PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Skill Challenges not working as suggested



Athistaur
2008-07-23, 05:03 AM
Hello,
Just recently we bought the books for 4e and started a one-shot adventure. As usual i was dungeonmaster and we had a good look at 4e.

However i ran into a problem. I set up a skill challenge for the party. Basicly the challenge was similiar to an urban chase, but on roof level and the party avoided to be seen.
I decided on atlethics, acrobatics and stealth as main skills, and had given a thought how i would handle the other skills.
Well, the trouble was... the party rouge decided to do it alone. In-charackter this was a reasonable and a fine decision. But it resulted in the skill challenge becoming plain boring and no fun. Basicly the whole party had to sit back and do nothing till the rouge completed the challenge. He performed good, but the checks were boring as he basicly was only using acrobatics all the time.

We did roleplay that part as usual (and as suggested) which helped a lot, but we wouldn't have needed a skill challenge for that.

The rule for skill challenges states that every charakter MUST contribute. This was a "wtf" moment for us. Why would the Barbarian need to "help" the cleric to convinvce the duke? How can the party in the Inn help the rouge tumble across the roofs?

So my points are:
- How do you handle or circumvent players that don't want to contribute to a skill challenge.
- How do you keep a skill challenge from becoming dull by using only your best ability ?

Please excuse my bad writing as i'm no native english speaker.

Greetings,
Athistaur

Kurald Galain
2008-07-23, 05:13 AM
The answer is simply that if skill challenges bother you, don't use them. There are numerous situations in which they don't make sense, anyway.

Orzel
2008-07-23, 05:42 AM
Think of it as everyone should not must.

Make using 1 skill over and over too difficult or cap it's effectiveness.

My party had to beat a wizard to the end of a river. We could swim, sail a boat, ride a horse through the forest, or run at the river edge. We had to succeed before the wizard.

Riding was fastest but you'll easily get lost.
Sailing was easiest and you could take riders but slow.
Swimming was very easy but you could only go so long
Running was easy but you can yell directions to riders.

The sailor (our weak wizard) carried the 2 runners for a bit for 2 easy successes. Our runner hopped out and passed out but his screams allowed the rider know where the wizard was and not get lost. Our other runner tried that and failed twice.

AJCSIV
2008-07-23, 06:40 AM
The first point to consider is the fact that if a skill challenge would only really involve one character, it's probably not going to be incredibly exciting for the other players unless it's a really dramatic moment that the players themselves are really interested in watching. However, as a rule, regardless of whether it's a skill challenge or not if it doesn't involve their character they generally won't be interested unless they have some contribution, for example.

You have a gladiatorial pit that one of the players has to fight in for whatever reason {or all the players but fighting one at a time}. The players not fighting are going to be bored out of their minds while that one player is fighting {helpful suggestion, have them place bets!}.

The party are ordered to entertain the king/duke/lord/random individual of power. Because there's no such skill as perform {and nobody could think of a way to justify a charsima roll that would suffice}, you decided to do a tightrope walk over the king/etc's head. Now it would be stupid to put the wizard who has no athletics ability on the rope, so you only have the rogue tightwalk. However you could do something like have the rope extended between two poles that are held up by your strongmen in the party, one of your others might make a roll of commentator and exagerate the feat via words and make a charisma roll to impress. That's four players covered right there with something that could have just been one player. Granted, it's four different skill checks, but if one fails you could make it more interesting by inventing ways for it to affect the others {In the end it might be the commentator who saves the day when the entire thing collapses but he did such a good job that the king/etc takes it as entertainment and let's them continue}.

Now as for your running over the rooftop idea... Well the other players might not be able to run over the rooftop but maybe one of the other players could follow after and the other players could take his directions and try to pursue on the ground, if he's making for the battlements it might take them time but the rogue can delay the villain while the others catch up on foot with directions from the other roofer. Or conversly you could distract the others by having random goonies stand up and get in their way entertaining them with a small fight scene, or heck, have them get engaged in a game of poker {on that note, if you're ever waiting for a player to start a game, bring a deck of cards and play blackjack or pokers with the players using their character's money, you get the feeling of risk and betting without actually loosing out in the real world}.

Hopefully that helps.

Athistaur
2008-07-23, 07:25 AM
Thanks for the answers so far.
I do like the concept of the skill challenges, so I'm not going to skip them completly. I'm just having trouble on how to run them.

On a side note: One of the players reasoned later that maybe the characters in the Inn could have used their turns in the skill challenge (rooftop chase) to drink to the health of the thief (giving him the +2 helping bonus).

