Quote Originally Posted by kyoryu View Post
That's not what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is:

1) as a GM that's played these silly games for decades, the general idea of SCs is pretty close to what I've built to as best practices.
2) scaffolding like this is a useful tool to help people figure out how to run non-combat challenges without having to go through decades of experience.

I'm not saying that "they work because I have decades of experience".
Ah, but I was not commenting on what you do. I was commenting on your assertion that the mechanic can be good for other people to learn from.

As near as I can tell, nobody here who says they use skill challenges is describing their use of skill challenges as by the book. Everyone who uses them has made a tweak. Most of those tweaks look very similar, and are much more flexible than the guidelines in the rulebooks suggest.

As far as I am concerned, if the mechanic and guidelines are almost universally houseruled, then the mechanics and guideline are a failure. And pretty much everyone involved in this conversation has a better idea of how to adjudicate these situations than what was created as the skill challenge mechanic.

Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
Interestingly, the 4E Organized Play team (who often appear more clueful about the rules than the devs) disagrees. Org Play gave the GM a lot of leeway in changing the adventure to make it more fitting to the PCs and/or more fun - and that includes changing the SC structure. Because also in Org Play, many GMs and players found SCs an unnecessary restriction.
I would have said, "Tellingly, 4E Organized Play team (who often appear more clueful about the rules than the devs) disagrees."