Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Vyvyan Basterd" data-source="post: 5035003" data-attributes="member: 4892">I disagree. Skill Challenges encourage players to think of innovative ways to use their character's skills to their fullest. For those with experience, like my players, their is no cue from me about how to solve a problem in character. For players without experience it can help them realize how to use their character's skills to solve a problem.So do more modern editions. The difference is that there is now a framework that determines what capabilities your character possesses instead of relying solely on player skill. You formulate the plan, your character's skills determine whether said plan will succeed.I was trying to draw parallels between editions, not mark differences.Bogus. You've not read a skill challenge at all then. Your plan influences the outcome of a skill challenge directly.As a measure of reward for overcoming a challenge. Not everything should be a Skill Challenge. And I have seen some published ones that shouldn't be. I've also seen some published ones that are BAD. But I see the potential in the structure and don't find them to be the least bit "silly."You could say the same about the game of Dungeons and Dragons over time. But with the right spirit put towards the game it becomes something more.I'm not trying to attack 1E here. I noted a specific module. I didn't claim it to be indicative of 1E AD&D. There is no auto-surprise, just no chance of surprise after enough successes. And I've already explained what I've meant by Attack. What do the bandits in your games do? Deliver daisies to the adventures and ask to be friends? No, they attack. Whether that becomes combat or not depends on what you (the players and DM) do.Yes.I did not claim that 1E prevented this. I was drawing parallels. I did claim that the particular passage in the module seemed to give you no such options, but as you pointed out the advice was not direct in the text, but implicit in the system.It's obviously not the same design goal, it has a different structure. But it can net the same result. Either method can be used to good or ill effect.My skill challenge challenges the players' skill of caution. It tests their skill in ingenuity to solve a problem using the tools at their character's disposal. And it tests the characters' skill as to whether the player's plans will succeed or fail.The difference is that they would be using those skills in an immediate confrontation. I believe said skills would be harder to use once bandits are bearing down on you and your stuff, but I wouldn't rule out their use entirely.Why have chances at all for random encounters if you're strapped for time? This skill challenge takes only as much time as the players devote to it. And at their discretion. If players are instigating the challenge or ignoring the danger wantonly one would have to believe they are doing so because that is the way they enjoy playing. Why not just do this without a skill challenge? I agree, if you don't want to spend the time creating them, then don't. They're hardly necessary to play the game. But I believe they have gotten a bad rap and can be a fun way to adjudicate matters in the game.And there is no edition war going on here despite how much Ariosto is trying to convince people I hate 1E. It is my 2nd favorite edition of D&D to date and I've never had any hateful feelings towards it.</blockquote>

Verification