Search results

I also want to point out that I think that it’s a reasonable expectation when playing a game, even one like D&D, that something like die rolls are accepted as they lay. When I started playing and read a sentence like, “...it is your right to control the dice at any time and to roll dice for the...

Well there are plenty of examples in the thread already, and like I said it matters what rules the table has. But here’s one from the 5e DMG: “Rolling behind a screen lets you fudge the results if you want to. If two critical hits in a row would kill a character, you could change the second...

Actually, one of the rules actually being discussed are the rules that state the DM is allowed to "fudge" or to modify or ignore a die roll in the moment. Whether that's the interpretation that the table has of the 1e DMG, or the more explicit rules in later DMGs, even if it's simply a house...

I'm still not sure where you're seeing this. One of the examples in particular is specifically about combat: "Now and then a player will die through no fault of his own. He or she will have done everything correctly, taken every reasonable precaution, but still the freakish roll of the dice...

OK, so what are you defining as cheating? Because to me, following the rules by definition cannot be cheating. I disagree with the assertion that we "added these allowances to allow the DM to "fudge" the rules so we didn't have to call it cheating." We have no idea why they more explicitly...

I agree, I don't think I've seen this particular chain. But the initiative/turn system is what makes any chain like that possible, so I've seen others. There will always be times that rules discussions come up, and we generally make a quick decision and move on. If necessary we'll address it...

Agreed on the goblins. I don’t think that deeply during play either, but when the opportunity arises and I do, like now, then I work it into future encounters. As for the Churchill-ish quote. Yes, unless the alternatives are better. For us, anyway, an alternative is.

In this case it's primarily the goblin chain that does it for me. "Oh, I'm awake, I'll slap him then run away...oh, I'm awake, I'll slap him and run away...oh, I'm awake, I'll slap him and run away..." all while the fighter is swinging that sword in slow...slower...slower still...motion. The...

Whether it says that in 5e somewhere or not, I have no idea. It probably comes from an earlier edition, and the goblins in my world haven't changed, even if the MM or Volo's Guide or whatever decides to make them different. Cowardly or not, though, I was thinking about it, and it's an...

"Narrative" was a poor word choice. That doesn't negate the fact that it's a clunky process to work through the rules sometimes create situations that drive the fiction in odd ways. Such as advice in another thread where a person was multiclassing paladin and warlock and complaining that they...

Every adventure they published had some background and story to it, however thin. But my point was that his example specifically references ignoring or adjusting the die roll for the purpose of more exploration that “would be particularly exciting.” If you want to choose to believe that there...

Absolutely, I mention the ready option in another reply. My issue, though, is that it causes the game to get caught up in the minutia of the rules to figure out how we can ensure the goblins won’t get their turn and gain a potential chain reaction like that. I’d rather focus on the fiction than...

It’s never slowed down our campaigns when O still used initiative, going back to AD&D. But to each their own. I’d prefer to never see combat on a grid ever again. But that wouldn’t be enough to make me choose not to play either.

Yeah, in a world where goblins have been at war with humans, elves, dwarves, and other intelligent races including spellcasters, I wouldn’t even question it. However, a cowardly goblin stopping to help its “weaker” friends? More importantly, creatures often don’t wake up instantly. To stop...

Don’t have it in front of me, but if I recall the DMG (maybe it’s the PHB) provides several options, such as individual for all monsters. Also not the group initiative doesn’t require you to group all goblins together, for example. The DM decides how best to group them, and a “group” can be a...

The issue behind people's dislike of fudging is not that the number has changed. It's that the GM is imposing their will over the game, when in theory they otherwise don't have that capability. That the actions of the player and the luck of the die aren't the deciding factor, but the GM is. It's...

This is one thing that I just disagree with. If the rules allow something, then by definition it cannot be cheating. The context of cheating often centers around not altering the roll of the dice. You get what you get. However, the halfling lucky trait says that if you roll a 1, you can reroll...

Question: How can anyone think that Gygax's DMG would support fudging combat outcomes? Answer: It all depends on your interpretation of sentences like, "As the creator and ultimate authority in your respective game..." "You have every right to overrule the dice at any time..." "You can weigh...

In the OD&D brown box, the introduction specifically says the rules are guidelines, and the word guidelines is underlined. The Holmes basic introduction has similar guidance. In the AD&D DMG it specifically says, “You do have every right to overrule the dice at any time if there is a...

Which is a great example of why we don’t use initiative in our campaign. Things happen in a logical order, and in this case, with the goblins asleep, the opposite would have happened. The PCs could coordinate their actions to disable the sleeping opponents since that amount of time was a...