As a Rule of thumb i'm considering this: If a challenge is not difficult enough to keep all players busy, it's not worth a skill challenge.
This could/should be supported by expanding the challenge and make opportunities for more people to shine, thus making it worth of a skill challenge.
I'm thinking about adding the constraints of at least 3 successes in different skills, before finally solving the challenge.
The party would have needed to use athletics at least once to keep up.
The party would have needed acrobatics at least once to cross a gap.
The party would have needed stealth at least once to keep low profile.
If the party includes skills of their own idea this would count towards the "3 different successes".
(This does not include yet the "keep all players busy", so the rooftop chase alone still wouldn't be worth a skill challenge.)
This would also go well with the river chase szenario or the entertaining of the duke.

Roderick_BR
2008-07-23, 02:20 PM
Another good rule of thumb is: If the "challenge" can be done by one person alone, and will take only a few seconds (1 or two rolls), then it's not a skill challenge, it's just a skill roll.
When it's something more people can take part, and is something time consuming, then you could use a skill challenge.

Starbuck_II
2008-07-23, 03:06 PM
However i ran into a problem. I set up a skill challenge for the party. Basicly the challenge was similiar to an urban chase, but on roof level and the party avoided to be seen.
I decided on atlethics, acrobatics and stealth as main skills, and had given a thought how i would handle the other skills.
Well, the trouble was... the party rouge decided to do it alone. In-charackter this was a reasonable and a fine decision. But it resulted in the skill challenge becoming plain boring and no fun. Basicly the whole party had to sit back and do nothing till the rouge completed the challenge. He performed good, but the checks were boring as he basicly was only using acrobatics all the time.

What did the party do on their turn?
Example:
DM: You are being chased by the thieves guild because X (whatever you did in the adventure). You are cornered and the only eay to escape is the roofrop.
Primary skills: atlethics, acrobatics and stealth. But any ideas for escaping are welcome. (Secretly, the DM notes 6 successes before 3 failures)
(assuming this was initiative: Ropgue, Fighter, Cleric, Wizard)
Rogue: I'll use athletics to climb up. (Rolls 15 total). Did I make it?
DM: You starting scaling the wall, by climbing on top of a box or two, you are up.
Fighter: I will make a perception check to look for around (+2 to next action if make it within reason), 15?
DM: You see some barrels top one side.
Fighter: I'll move the in the roadway, try to slow them down. (Str check DC 20). 21?
DM: You succeed, however, you need to do more to escape.
Wizard: I use a Know (history) check as a minor action, maybe I remember a escape that we can take ideas from. (rolls 19 total)
DM: Stretching it a little, but why not (was DC 17) you made it. You remember, that once Rudger the Wedge used this pass to escape hjust like you, inspiring the others with your tale you get +2 to next action.
Wizard: I'll try climbing. (rolls 15 total) did I make it.
DM: You make it up. The rogue pays you on the back and you alnmost fall back in, but you balance yourself.
Cleric: I'll attempt to climb; after all even the wizard made it. 13?
DM: You fall, luckily you weren't that high up or you would have taken damge.
Total so far: 3 successes, 1 failure. Perception/history just give bonus no count as success.

But that is just a example.
Could you better derscribe what happened in yours.




The rule for skill challenges states that every charakter MUST contribute. This was a "wtf" moment for us. Why would the Barbarian need to "help" the cleric to convinvce the duke? How can the party in the Inn help the rouge tumble across the roofs?

Barbarian helps by tellingf the Duke by his strength how strong he is. That his aid won't be used foolishly. They can drive the enemy orcs away if he would just give help.
The wizard uses his history knowldge to remember how the Duke once was battle against this tribe. Surely, the duke hates orcs just as much as anyone.
And the Rogue uses his cunning and knowledge to persuade the duke
or
maybe his acrobatics to entertain the duke while the others directly convince him.

Really, all of these are viable.

There are no solo skill challenges.
If the party sans the Rogue is in the inn than the rogue is not in a skill challenge.
If you want to run a solo skill challenge you are welcome, but well ask your party: it will be boring.

Yakk
2008-07-23, 03:18 PM
Hello,
Just recently we bought the books for 4e and started a one-shot adventure. As usual i was dungeonmaster and we had a good look at 4e.

However i ran into a problem. I set up a skill challenge for the party. Basicly the challenge was similiar to an urban chase, but on roof level and the party avoided to be seen.
I decided on atlethics, acrobatics and stealth as main skills, and had given a thought how i would handle the other skills.
Well, the trouble was... the party rouge decided to do it alone. In-charackter this was a reasonable and a fine decision. But it resulted in the skill challenge becoming plain boring and no fun. Basicly the whole party had to sit back and do nothing till the rouge completed the challenge. He performed good, but the checks were boring as he basicly was only using acrobatics all the time.

We did roleplay that part as usual (and as suggested) which helped a lot, but we wouldn't have needed a skill challenge for that.

The rule for skill challenges states that every charakter MUST contribute. This was a "wtf" moment for us. Why would the Barbarian need to "help" the cleric to convinvce the duke? How can the party in the Inn help the rouge tumble across the roofs?

So my points are:
- How do you handle or circumvent players that don't want to contribute to a skill challenge.
- How do you keep a skill challenge from becoming dull by using only your best ability ?

Please excuse my bad writing as i'm no native english speaker.

Greetings,
Athistaur

Every 2 characters who don't try to contribute generate 1 failure, due to time pressure and the lack of help.

If this is a complexity 5 skill challenge (a full encounter), that comes to 12 successes before 3 failures.

With 4 members of the party saying "pass" each round... your failure is assured. Your rogue needs help cutting them off!

You can have the skill challenge pass through multiple phases, where different skills are useful in different ways. Skill successes can give a bonus to doing something else different.

You can also generate cumulative penalties to trying the same thing multiple times in a row. Tossing out -2s is perfectly acceptable. :-)

Tsotha-lanti
2008-07-23, 11:10 PM
Every 2 characters who don't try to contribute generate 1 failure, due to time pressure and the lack of help.

If this is a complexity 5 skill challenge (a full encounter), that comes to 12 successes before 3 failures.

With 4 members of the party saying "pass" each round... your failure is assured. Your rogue needs help cutting them off!

Best freaking idea so far (out of several good ones). I'm stealing it. "You can't succeed alone" is such an important lesson in RPGs anyway.

Skill challenges take a lot of thought to run properly - just like similar scenes do in other games that don't have a "skill challenge" mechanic, or that don't involve any mechanic at all!

Athistaur
2008-07-24, 03:29 AM
Thanks once more. :smallsmile:
Obviously i made a few mistakes when I set up the skill challenge. However, we did learn and that was worth it.
- Mistake 1: There was low time pressure. At least no immidieate pressure that would have reasoned a failure for a pass. When starting the challenge i didn't thought of this as crucial.
- Mistake 2: There was no need for the whole party, allowing the resulting "solo challenge" in the first place.
- Mistake 3: The party was seperated when the challenge started, just one door, but seperated anyhow.

I adapt the "2 pass ~ 1 Failure" rule as well, thank you :smallbiggrin:

So the Answers to my questions so far are:
- How do you handle or circumvent players that don't want to contribute to a skill challenge?

design the challenge to have all players busy in the first place
solo challenge is not worth a skill challenge
keep time pressure high
2 pass ~ 1 Failure
- How do you keep a skill challenge from becoming dull by using only your best ability ?

Challenge needs success in at least 3 different skills
increase difficulty of repeated used skills
Throw obstacles during the challenge which result in an reasonable automatic failure for single skills during single rounds.


For those who are indeed more interested what exactly happend during the skill challenge you may read below:
The party consisted of 3 people Fighter, Warlock, Rogue. Warlock and rogue were considerable driven by greed. The party was in town to steal back from the thief guild. The Fighter was down in the Inn drinking and the Warlock and Rogue were upstairs in a chamber with a local whore.
Then the rogue came up with one of his stupid plans: Kill the whore and shove the guilt to the local thief guild. He at once started with step 1: 'Kill the whore'. The Warlock and thief discussed that he wantet to drag the whore over the rooftops to the thief guild, breaking in an deposit the corpse there, having a bloody trail in front of the house of the thief guild leading right inside. The Warlock agreed and went downstairs to persuade the fighter into the plan. Finally everybody agreed to the plan.
At this time it sounded like a good Idea to make the unseen draging of the corpse to the thiefs guild and deposing it there a skill challenge. (Well by now i know it wasn't a good idea) It sure seemed challenging enough. (If it would have the desired effect was a different matter.)
So the warlock went back upstairs where the rogue said: "I do it alone, im nimble and stealthy." The Warlock was ok with it and went down to tell the fighter (another mistake here, the party was seperated in two different rooms when the challenge started). Then the fighter an the warlock staid in the Inn while the rogue startet to climb out of the window with the corpse(1 success), draging it over the rooftops(4 more successes) and just a few roofs from the thiefs guild away he nearly was spoted(as he never made a stealth check).
By that time the rest of the party payed their bill and left the Inn, heading towards the guild at street level.
The thief then basicly screwed up as he tried to one-shot the bandit who stood in his way. He bloodied him in one shot, but the guy was screaming enough to cause alarm(automatic failure).
That was heard by the other two incoming "heros", speeding up to reach the thiefs guild.
The rogue still wanted to continue with his plan an tried to drag the corpse over the gap/street on roof level to the thiefs guild. He failed and was found by his party members a few moments later knocked prone on street level(another failure).
The skill challlenge ended here anyway (5 success 2 failure) as the fighter quickly made clear what he was thinking by now of the rogues plan. And they were interrupted by the alarmed thiefes anyway soon after.

nagora
2008-07-24, 05:03 AM
Every 2 characters who don't try to contribute generate 1 failure, due to time pressure and the lack of help.
Why?


