|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 12:10AM
#181
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2005
|
Note that we do try out different ways and more flexible ways to use and run SCs. I.e. we have several SCs that end when the PCs reach the goal - regardless of nr of successes. The difficulty of the SC is determined by assuming an average nr of successes needed to succeed, but if you reach the goal with less, you 'win'. After all, specially in an investigative encounter, you cannot exactly predict how many skill checks a party needs to make to reach their goal.
We also used challenges where the players can determine the route (and thus scenes) to their goal, SCs where scenes give successes regardless of how the PCs overcome them (as long as they do), SCs where rituals, favors, or specific actions grant successes, etc.
We can try out a fair amount of this, but ultimately DM and players should use the possibilities and make the encounter.
Including all skills in a SC is not going to happen unless WotC changes the entire SC layout and setup. We have limited place, and describing how to use Thletics in an audience with the uppity noble is likely not going to be useful in the majority of cases - incorporating such skill checks is the task of the DM. If a DM refuses to do so, he may need retraining.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 3:50AM
#182
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2007
|
Some posters have made some out of date claims. One, the outcome of a skill challenge is always binary and two, three failures always ends a skill challenge. DMG2 codified in the D&D rules that exceptions to both are possible. For instance, you can build a graduated skill challenge where you continue to some set number of successes (or perhaps number of rounds), and the total number of failures determines the outcome, so it can be more varied. The special option allows great flexibility for the designer.
While I stated that the DM is the person who presents or delivers the play experience, and I know of no way to change that, I agree not all DMs are as proficient as I would like.
Keith
Keith Hoffman
LFR Writing Director for Waterdeep
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 8:55AM
#183
|
- Senior Volunteer Community Lead
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
I've been running some MYREs (18 or so) lately, and even using very high DCs, as in the equivalent of level 14 challenges on level 6 characters - they've never failed a skill challenge.
That includes when I do group Nature checks and only one person has it trained, and when I have the 10 Charisma barbarian making talking checks. I've had challenges against every skill, and some skills like Heal and Insight are absolutely useful. (Actually, I'm still a bit shocked to see Insight earlier considered not a very useful skill)
Sure, they know up front that the MYRE campaign I'm running has lots of skill checks and challenges, so I think of 12 cards they are packing 4 That'll Do's... but I think mostly it's that they put some thought into their abilities so that they can function in a variety of situations.
Keith Richmond
Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 9:10AM
#184
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2009
|
I guess I have trouble with the entire premise... the thread is called "Are skill challenges too easy", with the majority of the discussion saying "yes". Then you are advocating making skill challenges easier so that they are more inclusive. That logic doesn't really hold up. Nor does the logic of blaming writing directors or admins, especially in a campaign that should use core rules.
I am not an advocate of making skill challenges easier, such as by DC. I am an advocate that skill challenges need to be easier to role play and even roll play, by making them more inclusive. If someone rolls and fails the DC, I am fine with that. If someone doesn't feel they should role play for fear of a roll, I am not ok with that. I think a lot of people agree with this, including most here on the forum. The issue is more about what to do.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 9:44AM
#185
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2009
|
I think that we can all agree that there are many, many DMs that need retraining or that are not proficient enough.
We all want published works in the RPGA to be better.
Alpha is right that encouragement is probably the best way to go to help each other. We have at least two writing directors posting on this thread and I don't know how many writers and lots more players and DMs that are passionate. We all care about skill challenges or we wouldn't even be reading and posting here.
Maybe we need to work out a different way to include tools and ideas into skill challenges instead of talking abstractly. I think it might be beneficial to have a shared experience here where we can try to fix issues with skill challenges by people working on a skill challenge openly.
Start vague and flesh out and narrow down the skill challenge as we go, including ideas people have about augmenting skill challenges. Begin with a basic concept like, "The PCs have to smuggle 5 NPC's from place X to place Y." As long as the concept is wide enough in scope it doesn't matter.
Then just go from there exploring different ways to make the concept work.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 3:00PM
#186
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2007
|
I've been running some MYREs (18 or so) lately, and even using very high DCs, as in the equivalent of level 14 challenges on level 6 characters - they've never failed a skill challenge.
That includes when I do group Nature checks and only one person has it trained, and when I have the 10 Charisma barbarian making talking checks. I've had challenges against every skill, and some skills like Heal and Insight are absolutely useful. (Actually, I'm still a bit shocked to see Insight earlier considered not a very useful skill)
Sure, they know up front that the MYRE campaign I'm running has lots of skill checks and challenges, so I think of 12 cards they are packing 4 That'll Do's... but I think mostly it's that they put some thought into their abilities so that they can function in a variety of situations.
