Sadras
Legend
I don't think there's intended to be any constraint on the duration or scope of a skill challenge. It could regulate getting a door open, or a 6 month sea voyage.
We have drifted. In your 80's war-campaign would you use a skill challenge for the entire campaign given that a skill challenge has no restraint on duration or scope? Please note, the question is not could you, but would you. I would guess no. If ones adventure does no have a time constraint and is not part of a skill challenge - answer the questions below (as per my original reply to Pemerton):
Sure, they have a reason to make haste (in-game fiction), but is there a possibility of failure. Are your players aware of this - do they even fear failure? i.e. are the consequences heavy enough to actually warrant the characters making haste.
Where/what are those limits where you say they have just taken too long? How do you measure them
I see nothing ridiculous about it. My example was quite clear. The nature of time as an imprecise resource measure renders it less than totally effective as a tool of dramatic tension
No. If time passing bears no consequence then yes, it will be less of a tool to inject dramatic tension. You can argue that certain adventures are more predicated for the use of time but not that time is an imprecise resource measure that it lacks the ability to impose dramatic tension.
I was quite accomplished as a DM at that time, with more than 10 years of experience. I don't take 1000's of hours either, anymore, but my point is that even with spending vast time on that project it was impossible to account for time adequately enough to make a completely timeline based drama function well.
Were there heavy enough consequences related directly to the PCs - loss of close NPCs (loved ones or allies)? loss of strongholds or lands? loss of treasure? loss of political and/or social influence? loss of history? loss of character investment in background?
loss of power in the war (can also include advantages for the enemy i.e. summoning of a portal to the Abyss)?
If yes, can you tell me why a SC focused on time creates dramatic tension for your players to save a bunch of unknown NPCs from being sacrificed by a bunch of cultists, but your players will not find the above 'losses' dramatic enough in campaign-arc which takes time into account.
Sure, assuming they can become privy to enough information to be able to make informed choices.
Up-thread I didn't deny this. I'm not sure why it is being reiterated here like I was against this point. In my current campaign arc, they are very much informed, of course they do not know all the facts, but they decide which quest deserves their attention more based on the information they have, personal and strategic reasons.
There's nothing at all wrong with having time constraints, but its better to transform them into something else that is a bit more abstract that the players can manage and avoid the awkward questions like "just how long did lunch take, and did that blow the time budget".
Again, more hyberbole. Perhaps this is why 25+ years ago you spent 1000's of hours when you were recording half an hour lunches and how it affected the timeline. Please read my posts upthread to see how and why we measure time.
The whole thread is about 4e...
Yes, but the thread has evolved. We were discussing Illusionism in the general sense.
If the fudging has some minor effect that has no plot consequence, then again it seems like it isn't worth arguing about what its called.
It becomes important when people, who define Illusionism - and paint it negatively, and ascertain that their decisions exclude any form of illusionism when to others the Illusionism in their decisions is so evidently displayed.
If I cheat in a test, but it doesn't change the outcome of my failure (plot consequence) in the test, did I cheat?
Its when the DM is railroading the players by juggling numbers, plot elements, maps, whatever and the players aren't in on it, then its Illusionism.
Exactly "whatever". Whether big or small it doesn't matter! This I can agree with.