Thanks for the clarification on the tasks @awryan
This is certainly unusual 
There must indeed be two different Silver Adventure board tasks. I wonder if there is a maximum time gate per campaign or if it is just a way to encourage players to get a head start in the first week and a donât miss out in the final week
Why has no-one written âSo players spend gems to skip the task.â yet? 
@Saltypatra explicitly said, on-stream, that itâs purely RNG.
While I doubt sheâd lie herself, thereâs no reason someone else might lie to her.
More importantly, if humans are not checking the list of RNG tasks before releasing them, theyâre failing the community.
Whatâs the point of RNG if itâs not allowed to be random? Curated-RNGâ˘?
Like not allowing 6 enemy Infernal King respawns?
Or disallowing 3 enemy devours in a row at 25% chance?
Or forcing every 30th encounter to be a gnome on vault weekends if none have appeared for that long?
Wouldnât hear any complaints from me if there was less RNG in general. Including the examples you give above.
I can guarantee a human at the very least glanced over the list of tasks. Nobody is that batshit insane when money is involved.
Gems of War mostly chooses to be fully random.
However, itâs completely legitimate to have a game that isnât fully random. Thereâs a randomness spectrum, from fully scripted (eg: the story quests) to partially predetermined (Explore teams have restrictions and an algorithm).
Human curation makes a lot of sense with certain things, like Campaign Tasks, precisely because weird situations can occur. Currently, the last week of Campaign 3 was precisely the worst possible scenario, but if there were another multi-day task, it might actually be impossible to complete the Campaign. You can certainly program rules for this, but nothing beats a quick glance by a knowledgable human.
From a developerâs point of view, RNG is a choice, not a necessity.
You mean from your opinion of what a developerâs point of view should be?
RNG is the tool, curating is a choice, not a necessity.
Theyâre both choices.
You choose from the range of options based on what you think is best for the game (as a dev) within whatever constraints you have.
But your choice has implications that you may not initially (or ever) be aware of.
If you philosophically insist on pure RNG, then youâre putting an arbitrary restriction on what your game can be. Sometimes, that turns out to be a bad choice.
I do not philosophically insist on pure RNG. I just do not philosophically agree with the assertion that it cannot be pure RNG. If your idea of a game is one that never bites back and never spawns bandits 5 times in a row, thatâs perfectly fine. I donât mind because cest la vie. I donât go calling the publisher/developer/qa/whoever a failure.
This is a very strong statement, presumptuously representing the entire community. I personally have no problem whatsoever with RNG tasks coming up with a total of 4 days to finish the last week. Itâs in the framework, such are the mechanics, and thatâs where the cards fell (benefit of the doubt). The phrasing âfailing the communityâ for not making a âchoiceâ (now we agree it is a choice, not a duty) is a bit strong. There are 100âs of choices one can make on every aspect of the game or development or splitting time between dev/QA etc., but âtheyâre failing the communityâ because of one thing they didnât do for you is not kind at all.
I think thatâs a bit silly. You canât have âpure RNGâ unless your game mode is literally rock, paper, scissors. RNG is always skewed in favour of something or somebody. Decisions were, are and will continually be made at every step of development and beyond to set and re(de)fine RNG restrictions and skew. The task system already has dozens of human imposed restrictions. Itâs already curated, monitored, decided on, supervised and adjusted. Nothing offensive in saying: âThe RNG parameters you set lead to results that are unfun, please revise restrictionsâ.
âWe do as the RNG commandsâ borders on a troll response from the devs when redefining RNG restrictions is a large part of what they do every day.
@Saltypatra There hasnât been any update the past weeks, could you please let us know how your investigation is progressing?
The answer hasnât changed, and the tasks are chosen by RNG. That is hasnât taken as many days in the past is due to RNG, no variables have been changed and no ninja fixes made.
Iâve passed on the feedback regarding the time taken with the adventure tasks and how it blocked progression for a few days during the Campaign. I havenât been told anything to report back at this time, or I would have let you know.
Iâd like to point out for the third time that this isnât the answer to the question that was asked. We are aware that tasks are chosen by RNG. We want to know why the task chosen by RNG, completing the Adventure Board, required three clears instead of two, with no variables supposedly having been changed. As much as has been communicated to far, task quantity components (e.g. opening *2* event chests as bronze task) are not subject to RNG.
Wasnât it already pointed out that the first campaign also had 3 day adventure board? Even if it didnt, there couldâve always been a 3 day adventure board task and RNG just never picked it before.
@snooj is correct. Just because something hasnât been picked by RNG before doesnât mean it canât be, or that it wonât be in future. Why was it picked? RNG picked it from a randomised list of possible tasks. The RNG picks each tasks independantly of any other, which means that phenomena such as this can occur. Iâm not sure what you want me to say, and I am sorry that I canât help you further. 
I guess the next question is, why is there a 2-day AND a 3-day adventure board task in the list the RNG picks from? Shouldnât they all be 2-day?
Salty, if you are saying there are two silver Adventure Board tasks, one taking two days and one taking three days, that doesnât make sense either. In that case your claim that all tasks get picked independently just canât be true, because then we could end up with a week that contains a silver two day Adventure Board task as well as a silver three day Adventure Board task, which Iâm quite convinced wonât happen.
Iâm not sure what part of what Iâm asking isnât clear. 
Trying to home into the issue from a different angle:
1.) How many silver Adventure Board tasks are there?
2.) How many clears does each of these silver Adventure Board tasks require?
Oh no. Watch this happens soon. IT WILL BE YOUR FAULT @Fourdottwoone !
What Salty said doesnât mean tasks arenât independently picked. It just means the feared double adventure board tasks in a single week hasnât happened yet.
Curious, does the community have a list of all known campaign tasks so far? I tried to find one to calculate the likelihood of that horror situation, but couldnt find such a list.
Thereâs a task list that got extracted from data files around the start of the first campaign, it didnât show any indication of duplicate tasks within the same rarity.
Iâm very sure tasks donât get picked independently, you wonât even see similar tasks of different rarity in the same week, e.g. a bronze and silver Treasure Hunt task. Salty is wrong about this.