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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 6244606" data-attributes="member: 87792">Because giving everyone the chance to shine involves people all making it to the start line rather than to the finish line.  What they do is up to them.  (And bench pressing the throne with the king on it isn't shining under most circumstances.To me, it's equally transparent.  Make your skill challenges so that everyone can be good at them, and have a chance to leap for greatness if they see the opportunity.  You take them to the start line; they choose how to cross the finish line.First, the bard has it easy in using skills in social interaction skill challenges.  Second, the bard gets Words of Friendship meaning they blow the curve mathematically anywhere they can use diplomacy.  Third, there are things called secondary skills in skill challenges.  Fourth a good reason and a transparent excuse aren't the same thing at all.So the bard is better numerically due to Words of Friendship and has a much easier time bringing their skill to bear.  This doesn't mean that the fighter holding the gates closed against half the palace guard while the bard sweet talks the cardinal isn't shining.  It means that the fighter needs to work much harder to shine and is shining in a different way from the bard.  The Bard is therefore special.  That someone who worked harder and played smarter might overturn the Bard's advantage in being the focal character of the skill challenge does not mean that the Bard isn't special and isn't the easy character to make focal this time.  It just means that hard work, skill, and luck can be more than a match for the raw ability that the bard has.The problem isn't that Sam was trying to be less good at areas.  It was that the way Sam was trying to be less good was pure jackass behaviour.  If Sam wants to be less good - and play the role of backing singer in the big fight scenes, stabbing enemies that get too close and trying to stay alive then that's fine.  But that's not what was happening in your example.  You wanted Sam, as the non-combatant (note: not weak combatant, non-combatant) to be the person who takes out the dragon.  You wanted Sam, as the person who can't fight well, to be the person the big fights revolve around.  You wanted Sam to be a spotlight stealing hog.So I do not take back a single thing I said.  The problem isn't that everyone has to be equally good.  They don't and they never have.  It was that your example is a textbook example of how not to do such things.</blockquote>

Verification