We do have an unusually high amount of skill focus (concept, not feat) in that party -- I had noticed that at the previous session. Out of 4 players, two of us have Bard of All Trades (which, I believe I've said, is a lot like cheating), we have pretty much all areas covered by someone, and several of us (ok, maybe just me) have noticable item-investment in skills.
I'm definitely going to start keeping a That'll Do in reserve in case of unplanned meeting with Cressida, though. :-)
That game might be a place to experiment with ``only one of each card'', although it might feel a bit punitive to the skill-obsessed bard.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 07, 2010 - 5:30PM
#187
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2009
|
This is what i said in a topic i created today but i have been directed to this thread so i shall repeat myself.
---
Ok they are way too easy , even chars with 10 in an attribute and untrained are making most checks with ease, i'm running a 4-7 tomorrow which is dc13 playing high! i mean come on they are called skill challenges yea!?
---
I shall continue after reading through some of the above. Skill challenges are the one part of 'roleplay' that remains with dungeons and dragons yes but letting parties get through them too easy just for storyline/gameflow sakes is wrong in my opinion. A dm can fit roleplay during encounters aswell as inbetween (giving reasons/details for things or adding something for fun etc.) easy enough.
It has got to the point now where the only thing a party worries about is the combats(often not even that.) and the skill challenges are becoming somewhat of a joke.Personally i would drop the amount of exp gained from skill challenges just so that they can be made harder and not have such an effect on the exp budget.
If its something like a party has to cross a small slow flowing river then thats not even a skill challenge at all a dm can just roleplay that in asking for a quick party roll, but if its a big strong flowing river a party should have some difficulty instead of waltzing across it like its a simple task.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 11, 2010 - 3:06PM
#188
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2009
|
There is one other thing that could help to solve this problem (and it is a problem i think all are agreed on that.)
Ban assists because it helps to make the low dcs even easier to achieve and also means a player has to do something making it more likely a party can fail a skill challenge sometime this year (shock horror a party may not get max exp!)
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 12, 2010 - 6:59AM
#189
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2009
|
Ban assists because it helps to make the low dcs even easier to achieve and also means a player has to do something making it more likely a party can fail a skill challenge sometime this year (shock horror a party may not get max exp!)
Do bear in mind that there are a lot of complexity 1 skill challenges in LFR. Especially at a convention, you can have the skill challenge completed in four rolls. If there are six players, then the only way that the other two players get to contribute "mechanically" is through assists.
Banning assists does mean that we cut out the only mechanic available to include all players in every skill challenge encounter. Skill challengese are an encounter, the same as combat is an encounter. As an encounter every player should be given the chance to participate.
Consider applying the loss of a mechanic to include everyone in a skill challenge encounter and apply it to a combat encounter. Would it be favorable to create a combat encounter where 1-2 players are exlucded from participating in the combat? I believe the answer is, "no". That is why I also believe that no encounter should exclude players. As the game is now, no encounter absolutely does exclude anyone from participation.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 12, 2010 - 8:34AM
#190
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2009
|
Ban assists because it helps to make the low dcs even easier to achieve and also means a player has to do something making it more likely a party can fail a skill challenge sometime this year (shock horror a party may not get max exp!)
Do bear in mind that there are a lot of complexity 1 skill challenges in LFR. Especially at a convention, you can have the skill challenge completed in four rolls. If there are six players, then the only way that the other two players get to contribute "mechanically" is through assists.
Banning assists does mean that we cut out the only mechanic available to include all players in every skill challenge encounter. Skill challengese are an encounter, the same as combat is an encounter. As an encounter every player should be given the chance to participate.
Consider applying the loss of a mechanic to include everyone in a skill challenge encounter and apply it to a combat encounter. Would it be favorable to create a combat encounter where 1-2 players are exlucded from participating in the combat? I believe the answer is, "no". That is why I also believe that no encounter should exclude players. As the game is now, no encounter absolutely does exclude anyone from participation.
True enough.
Perhaps make the exp gained from skill challenges less and the minumum number of sucesses to pass 6 or something.
I'm only coming up with ideas because in my opinion something clearly needs to be done about this and every player i game with regular and at conventions agrees skill challenges are too easy even for the untrained and with no bonuses from stats..
|
|
|