With 4 members of the party saying "pass" each round... your failure is assured. Your rogue needs help cutting them off!
Why?

What you're saying is that a lone thief chasing someone across the rooftops has x chance of success. But the same thief chasing the same people across the same rooftops has their ability reduced if they happened to have begun the chase in the company of some friends who don't join in the chase.

That's stupid.

What's the penalty for inept people (ie, those who don't have the thief's skills) trying to help?

Tsotha-lanti
2008-07-24, 10:35 AM
What you're saying is that a lone thief chasing someone across the rooftops has x chance of success. But the same thief chasing the same people across the same rooftops has their ability reduced if they happened to have begun the chase in the company of some friends who don't join in the chase.

Hardly. If the thief tried alone, he'd fail outright, because he can't do it alone. He needs help on the ground etc. If there's nobody else helping, he'll lose the target very early on. That is, if the thief tried alone, there would be no skill challenge - the target would just get away.

nagora
2008-07-24, 10:48 AM
Hardly. If the thief tried alone, he'd fail outright, because he can't do it alone. He needs help on the ground etc. If there's nobody else helping, he'll lose the target very early on. That is, if the thief tried alone, there would be no skill challenge - the target would just get away.
Why? If the thief is the faster/more skilled/luckier of the parties, why would they auto-fail when alone? It makes no sense, IC.

This is a core issue with the suggestion of 1 failure per 2 uninvolved characters: it requires people who are not skilled in the required areas to join in to allow the skilled people to do the jobs they have trained all their lives for. There are many, many times when a specialist is better off being allowed to work alone than with people who don't understand what's going on.

Tsotha-lanti
2008-07-24, 11:05 AM
This is a core issue with the suggestion of 1 failure per 2 uninvolved characters: it requires people who are not skilled in the required areas to join in to allow the skilled people to do the jobs they have trained all their lives for. There are many, many times when a specialist is better off being allowed to work alone than with people who don't understand what's going on.

Yes, but this is not, by definition, a skill challenge. It's a skill check. If you read the section on skill challenges, the whole point is that you make sure every PC has some chance to contribute - and when a PC suggests a skill, you don't block with "no", but guide with "yes, but".

If you're chasing someone across rooftops, the Fighter uses Athletics to join the chase (as do the Paladin and Warlord) or Streetwise to catch up with the target on the ground (as does the Warlock). The Wizard uses Insight to figure out where they're going, or Dungeoneering to help with the climbing - both granting bonuses to other characters' checks. The Ranger and Rogue use Acrobatics, Athletics, Perception, or Stealth - they've got the broadest skill selection, but are still only one person each.

With no one on the ground, the Rogue loses the target the first time he drops out of sight - but the Cleric running along on the street would spot the target who's dropped out of sight into an alley in order to let the Rogue run past. And so on.

Skill challenges, practically by definition, require teamwork. If it doesn't require teamwork, it's probably a skill check. (Although you could certainly have the rogue running a Complexity 1 skill challenge while the rest of the party fight 4/5ths of an encounter - nothing wrong with that, since everybody's busy. In fact, this is a great way to handle traps.)

Yakk
2008-07-24, 11:24 AM
No. That thief would fail if they tried it alone. The problem, being a complexity 5 one, is not something that a single thief could pull off by themselves.

The "every 2 passes is 1 failure notch" is a mere abstraction of that.

A task that the thief could finish on their own reliably it not a challenge, and as such deserves no XP reward, and it isn't worth bothering to roll the dice. Only things that are sufficiently hard that it takes a party deserve to be called challenges at the party scale.

If you want a less abstract version... let's make a system where 1 person has a decent chance against a complexity 1 task, but will have serious problems against a complexity 2 and greater task.

Before:
Complex 1: 3 succ, 3 fail
Complex 2: 5 succ, 3 fail
Complex 3: 7 succ, 3 fail
Complex 4: 9 succ, 3 fail
Complex 5: 11 succ, 3 fail

We have an expected 5 people in the party. So let's add time pressure!

Every round you accumulate an automatic failure. Players can take a -10 penalty to a roll to "double down": earn 2 successes if you win.

This design makes a "low complexity" tasks more doable by a smaller group of players. Which makes sense, as a C5 task is supposed to be a full-party thing, while a C2 task is supposed to use up the resources of 2 party members. . .

(Legend: S success, F failure, f auto-fail from a round passing, _ aid another or pass action).

