Quote from: Anon Adderlan;627815And we're STILL getting choice and challenge mixed up here.

Batman having to decide which of two people to save is a choice. Batman trying to save BOTH of them is a challenge.



What are you using to judge a good plan?

All game challenges are ultimately player challenges. So what skill is being challenged? Both D&D and Pathfinder give the players tools in which to present character optimization and tactical challenges. Which skill is involved in coming up with these good plans?

To play devil's advocate, can a choice be challenging to make?

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;627815What are you using to judge a good plan?

All game challenges are ultimately player challenges. So what skill is being challenged? Both D&D and Pathfinder give the players tools in which to present character optimization and tactical challenges. Which skill is involved in coming up with these good plans?

The party has learned that the gaunt merchant who hired them to recover a chalice is really a necromancer. And now he has withdrawn into the dungeons below an abandoned tower, no doubt to work some dread magic with the chalice. At this point, I give them no further hints or directions. What do they do?

They could seek out the unsavory stablehand who introduced them to the merchant. Perhaps he knows more about this necromancer. And if they find him, they have a variety of approaches they can take: threaten him, bribe him, pretend to be in the know already about the Necromancer's plans, etc.

Or they could ask around about the origins of the tower. Who built it? They may be able to find out what sorts of perils it holds - traps, or magic, or undead - and choose their spells and resources accordingly.

How about the chalice? Can a sage tell them its purpose and powers?

They could try to raise aid from the local temple of Mitra. Or call in a favour with the local baron to provide men-at-arms.

They could stake out the tower. Post a lookout and watch for several days to see who enters or leaves.

They could ambush a courier leaving the tower and then impersonate him to get back in.

Once in the tower, they could disguise themselves as supplicants or couriers.

They could send a rogue in with invisibility and other wards to scout the layout of the dungeon and look for ways to bypass guard posts.

They could capture a guard and compel him to talk.

They could bait a nearby troll and lure it into a clash with the guard post.

They could set up wards and lure the guards into a trap.

They could whittle away the minions of the necromancer to weaken him before they attack, or they could plan a swift tactical strike to take out the necromancer alone.

etc. etc. etc.

This is all stuff that the players think of - stuff that is not represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet. Any player can make these tactical and strategic suggestions - the one who plays the paladin, or the one who plays the wizard.

In my games, a smart, creative player with a weak character is far more effective than an unimaginative, tactically dull player running a powerhouse character. But if your game is simply a series of pre-defined tactical encounters framed by the battle grid, then I could see how character power becomes paramount.

Quote from: Haffrung;627856The party has learned that the gaunt merchant who hired them to recover a chalice is really a necromancer. And now he has withdrawn into the dungeons below an abandoned tower, no doubt to work some dread magic with the chalice. At this point, I give them no further hints or directions. What do they do?

They could seek out the unsavory stablehand who introduced them to the merchant. Perhaps he knows more about this necromancer. And if they find him, they have a variety of approaches they can take: threaten him, bribe him, pretend to be in the know already about the Necromancer's plans, etc.

Or they could ask around about the origins of the tower. Who built it? They may be able to find out what sorts of perils it holds - traps, or magic, or undead - and choose their spells and resources accordingly.

How about the chalice? Can a sage tell them its purpose and powers?

They could try to raise aid from the local temple of Mitra. Or call in a favour with the local baron to provide men-at-arms.

They could stake out the tower. Post a lookout and watch for several days to see who enters or leaves.

They could ambush a courier leaving the tower and then impersonate him to get back in.

Once in the tower, they could disguise themselves as supplicants or couriers.

They could send a rogue in with invisibility and other wards to scout the layout of the dungeon and look for ways to bypass guard posts.

They could capture a guard and compel him to talk.

They could bait a nearby troll and lure it into a clash with the guard post.

They could set up wards and lure the guards into a trap.

They could whittle away the minions of the necromancer to weaken him before they attack, or they could plan a swift tactical strike to take out the necromancer alone.

etc. etc. etc.

