Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 5423575" data-attributes="member: 336">I've put together a very rough one for magic items, and really any kind of crafting.&nbsp; I wrote about it a little <a href="http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/9-Dude-where-s-my-craft-%28Part-1%29" target="_blank">here</a>, and <a href="http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/10-Dude-where-s-my-craft-%28Part-2%29" target="_blank">here</a>.I find that the &quot;rigid&quot; way in which the skill challenge examples were written caused a lot of confusion.The great benefit I've found to the skill challenge framework is that it easily allows me to assign difficulty (complexity) and rewards (XP or otherwise).&nbsp; Everything else becomes an action/reaction, or better yet, an opportunity/reward system.&nbsp; It allows for a very fluid situation.The most common &quot;problem&quot; I've seen among the published skill challenges is that they followed the same &quot;rigid&quot; presentation as the samples in the original DMG.&nbsp; For me, a skill challenge only &quot;works&quot; when it feels organic.&nbsp; When it has a back and forth between the DM and players (action/reaction).&nbsp; Someone mentioned &quot;telling&quot; the players what they do or what happens when they use X skill.&nbsp; I can understand this &quot;disconnect&quot; because reading the samples in the original DMG you get a sense that is how the interchange occurs.&nbsp; There were &quot;arguments&quot; that hinged on the &quot;fact&quot; that you could not use intimidate on a social challenge because the example showed it as an automatic failure.&nbsp; What was missing in that argument was context.&nbsp; The example portrayed a negotiation with a Duke.&nbsp; I would probably say a powerful political figure.&nbsp; One that because of personality can't be cowed by intimidation.&nbsp; Therefore, using intimidation in that situation would fail because not only would he not comply, he'd probably be offended by the attempt.&nbsp; That doesn't mean that &quot;every&quot; social situation is the same.&nbsp; What if the challenge was to convince a local thief?&nbsp; The situation is not the same and the context is not the same.&nbsp; Those samples need to be looked at within context.&nbsp; I think over time WotC has done a better job of &quot;explaining&quot; the framework, but that is all it is, a framework.&nbsp; The meat of the skill challenge is still the actions of the players, and that is what should be the focus.&nbsp; How do &quot;they&quot; go about accomplishing a goal.&nbsp; The goal can be set by the DM, but that is not exclusive.&nbsp; In my games I've used skill challenges on different occasions when the players set a goal for themselves.&nbsp; It provided me a way to &quot;reward&quot; them &quot;appropriately&quot; for their non-combat actions instead of coming with an ad-hoc reward that could easily become inconsistent.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="D'karr, post: 5423575, member: 336"] I've put together a very rough one for magic items, and really any kind of crafting. I wrote about it a little [URL="http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/9-Dude-where-s-my-craft-%28Part-1%29"]here[/URL], and [URL="http://www.loremaster.org/entry.php/10-Dude-where-s-my-craft-%28Part-2%29"]here[/URL]. I find that the "rigid" way in which the skill challenge examples were written caused a lot of confusion. The great benefit I've found to the skill challenge framework is that it easily allows me to assign difficulty (complexity) and rewards (XP or otherwise). Everything else becomes an action/reaction, or better yet, an opportunity/reward system. It allows for a very fluid situation. The most common "problem" I've seen among the published skill challenges is that they followed the same "rigid" presentation as the samples in the original DMG. For me, a skill challenge only "works" when it feels organic. When it has a back and forth between the DM and players (action/reaction). Someone mentioned "telling" the players what they do or what happens when they use X skill. I can understand this "disconnect" because reading the samples in the original DMG you get a sense that is how the interchange occurs. There were "arguments" that hinged on the "fact" that you could not use intimidate on a social challenge because the example showed it as an automatic failure. What was missing in that argument was context. The example portrayed a negotiation with a Duke. I would probably say a powerful political figure. One that because of personality can't be cowed by intimidation. Therefore, using intimidation in that situation would fail because not only would he not comply, he'd probably be offended by the attempt. That doesn't mean that "every" social situation is the same. What if the challenge was to convince a local thief? The situation is not the same and the context is not the same. Those samples need to be looked at within context. I think over time WotC has done a better job of "explaining" the framework, but that is all it is, a framework. The meat of the skill challenge is still the actions of the players, and that is what should be the focus. How do "they" go about accomplishing a goal. The goal can be set by the DM, but that is not exclusive. In my games I've used skill challenges on different occasions when the players set a goal for themselves. It provided me a way to "reward" them "appropriately" for their non-combat actions instead of coming with an ad-hoc reward that could easily become inconsistent. [/QUOTE]

Verification