Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6028603" data-attributes="member: 42582">As I said in my XP tag, 100% this.You could resolve combat by having the players talk about what their PCs do, and the GM arbitrating it based on those descriptions plus his/her knowledge of their combat stats. But for some fairly obvious reasons we don't normally do it that way - we let the dice pay an important role, in particular mediating that gap between the players' aspirations for their PCs, and whether they in fact succeed or fail. The action resolution mechanics also permit both players and GMs to make decisions about how the combat proceeds (who attacks whom, for example) that shape the way the encounter unfolds in a way that supervenes on the choices of everyone, but is not determined by any single participant.A skill challenge (or any other comparable extended contest mechanic) plays a similar function in non-combat challenges. The players make choices about how their PCs engage the fiction (a bit like choosing who to attack in combat), and they roll dice which play an important role in determining how that engagement plays out. In a combat, no one would think that it didn't matter whether a player chose to have his/her PC attack the dragon, or the dragon's kobold flunky. Likewise, in a skill challenge it should matter whether the PC tries to befriend the merchant, or scare him/her. The GM's narration of the consequences of the skill check need to reflect that choice, just as the GM would narrate the dragon and kobold's behaviour in a way that reflects which one was attacked by the PCs. And just as the GM is obliged to narrate either success or failure in combat, depending on which side runs out of hit points first, so the GM is obliged to narrate either success or failure in the skill challenge, depending whether N successes or 3 failures comes up first.Of course - and as the above makes clear - the GM has a vital role (just as s/he plays a vital role in a combat encounter, by playing the NPCs and monsters). But that role is in adjudicating the complications that flow from successes, and moreso, from failures. Which is functionally somewhat like choosing which PC a monster or NPC attacks during combat - it matters to the outcome, but it doesn't determine it. The outcome supervenes on all the participants' choices, plus the dice rolls.And I say all this is a GM, not a player. I don't want to be responsible for deciding outright whether or not the PCs "win" out of combat than I do in combat. I want to be able to frame the scene then push hard on my part, while the players push hard for their PCs. And let the action resolution mechanics - dice plus participants' narration - tell us what happens.</blockquote>

Verification