranger was so descriptive of his actions, I would allow a +2 circumstance bonus to normal attack roll. Our group doesn't have any skill "specialists" per se, as each main skills each range between 7-10, which is inline with attack rolls also. One character does have like, 12 perception at level 2 or something, which thematically fits her character anyway.

...I think I rambled and my main point got lost in there somewhere. If this is confusing to anyone, say so and I'll clarify

 

[eriktheguy]

...I think I rambled and my main point got lost in there somewhere. If this is confusing to anyone, say so and I'll clarify

Yeah, I get what you're saying. I always allow skill checks to be used in combat for any sort of maneuver someone can come up with. But usually they just prefer twin strike. Whatever they're into .

 

[Aramax]

I used magnetic rocks,it went ok but I acedentily rushed though it,I needed to get more into the descriptions and not have everybody roll at once and didnt push the roleplaying.Anybody have any examples of this in use?

 

[Aramax]

Haunted coconuts in pathfinder,will report back

 

[Doombybbr]

Yeah, I get what you're saying. I always allow skill checks to be used in combat for any sort of maneuver someone can come up with. But usually they just prefer twin strike. Whatever they're into .

you could also have monsters that need you to do a skill check first eg. a barrior blocks attacks so the players figure out that they need to make an arcane check to beat up a boss (in the example of minions the arcane check affects all of them) but this is for when you need to make a battle tough.

 

[Doombybbr]

nice but just remember to only let them do it when it makes sense and do not make it TOO powerful BUT YOU CAN MAKE IT RUIN AN ENEMIES DAY EVERY SO OFTEN.