Will you accept fudging?

[Kmart Kommando]

If you change the -10 you're dead rule, you don't need to fudge.

At least one character each session ends up facing a full attack with 5 hit points, and nothing in the rules except an obscure PrC's ability (and the new Knight) to taunt the enemy away from the nearly dead character.

One of my groups had some weird rule about negative hit points, and even though there still were deaths, they were much less frequent, but still had the threat of death keeping us on our toes. Sometimes, the players themselves declared when their characters were dead, due to taking big hits while being way into the negative.

 

[vulcan_idic]

I voted an eight - I like the random factor of the dice, but a good DM knows when to follow what the dice says and when to change it so as to tell a better, more interesting story. It doesn't happen all the time but I haven't an issue with it at all as long as it happens to serve the greater goals of (1) a good story and (2) a rollicking good time for all involved

 

[vulcan_idic]

2) The Selfish Reason: The DM has a story to tell, and your character has a part to play. Your 1st level fighter can't get ganked by the kobolds that just ambushed you because you're supposed to discover you're the king's illegitimate son three months down the line and take the throne by the time you're 12th level. No thanks. I'll decide my own fate, thanks.

I don't generally feel that D&D is a place where the DM has a story to tell but rather a place where the group collectively - the DM, but also the players - together have a story to tell together.

 

[Quasqueton]

As long as I can't notice it or suspect it, I don't care.

Assume that you know of the fudging, either at the time it happens or shortly after (soon enough after that it would affect your feeling for the situation).

Quasqueton

 

[diaglo]

no fudging. EVAR. i want my character to die if that is what the dice and DM decide.

but if there are rules in play (like action/hero points) i'm gonna use them just like everybody else.

 

[Fishbone]

Never. Unless there is a mechanical in-game reason for it like Hero, Action, or Luck points, bennies, and so forth, I never want it to occur. I feel cheated if I know that the baddie "made" his save, or my character was spared, or damage was being skimmed off the top or that the blow hit "but just barely". Don't sugar coat it. When I run a game I put my philosophy on fudging right in the open, then I say that I won't use a screen because I believe in open rolling. Its pretty refreshing for some players.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

Mrs. Frost should have fudged where Blackleaf was concerned and saved all of us a lot of trouble.

As a player, I never fudge.

As a DM, I'll occasionally fudge, but usually only when I've grossly overestimated what the characters can handle.

 

[mara]

I'm more inclined to accept it if the DM underestimated the danger of the encounter. We've had a few "Wait a minute, that ability does *what*?" moments in a game I'm in. However, if the DM feels it's absolutely necessary, I'd rather not know about it. I also don't accept retconning if my character takes a lot of damage. A DM felt bad that my thief was knocked to -13 in one blow (still alive due to -Con house rule) and I elected to keep the damage when he offered to soften it a bit. My thief is somewhat based on the character of Titus Pullo from the series Rome, so being unconscious in the back of the wagon for a bit is perfectly in character. It would have been unpleasant had it actually killed my character, but I don't like retconning.

 

[wayne62682]

I voted 8... personally I do not mind fudging because IMO the game is a story, and it ruins the story if a main character (i.e. a PC) dies because of bad luck and not the plot.

I mean, how much fun would Star Wars be if Vader rolled a lucky critical and shot Luke out of the sky, or if Obi-Wan failed a Balance check and fell into the lava at Mustafar? Or Lord of the Rings if one of the Nazgul rolled lucky and killed Aragorn at Weathertop? The "game" mechanics exist IMO to tell a story, and fudging should be a necessary part of that to ensure the story is told.

 

[Ghendar]

I think fudging should not be revealed to the players. It breaks the illusion of the DM.

Totally agree. What happens behind the dm screen stays behind the dm screen.

Why on earth would any dm reveal to his/her players that he/she fudge dice rolls?????