My DM just told me he fudges rolls....

[The Shaman]

You are the one who has used words like lazy, rigging, making bad players to describe a way of playing the game different then you do.

Yes, I have, and I stand by my words.

Why do you care if I don't like the way you play? Have I asked you to do anything differently?

 

[SSquirrel]

Your Ranger just Criticalled on the big monster and did some ungodly amount of damage that brought him down from not even bloodied to 2 hit points. The DM decides to wipe off those last 2 HP as well in order to make this huge attack be a massive killing blow... rather than have the monster take the shot but then wimper on the ground for a bit with 2 HP just to wait for another PC to walk over and finally clonk him over the head. Bit anticlimactic.

See I don't consider just calling them dead fudging, I view that as giving in to inevitability. If the monster has a good last trick to pull and he's going next I'd say keep him up, but I'm a big fan of calling the fight when it's reached an inevitable conclusion.

Personally, I don't want the DM fudging rolls for me. I want to take what the dice give. Lord knows I roll badly enough on my own, so I already have to live w/my rolls. I should live w/what the DM rolls too. I always have plenty of character ideas, so if I do die, I can easily come up w/something just as fun to play

Basically, if we go on a mountain climb and just keep rolling THAT badly, the gods don't want us playing those characters. I'm fine with that. Usually if it's something like that my DM offers a couple of extra save chances, one for the player and one for one of us to try and rescue them. If it doesn't happen tho, whatever happens, happens. I appreciate that. One of my more memorable gaming experiences was playing CP2020 for the first time and us getting into a firefight in the first 5 minutes. I got shot up and killed like that. So he crossed out my name, gave me a new name and said I was the other skate punk who dealt for our Fixer character If the DM had fudged I would have been missed or had a crippling wound, which wouldn't have stuck out in my mind for 15 years.

Live by the die. Die by the die.

For instance, the next chest the party searches has a healing potion in it. It wasn't in the notes, but the GM put it there to be nice right then. If it's plausible to be there (because sometimes chests do have healing potions), then he's fudged game content in favor of the player.

Nah that's just Schroedinger's Healing Potion at work

 

[Elf Witch]

Yes, I have, and I stand by my words.

Why do you care if I don't like the way you play? Have I asked you to do anything differently?

Maybe because I find it rude to be called a lazy DM who ruins players ability to play.

This is not CM where anything goes and you can post statements like that. We agree to keep discussions civil here on Enworld which means sometimes not posting exactly what you think and using a little diplomacy to keep the discussions civil.

At this point I don't think we have anything more to say to each other. You have made it quite clear what you think of me as a DM and what you think of my players.

 

[enrious]

There was a climactic encounter where a PC should have died and the party should probably have TPK'd. The GM had mashed in several end bosses into one encounter and it was ridiculously OTT. He fudged very obviously to keep us alive by nerfing monster attacks & abilities. I tolerated it but it was poor DMing and it lessened the fun for most of us.

I agree, sounds like bad DMing to make up for bad DMing.

If the GM offered disability rather than death to my PC, I would happily take the offer. I would like either a random disability table or consistency among PCs though - not much fun I lose an arm while James gets a cool scar.

Man, I'm going to regret asking this.

But how is it any different from fudging you to -9hp? Does the disability serve as some sort of payment or the like for the mitigation? In other words, fudging is more a matter of "getting off scott-free"?

Because I'd do the same - take the disability but want consistency or a random chart.

 

[enrious]

Yes, I have, and I stand by my words.

Why do you care if I don't like the way you play? Have I asked you to do anything differently?

I think the lesson for all of us is that if you would be respected, you must respect others in turn.

 

[enrious]

See I don't consider just calling them dead fudging, I view that as giving in to inevitability. If the monster has a good last trick to pull and he's going next I'd say keep him up, but I'm a big fan of calling the fight when it's reached an inevitable conclusion.

Personally, I don't want the DM fudging rolls for me. I want to take what the dice give. Lord knows I roll badly enough on my own, so I already have to live w/my rolls. I should live w/what the DM rolls too. I always have plenty of character ideas, so if I do die, I can easily come up w/something just as fun to play

Basically, if we go on a mountain climb and just keep rolling THAT badly, the gods don't want us playing those characters. I'm fine with that. Usually if it's something like that my DM offers a couple of extra save chances, one for the player and one for one of us to try and rescue them. If it doesn't happen tho, whatever happens, happens. I appreciate that. One of my more memorable gaming experiences was playing CP2020 for the first time and us getting into a firefight in the first 5 minutes. I got shot up and killed like that. So he crossed out my name, gave me a new name and said I was the other skate punk who dealt for our Fixer character If the DM had fudged I would have been missed or had a crippling wound, which wouldn't have stuck out in my mind for 15 years.

