Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="swrushing" data-source="post: 2746098" data-attributes="member: 14140"></blockquote>oh cool. lets whip 'em out and see whose is longer.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />my dnd game lasted 3 years with about 7 players average. We played about 33 sessions a yearn so thats 99 sessions. We had four PCs die during the game. All were raised back. I instituted "after-life scenes" where each time the character got a significant scene wherein he found something out about him/herself, had to resolve or at least address a personal issue and make a choice between coming back when called or to go on to their afterlife reward. Three of the four characters ended up making significant changes to character following these after-life events. I also added a couple of death cults, one of whom chased after those brought back to kill them and another who sought them out because they considered them blessed and sought to help them develop and understand the gifts the goddess bestowed on them.inn short, even though the deaths were countered later by rezing, each became a special and pivotal moment in the character development,(Ok now for all you who are reaching for keyboard to explain how in DND the rules say you don't remember any of your afterlife and so how wrong this was... go away.)See, what this boils down to, and it just wont sink thru no matter how many times its said, is that people who fudge don't fudge for every mishap, for every skinned knee, for every PC death even if only temporary, for every failure and really, really it isn't that we are just so dense that we, unlike you clever "dont fudge it guys", cannot come up with anything interesting to do with the failure, the skinned knee or the PC death. guess what?in the midnight game we played in, i was player not the GM, the Gm fudged. he fudged a lot. Most of his fudging, frankly, came from the adversaries going butt dumb stupid once he realized his scenario was overmatched and we were all going to die. It happened repeatedly. It became less fun. Towards the end, one of the players actively psshawed planning even stating outloud several times "lets just rush on in and everything will turn out for the best anyway" whenever we bogged down trying to plan our way thru an encounter we could lok at and see was beyond us.not the best use of GMing techniques i have ever seen. He used the fudge tool badly to cover for his own lack of ability to assess encounters and to provide meaningful planning options or alternatives.so, yes, from the pro-fudging side, i am listing and example in play where the Gm botched using that technique and it hurt the game.got any example from the no-fudge side of how not fudging hurt a game?[/QUOTE]

Verification