Complex 1: 3 success before 5 fail, +1 auto-fail per round
Single player: SfSfFfS: 3/2
Two players: SSfFFfS: 3/3
Three players: SSFfFFS: 3/4
Four players: SSFFfF__S: 3/4 (2 aids)
Five players: SSFFFf____S: 3/4 (4 aids)

Complex 2: 5 success before 5 fail, +1 auto-fail per round
One player: SfSfSfSfS: 5/1
Two players: SSfSSfFS: 5/2
Three players: SSSfSFFf__S: 5/3 (2 aids)
Four players: SSSSfFFFS: 5/4
Five players: SSSSFfFF__S: 5/4 (2 aids)

Complex 3: 7 success before 5 fail, +1 auto-fail per round
One player: You are screwed, unless you double-down.
Two players: SSfSSfSSfFS works: 7/2
Three players: SSSfSSSfFFS: 7/3
Four players: SSSSfSSFFf___S: 7/3 (3 aids)
Five players: SSSSSfSFFFS: 7/4

Complex 4: 9 success before 5 fail, +1 auto-fail per round
One: Hopeless
Two: SSfSSfSSfSSf_S: 9/1 (1 aid)
Three: SSSfSSSfSSFf__S: 9/2 (2 aids)
Four: SSSSfSSSSfFF__S: 9/3 (2 aids)
Five: SSSSSfSSSFFf____S: 9/3 (4 aids)

Complex 5: 11 successes before 5 fail, +1 auto-fail per round
One: Hopeless
Two: Lots of double-downs
Three: SSSfSSSfSSSfSFS: 11/2
Four: SSSSfSSSSfSSF_f___S: 11/2 (4 aids)
Five: SSSSSfSSSSSfFF__S: 11/3 (2 aids)

That seems to work cleanly.

In short, for something to be a challenge, if you sit and do nothing the other side is going to win.

Having more people working on solving the problem leads helps chip away at the "if I do nothing, I'm screwed".

A high-complexity challenge is one that _needs_ the efforts of more people to pull off.

And it isn't as artificial as "2 people pass = 1 failure". It also makes the balance of a complexity 2 trap skill challenge, with 3 even-level monsters, work out nicely. If you don't send enough resources at the trap or skill challenge, it becomes too late and the skill challenge "matures". You can throw more resources at the skill challenge in order to wrap it up quicker, but that results in you having the monsters around for longer. . .

Note that it takes about 3 rounds for a group of size X to solve a complexity X challenge under this system.

With X players, X people doing an aid-another result in 1 additional failure (or one person doing it X times).

As an aside: Change the aid another rules so that you can aid someone in a task in exchange for a +10 bonus to your check result against the same target number as they are going after. (For the munchkins, you can aid someone at their aid another attempt... -- so 10 level 1 critters (Attack+6 vs AC) targetting a level 20 soldier (AC: 26) need to roll a 10+ to benefit someone from their aid another roll, instead of a 4+).

nagora
2008-07-24, 12:39 PM
A high-complexity challenge is one that _needs_ the efforts of more people to pull off.
Well, in that case the answer is that this should not have been a skill challenge in the first place, since rooftop chases are part of a thief's stock-in-trade.

The idea that the thief needed a bunch of non-thieves to have any chance of performing such a simple action is like saying that the ranger needed a barbarian to be able to track an elephant over soft ground.

Perhaps roleplaying the situation would be a better approach.

Athistaur
2008-07-24, 12:52 PM
Well, yes, we came to the same conclusion. It shouldn't have been a skill challenge in the first place.
We're not arguing that some things aren't better done by spezialist alone than by a group. The argument is that those simply aren't skill challenges.

And my approach is usually to smooth the rules into the roleplay part, not switching between one or the other. :smallamused:

FoE
2008-07-24, 02:15 PM
The party consisted of 3 people Fighter, Warlock, Rogue. Warlock and rogue were considerable driven by greed. The party was in town to steal back from the thief guild. The Fighter was down in the Inn drinking and the Warlock and Rogue were upstairs in a chamber with a local whore.
Then the rogue came up with one of his stupid plans: Kill the whore and shove the guilt to the local thief guild. He at once started with step 1: 'Kill the whore'. The Warlock and thief discussed that he wantet to drag the whore over the rooftops to the thief guild, breaking in an deposit the corpse there, having a bloody trail in front of the house of the thief guild leading right inside. The Warlock agreed and went downstairs to persuade the fighter into the plan. Finally everybody agreed to the plan.

From what I just read, your problem is not skill challenges. Your bigger problem is that you play with a bunch of d**ks.

Morty
2008-07-24, 03:30 PM
From what I just read, your problem is not skill challenges. Your bigger problem is that you play with a bunch of d**ks.

Or just people who wanted to play evil characters once in a while. Sure, maybe they are d***s, but let's not call them anything if we don't know the details, m'kay?

nagora
2008-07-24, 05:26 PM
Well, yes, we came to the same conclusion. It shouldn't have been a skill challenge in the first place.
We're not arguing that some things aren't better done by spezialist alone than by a group. The argument is that those simply aren't skill challenges.
The thing is, though, that the normal skill rolls suck because of the d20 system that was introduced waaaaay back in 1e Oriental Adventures. The reason it sucks is that the randomness is far too big compared to the skill levels.

