D&D 5E DMs, how do you fudge?

[Vaalingrade]

This is a False Equivalence, though. Video games cheating is not the same as a DM fudging in limited circumstances. First, there is no real intelligence fudging in a video game. Second, it's usually some sort of glitch, and nobody wants to lose to a glitch. Third, video games have win/lose situations, so people playing them are going into video games with a different mindset than tabletop RPGs.

I'm sure there are more reasons that they are not the same and shouldn't be equated, but those three are more than enough.

Games have things like the first shot from enemies will always missing to give you a chance to react, or your last sliver of health counting for more. All sorts of hidden psychological tricks to make games playable or even bearable. Even Dark Souls does this.

 

[billd91]

One of your players has missed his attack three rounds in a row. He rolls a 15, you look at your notes, that monster had an AC of 16. But you just decide to fudge the result and make the monster AC a 15. "You hit!". I may come from a good place, but I think this is destructive to the contract between DM, players and the game. If I fudge things to make them have success sometimes, how they can they be sure what when they truly succeed it was because of either their choices/their rolls?

The die roll is impersonal and arbitrary. Why would their rolls have anywhere near the significance of their choices? That's a major disconnect I have about the people who take anti-fudging stands as if they were sacred. The die cares less about the players' choices than I, as DM, do.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

The die roll is impersonal and arbitrary. Why would their rolls have anywhere near the significance of their choices? That's a major disconnect I have about the people who take anti-fudging stands as if they were sacred. The die cares less about the players' choices than I, as DM, do.

Because, in most cases, their rolls are a result of a choice. If everything went well, they have some information and decide to act upon it. You translate it and say "give me a something something roll" or "roll to hit". They willingly took a risk, and it succeeded. It's a gamble, but one they willingly take.

If you start fudging things, and they learn of it, whether it's through changing or refusing the outcome of your own rolls or tweaking a number like in the example you quoted; then the lesson you're teaching them is that when they're making a decision and take the risks and go through a gamble, it is not really one. Or, at least, not always one. You might be in the mood for things to happen directly. They make a choice where they will face the consequence, but you get a say in it.

 

[Gradine]

I fudge for one reason and one reason only: to bring to an end combats that have outlived their purpose, and even then only if there's no other out.

I played in a 4e combat against an enemy with ridiculously high defenses. We cleared out their backup and the battle basically ended anything interesting after about a half hour. It took us damn near another hour of constantly whiffing before we finally brought it down.

Never again. Not on my watch, anyway.

 

[iserith]

I fudge for one reason and one reason only: to bring to an end combats that have outlived their purpose, and even then only if there's no other out.

I played in a 4e combat against an enemy with ridiculously high defenses. We cleared out their backup and the battle basically ended anything interesting after about a half hour. It took us damn near another hour of constantly whiffing before we finally brought it down.

Never again. Not on my watch, anyway.

Aid Attack sounds like a good strategy when faced with such an enemy in D&D 4e. Four PCs doing that plus flanking is a +10 to the attack. It reduces the overall attacks per round, but the attack has a much better chance of landing for damage plus any riders. (Or do some some combination of attacks and Aid Another.)

Of course, the specifics here aren't that important. I only mean to say that often these sorts of situations can be dealt with by the players changing their tactics rather than the DM ending the fight or fudging in some way. It puts more focus on the meaningful decisions of the players and its impact upon the game.

 

[Hex08]

the lesson you're teaching them is that when they're making a decision and take the risks and go through a gamble, it is not really one. Or, at least, not always one. You might be in the mood for things to happen directly. They make a choice where they will face the consequence, but you get a say in it.

I think you seem to be overlooking the possibility that there are people who fudge and their players don't walk away with the lessons you think they are. If it would break the game in the way you consistently claim then those of us who do it would no longer have a gaming group. You really should take the time to realize that not everyone is going to have your gaming philosophy and not every player or gaming group is going to react the way you seem to think they will. People (DMs and players) are going to have different ideas about what makes a fun game. You need to accept that some tables are different than yours.

 

[Steampunkette]

I fudge based on what's best for the Story and the Drama because the dice exist to make the story more interesting, not the other way around.

Sometimes it's Monster HP getting a little thicker so the fight isn't quite as short as it might otherwise be. Sometimes it's fudging bad rolls for the NPCs to threaten the PCs more. Sometimes it's fudging those NPC rolls down to make the enemy on a hot streak not wipe the party anticlimactically.

Sometimes it's having an unannounced DC for a skill check that the player is going to pass unless they roll a natural 1 because it makes a better story if they do the cool chandelier swing.

And sometimes... It's fistfuls of dice which mean absolutely nothing.

