Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Magus Coeruleus" data-source="post: 4289145" data-attributes="member: 1704">Not having tried it I can't speak to the viability of this system in play, but your dedication and creativity are astounding!  I'm especially pleased to see that recoveries are not contingent on rolling 20s but come at crunch-time, are totally elective, but still limited.  Some thoughts:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Much resistance has and will come from the apparent complexity. Much of that complexity is on presentation rather than nuts and bolts of the system. Core system has a lot of hard to remember fiddly bits as well but is perhaps "eased into" better. I recommend rewriting to completely separate a concise designer-notes-free explanation (e.g. FAQ/IAQ) and all the fun why/how bits. I also suggest not starting with tagged skills, which are odd to see out the gate.  Instead, start with the default, which is a normal skill check to gain a success (or suffer a failure). Move on to the next (chrono)logically relevant thing, probably Aid Another, then the unlocking secondary skills, etc. Leave stuff related to Time of Trials toward the end because this deals with a near end situation.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I suggest renaming Bold Opening to avoid confusion with Bold Recovery. I like something including "unlock" in the name. I would present a list where a primary skill with this capacity would be followed by an indented secondary skill to visually indicate that one is unlocked by the other.  The same convention can be used if a skill's main or only use is to aid another; often this will logically be only relevant to aiding another specific skill or angle of approach, which could be indented after the primary. (I know your system doesn't deal with narrowed options for how one skill can aid another, but I think some verisimilitude is appropriate and that it shouldn't hurt the players if the DM makes clear when the Aid is successful what would benefit and what wouldn't.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I disagree with the idea that DM's should always or even routinely tell players what the secondaries (unlocked skills) are. I think it depends on the situation. For instance, if an Insight or History check gives info about the Duke's motivations in a negotiation scenario, I wouldn't specifically tell the players that there is something the Duke personally wants or that there is some historical precedent that will help their Diplomacy. Many times the fun is in the PCs discovering these things through reasoning or trial-and-error.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This is not a well thought out proposal on my part, but in terms of XP, how about saying a skill challenge of your level is like a fight of your level and that for every row you go up or down (i.e. 1-2 levels) the XP go up/down a level's worth? The skill challenge RAW says raise or lower DC by 1 per level of change in encounter and your system's DCs usually go up/down one per row (1-2 levels).  I would actually suggest that the Complexity 2 be the default because I don't think 3 successes is comparable to a combat vs. your level. You can marginally in/decrease the XP for Complexity 1 or >2 to reflect not added difficulty but more time and effort (just as longer fights are sometimes no more difficult but do take more time and effort).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">(Separate from concisely presented rules) any guidance you can provide from your analyses about average PWR increases/decreases from tweaking numbers would be helpful. I don't take issue with your using medium difficulty by default because I think that should be for a level-appropriate skill challenge and that an easier/harder one will correspond to a higher/lower level with attendant effect on both difficulty and XP. That said, unlike combats where you usually want to avoid excess difficulty and TPKs (though there are captures and you-should-flee scenarios), skill challenges should allow for much more difficult situations, like one in which parlaying may but probably won't allow PCs to avoid a tough fight. I'd like to know how to handle a range of target skill challenge success probabilities with your system.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Not to open a can of worms, but since you list so many mechanics or ideas you considered, how about one in which blowing a check does not result in a failure per se unless it fails by 5 or more, as opposed to the binary outcome of helpful/hurtful for primary checks? Just curious as to your thoughts on that sort of thing.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">In place of the fun but lengthy (ha, lengthy, I'm a hypocrite) example of monologue from the rogue in your example, I would recommend a concise but complete example showcasing your system, complete with specific DCs (which the DMG sadly lacked in its examples).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Any info on effects of varying party size?</li> </ul>Thanks again for all of this!</blockquote>

Verification