A skill challenge system which iterates that roll based on character actions should be a better way to do it and I initially thought that things like rooftop chases would be one area where it should shine. I still think it should, but it seems that the rules about other characters helping are very badly thought-out and undermine the system.

Khanderas
2008-07-25, 02:06 AM
As I interpret it:

Mission: Follow one target. For it to be sucessful it must be undetected or the target will get evasive, violent or enter the wrong building (and then NOT lead the party to his boss).

The target occationally moves on rooftops and other hard to reach places. If another person does the same behind him that he does not know, he will get suspicious. If it happens several times then he knows he is being followed.

If one person follows, it becomes obvious for the target he is being followed. But if more then one person follows and they switch around it becomes much less obvious and the target leads the group to the correct house.


A Real World anology would be cops tailing a suspect. If a squadcar follows the bad guy everywhere he will not lead them to the hideout.
If two or more civilian-looking cars follow, one at a time and alternating, the suspect will not be suspicious.

hamishspence
2008-07-25, 04:35 AM
Thunderspire Labyrinth had skill checks that grant varying levels of success depending on the number of successes achieved before failures end the challenge. However it was written before the revision.

AJCSIV
2008-07-25, 05:16 AM
Okay, put simply.
The 2 pass 1 fail rule works for skill challenges
The rooftop chase was not a skill challenge
Therefore no more arguments need to be made on the basis of the 2-1 rule applying to the rooftop chase.

As for actuall things that require skill challenges...
Frankly, the way I would do skill challenges is to play with people's specialisations individually, for example in a game I am about to run I have a Satyr challenger set up that consists of three parts

1: A singing challenge {Charisma}
2: A brawn challenge {One on one duel}
3: A riddle {Players answer}

The only one of those which requires a skill roll is the charisma roll as it's pretending to be a perform roll. This challenge may not actually use skills but it does cover the idea that the skill challenges are supposed to represent. A number of challenges with varying success rates that are not necessarily based on a fight scene {the duel for example could be replaced with an arm wrestle and strength check}.
That sort of idea would be the sort of thing a 'skill' challenge should be in my opinion. However it doesn't actually involve all the characters at once, so it doesn't fill the role of skill challenges as proposed in the book, and you really can't expect your players to think of something that uses all of them for any particular challenge {especially if they're like the rest of us and have played 3.5 and are treating 4th ed as if it were 3.5, which it's not}. So you as a DM need to set up the skill challenge so that it starts off involving all of them and them each applying themselves to related tasks within the challenge {see my scenario of the tightrope act above}.

Yakk
2008-07-25, 10:17 AM
Well, in that case the answer is that this should not have been a skill challenge in the first place, since rooftop chases are part of a thief's stock-in-trade.

I said high complexity. A complexity 1 skill challenge is supposed to be as hard as a single even-level monster.

So -- this being a complexity 1 skill challenge might make sense.


The idea that the thief needed a bunch of non-thieves to have any chance of performing such a simple action is like saying that the ranger needed a barbarian to be able to track an elephant over soft ground.

A chase over roof tops, avoiding being seen by anyone, to a thieves guild (I think that is the situation) is not "track an elephant over soft ground" prob.


Perhaps roleplaying the situation would be a better approach.

Skill challenge mechanics do not prevent roleplaying. All it does is provide a framework for the stakes of a single skill roll, instead of making the stakes improvised on-the-fly.

Deepblue706
2008-07-25, 12:42 PM
Wait, wouldn't the involvement of more people make them more likely to have been seen? Or, did I overlook something and that's not important?

nagora
2008-07-25, 01:10 PM
Wait, wouldn't the involvement of more people make them more likely to have been seen? Or, did I overlook something and that's not important?

Don't try to bring logic into a "Tell me why 4e is right and I'm wrong" thread!

carowsell
2008-07-25, 01:38 PM
I`m liking a lot of these ideas and will be stealing them... of course they`re free but stealing them makes them more fun :P

I was reading an article on WotC recently, skill of saying`yes' or something. It made an interesting point of letting the characters be creative. Like a mage using knowledge history or warlock using streetwise to uncover information. With the condensed knowledge skills 4e, well condensed skills in general, players need to be creative in using them, or DMs have to suggest possible alternatives IMO. The goal is fun, for everyone and the DM. The best suggestion here was making time critical, nothing spells fun then consiquences, having a feeling that you avoided certain death or impending doom is always a thrill.

I think you`re on the right track from what you`ve posted. 4e is requiring a lot of unlearning on my part. Fortuately when characters get frustrated you can just throw a bunch of minions and such at them to relieve the pressure. He`s running across roof tops, the other two are now being questioned by guild members ready to attack or some drunk pissante guards, do it all on intiative, the rogue above and the fighter and warlock below.

