Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5406971" data-attributes="member: 42582">I agree with this, except for the implication that page 42 is a substitute for, as opposed to a contributor to, good GMing. The number of problematic skill challenge threads posted on this website is enough to persuade me that poor or middling GMs don't do page 42 particularly better than they do any other parts of the game.And obviously I disagree with this "move on" thing.Page 42 is aimed at a very different sort of play experience from rule zero. Like I've posted upthread, it is 4e's analogue to HeroQuest's pass/fail cycle. But the idea that 4e or HeroQuest are inferior games from which one eventually "moves on" (to 3E? Classic Traveller? Runequest? Rolemaster? I've got a pretty good handle on these games, and don't feel any great pressure to move onto them - I personally feel more like I've moved on from them) isn't one to which I subscribe.The sort of game I want to run these days is not an exploration game, but a game in which the action resolution mechanics, both combat and non-combat, are simply via their application pretty much guaranteed to yield a non-predetermined but nevertheless engaging story experience. Page 42, by giveing the numbers that generate challenges at the right level of difficulty and complexity, is a crucial part of this.</blockquote>