Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Styles of D&D Play
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9241285" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Then you were simply using skill challenges incorrectly. Both of those things should always matter when running a skill challenge. A wisely-chosen turn of phrase or clever action should earn a success without rolling; a truly self-sabotaging action should earn a failure without rolling. The state of play should change from one action to the next, that's the whole point of having initiative involved. As others have said, there may even be cases where a particularly clever/foolish or complete response just ends the challenge one way or the other; this should be rare but hardly impossible.</p><p></p><p>No wonder you hate skill challenges so much.</p><p></p><p>It doesn't take several pages to explain skill challenges in an effective and productive way. I could easily do it in just two. (Not counting space eaten up by art or things like tables of difficulty values or the like, of course.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>Okay. Is that somehow <em>advocating</em> that people do that thing? Because that's very clearly the point you want to make: having political content of any kind is <em>endorsement</em> of certain kinds of behavior. Does that mean having dating mechanics in a game is endorsement of cheating, since players can cheat on their SOs? Does that mean D&D endorses violence because the vast majority of its rules are about how to make others die in violent combat?</p><p></p><p>The core point does not hold. A game where you play a ruthless, scheming noble cannot be equivalent to saying that assassination is a good and noble thing that people should totally do. The very notion is ludicrous.</p><p></p><p>(Also, "the only way to win is to ruthlessly crush your opponent" is not actually true of Coup. You can also win by simply <em>outlasting</em> your enemies. It is more difficult, to be sure, but if you play the long game and simply <em>survive</em> long enough, you can win by buying off those who support your rivals, until you are the only one left with supporters. It's a risky strategy, since assassination is an available tactic in play, but luck and skill might get you through. Much of your ability to win will rest on your poker face and your ability to see through others' deceptions, as the best "honest" ways to strip someone of their support are to successfully challenge a lie and to prove that you did <em>not</em> lie when challenged.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9241285, member: 6790260"] Then you were simply using skill challenges incorrectly. Both of those things should always matter when running a skill challenge. A wisely-chosen turn of phrase or clever action should earn a success without rolling; a truly self-sabotaging action should earn a failure without rolling. The state of play should change from one action to the next, that's the whole point of having initiative involved. As others have said, there may even be cases where a particularly clever/foolish or complete response just ends the challenge one way or the other; this should be rare but hardly impossible. No wonder you hate skill challenges so much. It doesn't take several pages to explain skill challenges in an effective and productive way. I could easily do it in just two. (Not counting space eaten up by art or things like tables of difficulty values or the like, of course.) Okay. Is that somehow [I]advocating[/I] that people do that thing? Because that's very clearly the point you want to make: having political content of any kind is [I]endorsement[/I] of certain kinds of behavior. Does that mean having dating mechanics in a game is endorsement of cheating, since players can cheat on their SOs? Does that mean D&D endorses violence because the vast majority of its rules are about how to make others die in violent combat? The core point does not hold. A game where you play a ruthless, scheming noble cannot be equivalent to saying that assassination is a good and noble thing that people should totally do. The very notion is ludicrous. (Also, "the only way to win is to ruthlessly crush your opponent" is not actually true of Coup. You can also win by simply [I]outlasting[/I] your enemies. It is more difficult, to be sure, but if you play the long game and simply [I]survive[/I] long enough, you can win by buying off those who support your rivals, until you are the only one left with supporters. It's a risky strategy, since assassination is an available tactic in play, but luck and skill might get you through. Much of your ability to win will rest on your poker face and your ability to see through others' deceptions, as the best "honest" ways to strip someone of their support are to successfully challenge a lie and to prove that you did [I]not[/I] lie when challenged.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Styles of D&D Play
Top