Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DonTadow" data-source="post: 2745284" data-attributes="member: 22622">Again, its key to know your players.&nbsp; I've never played in a gmae where as a player, I ddnt know that the dm fudged the dice every now and then.&nbsp; My players know it happens.&nbsp; Its something i talk about in the interview process.&nbsp; I've never had a player get up and walk out of an interview because of it.&nbsp; I get my enjoyment from my players enjoyment of the game.&nbsp; I have no want to follow every critical rule in the 3.5 ruleset.&nbsp; I have yet to see anyone follow every rule, and I don't think I'll be the first .&nbsp; I believe if you are pro (as you call it cheating) then as a DM you should follow every rule in the book, thus the point of you (not cheating) is moot because there are rules that you are not following and are thus breaking.&nbsp; If you have house rules, then you can not possibly argue against fudging, as you have essentially &quot;fudged the rules&quot; to suit the games enjoyment.&nbsp; I completely disagree with you.&nbsp; To compare this game to chess, is to say that this game is adversarial.&nbsp; Me VS. you.&nbsp; Thus you are putting the DM in the role you are arguing against, the role of judge, jury and executor instead of as a guide to move the game along.&nbsp; Just like other games, sometimes you have to lax on the rules when the tempo fits it.&nbsp; It's like the quarterback having the option of calling an audible if he reads something in the defense that doesnt make sense.&nbsp; The quarterback is the &quot;guide&quot; of the team just as the DM is the guide of the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DonTadow, post: 2745284, member: 22622"] Again, its key to know your players. I've never played in a gmae where as a player, I ddnt know that the dm fudged the dice every now and then. My players know it happens. Its something i talk about in the interview process. I've never had a player get up and walk out of an interview because of it. I get my enjoyment from my players enjoyment of the game. I have no want to follow every critical rule in the 3.5 ruleset. I have yet to see anyone follow every rule, and I don't think I'll be the first . I believe if you are pro (as you call it cheating) then as a DM you should follow every rule in the book, thus the point of you (not cheating) is moot because there are rules that you are not following and are thus breaking. If you have house rules, then you can not possibly argue against fudging, as you have essentially "fudged the rules" to suit the games enjoyment. I completely disagree with you. To compare this game to chess, is to say that this game is adversarial. Me VS. you. Thus you are putting the DM in the role you are arguing against, the role of judge, jury and executor instead of as a guide to move the game along. Just like other games, sometimes you have to lax on the rules when the tempo fits it. It's like the quarterback having the option of calling an audible if he reads something in the defense that doesnt make sense. The quarterback is the "guide" of the team just as the DM is the guide of the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification