Search results

Well, one way I can think of is if the DM has miscaclulated the threat level of a monster, and only realizes as the encounter unfolds that they have made a mistake. And I can readily imagine there being encounters that work fine with a lot of parties, but as there are thousands and thousands...

But an encounter can be unfair to the players, due to bad design. Me changing it on the fly could make it fair to the players.

Come to think about it, I could just state at the beginning that "I might have missed some parts of the design of the monsters. Do you mind if I adjust on the fly? I still think the encounters might be tough for you, as the opponents has some tricks up their sleeves". And the players could say...

My players prefer not seeing the man behind the curtain. :D And I don't see it as "dishonest". That's too strong of a word for me changing the HP on the fly to make an encounter run better and to create a more memorable experience. DM aren't infallible. Game designers aren't infallible. I'm...

Sure. But there is no guarantee that stopping the encounter and then restarting it, hoping it will play better, actually results in it playing better. And then I'd might have to stop it again. Changing on the fly takes us through the encounter and I can then analyze it to learn how to tweak it...

Sure, my players would do that, certainly. They also accept that I sometimes design encounters or challenges that won't be a good fit for the current situation, and that I adjust (fudge) them on the fly to keep things flowing. I believe that my group would rather I adjust on the fly, making...

Woot! A new tangent! When I am a player, I support the DM and if the DM feels the need to fudge to make a better game for me and the rest of the players, so be it. I don't feel betrayed, it's been part of my roleplaying experience since I started. It has changed in nature, sure, today the DM...

I know of one thread here on EN World that should keep them fed for years …

Yeah, I'm on that train as well, and in my group we railroad at times, just to keep things moving along. And sometimes play is freewheeling and emergent. But I appreciate Hussar's discussion about linear and railroad, to give another perspective on the word.

At least it is the thread with the most Off Topic tangents ever. :D

Ok, I guess it's time for all of us in this thread to jump on the "what is railroading" train! All aboard! :D My most popular published adventures are quite railroady, and I also think that works well for me and my players. Not that we think a lot about it, we mostly run pre-written material so...

My mistake then. I’m not taking part of the simulation track of this thread, mainly because I don’t understand what is being discussed. Same with the diegetic track. My angle was GM authority. I apologise for misreading the context of your post.

Wouldn't there be plenty of steps inbetween? Like, I could see it going like this: 1. You explain to the GM that a horse probably would make another type of noise. Maybe you say "but a horse with a rider would sound very different ... do I hear any difference?" 2. The GM says "no, you don't...

Thing is, I don't feel any particular need to reach for ridiculous exemples to explain things like falling damage or being hurt by being hit in the head with a sword, or avoiding damage if my opponent doesn't beat my AC, or performing an exquisite dance move in front of the emperor, even if none...

The inevitable result that you don’t agree. Maxperson won’t change his ways, and neither will you. That’s all. No need to play this up as the next great schism in the roleplaying hobby.

What are you on about? Too late to back out? This isn’t a fight to the death. It’s not a duel to determine who is in the right and who is not. It’s a discussion about personal preferences. No more, no less. Well, that and pixies for an unfathomable reason.

It has been my experience that a DM that figuratively summons pixies to explain falling damage, and does that on a whim, will be lacking players, either after the session is done ("guys, this was silly, let's play something else") or after the adventure ("well, next adventure I wan't something...

I think this is what is referenced: https://rpgmuseum.fandom.com/wiki/Czege_Principle Has been discussed earlier in the thread, but given that the thread is close to 20 000 posts long and contains a multitude of tangents, I’m sure many missed it.

I'm getting Neil Breen vibes from this. At least from the first 40 seconds.

I don't know about that, though. In this thread I've learned that everything can be explained by pixies. All the way down, it's all pixies. Raining? Pixies pis ... crying. Wind? Pixies flapping their wings. Snow ... pixie dust, in all probability. So no bakgrund assumptions, just pixies! So...