AD&D DMG, on fudging

[The Shaman]

Absolutely true! Now, why you interpreted something as vague as "what you have prepared" that way, I'll never know.

FE, I responded to your post advocating giving players the illusion of choice so they connect the dots in the story you concoct instead of giving them actual choices and the freedom to pursue them.

That's how we got here.

I think the mentality that thinks fudging in the interest of fun is the same one which feels the need to control what's important in the game. I don't share that point of view. I think the players and their characters should be in control of the game. It's up to them to decide what's important and to pursue it accordingly. I'm just the guy who tends the scenery and herds the extras.

And yes, I understand that you have your preferences just like I have mine. I'm not trying to convince you of anything, nor am I trying to find fault beyond noting that what I want from a game is so clearly different from what you want.

 

[billd91]

FE, I responded to your post advocating giving players the illusion of choice so they connect the dots in the story you concoct instead of giving them actual choices and the freedom to pursue them.

Illusion of choice? There was no illusion of choice in his original example. Presenting rumors and including some important info you want the PCs to know along with random ones has nothing to do with making the players' choices illusory. If anything, it's giving them the info they need to make those choices.

 

[The Shaman]

Illusion of choice? There was no illusion of choice in his original example. Presenting rumors and including some important info you want the PCs to know along with random ones has nothing to do with making the players' choices illusory. If anything, it's giving them the info they need to make those choices.

Re-read what 5E wrote:

There can often be value in making something planned appear to be random. You can put it to use when you want the PCs to pick up a clue that's important to the game, but you don't want the importance to be immediately obvious. I've done that before to allow the players to figure out its importance without shoving it in their faces.

If something appears to be random but isn't, then it's an illusion. If it's "clues" so "important" that the referee doesn't want them missed, then it's not about real choice anymore; it's about following the referee's breadcrumbs to the next encounter in the story.

 

[billd91]

If something appears to be random but isn't, then it's an illusion. If it's "clues" so "important" that the referee doesn't want them missed, then it's not about real choice anymore; it's about following the referee's breadcrumbs to the next encounter in the story.

You're so bound up in the idea of planted rumors being breadcrumbs you can't see alternative uses for them. Suppose the region's rife with bandits and the headquarters of the bandits is a well-fortified old dwarven outpost that's reputed to be impregnable. Clearly, the bandits are an important element of the game in its current state and, should the PCs choose to do something about them, getting rumors about their headquarters is a fine thing. It may help them decide if it's a short term or long term character goal. It may even convince them to leave the region or follow the maxim "if you can't beat them, join them". The choices are there and by not relying on random generate to present the rumors to the PCs, you promote the ability to make rational choices. It's about getting the info the players need to the players.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Re-read what 5E wrote:If something appears to be random but isn't, then it's an illusion. If it's "clues" so "important" that the referee doesn't want them missed, then it's not about real choice anymore; it's about following the referee's breadcrumbs to the next encounter in the story.

I don't think placing clues, in an of themselves, is truly a fudge move. I deliberately sprinkle my campaign with clues and leads to a variety of things. The players get the information. Some of these clues are followed up and some are not. Without relevant data, a meaningful decision about ignoring that data cannot be made. It is when all decisions (including one to ignore all clues) lead to the same point that the decision becomes meaningless.

 

[Fifth Element]

The choices are there and by not relying on random generate to present the rumors to the PCs, you promote the ability to make rational choices. It's about getting the info the players need to the players.

The man gets it. There's nothing inherent in giving the PCs in these clues that makes them the only possible things for the PCs to do. A sandbox DM had better have several things ready to go, unless he prefers to wing everything. The rumours in this case are a means of presenting information about your setting to the players. No more.

 

[Fifth Element]

Re-read what 5E wrote:If something appears to be random but isn't, then it's an illusion. If it's "clues" so "important" that the referee doesn't want them missed, then it's not about real choice anymore; it's about following the referee's breadcrumbs to the next encounter in the story.

You're reading things that just aren't there. I thought my first post was broad enough - things "important to the game" can mean just about anything, and then I broadened it even further into whatever it is the DM has prepared (note that does not mean a single plot or storyline, it could simply refer to the setting).

So you're interpreting my words in a particular way which you find unappealing. Try interpreting them in a way that fits your playstyle, it's pretty easy to do.

 

[Fifth Element]

I think the mentality that thinks fudging in the interest of fun is the same one which feels the need to control what's important in the game. I don't share that point of view.

I missed this before - so you're interpreting what I wrote not based on what I wrote, but what you assumed I was thinking at the time I wrote it. That, sir, is not cool.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I missed this before - so you're interpreting what I wrote not based on what I wrote, but what you assumed I was thinking at the time I wrote it. That, sir, is not cool.

Failed my Wisdom check.

This is just too funny.


RC

 

[Umbran]

So although Gygax has not taken a specific position on that action, the general principle seems to discourage it.

I see him taking a position:

"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 will kill the character. In the long run you should let such things pass as the players will kill more than one opponent with their own freakish rolls at some later time. Yet you do have the right to arbitrate the situation..."

(emphasis mine)

The only dice he explicitly invites you to fix are ones related to creating the structure of the game: its wandering monsters, the availability of clues which lead to adventures, etc. Those rolls determine the initial starting conditions.

Not quite right, by my reading (see above). In those freakish situations where the character is killed through no fault of their own, the DM does specifically have the right to 'arbitrate the situation', and impose a penalty other than death.

It looks to me like Gary did specifically allow for it, but suggested that one should not to so frequently, and should do so only with caution. I've got no problem with that.

And, to loop some of the rest of the discussion back to the AD&D DMG - on hinting at plot points/elements, I didn't see anyone mention this:

"There must always be something desirable to win, something important to lose, and the chance for either to happen. Furthermore, there must be some purpose to it all. There must be some backdrop against which adventures are carried out, and no matter how tenuous the strands, some web which connects the evil and the good, the opposing powers, the rival states and various peoples. This need not be evident at first, but as play continues hints should be given to the players, and their characters should become involved in the interaction and struggle between these vaster entities."

-AD&D DMG pg 112