Athistaur
2008-07-25, 01:49 PM
I just saw that the errata for 4th Edition already made changes to the skill challenge.
It's no longer in the rules that everybody must contribute. Doing nothing is fair game. It doesn't cumulate failures as well. (So they ereased the "wtf" rule.)
Rounds are gone as well. A skill challenge is no longer measured in rounds or initiative.
I further found examples of skill challenges designed for single people and single skills only. Mainly in the traps section where these challenges can be a part of a fight.
This is a bit disapointing in my opinion. It feels like a missed chance for a great idea. It still seems to boil down to the question if players and dm can make a skill based encounter worthwhile on their own. The frame of the skill challenge itself doesn't do any good that wouldn't have happend without it. However this fits to the statement of "The game is still the same."

Yakk
2008-07-25, 02:38 PM
Wait, wouldn't the involvement of more people make them more likely to have been seen? Or, did I overlook something and that's not important?
That depends.

What if there are guards near the destination that need being distracted? Then players on the ground could arrange a distraction for the player on the rooftops to get through.

Yes, for something to be a good skill challenge for the entire party, it needs to be set up so that the entire party can and should participate. Smaller skill challenges are analagous to a single member of the party fighting a duel.

Deepblue706
2008-07-25, 03:14 PM
That depends.

What if there are guards near the destination that need being distracted? Then players on the ground could arrange a distraction for the player on the rooftops to get through.

So, is it that DMs are supposed to come up with ways to involve everyone in a skill challenge, and not just present a basic obstacle? Or, do people just roll what suits them and then things are logically applied retroactively, based on results of rolls? Just because other people might come in handy in specific cases, it doesn't stand that more people should be required. And, in some cases, they should prove to be a liability.

batsofchaos
2008-07-25, 03:32 PM
So, is it that DMs are supposed to come up with ways to involve everyone in a skill challenge, and not just present a basic obstacle? Or, do people just roll what suits them and then things are logically applied retroactively, based on results of rolls? Just because other people might come in handy in specific cases, it doesn't stand that more people should be required. And, in some cases, they should prove to be a liability.

It's the former, but as with everything the latter comes into play. DMs develop skill challenges that can support all the characters in some fashion, and if a player comes up with a unique skill use and justifies how it could be applied to the situation, the DM adapts things to allow it.

Keep in mind that skill challenges are designed to be mechanics for non-combat encounters, not a replacement for skill checks. They are best utilized as encounters, and fall flat when shoe-horned into simple/single-character checks.

Deepblue706
2008-07-25, 03:50 PM
It's the former, but as with everything the latter comes into play. DMs develop skill challenges that can support all the characters in some fashion, and if a player comes up with a unique skill use and justifies how it could be applied to the situation, the DM adapts things to allow it.

Keep in mind that skill challenges are designed to be mechanics for non-combat encounters, not a replacement for skill checks. They are best utilized as encounters, and fall flat when shoe-horned into simple/single-character checks.

Huh. Okay then.

I think I'm gonna just stick with regular skill checks, if I ever run a game.

Yakk
2008-07-25, 03:50 PM
So, is it that DMs are supposed to come up with ways to involve everyone in a skill challenge, and not just present a basic obstacle?

I would say that a passive obstacle, with no "time limit" on defeating it, might best be served with a simple skill check with a negative consequence to failing it.

A skill challenge should be something that is expected to take combined effort of about (complexity) adventurers to defeat it before the BadThing happens.


Just because other people might come in handy in specific cases, it doesn't stand that more people should be required. And, in some cases, they should prove to be a liability.

If it is a challenge that a single character can be expected to defeat, then it is analogous to a single monster. Hence it should be a complexity 1 challenge -- and be about as common as you would include duels in an adventure for a single character, if it isn't set up to be in parallel with the rest of the party doing things.

If it is defeatable by 2 characters, a complexity 2 skill challenge is appropriate.

If it is something that you'd expect to require all 5 players to work together to solve, then it is a complexity 5 challenge.

I do need to tweak my math -- but I think it should be possible with the addition of an "auto failure every 'round'" mechanism to make this boil out naturally. As a side bonus, having "help" in the form of aid anothers is always good, but wasting your rolls "aid another"ing can be costly due to the ticking failure count!

Shatteredtower
2008-07-25, 04:04 PM
Well, in that case the answer is that this should not have been a skill challenge in the first place, since rooftop chases are part of a thief's stock-in-trade.So much for the claim that 4th Edition forces classes into certain preconceived pigeonholes... :smallwink:


The idea that the thief needed a bunch of non-thieves to have any chance of performing such a simple action is like saying that the ranger needed a barbarian to be able to track an elephant over soft ground.Finding said elephant before it endangers itself or someone else means avoiding violent conflict somewhere else. Said barbarian is better versed than the ranger in local hazards. Said barbarian is also better able to intuit which way the beast is likely to go over the long term (never chase what you can wait for), based on cues the party can find along the way.

