Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LostSoul" data-source="post: 4206065" data-attributes="member: 386">Here are my scattered thoughts:1. This isn't the direction I thought they would go - this looks very gamist to me.  If it works, I think it will be brilliant.  I'm thinking it's a mechanical way to get what 1st edition had - with less fiat, but with the same creativity from players & DMs to solve challenges.2. "Intimidate = fail" isn't railroading, in my opinion, it's fiat.  Which is fine when it's handled in the way your group likes.  This example of fiat seems to be to make the choices of skills the players use more important - they have to find the right one.It's great that each DM can decide on his own.  I doubt I'll have many pre-written auto-failures.3. Coming up with cool results for failure is a skill that I have been learning recently.  It looks like that training will be put to good use with the skill challenges.In my opinion, failures (from bad to good) are:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The adventure comes to a crashing end.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The status quo - nothing changes.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The situation is resolved in the expected way, and the conflict is slightly escalated. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The situation is resolved in an unexpected way due to the input of the players, and the conflict is changed or escalated because of it.</li> </ul></blockquote>