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

[Vaalingrade]

As a player, don't get too attached to a character. [emoji2369]

This is exactly what I DON'T want my players to take away from my games.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Alternatively, some people deal with such runs of bad luck by fudging. That isn't any less mature.

If a player says that their evening was “ruined” because their dice were cold, they are acting immaturely, and being a bit insulting to the people with whom they are playing. Good sportsmanship is something that we all try to teach our children, and RPGs aren’t even an adversarial context.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I feel like people should be allowed to be upset by things that upset them without being immaturely called names.

 

[iserith]

Thinking about it, I wonder about the following - especially from those who really hate fudging:

(1) Lots of times I don't particularly have anything written down as DM and am winging it ("expletive, I wasn't planning on them going there... what will be there"). Obviously in those cases what I decide to put in is related to their health and things. What makes that materially different than fudging by upping/downing the hitpoints of something in a room that they are getting to? Is that much different in effect than fudging?

Again, for me it depends on context and why the DM is doing what they are doing. As a DM, I'll have a roll table for that sort of thing created ahead of time. There's nowhere the PCs can go that I don't have prepped in some way and none of that will be based on the PCs' health at the time. As a player, I'm unlikely to play in a game where I know the DM is winging it a lot.

(2) There are lots of times where it feels like things are a judgement call. Is the monsters morale shaky? Would the monsters be happy capturing them instead of fighting more and ask the party to surrender? Will the monsters chase the party if they decide to retreat? Will the monsters double tap instead of going for a new target? Should the answers to all of those be written down before the combat starts to avoid having to decide on the spur of the moment when influenced by how it is going? Is not doing so much different in effect than fudging?

Ideally, yes it is prepped ahead of time, and telegraphed during play in my view. You'll tend to know in my games, for example, if the monsters are going to kill you or capture you or likely to chase you if you run. That's me as DM setting the stakes for the challenge.

(3) If the problem is swinginess of dice, is it bad if the DM either has some fixed rule to ameliorate it (will have monsters have possible fumbles but not crits if party is doing bad, and vice versa if good) or have a DM pool of inspiration (one per session? two per session) to balance things out? Is that too fudgey?

I would say that the swing of the dice is just something one must accept in a game that uses a d20. Govern oneself accordingly!

 

[Umbran]

Or in this case, that no matter what a GM's intent is for fudging a roll, no matter their good intentions, it is very possible that they might be eroding the health of their game. They probably won't ever see it...

So, question - did the GMs who made you feel this way discuss using these techniques before play began?

 

[reelo]

I feel like people should be allowed to be upset by things that upset them without being immaturely called names.

I dunno. I feel like an appropriate reaction should be: "Aaaaw, bummer! Ah well, xxx had a good run while it lasted. Now where are my d6's so I can roll up a new one?"

But of course, with ppl now commissioning character art, buying character-specific sets of dice, and even cosplaying their character, there's a considerable cost sunken into it. I think some of that stuff borders on the obsessive...

 

[Vaalingrade]

I feel like you quoted the wrong post there.

 

[Umbran]

I think some of that stuff borders on the obsessive...

Because, what the world needs is more judging other people?

 

[Lanefan]

It's weird how the general vibe is that the DM is the main character who gets to do whatever they want because 'DMing is hard' and apparently not voluntary, but the second they do something pro-player and pro-story, they're a cheating scumbag who deserves all sorts of random insults.

You're assuming, it seems, that DM fudging is always in the players' favour.

We've already seen posted examples of the opposite; where a DM beefs up the opposition on the fly to make things more exciting etc.

IMO fudging in either direction is bad form; good form is to set the encounter parameters ahead of time and then neutrally and fairly run it as written when it occurs, letting the chips fall where they may.

 

[Blue]

How about real poll choices, like "Fudging can be used in positive and negative ways".

I've had DMs coddle us in adventures that were poorly written, and that sucked. I've had DMs finish foregone battles quickly when we have 2.5 hours of game time after work, and that pacing improvement was well received.

Trying to pretend that all fudging is the same puts a huge bias on the poll - it assumes the only way to evaluate it is a boolean used/not used which is patently untrue.