Search results

I agree. Which is why it's odd you cut off my next sentence in the quote. It states: This implies many aspects of lie, including illusionism. It does not change the definition of lie. It's semantics again just like fudging. In the reality show, Survivor, they lie. It can be really fun for many...

That's fair. I was simply providing one possible explanation. There are many more valid explanations.

Just to be clear, my bolded words were a statement that discussed how a character who fudges can do so for the same reason a DM who fudges. Therefore, if you, as DM need to fudge, it should be ok for your players to do so as well. And I think a DM screen is fine. Like I said, I have played with...

To be clear, I don't think DMs that fudge are cheaters. But they do lie to their players. I think that is a fact. (And I don't mean lie as a sinful act. There are many games where you lie, and those can be very fun.) Also, I don't think DMs that fudge are bad either. But, I think they need to...

It's ok to call me out. But read what I wrote please. The DM that spends more time prepping their encounters will have less problems with swingy dice rolls - which is what this is all about. The fact that people try to semantically parsnip fudging dice rolls because of game mechanics is silly...

I agree. But there is also this, which is sometimes true: Sometimes take it as "They're telling me I play bad" because they feel a bit guilty. And guilt, as we know can come from a myriad of things. It might be their group just broke up and no one was really having any fun. Or they have never...

To be fair, I don't think anyone has been insulted. They may not like the other person's view, but they weren't insulted. Everyone I read who likes open rolling has said one of the following: It's more suspenseful It's more honest It's not difficult to do if you as DM prepped thoroughly

You are correct. My bad. As for the DM stepping in, you really shouldn't have to if you did your prep work. I mean, unless you are playing D&D with one player and one DM, another person in the group should step in. If you have a group with no healers, and no one bothered to bring Goodberries...

No more than the DM screaming it's in the interest of my story. I literally gave the counter-example of that; the DM rolling opposing skill checks for the gauntlet. If you are ok with one, you should be ok with the other. What low frequency event? The event that you might go down in a game...

To be clear, in my personal gaming mentality, there is nothing wrong with this. What is wrong is trying to semantically parcel a different definition of fudging. You don't fudge, even though you roll behind the screen. I am sure your players don't believe you're fudging either. That's how...

That assumption is unproven, and at the least, unwise. The player really wanting to look the part of the hero while running a gauntlet with excessively hard skill checks, all to impress the significant other they adore in character isn't fudging the acrobatics check just for self-interest. They...

I never said their roles or motivations are the same. But the GM that rolls behind the screen is still doing the exact same thing as the player who does. Using the words "desirable" or "undesirable" to try and piecemeal a difference is silly. An "undesirable" outcome specifically implies there...

The only question is: Should the players roll behind a screen? This is especially true once they figure out a targets' AC. If you say no, then the DM shouldn't either. All the same thoughts apply: The player could want to add tension to the story by failing their tightrope walk knowing they...

Memory is a leaky reservoir, I agree. But does that mean we should also discount anyone's play experience from years past? When someone says that a DM railroaded the group, and they bring up how it stifled the campaign, should we reply with an implication that the event might not have occurred...

Fair enough. I replied with too hastily. There are probably several that use their real names.

Exactly. I never claimed CR scripts their stuff. And as for believing me, I really don't care if you (or anyone here) does. I know what I heard. I also know I am the only person that doesn't try to hide behind some internet pseudonym. I keep my discussions, and more importantly, who I am - out...

Sorry Clint, I was trying to be vague on details because I don't know if the two people involved want it to be known. I am merely respecting their right to a private conversation by keeping their anonymity. I do this with all writers I've had conversations with. This includes several tv writers...

I agree with you, to a point. But this was literally a two-hour discussion with notes being taken and specific lines and phrases that sound cool being jotted down. Like I said, it was very similar to a writers' roundtable. It was not a fifteen- or twenty-minute conversation with a player about...

Interesting. I had no idea. Maybe since so many of the cast members have "Hollywood" experience, it's not needed. Or maybe Mercer is actually better than everyone already gives him credit for. But it is interesting, nonetheless. My experience with the podcasters was eye-opening. I had always...

No. But there is no doubt that the vocabulary and phrasing of sentences can have just as great an impact on the emotional feel of a book (even a rulebook) than pictures. And, in that sense, I think 2e, 3e, and even the 2014 5th edition did a better job. It's not a large critique, but for me, it...