This is all stuff that the players think of - stuff that is not represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet. Any player can make these tactical and strategic suggestions - the one who plays the paladin, or the one who plays the wizard.

In my games, a smart, creative player with a weak character is far more effective than an unimaginative, tactically dull player running a powerhouse character. But if your game is simply a series of pre-defined tactical encounters framed by the battle grid, then I could see how character power becomes paramount.

As a GM I don't really enjoy characters that are "I kill it with my sword of Ubar!!!"

I greatly prefer clever and imaginative characters.

But sometimes you have to give Gonad, wielder of the Sword of Ubar, the bloodbath he craves.

Quote from: Haffrung;627856The party has learned that the gaunt merchant who hired them to recover a chalice is really a necromancer. And now he has withdrawn into the dungeons below an abandoned tower, no doubt to work some dread magic with the chalice. At this point, I give them no further hints or directions. What do they do?

They could seek out the unsavory stablehand who introduced them to the merchant. Perhaps he knows more about this necromancer. And if they find him, they have a variety of approaches they can take: threaten him, bribe him, pretend to be in the know already about the Necromancer's plans, etc.

Or they could ask around about the origins of the tower. Who built it? They may be able to find out what sorts of perils it holds - traps, or magic, or undead - and choose their spells and resources accordingly.

How about the chalice? Can a sage tell them its purpose and powers?

They could try to raise aid from the local temple of Mitra. Or call in a favour with the local baron to provide men-at-arms.

They could stake out the tower. Post a lookout and watch for several days to see who enters or leaves.

They could ambush a courier leaving the tower and then impersonate him to get back in.

Once in the tower, they could disguise themselves as supplicants or couriers.

They could send a rogue in with invisibility and other wards to scout the layout of the dungeon and look for ways to bypass guard posts.

They could capture a guard and compel him to talk.

They could bait a nearby troll and lure it into a clash with the guard post.

They could set up wards and lure the guards into a trap.

They could whittle away the minions of the necromancer to weaken him before they attack, or they could plan a swift tactical strike to take out the necromancer alone.

etc. etc. etc.

This is all stuff that the players think of - stuff that is not represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet. Any player can make these tactical and strategic suggestions - the one who plays the paladin, or the one who plays the wizard.

In my games, a smart, creative player with a weak character is far more effective than an unimaginative, tactically dull player running a powerhouse character. But if your game is simply a series of pre-defined tactical encounters framed by the battle grid, then I could see how character power becomes paramount.

This is how we always played, shit I expect it's how 90% of groups play.
However, I began a few years back thinking that I always end up playing a smart mouth, cunning, sly, manipulative kind of PC. Now there have been excpetions and the cunning manipulative PC might be goodly or evil, brave or craven, however they were very rarely stupid. So I tried playing simple and uncomplicated, ' The Necromancer is in the ruined tower, okay saddle up in we go..... ' Doesn't tend to last very long but quite refreshing

Quote from: Bill;627864As a GM I don't really enjoy characters that are "I kill it with my sword of Ubar!!!"

I greatly prefer clever and imaginative characters.

Me too.  My absolute favorite player always picked odd balls and/or weaklings.  He'd make it work, one way or another.

Quote from: Bill;627848To play devil's advocate, can a choice be challenging to make?

Interesting question.

The term 'challenging' to my mind indicates some level of performance needs to be reached in order to be successful. So making the *correct* choice might be challenging, but just making a choice could be something as easy and brain dead as a die roll. So no, I don't think the choice can be challenging, but getting the information and reading it right to make a correct choice can be.



Changing notes slightly, watching this discussion causes me to want to mention the 800 lb gorilla over there in the corner...

For all the talk of having things be challenging, table top games are in reality a bag of Cheetos. Mostly a bunch of blown up hot air.

A gaming group will find a level of difficultly in each area of play that they can master and seldom attempt to exceed or press the matter any further. This is true for a simple reason, the group wishes to continue play. Thus there is a built in bias to win.

