Fudging is not your friend

S'mon · Oct 9, 2012

Ran a dragonfight last night in my 4e Loudwater game - no fudging - PCs lost. The players of the two survivors were very happy at their exceptionally narrow escape, resulting from consecutive '1's on the dragon's attacks as it chased after the last standing PC, the Wizard, dragging the body of her unconscious Ranger friend. The other three players were sad to lose their PCs, but are looking forward to their new characters. Overall I'd say it was far better than if I'd fudged to nerf the dragon.

Desdichado · Oct 9, 2012

JustinAlexander said:
Most people who talk about fudging being a good idea talk about using fudging to "increase the fun".

But I've discovered that fudging usually does the exact opposite of that: It removes the memorable and unique experiences and replaces them with whatever prepackaged experience the GM was planning.

When you exaggerate the position that you're trying to refute and attack that instead of what the actual position is, that's called a "strawman argument."

Seriously; "whatever prepackaged experience the GM was planning?"

Fudging, when used, is to fix minor errors in judgement that are not apparent before they happen, but as soon as they do, it's obvious that it's not a good situation to be in. If you're arguing against anything else than that, you're attacking a strawman. Most especially if you're raising the specter--implicitly or explicitly--of the GM and his precious plot, then you're attacking a whole army of straw dummies.

S'mon · Oct 9, 2012

Hobo said:
Fudging, when used, is to fix minor errors in judgement that are not apparent before they happen, but as soon as they do, it's obvious that it's not a good situation to be in.

Always? If you are seriously claiming that fudging is only ever used that way, that's ridiculous. And who decides what is a minor error?

The typical fudging situation IME is when the GM thinks he's made a tough but winnable fight, then sees the PCs will actually lose, so fudges until they win - ie, to achieve the desired outcome. Often IME this fudging is very obvious, blatant - the degree of intervention is certainly not minor, even if the GM regards his error as minor. There may be very subtle fudging that players don't notice, of course - we notice the blatant, ham-fisted fudging. It certainly exists.

Nytmare · Oct 9, 2012

S'mon said:
Ran a dragonfight last night in my 4e Loudwater game - no fudging - PCs lost.

For arguments sake, what do you see as the difference between the DM rolling 20, 20, 1, 1, 1 vs the DM saying that he rolled 20, 20, 1, 1, 1?

S'mon · Oct 9, 2012

Nytmare said:
For arguments sake, what do you see as the difference between the DM rolling 20, 20, 1, 1, 1 vs the DM saying that he rolled 20, 20, 1, 1, 1?

In the latter case the GM is lying.

In the former case (which is basically what happened in my game last night - several crits followed by several 1s) as long as the dice are properly rolled, out in the open, the players can see that it is the vagaries of fate, not the GM's railroad, that combines with player skill and PC ability to their ultimate success or defeat.

For me, the latter is a satisfying game experience. The former would be wholly unsatisfying either as player or GM.

herrozerro · Oct 9, 2012

Honestly, I fudge a bit. but it is more of the tactical error kind. if a fight starts turning monsters might get a little stupider, they might take OAs to engage a new target or ignore a baddly wounded PC to attack a fresh one.

though I dont think i'd explicitly fudge a win for the PCs, mostly just to give them maybe a retreat or a surrender.

Desdichado · Oct 9, 2012

S'mon said:
Always? If you are seriously claiming that fudging is only ever used that way, that's ridiculous. And who decides what is a minor error?

I can't speak for all GMs. That's only how I ever use it. And that's all that I've seen called for in this thread so far as well.

S'mon said:
The typical fudging situation IME is when the GM thinks he's made a tough but winnable fight, then sees the PCs will actually lose, so fudges until they win - ie, to achieve the desired outcome. Often IME this fudging is very obvious, blatant - the degree of intervention is certainly not minor, even if the GM regards his error as minor. There may be very subtle fudging that players don't notice, of course - we notice the blatant, ham-fisted fudging. It certainly exists.

Fudging when done by a poor GM, or done poorly by a GM who is otherwise OK, but not in the use of that particular tool, is a misapplied condemnation of the practice. Of course if it's done badly it sucks, but the same is true of anything else a GM might do. Including, ironically, not fudging when it would be more appropriate to do so. I've seen plenty of games end lamely with everyone frustrated by something inanely stupid, but with a GM who's shrugging his shoulders because hey, he's got the moral high ground because the dice don't lie or whatever. And then we simply start anew with a new campaign and higher hopes.

Viking Bastard · Oct 9, 2012

So, has the thread reached a shaky consensus of what fudging entails? Because I generally don't fudge dice rolls (and roll all dice in front of my players, though not because of any highly grounded reasons, I just find it quicker and easier), but I suspect a lot of people would consider a lot of features of my DMing as fudging (or simply cheating).

FireLance · Oct 9, 2012

Kind of skirting the no politics rule here, but trying to get gamers to agree on whether fudging is good or bad for a game is like trying to get people to agree on whether government intervention in the free market is good or bad for the economy.

(And, as previously mentioned, my favored approach is never to rule out the possibility of fudging, but to try and set things up so that you never have to fudge in the first place.

)

JustinAlexander · Oct 9, 2012

Hobo said:
When you exaggerate the position that you're trying to refute and attack that instead of what the actual position is, that's called a "strawman argument."

When you pretend that you know my personal gaming experience better than I do, that's called "Hobo is easily ignored".