Skill Challenges: Design and Construction

[Xeviat]

Ever since 4E D&D came out, I loved the idea of skill challenges but I have hated their implementation. It is the perfect system to model many scenes we see in comics, books, and cinema, but I think it's current implementation leads to simple dice rolling and pulls players out of the game. I'm not here to tell everyone how to do them, I'm here to look for solutions and ideas to do them right.

I'm not currently playing D&D; I'm using Mutants and Masterminds for my gaming at the momment. But I still like the idea of skill challenges, and I want to use them in my M&M games. Without dealing with the mechanics (as I am still deciding on a number of successes/failures to be close to the combat length of an M&M fight), I'd like to hear all of your thoughts on running skill challenges.

For those unfamiliar with the term or the 4E D&D system, a skill challenge could be better called a "skill encounter". Rather than combat abilities, characters use their skills to succeed at an encounter. Examples include a skill encounter to navigate a dense jungle and reach the dungeon in time to save hostages, a chase scene through crowded city streets, or even a heated debate to win the favor of a king. The system requires a certain number of skill successes before a certain number of failures are attained, but they seem to require too much player innitiative.

Now, combat requires a mix of player initiative and player reaction. This is the balance I am searching for in a skill encounter. Part of this is descriptive; if the scene and encounter are described well enough, players will come up with solutions on their own. I guess an amount of it simply is the requirement of player input, making sure your players know what to expect of skill encounters.

I am about to start up a super hero game, something "street level" with super soldiers and such. I am trying to write two skill encounters; one is a simple "sneak up to the base undetected" and the other is a "disarm the security measures on the door while defending against attackers". Both of these are fairly simple, but to keep them from growing stail I am starting to think skill encounters need to be designed in phases (like the acts of a play). If hurdles pop up in the middle of the encounter, the encounter may be more dynamic and more enjoyable. After all, this is how they seem to be written in movies.

Before I ramble on for ever, did anyone have any input on designing or playing in non-combat encounters?

[sparkletwist]

I'm not sure if this is exactly what you're looking for, but one idea that I've seen done in a few places that I am rather fond of is awarding a bonus on the die roll for players who describe their attempt at the skill an engaging, exciting (and dare I say "cinematic" if it's relevant for the game) way.

[Mason]

I think skill challenges in 4E are just a way for PCs to use some of there less used skills in inventive/creative ways via roleplaying. Whether or not die rolling facilitates the actual role playing aspect of the game...
  I do know that the DMG2 (or is it 3?) has clarifications/better explanations of skill challenges/non-combat encounters. I never used skill challenges much before...but my solo Thief! game using 4E could probably use them.

[Lmns Crn]

Before I ramble on for ever, did anyone have any input on designing or playing in non-combat encounters?

Well, most of my relevant input is for systems designed pretty dramatically differently than 4E, so I'm not sure how directly helpful I can be.

If you want players to have initiative and the requirement to react (the way you frame combat), let player actions change the terms of the skill challenge, so it's more fluid than "can use skills A, B, and C at difficulties X, Y, and Z, need five successes." Maybe depending on player choices, the terms of the encounter change, and certain options become easier or more difficult (or become newly available or unavailable). If the skill challenge is a negotiation with a noble, a lot can change depending on whether the PCs let him know they have proof of his corruption. If the skill challenge is disarming a doomsday trap, characters who decide to smash the controls might end up flooding the sealed room with water, adding more complex variables as the price of a possible shortcut to shutting the thing off. If the challenge is a day's worth of information-scrounging around town, options, information gained, and potential consequences might vary widely based on what types of places characters go and who they ask what questions of.

Right track? Wrong track?

[CoyoteCamouflage]

Having been on the receiving end of a few overly tedious skill challenges, I think I can help offer some insight into some of the things to do or to avoid. I'll try to keep this version short for now, though I may improve upon/edit it later. These are from my own experiences, and most are from DnD systems. That said, some systems lend themselves better to the idea, though I think DnD (3.5, 4E, PF) as a whole fails spectacularly at it.

Problems:
Requirements. By their very nature, Skill Challenges are largely dependent upon having the relevant skills to do the task at hand. This can quickly alienate players whose PC is not a skill build, as it separates them from the encounter, even though almost every type of PC can do something useful in a combat encounter.

Pacing. Sometimes the PCs simply are not as bright as you hoped them to be. Maybe they are missing the blatant, obvious clue sitting right in front of them, or maybe they simply do not quite understand what they are supposed to do during a skill challenge (especially those who lack the skills required). This greatly disrupts the tempo of the game, especially when used in situations between combat or other major events. This is a tough problem-- however, once the group is used to dealing with these kinds of situations, they do tend to pick them up more quickly in the future. Granted, most of this can be alleviated by a good DM, but finding ways to simply avoid it is still a helpful consideration for those of us who are only so-so DMs.


To-Do:
Consider splitting the party. Why? Because your PCs should all have different strengths, and splitting the party allows you to give an appropriate skill challenge/encounter to the PC who has the corresponding skill set (it need not be easy for them despite that, however). Or you can purposefully play at their weaknesses if you are evil. This also helps to make sure that each PC can stand to get their moment in the spot-light. Complain all you wish about this, I still think it provides some of the most entertaining situations. ^^

Flexibility. As LC stated above, sometimes the PCs surprise you in ways for the better. Being able to adapt a situation to what the PCs want to try to solve it (for better or worse) is most likely going to result in a better experience for the player, even if they might still end up failing. The same goes for multiple solving attempts.

Stunt Dice/Rewards. OK, I love stunt dice. I admit it. I even find ways to implement them in other game systems, because it really encourages behavior suited to the characters-- which can lead to some hilarious or awesome events during skill checks when a good character is played true to form. Giving rewards of some fashion for moments of awesome can serve two purposes. First, it can assist a character with a skill that they are otherwise poor at, or it can serve in giving the PCs reasons to find awesome ways to get through an otherwise droll or basic challenge.

Mechanics. Be forgiving (Unless you're that kind of DM). Not everyone is going to be a skill monkey. In that sense, dooming or royally fething up (as opposed to decidedly inconveniencing) the PC for failing should usually be a no-no, especially if there is little/no choice in which PC needs to make the checks. Bad things happen when fighters need to make Diplomacy checks. Unless it is a suitably epic situation.

[Xeviat]

Definitely the right track. I had a longer post but it got eaten. It's bed time (I've turned into an old man), so I'll repost it tomorrow.