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

[Crimson Longinus]

One thing I noticed about my own fudging. I fudged a lot more often when I first started GMing. Often, it was a scramble to get the game working because of my inexperience. The more experienced I became with the game system, and being a GM in general, the less and less I resorted to fudging.

Which also is one reason why I find the extreme negativity some people have towards fudging off-putting. Some GMs may not be that experienced, or otherwise just not that good at gauging what enemy stats will achieve what results (an issue exacerbated by the CR system being practically useless.) So if they feel fudging is an useful tool for running the sort of game they want, they shouldn't need to feel ashamed for using it.

 

[payn]

Which also is one reason why I find the extreme negativity some people have towards fudging off-putting. Some GMs may not be that experienced, or otherwise just not that good at gauging what enemy stats will achieve what results (an issue exacerbated by the CR system being practically useless.) So if they feel fudging is an useful tool for running the sort of game they want, they shouldn't need to feel ashamed for using it.

Some folks take a hardline, and I can understand that. There are several RPG methods and tools folks employ that I dislike on a conceptual level. I don't feel the need to explain their liking of such concepts by tearing them down personally.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Still waiting to hear how 'Whoops, I screwed up the encounter design, time to adjust accordingly' and 'RNJesus has made this fight more unfair than I expected, better reign it in' hurt player agency.

 

[TheSword]

The truth of the matter is that when it’s done properly no one would ever know you are fudging. Those little corrections that keep the game rolling on at pace. Which are only ever made in a DM visible space anyway.

Whether I decide to add shields to the orcs at the last minute or swap for greataxes has no impact on agency. Whether I decide the orc boss has a parry ability or not has no impact on free will. Or if I decide the wizard has the shield spell… or even a wand of Magic missile. The reinforcements arriving after 2 rounds or 5 rounds is entirely down to me as a DM.

The fallacy here is the idea that somehow, some of the DMs arbitrary decisions are pure and honest and others are corrupt and dishonest.

It’s easy to say changing dice rolls breaks trust. I have some sympathy for that opinion, even though it personally doesn’t bother me. Adding a potion of healing to a character at the last minute because you decide it’s reasonable they would have one, or making the boss 20 hp harder because you originally made them too weak is a lot harder to criticize I think.

I personally don’t believe this kind of fudging needs to be approved by the players in advance. It’s par for the course of game prep and frankly whether I do it a week in advance, in lunch break on the day of the game, or as the combat proceeds is frankly up to me. You’ll never know the difference so this is all theoretical.

 

[Arilyn]

One thing I noticed about my own fudging. I fudged a lot more often when I first started GMing. Often, it was a scramble to get the game working because of my inexperience. The more experienced I became with the game system, and being a GM in general, the less and less I resorted to fudging.

I think this is probably fairly common. And since new GMs lack the experience to eyeball the difficulty of an encounter (5e CRs are not helpful here,) a new GM should not feel bad for some on the fly adjusting. This is especially true if the players are new as well. Too many dead characters, especially in first few sessions, risk turning some players away from the hobby.

 

[Maxperson]

It is a reference to a cheesy line from an old TV show.

G.I. Joe!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

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.

Surely it's a hell of a lot more applicable than housing, given, y'know, they're both games.

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.

Okay. So every DM that fudges should be honest with its players that that will happen, and will be concealed from them whenever it does?

Because I guarantee you most DMs that fudge do not do that. They would never tell the players that they fudge rolls sometimes. They might even do as Colville does, and literally fake physical die rolls in order to "prove" that the result was "real."

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.

That isn't fudging, for one thing, and is almost exactly how I run my own Dungeon World game for adult players. I say "almost" because PC death can happen, but it will never be permanent and irrevocable unless that's what the player wants. There haven't been too many situations where it was much of a concern because I admit I tend to underestimate my players' characters, something I have been working to address. (The fight I mentioned earlier that was fully intended to be "too hard" was a test, to see how high a bard would be too high. Now I know, and can use that information to set bars that are slightly lower but still very high, should I wish to.)

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.

That isn't fudging either. It's impossible to conceal "okay guys, you've won, I won't drag this out." Calling a fight when it has become completely hopeless for one side or the other is a perfectly legitimate tool for maintaining pacing, and is completely orthogonal to fudging, unless it is done in secret. I have no idea why one would want to, since that kind of secret doesn't add anything that just being honest wouldn't.

 

[Tutara]

In a game where failure is part of the fun, there's no need to fudge.

D&D - in my opinion - doesn't do a very good job of making failure fun. I'm not talking about the hilarity of absolute catastrophic failure, or those meat grinders you used to run where everyone came with a pre-rolled four pack of victims, but rather that miserable drip feed of mediocre rolls that leaves a player feeling utterly pointless. They soldier on as their supposedly competent hero whiffs every round, not complaining but also plainly not enjoying themself. They don't chuck their toys, but they are disheartened.

In this circumstance, fudging is tempting, but the player isn't an idiot. They don't want me to cheat on their behalf out of pity. So what I do is let players accrue bonus points (like Momentum in 2D20, or spending XP in Numenera) that let them fudge their own dice to a limited degree (take 10, rerolls etc). I don't have to fudge, the players don't have to suck because of a bad D20 roll at the wrong time. Fudging becomes a mechanic rather than an indulgence.

If I've screwed up an encounter's balance, I'll correct it narratively rather than mechanically. Reinforcements will arrive, or enemies will withdraw or flee. I'll try to avoid ignoring dice rolls.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Note: I very specifically never fudge dice rolls. If the die roll is called for by the dm, the number rolled is the number. This sometimes causes problems, but the players feeling like the rolls are just suggestions takes the game out of the role-playing game experience, and part of the reason I play DnD and not another system is for the game.

I, as a habit, don't adjust npc stat numbers during combat. It's never worth the effort on my part, but mostly because balancing on-the-fly taxes math skills I'm bad at. Closest I'll get is declaring a fight over before the last hp is dealt because it's obvious the pc's will mop up the remaining minions with no effort.

I do feel free to make whatever adjustments I want during prep. That's just decisions I was going to be making on my own anyways.

Flipping the screen around, if I'm offering advice: if you're the dm, either state right out that you will fudge or never admit to fudging dices rolls. Because once fudging is on the table, an die not fudged is one you chose to let stand. All rolls are now subject to dm review. I'd say fudging hp in-play is similar.

Now, if you find yourself needing to fudge, because you noticed a mistake during prep... go ahead. Everyone makes mistakes. But I think the need should be seen as a sign of an error to be avoided in the future (ie don't use lots of shadows, no matter what the CR is). If you find yourself fudging a lot, you should work on how you prep.

 

[Maxperson]

Surely it's a hell of a lot more applicable than housing, given, y'know, they're both games.

That's like saying that commercial planes are a lot more applicable than housing to a discussion about cars, because both are transportation. I mean, yeah, it's true, but...

Computer games and the issues with cheating are too far from RPG fudging to be relevant. You're comparing commercial planes and cars.