Will you accept fudging?

[Flexor the Mighty!]

When dice conflict with the story, the story wins.

Agree or Disagree?

Can't disagree more. The dice tell the story ultimately, so they can't conflict with said "story". We are playing a game, not writing a novel. Will the PC be the hero of the realm or another noble soul that fell victim to the BBEG? We find out by how the dice roll.

I roll in the open for the most part so fudging isn't really an option in terms of dice.

 

[Ravendruid]

I don't mind fudging as long as it's not too blatant or frequent. It keeps the game and story moving along. Just PLEASE don't save me if I do something stupid, or that I really should have known better. If I deserve to be killed, then by all means, kill me off.

 

[Reynard]

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.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of DMs out there that disagree with you.

 

[wayne62682]

The dice tell the story ultimately, so they can't conflict with said "story". We are playing a game, not writing a novel. Will the PC be the hero of the realm or another noble soul that fell victim to the BBEG? We find out by how the dice roll.

I completely and respectfully disagree. The dice and mechanics are there to give us the illusion of telling a story and to make it more entertaining than sitting around describing things. I agree totally that when dice and story conflict, the story always wins. The dice do not tell the story, the players tell the story, and the script should not have to be rewritten because of a bad roll. All IMO, of course.

 

[Umbran]

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

I am not so sure it is a matter of illusion, so much as letting the players be able to derive the pattern.

A DM can misjudge, and create things that are more tough, or more weak, than intended. When such becomes apparent, fudging is, in my opinion, an option. This is more like run-time editing of the prepared materials than anything else.

A given DM may have "tells", such that if you tell the players when you are fudging, they can start predicting the need, and that's no good for anyone.

 

[Ghendar]

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.

Unfortunately, there's a lot of DMs out there that disagree with you.

One of the best (and most satisfying) adventures I ever ran involved me coming up with a basic outline and then just letting the players run with it. Of course, they didn't know that at the time. Sure, it was challenging for me, but when I saw the result, man it was fantastic.

 

[Davek]

I prefer all rolls in the open, with the numbers to be achieved kept secret (ac, dc, sr, whatever).

What functional difference is there in rolling in the open but keeping the target numbers secret (and therefore susceptible to 'fudging') and hidden rolling (and therefore susceptible to 'fudging') and having the target numbers known?

Of course the combination of hidden rolling and secret targets does present some interesting possibilities

 

[Breakdaddy]

I have been known to allow some VERY RARE fudging in order to keep the game flowing without starting a major argument. Normally if I catch someone fudging I will put it in my mental rolodex and will drop some sort of minor bad luck on them later. If the player in question has been frustrated by bad rolls all night, I will let it slide. I know how it is to have bad rolls ruin your fun. I voted 3 for this reason only, I vote 1 or possibly 2 for straight up cheating.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I completely and respectfully disagree. The dice and mechanics are there to give us the illusion of telling a story and to make it more entertaining than sitting around describing things. I agree totally that when dice and story conflict, the story always wins. The dice do not tell the story, the players tell the story, and the script should not have to be rewritten because of a bad roll. All IMO, of course.

Script? When we game the players write thier own "scripts" as the game progresses and they react to the outcomes of encounters which are determined by dice rolls for the most part, or the players problem solving abilities in non-combat encounters. Of course I'm of the opinion that the only story is when the players relate thier adventures to each other after sessions or later down the line. I don't set up a metaplot or anything like that for the most part.

We are like night and day on this I think, which is totally cool as long as everyone is having a good time.

 

[LostSoul]

I completely and respectfully disagree. The dice and mechanics are there to give us the illusion of telling a story and to make it more entertaining than sitting around describing things. I agree totally that when dice and story conflict, the story always wins. The dice do not tell the story, the players tell the story, and the script should not have to be rewritten because of a bad roll. All IMO, of course.

You should check out a game like Dogs in the Vineyard or (less of a game, more of a story-telling aid) Prime-Time Adventures. The mechanics in both support making cool stories, and you won't have to fudge.