Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5035911" data-attributes="member: 18280">It is far worse (IMHO) than:Players: We want to avoid the bandits on the road back to town.DM: Ok, how do you plan on doing that?Players: We'll travel away from the roads near ambush spots.DM: How, exactly?  You are currently on the road from Castle Greyhawk, the morning sun burning away the mists as you face the day's travel.Player A:  Do I know where bandits lurk on this road, or where there were famous attacks?DM:  You remember that bandits used to ambush people in Dead Man's Valley and the Singing Wood, because there is plenty of cover there.  Of course, that's no guarantee -- the bandits are likely to know this as well!Player B: I'm going to keep a sharp lookout for bandits!DM: Ok, but that sort of goes without saying! You keep watch, wary for bandits.Player C: I jump really high in the air looking for bandits, bouncing along! DM: You sure? That's pretty silly, and likely to kick up lots of dust from the road.  It's also likely to tire you out, leaving you fatigued if you do encounter any bandits!Player C:  You're right.  Never mind.Player D: I'm going to scry on the Dead Man's Valley, looking for bandit activity. DM: Ok, you perform the short ritual and get a picture of the famous ambush spot. Theres no sign of bandit activity there right now. Player A:  Of course, we still don't know where the bandits are, so we're still going to have to pick a route.....etc.*************************The "skill challenge" as presented assumes a few odd things, such as that using one's perception where there are no bandits somehow tells you something other than that you see no bandits at your current location.  Why is it less silly to make a Perception check before picking a route than it is to bound along like a giant grasshopper?  IMHO, they apply equally as presented -- which is to say, not at all.Why would a player even imagine that bounding would help?  Because his reading of the skill challenge formula suggests that it would!  Moreover, let us assume momentarily that the DM knows where the bandits are.  Presumably, then, scrying on their location reveals the bandits, and scrying elsewhere does not.  If you know where the bandits are, they should be relatively easy to avoid.  Why bother with the "skill challenge"?  If you know where they are not, that knowledge can help you pick your route, but why would the PCs not have to still pick their route?"If they're not at Dead Man's Valley, they're probably in the Singing Wood.  We cut off the road there to the east, giving the Singing Wood a wide berth."Again, if the bandits are in the Singing Wood, why bother with the rest of the "skill challenge"?  If they are not, how did the scrying actually help the PCs?This just smacks of the "quantum states" approach that 4e seems built around.  The bandits are in/not in the area you pass through based on your skill checks.I have no problem with random encounter frequency being reduced through skill use....woodcraft, for example.....but the idea that a set encounter changes locations because the players decide to have their characters march down the King's Highway, and, hey, they made X successes before Y failures, sets my teeth on edge.YMMV, of course.RC</blockquote>

Verification