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

[theCourier]

If anything, generic tools something like GURPS or Savage World (that still enforce certain tones and expectations due to their mechanics and areas of focus) is the multitool people want.

 

[billd91]

If anything, generic tools something like GURPS or Savage World (that still enforce certain tones and expectations due to their mechanics and areas of focus) is the multitool people want.

No, they really aren't. Please don't tell us what we want.

 

[Vaalingrade]

If someone isn't asking for another game, maybe we should chill on our unsolicited recommendations though.

 

[Thomas Shey]

If someone isn't asking for another game, maybe we should chill on our unsolicited recommendations though.

The issue is that this usually comes up in the context of "I'm doing this thing to address an undesirable result that can happen in the game I'm using." or "I'm going this to make this game work better." I have trouble not seeing "Well, using a game that doesn't require doing that thing to avoid those results or to make the game work well might be worth a look."

Or put another way, discussion is discussion. Some reactions to discussion are not going to be things people want to hear. That doesn't make them inappropriate.

 

[Cadence]

The issue is that this usually comes up in the context of "I'm doing this thing to address an undesirable result that can happen in the game I'm using." or "I'm going this to make this game work better." I have trouble not seeing "Well, using a game that doesn't require doing that thing to avoid those results or to make the game work well might be worth a look."

Or put another way, discussion is discussion. Some reactions to discussion are not going to be things people want to hear. That doesn't make them inappropriate.

"I had this piece of furniture that would have been about perfect if only it was 1/2" taller and 1/16" narrower. So I put some 1/2" wood blocks under the legs and sanded a 1/16th inch off the side going against the wall."

"Why not just actually try to find a piece of furniture that is perfect?"

----

Which system do you suggest that does everything else virutally the same as D&D does except for avoiding the long runs of super good or super bad luck on the dice?

 

[Vaalingrade]

The issue is that this usually comes up in the context of "I'm doing this thing to address an undesirable result that can happen in the game I'm using." or "I'm going this to make this game work better." I have trouble not seeing "Well, using a game that doesn't require doing that thing to avoid those results or to make the game work well might be worth a look."

Or put another way, discussion is discussion. Some reactions to discussion are not going to be things people want to hear. That doesn't make them inappropriate.

On a D&D board about D&D, telling people to stop playing D&D because you don't like them monkeying with D&D and see it as 'using a wrench to hammer nails' is both inappropriate, insulting, and obnoxious.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

The issue is that this usually comes up in the context of "I'm doing this thing to address an undesirable result that can happen in the game I'm using." or "I'm going this to make this game work better." I have trouble not seeing "Well, using a game that doesn't require doing that thing to avoid those results or to make the game work well might be worth a look."

Or put another way, discussion is discussion. Some reactions to discussion are not going to be things people want to hear. That doesn't make them inappropriate.

Well kinda, it can open up a whole other kettle of worms if it doesn't do what the GM who's asking wants it to in other respects, which is usually the problem. E.g. in our case we play Pathfinder and hacked it a little to do OSR style hexcrawling and sandboxing, if someone tries to redirect the conversation to another game, that might make sense to them, but it would be missing a lot of the reasons I want to adjust the game I'm playing to do it.

In a lot of cases its breaking A, B, and D to fix C, if that makes sense to you.

 

[Ovinomancer]

On a D&D board about D&D, telling people to stop playing D&D because you don't like them monkeying with D&D and see it as 'using a wrench to hammer nails' is both inappropriate, insulting, and obnoxious.

100% agree, and I'm not about to stop recommending other games when it's appropriate. I can't recall a single person ever recommending a different game because they want to keep D&D pure. This is a terrible take.

 

[soviet]

"I had this piece of furniture that would have been about perfect if only it was 1/2" taller and 1/16" narrower. So I put some 1/2" wood blocks under the legs and sanded a 1/16th inch off the side going against the wall."

"Why not just actually try to find a piece of furniture that is perfect?"

----

Which system do you suggest that does everything else virutally the same as D&D does except for avoiding the long runs of super good or super bad luck on the dice?

The system I suggest is stock D&D but giving each PC a couple of rerolls.

Your 'slightly imperfect furniture' analogy doesn't really work here, because the kind of tinkering you describe is not what you're doing. Instead of luck points or house rules etc to fix the problems you're experiencing, you're sidestepping them by secretly and unilaterally ignoring the rules when it suits. (I have no idea how to put that in context of the analogy!)

 

[Cadence]

The system I suggest is stock D&D but giving each PC a couple of rerolls.

Your 'slightly imperfect furniture' analogy doesn't really work here, because the kind of tinkering you describe is not what you're doing. Instead of luck points or house rules etc to fix the problems you're experiencing, you're sidestepping them by secretly and unilaterally ignoring the rules when it suits. (I have no idea how to put that in context of the analogy!)

Player rerolls under limited circumstances would probably work. I'm not sure the players would always know when to use them for things like saves, or how they would stop the DM from criticaling them four times in a row, say

---

5e explicitly mentions it as a doable thing to consider. Early Gygax mentions having divine intervention for the DM to fix things one doesn't like, which seems to clarify what is explicitly mentioned in some places in 1e. It kind of feels like it isn't against the rules.

Why is giving the DM rerolls (or allowing the DM - who controls all the gods in the game, including the ones of luck and time - to intervene) on rare occasions a bigger rule change than giving the players some? [Not asking how folks feel about it, but why it's viewed as a bigger rule change.]