"I know the trail leads south, but he'll be turning west up ahead, back toward the river. The only reason he hasn't done it sooner is because the ground's too steep here. Let's take the short-cut."

Sound like the sort of thing the ranger wants to chance doing alone?

Likewise, you ought to listen if your cleric tells you: "Hold up now. These markings declare this valley to be an accursed place. How about we just go around for now? Better not risk it unless we have to."

As for why a rooftop chase might work better as a skill challenge than a solo effort, that's as obvious as the advantage of throwing to third base over just chasing the runner from second. If the party doesn't work together to cut off or steer the target, said target gets away. Whether that's only possible because someone knows a temple's layout well enough, talks their way past a guard patrol, or gets disinterested parties involved in their effort through a molasses storehouse doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that the party comes up with options the DM never considered first -- if success at any of them seem like it could possibly improve their chances, go with it.

Even hauling a corpse around for the reasons described earlier can be made into a skill challenge. Such a task is unlikely to go unnoticed if you don't have someone scouting up ahead for you, prepared to create diversions as necessary. What, you think your thief can convince the city watch that he's merely taking a drunk girl home while he's halfway up some wall with the body? Pull the other one, Spider-Man. You might know the streets better than everyone else in your group, but it's a good thing your warlord caught wind of that funeral procession scheduled for Carter's Way tonight.

batsofchaos
2008-07-25, 04:24 PM
Huh. Okay then.

I think I'm gonna just stick with regular skill checks, if I ever run a game.

Skill Challenges are definitely optional; 3.5 worked just fine without them, no reason a 4e game can't skip them as well.

However, they can add a sense of tension and give DMs a concrete mechanic to work with in situations that were largely arbitrary beforehand. For example, lets say the party has infiltrated a stronghold and are trying to sneak around unnoticed. This can be run as a skill challenge to give specific rules for how battle-ready the stronghold is. Since there's no point of "success," the skill challenge would basically be tied to failures.

0 failures: guards are lazy and inattentive, those not on gaurd-duty are completely at ease.
1 failure: guards are lazy but are less inattentive, those not on gaurd-duty are completely at ease.
2 failures: guards are paying attention, but are still lazy. Those not on guard-blah, blah, blah.
3 failures: Gaurds think there's something up and start patrolling more fervently. The non-guards are now slightly attentive that something might be going on.
4 failures: Guards are patrolling and watching with keen interest. Non-guards start stirring into possible action.
5 failures: The guards know for sure that something is up and start actively alerting others and hunting for the disturbance. Non-guards are on the alert and are getting ready for battle.
6 failures: The stonghold is buzzing with activity, everyone is ready for battle and are hunting the intuders.

The challenge would be facilitated as thus:

Any combat encounter that lasts more than 4 rounds causes the nearest denizen (whether gaurd or not) to make a passive perception check, mild DC. If they pass, it counts as a failure.

Dead bodies that are not hidden or disguised (ie: propped up to look like they're sleeping) will result in an auto-failure in ten minutes when someone checks on the guard.

Any guard that spots the party and escapes to warn others automatically brings the tally to 5 failures.

Stealth checks required once every half-hour, a failure attracts the attention of a guard.

A situation like this adds some concrete mechanics to judge the readiness of the stronghold at any given point of infiltration. The individual characters can do an assortment of activities in order to avoid failures, and the whole thing ups tension.

Deepblue706
2008-07-25, 04:26 PM
Things.

Eh. Guidelines are nice, but I have no need for this kind of system.

nagora
2008-07-25, 05:44 PM
As for why a rooftop chase might work better as a skill challenge than a solo effort, that's as obvious as the advantage of throwing to third base over just chasing the runner from second.
The issue I had was with the assertion that without help, the thief should auto-fail. I don't accept that.

If I'm programming and a bunch of my friends come over and start making suggestions then they might, just possibly (because some of them have done a bit of programming) help. But, really they're much more likely to hold me back because I have to spend time explaining things they don't understand as well as explaining why their idea won't work. This is the "Barbarian in the Diplomacy Challenge" problem.

Still, if the errata has dropped some of the silliness, it's a moot point. As is the question of why it wasn't playtested properly :smallwink:

Athistaur
2008-08-04, 05:07 AM
I've done further research in this matter and developed a system of my own to handle skill challenges. I try to keep close to the erratad version of skill challenges and add a mechanic called conditions to involve players, encourage the use of different skills and to give possibilitys and guidelines on how to ease a challenge or how to make it more troublesome for the players.

This can be found here: Guideline for skill challenges