Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5964969" data-attributes="member: 6668292">As I just said in another thread (and in a reply to you), I like the X successes before 3 failures rule, as long as each failure introduces a complication, and as long as the in-game fiction keeps moving between each check. I think 4e usually hits these goals.However, I do run my differently from you. I, as GM, call for what the next check will be. And, it usually won't be immediately after the next check. And, I also don't make everyone participate (the best goes when applicable, and the worst when applicable).For example, if they're trying to research, then infiltrate a castle, and then convince a king of something, it might look like this: (0) Fictional setup in-game already established. Plan established. Skill challenge begins.(1) I'll call for a Knowledge check first for researching. If they succeed, it'll be one success on the skill challenge.(1a) The interaction from there continues, and convincing the guards to allow them into the castle will generally not be towards the skill challenge.(1b) Speaking to the chancellor might be, but may not be, depending on whether anything even gets rolled.(2) The second check may not even show up until they speak to the king, where they try to convince him using the Negotiation skill (modified by the Empathy, Sense Motive, Leadership, and Knowledge skills, maybe the Intimidation, Bluff, or Perform skills, rarely other skills [like Appraise, Assess, Disguise, Martial Prowess, Tactics, etc.], and stunts).(2a) Depending on how much he buys into it (he may go for it from the start, even before the skill challenge ends), the challenge continues. If he bought into it, his advisers might begin to attempt to convince him not to follow through, or to go through with it in a way that doesn't work for the PCs, or to stall until they can coordinate the effort better, or the like.(2b) Depending on their success, we either have the king altering his plan, and the PCs trying to convince him again (harder than before if the advisers succeeded), or convince the advisers.(3) Depending on the PCs' choice, I might call for a Knowledge check to know about their personality, or a Sense Motive check to figure out what they value in this conversation (so they know what to appeal to).(4) As of this point, I might ramp the tension or excitement up a little by following an actual skill challenge check with a second one (Negotiation check, again augmented by the same set of possible skills or stunts).And on it goes. I didn't account for complications that might arise from failures, but complications can arise even via success (the advisers trying to change the parameters of the success). I find this to make for a dynamic fictional outcome, and one that is unpredictable in most cases (something I also want it to produce for me).I think, personally, that calling for the checks as the GM (based on what they players say they want to do) is important for dynamic and fun skill challenges. Players can certainly think "I want to convince the king", and tell me "[to the king] Your majesty, we're just trying to keep your kingdom safe by aiding you in your cause against the goblins*. If you give us twenty-five knights, I think we can clear out the goblin cultists we've found." In such a situation, I don't deny the player his Negotiation check, but I do decide whether or not it applies towards the skill challenge's successes.*(As an aside, I don't have goblins in my game currently, so it's obviously just an example.)This seems like an argument for a rules-light system. I see the appeal, but I think it's not necessary for a good skill challenge system, personally.I'd disagree, other than with your "this sort of" qualifier. It doesn't need those things in order to have a skill challenge system. It doesn't need to force everyone to participate, it doesn't need to define the skills usable at the beginning, it doesn't need to allow the players to decide which check will contribute towards the skill challenge total. Those are all fine, or even better, depending on play style, but they aren't necessary for an enjoyable skill challenge system (obviously for a different play style).At any rate, I'd like to see some form of system in effect in a rules mod in the PHB (with advice on running them in the DMG, probably). They can definitely add to the game, from my experience, and while many people dislike them, I would like them around in some form. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification