Skill Challenge Codex: Everything But Combat

John's picture

This series of blog posts will be an exploration of skill challenges -- an attempt to dig deep into ideas for unique, interesting game play experiences that deliver on the promise of the basic skill challenge mechanics.  I've kicked a lot of theories and ideas around in my home games and in some scattered blog entries here and there, but this is going to be a concerted effort to really plumb the depths. 

Skill Challenges were not exactly new to 4e, but that was where a lot of gamers encountered the idea for the first time. I saw the basic idea myself for the first time in Alternity, but the idea of complex skill-based activities have been around for a long time. The 4e incarnation, though, put the idea out in front of a much broader audience of players and DMs. The system has been given a lot of attention over the years, in small efforts here and there.  Mike Mearls wrote a series of articles on DDI that I found very useful and helpful, for example, but like most of what's out there, they fall short of a complete treatment of the subject.  

In this series we'll explore some of the concepts and ideas inherent in the idea of skill challenges, we'll define some types of challenges, and throw around a ton of examples.  

Why Are Skill Challenges Important?

After extensive, statistical analysis which involves mostly sitting in my swivel chair and spinning, I'm prepared to declare that for a majority of the people who play Dungeons and Dragons, especially 4th edition, the part of the game that is most exciting and engaging is the combat encounters.  That's certainly not all of what the game is, and there are people that enjoy some of the other elements of the game as well, but for a lot of people that's the garnish on their battles. 

That's not a value judgement -- it's not good or bad. But I think it's an important observation as we look at skill challenges. Skill challenges are an attempt to bring some of the things that make non-combat encounters and interactions in the game exciting and interesting in some of the same ways that combat encounters are.  So, for that we should take a look at makes combat interesting and exciting. 

Why players Like Combat

Okay, so that's a big grand. Maybe this is why some players like combat. Your Mileage May Vary.  

Combat, in Dungeons and Dragons, is interesting for players because:

  1. The players have a clear idea of what their goals are in the encounter (kill the orc, take his pie). 
  2. The players have a wide variety of clear choices to make, choices that are individual to their character, that have a predictable outcome yet have an element of chance involved, and that have the opprotunity to be cool and exciting to have completed. 
  3. All of the players have a chance to contribute
  4. Choices made in character creation have a direct impact on the sorts of things they're able to do in combat

Now look at a typical roleplaying/non-combat encounter

  1. The players may or may not have a clear idea of what they need to accomplish
  2. The players have very fuzzy ideas about what they can try to do, and what the outcome of those choices will be
  3. Not all players or characters are equally able to contribute
  4. Often, thanks to choices made in character creation, there are not good ways for some characters to contribute

Odds are, if that doesn't sound like your group, you've got a great team of creative, interesting roleplayers that would be able to enjoy that sort of encounter regardless of the game system.  If that's you and your players, you're probably going to feel this collection of ideas is lame -- and in your case, I'd agree.  

My intent, with this collection, is to help DMs use the skill challenge system to bring the fun we have in tactical combat into other parts of our games, so we can enjoy more rich, varied game experience.  

Comments

In addition, what is fun about combat is the building of tension through the character elements and random elements you mention. My character can be good at hitting things with his sword, but he will still miss sometimes. In combat, the occasional miss (while sucky) will add to the excitement of the encounter as a whole.

This is different from the straight skill check (outside of a skill challenge). You want to pick that lock? Roll Thievery. Sorry.

I find nothing in the game more irksome than building a huge, brawny character who, despite all his strength and athleticism, can't break down a door because I rolled a 5. Or a rogue who can't unlock a door, or a ranger who can't find tracks, etc.

It's a discussion for another time, but it's starting to feel to me that if a door can be broken open with a single roll (or a lock picked, etc.) maybe a skilled character ought to just be able to use a standard action and break it open (or unlock it) without worrying about the vagaries of chance. After all, it's basically the skill equivalent of a combat with a single minion. It's pretty safe just to say, "you kill it" even if there is a chance that it will take me 3 rounds of whiffing before I do so. If it's a reinforced door or a complex lock, on the other hand, a series of successes might be required (2 people need to work together to break the door or the rogue has to spend extra time on the lock). In those situations, like in combat, a bad roll might heighten the tension rather than killing it altogether. And as an added bonus, the burly fighter doesn't look quite so incompetent if he has to succeed 3 times before the door comes down.

If it wasn't absolutely clear already, my dragonborn barbarian failed to smash a door recently and the stupid elf beside him had to step in. And that blows. But what's important is why it blows. Combats are fun because while they contain a lot of binary components (hits and misses), they are not binary themselves. Skill rolls (like death saves) are binary. Skill challenges, however, are not.

That's not to say skill checks don't have their place or that failure should never happen or that dragonborn should always be > door (although I have my opinions), but that one of the reasons combats and skill challenges are inherently fun is that they both can contain success and failure within the same construct and the successes feel sweeter when they co-exist with the failures.

But, hey, some people like death saves. I'm just not one of those people.

 

Those damn doors.  

I think you're ovestating the case a little -- a flubbed skill check to open a door does not mean your character will NEVER be able to get the door open, only that he is going to take a little longer, probably because he didn't plant his feet or was distracted by the Elf's effeminate lisping.  

In the bad old 3.5 days, we could "take 10" on a skill check if it were not a combat situation, but the situation you're talking about WAS a combat situation, so even if we were playing 3.5, your experience could have been exactly the same. 

Anyway....failure is not often fun, especially if it's not part of the game's culture. And the role of failure in skill challenges -- something which has changed as the rules have evolved over the past couple of years -- is an interesting topic for a blog entry, I'll bet......