Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9510530" data-attributes="member: 7635">The issue of fudging vs fate is as old as D&D itself, and outside of Gygax's notion that all rolls be fair regardless of outcome, most of the advice I've ever seen in RPGs is that in a choice between fun and fair, fun should win. So much so that I thought it was universally assumed a DM can alter his rolls in pursuit of the greater good of people having fun. (The notion that a DM who does is cheating wasn't something I ever saw expressed until within the last decade, when OS purity became en vogue). Which I think is why I prefer separate game systems rather than merely DM advice when it comes to game systems. 2nd edition (where I cut my teeth) was a terrible mismatch of expectations and rules. 2e wanted narrative focused adventures with heavy role playing and storytelling and then used a version of D&D that was full of instant death, randomized chargen and shackles on PC power. No matter how many essays the Dragon Mag and the DMG made, the rules were at odds with the mission statement. So if a game comes along with a "let the dice fall where they may" style of play (something like Hackmaster or DCCRPG) the rules will support that, and a game like Doctor Who AiS&T which is all about the narrative over the dice, the rules support that. But I wouldn't want both to run off the same engine because their goals are too widely different.</blockquote>