Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 8610909" data-attributes="member: 16814">That's pretty much what I said -- you have a mechanical answer which you ignore and replace with what you want.&nbsp; This is not the same thing as when the mechanics don't have an answer and you establish one.No, the answer is &quot;check the established fiction,&quot; and then &quot;extrapolate from there,&quot; and then &quot;GM makes a call if it's unclear.&quot;No, because there's no mechanical answer here to fudge.&nbsp; The issue here is ambiguity and authority to resolve that ambiguity.&nbsp; You've smuggled in assumptions about play not present before your argument -- effectively begging the question here.It better have something to do with the game fiction.&nbsp; If the GM is violating the established fiction, that's not fudging either, it's a different thing because there's still no mechanical answer here.&nbsp; You aren't overriding a game mechanic, you're retconning the situation.See, fudging is largely invisible because the GM is doing this while hiding the outcome of the mechanics so the players have trouble noticing the change.&nbsp; What you're describing is just willy-nilly changing established fiction because you want to.&nbsp; That's obvious -- every was there when it was established, it's known, and now it's something different.&nbsp; If we use fudging to describe this, then we're mixing two different concepts into the same term, and you might as well just replace fudging with cheating, because that's largely where you're going with this.Okay, if it wasn't openly established where the PCs are in relation to the bad guys, then there was no violation.&nbsp; This seems to revolve around &quot;the GM had an idea, but didn't speak it aloud, and then changed their mind and spoke aloud a different idea, and that is fudging.&quot;&nbsp; This means that almost every GM fudging all the time while developing prep, because they think and refine and change their mind.&nbsp; Nothing is &quot;real&quot; until it enters play.&nbsp; An individual may prefer to cleave to prep and not alter it, but that's a choice, not a requirement for anything.&nbsp; Until it's shared, it's not part of play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ovinomancer, post: 8610909, member: 16814"] That's pretty much what I said -- you have a mechanical answer which you ignore and replace with what you want. This is not the same thing as when the mechanics don't have an answer and you establish one. No, the answer is "check the established fiction," and then "extrapolate from there," and then "GM makes a call if it's unclear." No, because there's no mechanical answer here to fudge. The issue here is ambiguity and authority to resolve that ambiguity. You've smuggled in assumptions about play not present before your argument -- effectively begging the question here. It better have something to do with the game fiction. If the GM is violating the established fiction, that's not fudging either, it's a different thing because there's still no mechanical answer here. You aren't overriding a game mechanic, you're retconning the situation. See, fudging is largely invisible because the GM is doing this while hiding the outcome of the mechanics so the players have trouble noticing the change. What you're describing is just willy-nilly changing established fiction because you want to. That's obvious -- every was there when it was established, it's known, and now it's something different. If we use fudging to describe this, then we're mixing two different concepts into the same term, and you might as well just replace fudging with cheating, because that's largely where you're going with this. Okay, if it wasn't openly established where the PCs are in relation to the bad guys, then there was no violation. This seems to revolve around "the GM had an idea, but didn't speak it aloud, and then changed their mind and spoke aloud a different idea, and that is fudging." This means that almost every GM fudging all the time while developing prep, because they think and refine and change their mind. Nothing is "real" until it enters play. An individual may prefer to cleave to prep and not alter it, but that's a choice, not a requirement for anything. Until it's shared, it's not part of play. [/QUOTE]

Verification