Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 6568916" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Looks like a pretty standard skill challenge, yep.This is true.I think this is true for people that grok skill challenges.Okay.True. Well, mostly. The GM still has total control over the complications when failures present themselves. And say, for instance, we took your consequence for failing the skill challenge and used it in context with the stated goal of the skill challenge.The stated goal, in your post: "find a secured shelter, safe from the elements and predators, where she can stow the children".Your stated consequence for a failed skill challenge when hyenas or mountain lions are preset: "I'm pretty certain that if she would have failed the SC outright with those hyenas or the mountain lion being the relevant threat at the moment, I would have charged her an HS and we would have begun a combat encounter whereby all of the children are one-hit-kill minions (with some kind of attack - like throwing rocks - and utility power defense each) and she has to control/kill the bad guys and keep them off of the kids. Then, down several resources and possibly some kids, she could attempt to start anew (a C1 SC)."No, this doesn't add up to me. Her goal (to find a secure shelter, safe from elements and predators, to stow the children) has failed. There should be no retries, I would think. That doesn't mean she can't find shelter, or a place to stow the children. It just means that it shouldn't be safe or secure.Also, even if you did allow her to try again, you are the person coming up with the complications on each failure. You can call for combat, or 1 healing surge lost, or 10 healing surges lost, or magic items or blessing disappearing, or loss of a hand or eye, or someone loyal betraying her, or whatever.This is empowering. It's just not empowering to the player, in my opinion. It allows for a lot of variation in gameplay, but I can see a GM definitely use the rules to attempt a level of illusionist play. A GM can frame the challenge, targeting bad skills of the PCs, and use failure consequences to keep things on the rails. (Obvious bad GMing is obvious, but we're talking of illuionism and how 4e might combat it at a base level.)Now, let's look at your four points on how this skill challenge helps fight off illusionism with regards to the bad GMing technique I've noted above:1) The resolution mechanics are codified and explicit: I think this is still the case, even for the bad GM. Advantages, Hard requirements, etc. are all explicitly codified.2) The GM's job and principles are clear: This one is trickier. The GM probably thinks that they are running a good game, so I'm going to assume they just have poor technique and aren't trying to ruin the fun of the players. The GM's job (setting consequences, framing the scene, etc.) are all clear to this GM.3) The PC build mechanics are properly synthesized with the resolution mechanics to achieve coherency between the two: Well, PCs have skill modifiers, and can roll skill checks, but that's about where this one ends. If you believe that skill challenges must be tailored to fit PC skill strengths (or explicitly that they are never to target weaknesses), then it fails at this step. Otherwise, this one checks out as well.4) The GM's latitude is tightly and overtly constrained. If they attempt to break those constraints, such as deny the player the earned, secure shelter for the children (despite the SC victory and the explicated stakes), their bad faith will be utterly apparent: This is true, but there's tons of leeway here with all the failures along the way. And even with success, I can give them their shelter, but if the only plausible success is inconvenient, it might stop other plans they had (she might be able to find shelter for the children, but it might be hard to look for a village from there for some reason).I don't know. I mean, I'm definitely against railroading players (for my particular style), but I don't think these principles are enough to fight illusionism off completely. I'm fairly sure that I or my brother could run these types of skill challenges and control the narrative quite effectively while still keeping our players happy, if we really wanted to. Would they see what's going on? They'd probably start to suspect it, if it was a regular occurrence. But as long as they're having a good time with it, they'd probably just think the mechanics are working as intended, and indeed might even blame the mechanics themselves rather than the GM ("I wish skill challenges didn't exist; I'd rather just be able to make skill checks over and over again, rather than be arbitrarily cut off or have something bad happen.")Oh yeah, definitely looks easier here. No doubt. I think that 4e (and even the skill challenge system) definitely improved on your description of AD&D (I've never played), but I have no doubt that it could be revised greatly to empower players more (which, in turn, means that there are less rules for a GM to use to keep players on the rails).To sum up, I don't think the 4e skill challenge system bucks against your illusionism (as I understand it) that hard, but it certainly bucks harder than AD&D as you've described it. I think it has great potential to be revised and built upon, though, to help combat illusionism (again, as I understand it) much more effectively. In the right hands (a GM who doesn't like illusionism), though, it's already a really good tool.Again, thanks for the precise and clear reply.</blockquote>

Verification