Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8001412" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Those are all related quotes, so I'll respond to them together real quick. For one thing, I think you are using a different definition of challenge than I and some others here are using. Can you maybe describe the parameters of what a challenge is and isn't, in your usage of the term? You've given clues to the answer, but I at least am still kinda left wondering what exactly the word means to you. In case it helps, my definition is; Anything the players encounter that is difficult, and has a potential cost even for success (ie may cost resources to get through). More on that at the end, where I'll try to explain the thing from earlier.So, basically, to me stakes and challenge are separate considerations. What I was trying to get across with my reply on your confusion about my statement that "[there] Doesn't need to be a challenge for the stakes to matter." is that the two are separate, and I hoped that showing it from the other angle would help. So, to try again with a different approach, and make a new roll...If I present a choice between two paths, and the course of the game will be very different depending on which path is chosen, that isn't a challenge. It's just a choice with consequences, and thus stakes. But there isn't any effort, cost, or challenge in the choice. It's just left or right. It matters, but it isn't a challenging scenario. It needn't be overcome with effort, it isn't even something overcome by any reasonable definition of the term. Again, to me, what defines challenge is effort, difficulty, and/or cost to overcome. It it isn't natural to say that you overcame it, it probably isn't a challenge. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have stakes. Flipping a coin between two equal choices has stakes, but it isn't something you've overcome in any way.</blockquote>

Verification