Live by the die. Die by the die.

I don't know if one can interject CP2020 into a discussion about death in D&D - CP2020 practically came with a character sheet with an erasable name for a reason!

That and guns. Lots of deadly, beautiful guns.

 

[Umbran]

Yes, I have, and I stand by my words.

If you want to stand by insulting words, you probably want to stand outside. While we can often make allowances for folks who go a bit over the line for a moment in the heat of discussion, coldly and willfully standing by insults doesn't leave us much room.

Why do you care if I don't like the way you play? Have I asked you to do anything differently?

That you don't like how others play is not material.

That you publicly cast personal judgements and aspersions upon them for how they play, however, is.

 

[The Shaman]

Maybe because I find it rude to be called a lazy DM who ruins players ability to play.

You wanna know what I find rude? Passive-aggressive behavior.

But there are some of the non fudgers who are doing this.

Well I see what you were trying to do but I still maintain that some posters are lumping people who fudge as being all the same without any nuances.

Why is it that some people who don't ever fudge think that those of have done do it because we don't like to roll dice?

Yet several people here can't seem to accept that not all people play the game the same way.

If you have something to say to me or about me, please, don't resort to "some people," particularly when you're ascribing things that were never said. Say it, use "The Shaman" in the post, and throw some Mention tags around it, and we'll actually have an exchange of ideas.

That said, in the spirit of comity, here's something on which we can both agree, without reservation or qualification.

One way of avoiding bad games is to have some idea of what you are getting into before any dice is rolled.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Look I have clarified what I meant on this that I was not just talking about fudging when I said being flexible is a sign of a great DM. I pointed out that being flexible could also mean not fudging because your players don't like it. Being flexible could be hating elves and usually not allowing them as a race in your game but having a player really jonesing to play one so you make an exception this one time. I can not possibly envision everything that may come up in future games which is why I won't lock myself into saying I will never do something.

You've clarified, but The Shaman was still correct. We can agree to disagree on that if you want to.

I would also like to point out that I have never criticized DMs who don't fudge or who choose to roll in the open because that is how their players like the game. I have not used words to describe their DMing styles as lazy or making bad players or cheap. Yet several people here can't seem to accept that not all people play the game the same way.

Sure, and some people early in the thread can't accept that some people may not want to fudge. It goes both ways. The Shaman was a little more insulting than others are, sure, but when I hear you say that me not fitting your ideal description of flexibility means I'm missing a sign of a "good" GM, can't you see how that could be insulting? I'm not insulted by it, but I don't define my personal value by what others think of me. I do think that your statement, while more diplomatic, is still potentially insulting, however, and obviously objectively false.

I have no hard feelings towards you, or towards your style. You know my mantra. However, I don't like seeing The Shaman getting piled on for people taking his quote out of context. I also don't see the discussion going anywhere productive, so it's probably wise to move on. As always, play what you like

As it is, I too appreciate the civil discussion with you and have a feeling that were we ever at the same table would be able to play and have fun.

Indeed, we probably would. And, if you're in the area and a spot opens up at my table (I have six players, and a seventh showing up in a couple months when my brother gets back from Fort Hood), feel free to join us. Good times will be had by all. As always, play what you like

This is an interesting thought. I wonder how many of those who dislike fudging dice would leave a game if they learned that the DM fudged to save their character.

Assuming my normal group (so, full of long term friends): Once, and I'd let it go without mentioning it. Twice, I'd bring it up, explain my objection, and continue with the understanding that I won't continue playing if it happens to me again. A third time and I'd bow out.

Also, in a different direction:

Those who dislike fudging dice, if an attack (or something) roll would kill your character, would you accept a DM's offer to survive but suffer some kind of notable injury? For instance, if the adventure was in a setting where bringing in a new PC would be difficult or impossible, (like on an island, or deep in the dungeon). Your character takes a killing blow, but the DM says that instead of death, you loose a limb, or an eye, or some permanent ability score damage, or something similar.

Well, as my system has mechanics on how normal hits can make me lose an eye, or a limb, etc., I'd probably say no. In a traditional game... maybe. We're friends, so I might let it slide. As a GM, I'd never do it. As a player, I might do it for a friend, once. I wouldn't do it a second time. I'd rather force a new character in than twist my character to being alive. In fact, I'd rather watch the rest of the session with no PC to play than to have my character survive.

Just me, though. As always, play what you like

 

[The Shaman]

I wonder how many of those who dislike fudging dice would leave a game if they learned that the DM fudged to save their character.

Leaving would definitely be my first inclination.

At a minimum I would begin by reminding* the referee how vehemently I dislike fudging for any reason. Where the conversation goes from there would determine whether I bow out or not.


* Because I don't join a campaign without having a playstyle conversation with the referee first.