NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="M_Natas" data-source="post: 9293341" data-attributes="member: 7025918">I mean, I'm pretty sure they could tell by my descriptions that they were succeeding and on the right track. I really prefer to draw the finish line trough ingame means. I also wouldn't tell the players how much HP a Monster has, but would make it clear with the description if it is barley scratched, wounded or hanging on a thread.I prefer to not use playervisble meta currency whenever possible. Like I hat hate the Bastion points in the D&D24 Beta Test with a passion, because they are stupid.Also not exactly knowing if you are succeeding until it is done is also tension raising. Nor knowing is a powerful tool (that's why in good horror films you don't see the monster for a long time because the moment you really see it the tension is usullay gone).But I prefer the visible failure points to be rooted inside the game world.Like ... there is the city council with 9 members. In order to get the Law passed you want, you need to convince at least 5 council members. So know we have an ingame justification.The write up is fine and If I would write it up to publish I would probably look similar to your write up, including possible venues the PCs could take, failure and win conditions ectera. But again, all DM facing.I usually get the ball rolling by after Inset the scene I ask the (for the scene) most important player what he wants to do (else I one by random or the one with the least time to shine) and then let the players naturally go from there. But I would never call it initiative, because it is a naturally flowing back and forth.I mean, Skill challenges are basically just an extension of RAW play. It is quite natural that for complex situations you use more than one skill check.I didn't say no one would benefit from adding a different mode of play. I'm saying that I haven't seen one yet that I think would be an improvement over the current one. That's why I started to bring concrete table examples, because with those it is easier to show how something looks in actual play and also helps to eliminate misunderstandings on how things will work in actual play. And after the first example somebody basically  said, that's not complex enough for "social combat"-rules so I tried to think of a more complex example and couldn't find one in my current game (because that is still low level and despite being quite roguish they are not on the radar of Law Enforcment yet and also quite far from other big social interactions).I said I couldn't find many in my current game, that's why I went to my campaign before.Yeah, and I would usually run them based on the ingame-fiction.Like a court case, the rules are informed by the rules of the court - who is allowed to speak when, for how long and how often. So here we have fixed numbers based on the ingame fiction.So I would usually present all those examples with as concrete ingame goals as possible.I already said (probably already 20 pages ago) I would be fine with a DM facing book a la Tashas Cauldron of Social mixture that gives like 20 or 30 examples/subsystems for those specific examples you mentioned to help DMs run those things.As long as they don't have player facing Meta currencies, I will be fine with that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />.</blockquote>

Verification