Therefore play will focus on what the group is good at, and reduce or ignore that which they aren't.

A lot of conflict between different styles of play is based upon this fact as everyone wants to consider themselves exceptional- and thus wants to say what they do is the true 'challenge' of table top play and what others do is pointless.

And for those that care, I do this as much as just about anyone.

Quote from: Thalaba;626963In my experience the most meaningful and challenging experience for players in an RPG is talking with NPCs, which I prefer to do mostly freeform with the occasional 'persuade' roll or something similar to decide the outcome.

I use a similar approach. I let the player dictate the 'structure' of the conversation (argument/persuasion/intimidation) with NPCs, in their own words, and have PC skill rolls shift the result more or less favorably. And, it's commonly resulted in some of the greatest challenges to their 'player-skill'.

One group of players I've played with have burned bridges/poisoned the well/salted the earth with NPCs they've conversed with, because the NPC has an opposing agenda, or refuses to be bullied, or should be addressed with some form of civilized etiquette. And the players have tried 'walking through' the NPC to meet their needs. (My guess is that they've never been exposed to these kind of social player-challenges before. For them, NPCs have either been benevolent patrons, 'normals' that can be easily manipulated, or targets for a spear-to-the-face).

Quote from: Bill;627864But sometimes you have to give Gonad, wielder of the Sword of Ubar, the bloodbath he craves.

Quote from: mcbobbo;627905Me too.  My absolute favorite player always picked odd balls

Well, now.

Another way a game can be challenging is setting up for the dice roll. In 3.0, positioning yourself to flank, so the rogue can sneak attack. In Torg, making a non-combat interaction check, so the target will be softened up.

This turns combat from an "I roll, you roll" situation into a series of die rolls/tactical maneuvers, each of which is a small part of a larger goal. The challenge there was making the circumstances of the final roll be as favorable as possible.

The James Bond 007 game did this with Seduction, where each seduction had a purpose and an associated die roll.

Extended effort is a great challenge, and it can be applied in many situations, not just combat. It allows the players to think about how to approach a situation, and allows them to deploy their character's abilities in various ways.

EDIT: Looked at another way, even the most basic "I go, you go" combats are extended challenges. A series of die rolls, affected by the tactical situation, working towards a common goal (usually, killing the enemy).

Quote from: Bill;627848To play devil's advocate, can a choice be challenging to make?

Well yes, but what's being challenged in making it? And it's not a challenge if there ISN'T a choice.

Quote from: Haffrung;627856The party has learned that the gaunt merchant who hired them to recover a chalice is really a necromancer. And now he has withdrawn into the dungeons below an abandoned tower, no doubt to work some dread magic with the chalice. At this point, I give them no further hints or directions. What do they do?

They could seek out the unsavory stablehand who introduced them to the merchant. Perhaps he knows more about this necromancer. And if they find him, they have a variety of approaches they can take: threaten him, bribe him, pretend to be in the know already about the Necromancer's plans, etc.

Or they could ask around about the origins of the tower. Who built it? They may be able to find out what sorts of perils it holds - traps, or magic, or undead - and choose their spells and resources accordingly.

How about the chalice? Can a sage tell them its purpose and powers?

They could try to raise aid from the local temple of Mitra. Or call in a favour with the local baron to provide men-at-arms.

They could stake out the tower. Post a lookout and watch for several days to see who enters or leaves.

They could ambush a courier leaving the tower and then impersonate him to get back in.

Once in the tower, they could disguise themselves as supplicants or couriers.

They could send a rogue in with invisibility and other wards to scout the layout of the dungeon and look for ways to bypass guard posts.

They could capture a guard and compel him to talk.

They could bait a nearby troll and lure it into a clash with the guard post.

They could set up wards and lure the guards into a trap.

They could whittle away the minions of the necromancer to weaken him before they attack, or they could plan a swift tactical strike to take out the necromancer alone.

etc. etc. etc.