I'm loving the WOIN/Level Up Countdown mechanic and plan to use it to spur drama both in my own games and in my writing. Things like NPCs having a slow countdown (only removed on a 6) with 5 dice while the players have a 5 dice medium countdown (remove on a 5 or 6). Or even fast countdowns on the part of NPCs that block off ancillary chambers as the building the players are escaping collapses (subtly showing them where not to go). Or even having a Countdown that does... nothing. It involves rooms the players have already run past getting filled with rushing water and the players were never in danger but describing the big flood and rolling fistfuls of dice makes them feel like something is coming...

And it is. Just not for -them-. At least sometimes.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

I think you seem to be overlooking the possibility that there are people who fudge and their players don't walk away with the lessons you think they are. If it would break the game in the way you consistently claim then those of us who do it would no longer have a gaming group. You really should take the time to realize that not everyone is going to have your gaming philosophy and not every player or gaming group is going to react the way you seem to think they will. People (DMs and players) are going to have different ideas about what makes a fun game. You need to accept that some tables are different than yours.

I already know all of this.

Don't worry, I'm not going to barge in your gaming room to catch you by the wrist if you're about the fudge a roll. I think you should take for granted that I'm obviously speaking all the experience I was apart of or the experiences I was a witness to.

But we're having a discussion, so I'm sharing my philosophy, why I think fudging is bad and giving out examples. I'm hoping it'll lead to further discussion about why people don't think it harms what I think is core to the experience of TTRPGs, or why they think it doesn't matter (if they partially agree with me).

 

[Lyxen]

I think you seem to be overlooking the possibility that there are people who fudge and their players don't walk away with the lessons you think they are.

And also, since when is D&D a game where the DM is supposed to be teaching lessons to his players ? Isn't it a game that everyone, players and DM, play just for fun ?

I always respect my DM, but I would not play with a DM who came to the table thinking that he is there to teach me anything. Fortunately, I have never encountered that kind of attitude in a DM.

 

[Campbell]

I'm somewhat confused by the conflation some people seem to have between this is a challenging fight and this fight took a decent chunk of player resources away. What makes something challenging or difficult is the mental effort required to succeed at the endeavor or use your resources wisely. An encounter that strips player characters of more hit points yet does not require more mental effort or skill to achieve success is not more challenging. It might feel more tense, but it is not actually presenting any additional obstacles for players to overcome.

 

[Lanefan]

I'm somewhat confused by the conflation some people seem to have between this is a challenging fight and this fight took a decent chunk of player resources away. What makes something challenging or difficult is the mental effort required to succeed at the endeavor or use your resources wisely. An encounter that strips player characters of more hit points yet does not require more mental effort or skill to achieve success is not more challenging. It might feel more tense, but it is not actually presenting any additional obstacles for players to overcome.

Wait until the next combat comes along and you haven't yet got those hit points back...

 

[DEFCON 1]

Because, in most cases, their rolls are a result of a choice. If everything went well, they have some information and decide to act upon it. You translate it and say "give me a something something roll" or "roll to hit". They willingly took a risk, and it succeeded. It's a gamble, but one they willingly take.

And if it was a one-and-done roll, then sure I could maybe get behind what you are saying.

But a combat involves dozens upon dozens of different rolls... attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, ability checks in the moment etc. To think every single one is "important" due to the "choice" a player took to get to that roll is a little extreme in my opinion. If a player has stood in front of an enemy and is making their seventh attack roll against that enemy because they are just in a mano-a-mano fight... what real "choice" did they make that was so important? They aren't that hurt and their enemy isn't down yet after a bunch of hits-- so it's either keep doing what they've been doing, or else run away for what would seem to be no real reason. At the end of the day, there really isn't a "choice", because there's only one rather logical action to take... the same exact action they had taken six times previously. So that "choice" isn't really so special that I need to hold it up like a Faberge egg.

But be that as it may... for me and my players it comes down to the functionality of combat. What is getting into combat supposed to accomplish? For other tables, it might be the tactical board game-- the pieces are on the board, everyone has their stats, and now it comes down to out-strategizing the DM in order to win the fight. So the same way you wouldn't want to cheat at Risk (because otherwise, why play it?)... you wouldn't want to cheat in the D&D board game. And I get that, absolutely 100%. For a large percentage of players, the board game is sacrosanct. It's why optimization is such an important thing for a lot of folks-- they want to play the strategy combat game to the top of their intelligence (and which also explains why so many players hate when WotC removes restrictions from character creation, because then if they want to play less stereotypical and optimized PCs, they have to purposefully nerf themselves on their own, rather than relying on WotC to do it. Which makes them feel like they aren't playing to the top of their intelligence.)

