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

[Crimson Longinus]

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. For whatever reason, the way you phrased it earlier ("only half thought it was bad") implied that the other half must think it's good. And that's not the case...half think it's bad, and only a fifth think it's good.

I'm not at all surprised that people who think fudging is good are in the minority. Fudging is a kludge that some people use to fix mistakes, bugs and imperfections of the system. I'm sure that even majority of those who occasionally use it would prefer if it was not needed.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Use a diceless system.

No, I don't think I will.

Why use a system that focuses on die rolls for resolution when you are not going to rely upon the die rolls?

Not ever die roll is an issue. Do people just skip over this part when people mention it?

 

[payn]

I'm not at all surprised that people who think fudging is good are in the minority. Fudging is a kludge that some people use to fix mistakes, bugs and imperfections of the system. I'm sure that even majority of those who occasionally use it would prefer if it was not needed.

Yeah for me its tool that's strictly use in case of emergency type thing.

 

[Flamestrike]

No. Thank you though.

Yep thought so.

You blokes who complain about balance, diss martials and sook about fudging don't want to engage in actual game play hypotheticals or engage in actual play examples, because you know the results don't favor your argument.

Also apparently you're infallible DMs who never find yourselves in a situations where you've thrown an encounter at your group, that they clearly cant handle, so you've never been in a situation where you had to improvise some dues ex machina to keep them alive (or you just TPK'd them anyway).

Frankly though, I dont really care. You do you, and I'll do me, going by the RAW and guidance of the DMG that expressly tells me to ignore the dice when the result goes against the story or the game.

 

[Vaalingrade]

By lying about the result of the dice roll?

If need be.

I don’t like being lied to.

I have terrible news about the entire history of human interaction...

 

[Maxperson]

Ah, gotcha. Thanks for clarifying. For whatever reason, the way you phrased it earlier ("only half thought it was bad") implied that the other half must think it's good. And that's not the case...half think it's bad, and only a fifth think it's good.

The wording on the poll is funky. Neutral should have said "Find it acceptable," because that's neutral language. They accept it, but have no further opinion. Positive should have said, "Fudging can be beneficial." And very positive should have said, "fudging is good."

 

[Flamestrike]

In general I don't care if a TPK happens.

That's one way to play I guess.

I can think of better ways to spend my free time, but that's just me.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So, how do the people who think it's ok for the DM to fudge feel about players doing the same?

Either way it’s a matter of a given table’s social contract.

I’d really rather neither, but if the DM feels they made a mistake serious enough to require changing the parameters of the fight, I’d rather they be open and honest about it than do it in secret. Even if it’s adjusting the HP mid-fight, they could say “this isn’t going like I thought it would. What do you all think if I lower the HP values a bit?”

I would dislike that, as a player. The only time I want to be consulted on a thing like that is if it directly involves my PC, like proposing to change how much damage I just took.

I don’t feel like “be open and honest with your players” should be such controversial advice. In every other situation people advise it, but when it comes to fudging? Oh, no, for some reason that’s different and suddenly it’s better to go behind the players’ backs. I don’t get it.

I think what is being lost here is that it’s not “going behind thier back” so much as working to keep the flow and feel of the game consistently immersive.

 

[Flamestrike]

I'm not at all surprised that people who think fudging is good are in the minority. Fudging is a kludge that some people use to fix mistakes, bugs and imperfections of the system. I'm sure that even majority of those who occasionally use it would prefer if it was not needed.

Not really. I mean, its a human game, with human elements to it. I see no need to remove that human element. As a player you put faith in your DM to run a challenging and fun game, and as a DM you repay that faith and do just that.

Hilariously, even the 'anti fudgers' seem to be totally OK with this human element being involved to ignore charts entirely, or simply selecting results or an outcome the DM wants from a chart, as long as the DM doesnt also roll the dice at the same time.

What about if I selected my random encounter, yet still rolled the dice, but for no other reason other than to hear them hit the table, and I didnt even look at them, or register the result?

Would the anti-fudging crowd still be angry at me?

 

[Grendel_Khan]

Yep thought so.

You blokes who complain about balance, diss martials and sook about fudging don't want to engage in actual game play hypotheticals or engage in actual play examples, because you know the results don't favor your argument.

Also apparently you're infallible DMs who never find yourselves in a situations where you've thrown an encounter at your group, that they clearly cant handle, so you've never been in a situation where you had to improvise some dues ex machina to keep them alive (or you just TPK'd them anyway).

Frankly though, I dont really care. You do you, and I'll do me, going by the RAW and guidance of the DMG that expressly tells me to ignore the dice when the result goes against the story or the game.

Ah yes, the classic behavior of someone who doesn't really care: drop into a thread late and swinging hard, write a rapid-fire stream of confrontational posts, then toss some insults--with a dash of sealioning--on the way out (but not really on the way out, we know how this goes). I've never seen someone care less!