Revisiting Skills & Redefining Failure

Previously I wrote about some of my thoughts on the differences between how 3e and 4e approached skills. Today I read an excellent article on Gnome Stew called How To Make Skill Checks Not Suck. It was a great read and pretty insightful. If you’ve never read Gnome Stew before all I can say is, DUDE! Go now and check it out. Seriously, there is way better material for you there in just a handful of articles than on this entire crappy blog of mine.

Anyway to sum up what that article was trying to say in a nutshell was this:

 1. No Mundane tasks, a skill check should add something interesting to the story .

2. An interesting check will move the story forward regardless of success or failure.

3. Something should be at stake and riding on the success or failure of a check.

So what does this mean?

1. No Mundane tasks, a skill check should add something interesting to the story .

Not every bloody task requires a roll. Recently when playing with my group I have encouraged them to be more descriptive about exactly what and how they’re trying to accomplish something. Specific beats general. If a player tells me they are looking for a specific clue or item, I don’t require a roll at all. If however they are just trawling for random clues then I make them roll, and then only if it doesn’t matter. I’d rather over load my players with info, than frustrate them with a lack of it. In the end it’s what they do with that information that’s most important.

2. An interesting check will move the story forward regardless of success or failure.

When a player succeeds at a check it’s meaning is pretty obvious, they succeed at accomplishing the challenge. Failure is where we tend to run into a problem. This is the part where we need to redefine what failure means. Failure at a check shouldn’t be a roadblock that can only be bypassed by requiring additional rolls till someone succeeds. Instead it should be a mitigated success that’s tied with negative consequences. You succeed but not as cleanly as if you had succeeded the check. This creates friction and drama that drives the narrative forward, rather than grinding everything to a sudden boring and unproductive halt.

3. Something should be at stake and riding on the success or failure of a check

If nothing important is ridding on the success or failure of a check then why bother rolling in the first place? What’s important here is that the success should provide a benefit to the player or group, and a failure some kind of penalty.