This is all stuff that the players think of - stuff that is not represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet. Any player can make these tactical and strategic suggestions - the one who plays the paladin, or the one who plays the wizard.

In my games, a smart, creative player with a weak character is far more effective than an unimaginative, tactically dull player running a powerhouse character. But if your game is simply a series of pre-defined tactical encounters framed by the battle grid, then I could see how character power becomes paramount.

Well first, the ability to do everything in bold is very much represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet, and usually a single roll at that, unless you're resolving manipulation and negotiation diceless.

And second, the key here is 'In MY game'. And while I love this style of play, it's not specifically supported by games like Pathfinder. So it's not a product of the RPG, it's a product of your methods.

Finally, I don't care how deeply people put their thumbs in their ears, System Matters, if for no other reason than it's a description of what the game is like to new players.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;628079Finally, I don't care how deeply people put their thumbs in their ears, System Matters, if for no other reason than it's a description of what the game is like to new players.

System Matters when people use it.

Many here don't really use it all, too complex for them.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;628079Well yes, but what's being challenged in making it? And it's not a challenge if there ISN'T a choice.



Well first, the ability to do everything in bold is very much represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet, and usually a single roll at that, unless you're resolving manipulation and negotiation diceless.

The idea to carry out those actions in the first place comes from the players.  So the challenge to the players is to come up with effective plans to set up situations where they can use those skills.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;628079And second, the key here is 'In MY game'. And while I love this style of play, it's not specifically supported by games like Pathfinder. So it's not a product of the RPG, it's a product of your methods.

Thankfully, I couldn't give a shit what style of play is supported by the mechanics of Pathfinder. If players can't suggest actions outside the mechanically-supported combat grid, then they may as well play a wargame or a MMORPG.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;628079Finally, I don't care how deeply people put their thumbs in their ears, System Matters, if for no other reason than it's a description of what the game is like to new players.

No thumbs in ears here. I run my own game, tailored to the preferences of my group, and I teach new players myself. If they want to play something by the book with THE OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED MODE OF PLAY, they're free to find another game. However, I've had no problems attracting and keeping players for the last 34 years.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;628079Well first, the ability to do everything in bold is very much represented by values, skills, and abilities on a character sheet, and usually a single roll at that, unless you're resolving manipulation and negotiation diceless.

Pick up a character sheet, any one will suffice and ask it how challenging X is to do?

Challenges are for the actual people playing the game, and have nothing to do with whats on a character sheet. Challenges help provide entertainment value from the game and only people can appreciate them.

Any answer from that character sheet yet? Keep waiting.

A character is a fictitious creation. It cannot appreciate the feel of a challenging endeavor. The various values on the character sheet have nothing to do with challenge. At best they can define mathematical probabilities.

Quote from: Anon Adderlan;628079And second, the key here is 'In MY game'. And while I love this style of play, it's not specifically supported by games like Pathfinder. So it's not a product of the RPG, it's a product of your methods.

if an rpg does not support creative player input as a meaningful way to overcome challenges then it kind of fails at being an entertaining rpg. I would rather be watching a movie or reading a book than just sitting there endlessly rolling dice until I pass out from boredom.

Quote from: gleichman;628082System Matters when people use it.

Many here don't really use it all,

Perfectly reasonable point for discussion...

Quotetoo complex for them.

Aaaaaaaaand dickhead.

Quote from: gleichman;627906Changing notes slightly, watching this discussion causes me to want to mention the 800 lb gorilla over there in the corner...

For all the talk of having things be challenging, table top games are in reality a bag of Cheetos. Mostly a bunch of blown up hot air.

A gaming group will find a level of difficultly in each area of play that they can master and seldom attempt to exceed or press the matter any further. This is true for a simple reason, the group wishes to continue play. Thus there is a built in bias to win.

To play devil's advocate: how are you defining "win" in this context? One could make the argument that some CoC games (to give an example) have a built in bias to lose, depending on how you define the dichotomy.