Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="surfarcher" data-source="post: 5389762" data-attributes="member: 84774">Nope. But when someone only disagrees and disregards a lot of what I'm saying... And keeps up that pattern.  Well that person tends to read argumentative, to say the least.  In those circumstances I generally feel a compulsion to check up on their history.I'm happy to be wrong and have no qualms about eating humble pie, should I prove so.It was an example of how it could play out.  I put some effort into indicating that it would be driven a lot by the players and that I adlib quite a lot. Whatever the players come up with I'll react to and build on.  It's a very dynamic approach and I can't predict what the result will be, because I can't predict what they'll try.  The outcome of their success or failure is as dictated by their actions as by the result of any check they might make. Arriving at the gate too late is one possibility.  By no means the only one.  Still it's the most likely because the players are actively trying to achieve a goal they have taken on.  So if they find a crevasse impassable, for example, they'll likely try to find a way around it.  At a cost of time.There are plenty of other possibilities too, but they all depend on the PC actions.All kinds of things could happen and I personally don't them in advance.  At best I make some scribbly notes on what might happen.Inspiration.  Adlib.So you will force a result on your players not based on their actions?  I call the railroading and it's not something I practice.  If they choose to pursue a certain goal doggedly, I won't force them to miss it.  Other things may happen along the way, but if they are determined to reach that goal and don't give up?  Now if they give up on that goal and turn aside, that's a whole different kettle of fish.Where does it say they must always be announced?  Where does it it say you must always inform them?I'm basing mine of a lot of reading. A lot of research. A lot of discussion. A lot of feedback. And DMing more skill challenges than I can remember.Going back over your posts you've asked one real question.  Several times.  Ignoring what people had answered.  In fact, what they were saying before you first asked the question... Which I will answer yet again below.  The rest of your "questions"... Well they kinda all read snarky and sarcastic.  That could just be me tho.  That's the tone I've been getting from all of your posts.  It kinda seems like other folks take you that way on other threads too.And again I say "suspension of disbelief".The fact is most player's change their mode of thinking the moment an SC is announced.  Most players will literally start looking at their skills and thinking "My best skill is Diplomacy, can I use that to win this Skill Challenge?".  It happens like clockwork!  And that's not a problem as long as that's what your players want and enjoy.  But a huge number of folks out there got bored of it quickly and loathed the result, so the system got a huge flogging out in public.  There's a good reason WotC invested so much pagespace in DMG2 to SCs.I prefer to encourage my players to think along the lines of "How can I best resolve this problem?  How can we reach this goal?  What would my character do?".  And I find the best method of reaching that is by me putting a lot more work into framing the situation up</blockquote>

Verification