Search results

I don't understand these situations you envisage. First it's a complex multi-part conflict such that we want to break out the skill challenge rules. Then, almost immediately, one of the players has resolved it in one go and the GM is apparently scrambling to throw in quantum cooks to draw things...

Ouija board roleplaying. I'm not moving the planchette, the causality of the fiction simply has an undeniable momentum of its own!

It's going to get pretty tiresome if you just keep posting 'I don't like this playstyle' again and again.

Obviously. The 'you' includes the players.

Maybe don't use a lot of skill challenges then.

No I have shown that I decided, not 'the fiction' or 'the simulated world'. A man kicks a ball. It's a goal! A man kicks a ball. It isn't a goal.

The GM isn't expected to quantum cook some new obstacles to keep things going. The SC structure is transparent. It's a pacing tool. If players are describing big SC-ending actions when they have three successes left to go, or describe nothingburger actions when one more failure means disaster...

You still have normal one-off skill rolls. Skill challenges don't become mandatory. You just described the TSR editions. You can do this in a SC too.

A man kicks a ball. The ball doesn't move. A hat appears and turns into a pigeon. I have broken the laws of causality!

I'm not sure all these investigation rolls should be a part of the SC. I'm not sure players should make five barely related checks (at things they are apparently also bad at) in a three-failure skill challenge. That says to me that the players either want to lose or simply don't understand the...

This is absolutely not true. 'The fiction' is our shared idea of what is happening. It isn't real. It can't 'evolve causally'. What can happen is either a) participants decide that a particular thing happens next or b) the mechanics determine what happens next.

'Autotext gave me incorrect medical advice'

The guard patrol changes shift, make another stealth roll. The ground here is more gravelly, make another stealth roll. You're near the inner palace now, make another stealth roll. You're climbing now? Make another stealth roll. There are no specific rules in D&D for 'infiltrating a compound'...

Fictional state as assessed by you. That's a decision. The only two resolution methods available are 'the rules say' or 'a participant decides'.

There is a point at which the success of the venture has not yet been determined. There is a point at which a further success or failure happens and then you decide the outcome of the overall venture. This is you 'deciding when the venture has succeeded based on the number of successes'. It...

Don't remember that bit of the bible!

Does this apply to combat? I know that my first attack against the monster is very unlikely to be fatal. Quite likely it would be impossible for me to kill them in one round, or even two rounds. Likewise, I know that the monster is also incredibly unlikely to be able to kill me in the first turn...

You keep conflating the resolution of the skill rolls with the resolution of the overall conflict. The choice is between 'the GM decides when enough individual successes have been accrued to win the overall conflict' and 'three individual successes before three failures is what wins the overall...

Well, again, if it's a single roll, then don't use a skill challenge. The point of a skill challenge is to incorporate all these back and forth attempts from all the characters into one resolution process. If you are allowing other players to maybe also have a go if they reveal new information...

I would, but a first-up failure of a stealth check can't then be 'the alarm is raised'. It has to be something like 'the guards heard something but they're not sure what it was, maybe they're slightly more alert now or maybe they send old Jim out to do an extra patrol'. (So your minor failure...