But for a lot of the rest of us... combat is just part of the narrative. The fights add drama to the story of these characters. But the combat are no more important than any other part of the drama. I mean for me... if I'm in a roleplay scenario with the PCs and their characters make really good arguments in their communication with whomever I'm playing as an NPC... I might forgo asking for a Persuasion check altogether. They won the argument, so I'm not even going to make the roll. Essentially I'm "fudging" the roleplay scenario by automatically letting the PCs win their "fight". That kind of stuff happens all the time. If the players explain a really awesome method for getting up the 50' waterfall, I might "fudge" and say they don't have to roll Athletics checks even if I had written down it was originally a DC 15 check to do so. And I don't treat combat really any differently. It might involve MORE dice rolls than climbing a waterfall... but I don't see them inherently more important. And thus "fudging" is not the end of the world for my table.

And as far as "lying" to my players... guilty as charged! As was said above... DMing is like being a magician-- turning talking, numbers, and dice into a fun and awesome 3 hours of drama and excitement. And I will lie my ass off to make sure my magic tricks work. And my player do not care in the slightest nor ever ask how I'm doing it, because they know coming into the game that D&D is entirely a magic trick, and they are looking to be fooled. Because being fooled is part of the fun. And obviously, other tables will certainly disagree and feel differently. But thankfully I don't play with any of you weirdos. LOL!

 

[loverdrive]

I don't. If I think that I screwed up and asked for a roll where there was no need for, I'll just say exactly that.

Fudging dice/numbers/whatever, for any reason, pretty much defeats the reason I'd use D&D instead of a proper storytelling game.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I do not fudge. I think it takes the 'game' out of RPG when that occurs. It also is just a more exciting experience when all the dice rolls are legit. I've been gaming online lately, so it has been honor system. But in person I don't use a screen for dice rolls for this reason

 

[loverdrive]

I'm somewhat confused by the conflation some people seem to have between this is a challenging fight and this fight took a decent chunk of player resources away. What makes something challenging or difficult is the mental effort required to succeed at the endeavor or use your resources wisely. An encounter that strips player characters of more hit points yet does not require more mental effort or skill to achieve success is not more challenging. It might feel more tense, but it is not actually presenting any additional obstacles for players to overcome.

Well, vidya game designers have the exact same issue, so it's not exactly surprising.

Dear Goddess above, how much do I hate bullet sponges...

 

[FrozenNorth]

I always respect my DM, but I would not play with a DM who came to the table thinking that he is there to teach me anything. Fortunately, I have never encountered that kind of attitude in a DM.

But isn’t knowing half the battle?

 

[Blue]

I'm not sure you get the "math". A couple of tweaks an I can make any foe near unbeatable or an easy target. Plus adding in the environment, setting, effects and foe tactics.

Example: I want the characters to fall into the trap at spot x.....so some foes attack and then run away to spot x. Like 99% of the time the crazy mad xp thirsty players will chase the fleeing monster...right into the trap. The "math" does not matter.

If I want some character death I toss in a 3d encounter...like being underwater. Many players get super frustrated with 360 attacks and it leads to easy character death.

I guess you are thinking that combat is just rolling a bunch of dice and seeing what happens? My point is that I don't do that. I don't hinge things I want in my game on such combat. I do LOVE tons and tons and tons of randomness.......but things I want happen as I create/alter the game reality.

No, I think combat is a aspect of play with a large amount of uncertainty determined by randomness and that the players control a large amount of authorship.

For you to be in complete control, you need to overcome both the randomness and the player agency - because there are times they will do things you don't expect that would lead to a different outcome than you are aiming for.

I hadn't followed that path because that's pretty much railroading and I didn't expect that that. But I really don't see any other way to read about what you doing.

 

[Lyxen]

But isn’t knowing half the battle?

Knowing what exactly ?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Knowing what exactly ?

PORKCHOP SANDWICHES!

 

[Blue]

As said above: Video games. A much, much bigger market than TTRPGs ever hoped to be. Players hate when video games cheat. A reveal that AI cheat in a game is understood to be a bad thing by game AI designers. MMORPGs exist specifically because it is possible to approximate the rule-adjudication functions of DMs using a video game--and I can guarantee you that MMO players absolutely despise it when it turns out creatures in the world can break rules the players are forced to obey.

The housing market is a much, much bigger market than TTRPGs ever hoped to be. Buyers hate when sellers cheat.

Yes, it's bigger. No, that does not make it directly applicable. With a TTRPG you are putting trust into an individual whom you are granting authority to craft a game for your table. If for a specific table that means fudging, it means fudging.

For instance I was running for my kids, niece and nephew. They were emotionally attached to their characters. I basically moved death off the table, and used what could be death to get them captured and need to be rescued or otherwise deeper into plots and bad situations.

In another game dice lie where they may, but a foe with 1-2 HPs left I may just kill off to end combat where it's a forgone conclusion - because there's no tension left at that point and the pacing of the game during our limited widow of play is more important of a tool for table enjoyment than the possibility that a resource (HP, spell slot, etc.) might be expended from the player's side.