Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 7084720" data-attributes="member: 23751">I can only go by what you say here, and what you've described here is as I've stated it.&nbsp; As stated here, the advisor attempting mitigation would not negate the challenge the PCs won.&nbsp; If you have some other information you have not described here that would change that, please share it.Correct.&nbsp; It also would not be altered at all if the advisor was able to mitigate the damage.Actually, I'm saying that it doesn't prevent mitigation.&nbsp; The success of the established challenge as you have described it was that the outing not affect the PCs.&nbsp; If he mitigates things, they are still not affected and he still outed himself.Event number 1 is the challenge to get the advisor to out himself.&nbsp; Event number 2 is the advisor attempting to mitigate the damage caused by event number 1.As you have described it here, you weren't actually putting the success in doubt.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 7084720, member: 23751"] I can only go by what you say here, and what you've described here is as I've stated it. As stated here, the advisor attempting mitigation would not negate the challenge the PCs won. If you have some other information you have not described here that would change that, please share it. Correct. It also would not be altered at all if the advisor was able to mitigate the damage. Actually, I'm saying that it doesn't prevent mitigation. The success of the established challenge as you have described it was that the outing not affect the PCs. If he mitigates things, they are still not affected and he still outed himself. Event number 1 is the challenge to get the advisor to out himself. Event number 2 is the advisor attempting to mitigate the damage caused by event number 1. As you have described it here, you weren't actually putting the success in doubt. [/QUOTE]

Verification