D&D General How do players feel about DM fudging?

[Swarmkeeper]

The section literally says, "This section gives recommendations for table rules you can establish to help meet that goal." They are recommending fudging as a table rule. That's an endorsement!

They also recommend not fudging as a table rule. So, would you say they endorse both?
Or is it really that they endorse thinking about these things up front and setting expectations for the group?

 

[reelo]

I don't want to have my character killed for no reason.
Sometimes the DM misjudges difficulty of an encounter or there isnextreme bad luck happening.
Then I expect some way out, even if that was not planned ahead of time. That does not mean I want a win, but at least a chance to retreat or surrender.

Retreat or surrender is always an option. But a lot of players don't realise that and think once a fight starts it HAS to end with the death of either party. That's on them, though, not on the DM.

 

[iserith]

The section literally says, "This section gives recommendations for table rules you can establish to help meet that goal." They are recommending fudging as a table rule. That's an endorsement!

That's not an endorsement of fudging. It's an endorsement of setting expectations about how the group will play the game so that everyone can have fun together (the goal). Fudging is listed as one of several reasons to use a DM screen. That's all.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Thanks for badwrongfunning other ways of playing, well done.

We can all hold hands with fake smiles or people can answer your question truthfully about what they believe to be an inferior style game (it is based on preference, it is all good). I prefer the latter.
No need for throwing around badwrongfun from an elevated position.

 

[Maxperson]

They also recommend not fudging as a table rule. So, would you say they endorse both?
Or is it really that they endorse thinking about these things up front and setting expectations for the group?

Yep. They are saying both are good.

 

[Umbran]

For me, it is all about setting expectations before play begins.

If the GM says there will be no fudging, then I expect them to hold to that. If the GM reserves the right to fudge, I am perfectly okay with that, too.

 

[Maxperson]

That's not an endorsement of fudging. It's an endorsement of setting expectations about how the group will play the game so that everyone can have fun together (the goal). Fudging is listed as one of several reasons to use a DM screen. That's all.

It's literally recommendations for table rules to use. Those are endorsements. When a former president recommends a specific candidate, he's not endorsing politics. He's endorsing that specific person.

The Table Rules section is endorsing specific rules for use at the table. If it wasn't, they would have said, "We are recommending setting expectations." and left it at that. Instead, they went further and said that to achieve the goal of a fun time together, here are specific rules we are recommending(endorsing).

 

[Umbran]

We can all hold hands with fake smiles or people can answer your question truthfully about what they believe to be an inferior style game (it is based on preference, it is all good).

If you cannot say that you don't like a thing without categorizing it as "inferior" that's on you.

Personally, I am not a fan of olives. I don't have to insult them, or the people who like them, to say that.

 

[Jer]

Retreat or surrender is always an option. But a lot of players don't realise that and think once a fight starts it HAS to end with the death of either party. That's on them, though, not on the DM.

Disagree - it's on the DM and the players to set expectations for what the game is going to be like. If a DM never says "I plan to run a game where you need to run away sometimes and encounters won't always be balanced" then it's on them when the players don't realize that they should be running away instead of assuming they can win if they do it right. Especially if the DM has previously run games where the players had no expectation of unbalanced encounters or if you're DM-ing a group with folks in it you've never DM'ed for who might not have that expectation.

Setting table style expectations up front and getting buy in from all of the players (including the DM as a player) is crucial to not having a game where someone ends up feeling screwed over. Which is what all of this talk always ends up boiling down to - who's feeling screwed over about what.

 

[AnotherGuy]

If you cannot say that you don't like a thing without categorizing it as "inferior" that's on you.

Personally, I am not a fan of olives. I don't have to insult them, or the people who like them, to say that.

Lyxen specifically selected that word in his question to @loverdrive. Make of it what you will.

Which is exactly what happens with a story-driven game and a DM occasionally fudging dices to help along. Or is that a style of gaming that is somehow inferior in your view ?