|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 5:39PM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Aug 23, 2010
|
Aw, shucks. I sho hope I can handle such intellectual discussions. I also hope that you are not representative of the calibre of intellect on these boards.
Thank you and good day.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 5:51PM
#52
|
|
|
Aw, shucks. I sho hope I can handle such intellectual discussions. I also hope that you are not representative of the calibre of intellect on these boards.
Thank you and good day.
I tend to have fairly controversial opinions, I'll give you that.
I generally recommend paying attention to mvincent-he almost always knows what he's talking about, and has a really good perspective on things. Other people to keep an eye out for (but of whom I don't always agree with) are sharkpower, Plaguescarred, and LordOfWeasels. Mand12 also tends to hang out 'round these parts.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 5:51PM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2009
|
Non-adventuring skills should not improve by adventuring. They should improve by not adventuring and staying home and working on those non-adventuring skills.
For a Bard, music is an adventuring skill.
However, I don't want to give the impression I'm a hard-line simulationist. I recognize the value in abstraction, and I totally dig all of the ideas presented in this thread.
I just think it's odd that trapeze artists, arm wrestlers, and members of a debate team can perform and compete in their chosen pastime via skill challenges that use a skill that closely represents their training and expertise ... but bards cannot.
Simulation or not, it's not very equitable to let some PCs use their skills that way while others are told to "just roleplay it out".
Powers &8^]
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 5:53PM
#54
|
|
|
Non-adventuring skills should not improve by adventuring. They should improve by not adventuring and staying home and working on those non-adventuring skills.
For a Bard, music is an adventuring skill.
However, I don't want to give the impression I'm a hard-line simulationist. I recognize the value in abstraction, and I totally dig all of the ideas presented in this thread.
I just think it's odd that trapeze artists, arm wrestlers, and members of a debate team can perform and compete in their chosen pastime via skill challenges that use a skill that closely represents their training and expertise ... but bards cannot.
Simulation or not, it's not very equitable to let some PCs use their skills that way while others are told to "just roleplay it out".
Powers &8^]
Judging by Bard class features, I would just as well assume that most elements of Perform are incorporated into Diplomacy.
Also, bards have a lot of powers which are specifically musically oriented. I guess the bottom line is that, if you're using music to impress a crowd, it's diplomacy. If you're using music to create a work of quality it's ... well, that's something totally undefined. Knowledge (History) might work?
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 6:09PM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2009
|
Well, consider this: say you've got a big courtroom scene lined up, and one of the PCs has been roped into being the defense attorney. The facts of the case aren't in issue; it's all a matter of convincing the tribunal that the defendant shouldn't be put to death (or should be set free or has already suffered enough for his errors, whatever). That could be set up as a skill challenge for the member of the team with the most ranks in Persuade, doing what he does best against a similarly equipped prosecutor.
Or you could choose to roleplay it out completely with no skill challenge.
But, on the other hand, say you've got a battle of the bands, and the PCs need the prize money to keep the local orphanage from closing down. The party bard sets up the other PCs as their backing group and starts wailing, competing against the local favorites for bragging rights and the prize money. That scenario can't really be roleplayed out (at least not without actual musical skill on the part of the players). So how would you resolve this 'encounter'? If with a skill challenge, is Diplomacy the closest you could come to an appropriate skill? Even if it has more to do with technical skill than with convincing someone of something?
And if the Paladin happens to have a better Diplomacy skill than the Bard, does that mean the Paladin should be the lead singer?
Powers &8^]
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 6:17PM
#56
|
|
|
Well, consider this: say you've got a big courtroom scene lined up, and one of the PCs has been roped into being the defense attorney. The facts of the case aren't in issue; it's all a matter of convincing the tribunal that the defendant shouldn't be put to death (or should be set free or has already suffered enough for his errors, whatever). That could be set up as a skill challenge for the member of the team with the most ranks in Persuade, doing what he does best against a similarly equipped prosecutor.
Or you could choose to roleplay it out completely with no skill challenge.
But, on the other hand, say you've got a battle of the bands, and the PCs need the prize money to keep the local orphanage from closing down. The party bard sets up the other PCs as their backing group and starts wailing, competing against the local favorites for bragging rights and the prize money. That scenario can't really be roleplayed out (at least not without actual musical skill on the part of the players). So how would you resolve this 'encounter'? If with a skill challenge, is Diplomacy the closest you could come to an appropriate skill? Even if it has more to do with technical skill than with convincing someone of something?
And if the Paladin happens to have a better Diplomacy skill than the Bard, does that mean the Paladin should be the lead singer?
Powers &8^]
Well, let's see:
The bard should have a circumstance bonus to any perform checks. Treat as a +2 to +4.
The Paladin should have a circumstance bonus to any check to save orphans who are religious because, hey, he's a paladin! However, if it's been established that his character has a very rough voice, then presumably, the DM would bestow a circumstance penalty (He's within his right, especially since it's already an ad-hoc scenario).
Personally? I'd prefer to treat it as some ridiculous puzzle based mini-game, but those are extremely difficult to write for. For the rest of it? It's narrative causality. Either automatic success or automatic failure depending on what works better. Alternatively, you can have the bard play the music, and the other characters have to do something to "woo fate" which, really, shouldn't have anything to do with how the bard performs but ends up somehow determining how the DM will decide the events go down anyway-like I said, what's most important is keeping everyone engaged. And remember: Schrodinger's Adventure. The players don't have to KNOW that if they didn't do all this random crap while the bard was performing that they'd somehow make the bard lose. What's important is that everyone feels active.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 6:28PM
#57
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
I just think it's odd that trapeze artists, arm wrestlers, and members of a debate team can perform and compete in their chosen pastime via skill challenges that use a skill that closely represents their training and expertise ... but bards cannot.
Performing and competing would not be a skill challenge. A Skill Challenge is a party-based encounter, not two dudes whipping out their Acrobatics bonses to see whose is longer.
Again, adventuring skills are for adventuring. Non-adventuring stuff is narrative. Someone who tumbles in combat is not necessarily going to win a gold medal in ice dancing. Now, if you want your rogue to be a gold-medal ice dancing, that Acrobatics bonus will go a long way to convincing your DM to allow that background. But not all people trained in Acrobatics are able to perform; not all people who can perform in the circus will be able to use Acrobatics in combat.
Simulation or not, it's not very equitable to let some PCs use their skills that way while others are told to "just roleplay it out".
Agreed, which is why it doesn't work the way you erroneously think it does.
@TheyCallMeTomuReborn:
You can have an awesome fight in a volcano at high heroic, at paragon, or at epic. The lava will deal 5 fire damage per tier. Per tier. It's the same lava.
That is wrong. Since this is the Rules Q&A forum, let's look at the rules.
Lava and the like (terrains that have variable elements based on tier) is Fantastic Terrain, the rules for which are in the DMG, p. 67. Here is how the rules describe these tier-based elements:
Terrain scales in order to keep it relevant as PCs and monsters gain hiher attack bonises and hit points. It is an element of game balance and a reflection of the greater magical power present in paragon and epic locations.
In other words, if a 10th level (heroic) and 11th level (paragon) PC are traveling together and find a radiant Font of Power, the heroic and paragon PCs will get the same bonus as each other. The value of the bonus depends not on the tier of the PC, but the tier of the "location". The terrain doesn't change based on the PC's level; the qualities of the terrain are based on the intended difficulty of the encounter.
I understand how one could be confused by the "/tier" mechanics, but they are not variegated on the basis of the PC's level, but on the level of the challenge. So, no, it is not the same lava.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 6:34PM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2009
|
Either automatic success or automatic failure depending on what works better.
Which is all well and good, but we don't (usually) do that for combat encounters. Or skill challenges. We let the feats and skills in which the PCs have invested matter, and make a difference for them. Why should it be any different for aristry or craftsmanship?
What I'm saying is that D&D has this great, fantastic skill challenge system set up, but no way to use it for the set of skills that aren't represented by game mechanics.
Powers &8^]
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 6:45PM
#59
|
|
|
A fair interpretation, but that still sounds to me like an ad hoc decision to try and hide the non-simulationist elements of the game under the rug. Lava in a heroic dungeon isn't the same lava in a paragon dungeon because it's not as "magical?" Pfft.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Sep 07, 2010 - 6:46PM
#60
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
on the other hand, say you've got a battle of the bands
Ugh. These debates always come up to the most bizarre corner case issues. Where do people come up with these scenarios?! Battle of the bands? Really? How often is this going to come up in a campaign. Once? Maybe?
It's always the same bizarre scenario... the king is having a bake-off, or a battle of the bands, or some weird sculpting contest. These scenarios have no literary, cinematic or mythological basis.fn They exist solely to criticize the lack of CraPPer (Craft/Profession/Perform) skills.
There is no reason for rules that are going to be used once a campaign, at most.
If you have a battle of the bands, one of those bands is comprised of NPCs. So the DM is alreayd going to be deciding what the Perform bonus is for those NPCs. All 4e does is eliminate the arbitrary middleman. If the DM wants there to be a random element, he can just tell you... "You have a 70% chance of outperforming the other band". Then you roll.
fn The only mythological comparison I can conceive is the myth of Arachne, the weaver who was so masterful, she challenged Athena to a weaving contest....
However, this example fails on several levels. First, Arachne was not an adventurer and her mastery is unrelated to her (lack of) adventuring skills. Second, the contrest was not to be decided on technical skill -- it was acknowledged that Athena and Arachne were master weavers. The contest was not going to be decided by couting misplaced stitches. Rather, the contest was based on the originality of the design... which, in D&D terms, is really the originality of the player. Third, Arachne lost the contest not due to a botched Craft check, but because her theme was blasphemous. (She chose as a theme, the foibles of the gods.) Her hubris, not her lack of skill, did her in. So even this famous story of craftsmanship competition had absolutely nothing to do with crafting checks.
|
|
|
