Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5654146" data-attributes="member: 42582">In focusing on success here, it seems you're already presupposing an approach to play that not everyone may share. You also haven't made it clear what you mean by "success".Here is a relevant passage from 4e's DMG2 (p 87):e sure to distinguish between what the characters find desirable and what the players enjoy. The characters probably don't like being attacked by drow assassins in the middle of the night, but the players will probably have fun playing out the encounter. Failing a skill challenge can create plenty of problems for the PCs, but the best kinds of problems are ones that lead to additional fun encounters.This is similar to my example upthread. If the players had failed the skill challenge (because the final action point had not been spent) then their wizard enemy would have walked away rather than decided to attack them. Which is to say that they would not have achieved what they wanted to in the encounter (which is to goad him into attacking).But it's hardly as if either the players or the PCs have failed in any deeper sense. They've still had an interesting and engaging social encounter. They've still taunted their enemy. They're still the ones sitting at the banquet table, with him having left in anger.To generalise: in my game, at least - but I think this is the default 4e approach - success and failure are about "Did the players achieve their goals for the encounter in question?" But even if the answer to that question is "No", it is still expected that they will have achieved their broader goal of having a fun time, and will be continuing to have a fun time in the next situation, even though it's not quite the one they were hoping to take part in.In my view, at least in my game, none of these successes in an illusion. The fun isn't an illusion. The relationship between the scenes I frame, the outcomes of prior scenes, and the baggage that the players and their PCs bring to these scenes, is not an illusion. The use of action resolution mechanics to determine how a situation resolves, which in turn influences what scene is framed next, is not an illusion (eg if the players succeed on an Intimidate check, such that their PCs successfully cow a cultist, then the next scene will not involve that cultist attacking them).So far you seem to have been speculating abstractly about whether or not the player influence on the direction of play must be an illusion. Do you have any actual instances of play, or any particular approach to play, in mind, that you can post about?</blockquote>

Verification