Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7085315" data-attributes="member: 42582">What system do you have in mind?In 4e, there is no such thing as "the advisor challenging their success". The GM doesn't run skill challenges against him-/herself. So the question becomes, under what circumstances is it acceptable for the GM to reopen the matter of the players' success?My view - which combines what I take to be the general tenor of the 4e GMing advice, together with the particular mechanical framework of skill challenges, together with the fact that 4e is - in its overall tone - a pretty "pro-the-heroes" game without much grit or grimness, together with my own RPGing preferences (which are what led me to 4e in the first place) - is that the GM should not be reopening the matter that was settled by the skill challenge unless some other event in play - some sort of setback to the PCs, and thereby the players - puts it into play.That's the meaning of setback, after all - the interests of the PCs and the players are set back.Conversely, in the absence of any such setback, the PCs (and their players) get to keep the fruits of their victories.This is the approach that I believe most D&D GMs, most of the time, take to combat. 4e generalises finality to other, non-combat, situations of conflict (via the skill challenge mechanic).</blockquote>