D&D 5E Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?

travathian · Mar 27, 2015

emdw45 said:
You think I wouldn't notice that? You'd probably be wrong. Anomalously-easy traps would twig my radar. "Hey, all those other tripwires were DC 15. Why did that one succeed on a 13? That smells like cheating."

I'm curious, does your DM tell you the exact target DC for an ability check?

I haven't run or played a campaign (any edition) where the DM would share numbers. The player could ask how challenging their character might find a task, and the DM would respond anywhere from impossible to trivial, but wouldn't give a concrete number. It would require highly similar traps and very similar dice rolls for a player to suss out the DC of a trap.

S'mon · Mar 27, 2015

The Human Target said:
You never tweak an NPC on the fly?

Like say one of the PCs is talking to a bartender to gain information.

And mid conversation the PC decides to hit on the young waitress that you the DM happened to have said drops off the PC's dinner.

And you decide, spur of the moment, that the waitress is the bartenders fiance and that he is now less than happy with the PC because of it.

Just because you realize it would make the scene much more interesting and memorable.

That's a no no?

Personally:
I might roll a '2 in 6 the bartender is romantically engaged with the barmaid".
In general I am very happy to create content in play, preferably extrapolated from what already exists. I may roll monster hit points when they get hit, for instance. I don't see that as equivalent to changing stuff that already exists. However in a world with divine intervention, the gods may intervene in little ways here and there, to favour the PCs or get them into scrapes, as with Odysseus in The Odyssey, only usually less heavy-handed.

Blackbrrd · Mar 27, 2015

travathian said:
So then my question would be, what if the DM could pull of the fudging in such a way that the PCs wouldn't ever know about it?

I think that if you have to fudge so little that it can't ever be detected, there is a good chance you don't need to fudge at all. Remember, you only have to be noticed once while fudging, to make all your actions suspect.

I don't like pen and paper rpg games where the story is something the DM has planned for at the players can play through, where chance isn't allowed to take the game in a new direction. I think it should be a dynamic thing, far away from the computer rpgs where there is a fixed story you can't really affect. If I wanted a story I couldn't affect outside the orginal story the DM has prepared, I could probably just have played a crpg. Which I don't want to.

I think for fudging to be ok, you should have had a talk with your players first and agreed that fudging for story is something you want. I do think that pretty few players actually want a fudging DM though. My assumption is that it's something the DM wants - to tell the story he prepared.

The Human Target · Mar 27, 2015

Blackbrrd said:
I think that if you have to fudge so little that it can't ever be detected, there is a good chance you don't need to fudge at all. Remember, you only have to be noticed once while fudging, to make all your actions suspect.

I don't like pen and paper rpg games where the story is something the DM has planned for at the players can play through, where chance isn't allowed to take the game in a new direction. I think it should be a dynamic thing, far away from the computer rpgs where there is a fixed story you can't really affect. If I wanted a story I couldn't affect outside the orginal story the DM has prepared, I could probably just have played a crpg. Which I don't want to.

I think for fudging to be ok, you should have had a talk with your players first and agreed that fudging for story is something you want. I do think that pretty few players actually want a fudging DM though. My assumption is that it's something the DM wants - to tell the story he prepared.

At least in my case, you would be very wrong.

I loathe playing through the DMs unpublished fantasy novel.

You're painting in others intentions with far too narrow a brush.

The Human Target · Mar 27, 2015

S'mon said:
Personally:
I might roll a '2 in 6 the bartender is romantically engaged with the barmaid".
In general I am very happy to create content in play, preferably extrapolated from what already exists. I may roll monster hit points when they get hit, for instance. I don't see that as equivalent to changing stuff that already exists. However in a world with divine intervention, the gods may intervene in little ways here and there, to favour the PCs or get them into scrapes, as with Odysseus in The Odyssey, only usually less heavy-handed.

I'm the god that wants player characters to live a long but interesting life full of close calls and trauma.

ehenning · Mar 27, 2015

The Human Target said:
At least in my case, you would be very wrong.

I loathe playing through the DMs unpublished fantasy novel.

You're painting in others intentions with far too narrow a brush.

To each his/her own. This is why you can choose who you play with.

Umbran · Mar 27, 2015

Blackbrrd said:
I think for fudging to be ok, you should have had a talk with your players first and agreed that fudging for story is something you want. I do think that pretty few players actually want a fudging DM though. My assumption is that it's something the DM wants - to tell the story he prepared.

I think talking to your players about it before the game starts is a good idea.

However, I personally find few players mind it. Objections are usually more strident among players who are at the table largely for the tactical combat portion of the game, and if that's where their fun lies, I can't fault them for not liking fudging. I can fault them for *vilifying* fudging, but that's a separate thing.

On the flip side, in speaking with other GMs, I find your assumption to be incorrect. Most fudging isn't about getting a prepared story to happen in detail. It is about adjusting the particular moment, in the context of what's already gone on. The misunderstanding being that "fudging for story" is about reaching a particular predetermined end point, when it is more often about story pacing and general structure and complexity, more about a section grinding on in a boring manner, or something ending way too soon to be interesting.

Blackbrrd · Mar 27, 2015

The Human Target said:
At least in my case, you would be very wrong.

I loathe playing through the DMs unpublished fantasy novel.

You're painting in others intentions with far too narrow a brush.

You are criticism is valid, my statements where hyperbolic

Blackbrrd · Mar 27, 2015

Umbran said:
I think talking to your players about it before the game starts is a good idea.

However, I personally find few players mind it. Objections are usually more strident among players who are at the table largely for the tactical combat portion of the game, and if that's where their fun lies, I can't fault them for not liking fudging. I can fault them for *vilifying* fudging, but that's a separate thing.

On the flip side, in speaking with other GMs, I find your assumption to be incorrect. Most fudging isn't about getting a prepared story to happen in detail. It is about adjusting the particular moment, in the context of what's already gone on. The misunderstanding being that "fudging for story" is about reaching a particular predetermined end point, when it is more often about story pacing and general structure and complexity, more about a section grinding on in a boring manner, or something ending way too soon to be interesting.

Some good points here, and were you write that you think my assumption is incorrect, I think you are right.

I do think that if you are in a situation where you want to end a combat, the way isn't to fudge, but to just say something in the lines of: "And then you mop up the remaining forces".

I think I am mainly opposed to behind-the-scenes adjustment of combat than I am against adjusting combat. As I have mentioned multiple times, there are times when you probably should do adjustments, but I think it should be in the open.

JWO · Mar 27, 2015

I have no problem with changing an arbitrary number that the players are unaware of in the middle of a fight if it makes the fight better in some way. I would also have no problem if the DM did it in a game I was playing.

D&D 5E Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?

travathian

First Post

S'mon

Legend

Blackbrrd

First Post

The Human Target

Adventurer

The Human Target

Adventurer

ehenning

Explorer

Umbran

Mod Squad

Blackbrrd

First Post

Blackbrrd

First Post

JWO

First Post

Similar Threads