D&D 5E Do you want your DM to fudge?

[iserith]

I wonder if this goes some distance to explaining the different approaches. Those that don't fudge, at a guess, probably hew closer to baseline game expectations, and those that do fudge tend to wander further afield when creating encounters.

It's not true in my case. I don't even look at XP or CR anymore. I throw whatever makes sense at the party. Oftentimes, that means well above Deadly (by the numbers) multiple times per adventuring day.

The reason I don't need to fudge is that the stakes aren't always life-and-death and, even when they are, I'm prepared for character death with backup characters. If your PC gets laid low by that multi-critical fire giant, grab your backup character and play on. Or if you are of appropriate level and resources, have a contingency plan in place to resurrect the character in short order.

The possibility of bad luck occurring should be part of a player's decision-making process as should what to do if the character buys the farm.

 

[Lanliss]

It's not true in my case. I don't even look at XP or CR anymore. I throw whatever makes sense at the party. Oftentimes, that means well above Deadly (by the numbers) multiple times per adventuring day.

The reason I don't need to fudge is that the stakes aren't always life-and-death and, even when they are, I'm prepared for character death with backup characters. If your PC gets laid low by that multi-critical fire giant, grab your backup character and play on. Or if you are of appropriate level and resources, have a contingency plan in place to resurrect the character in short order.

The possibility of bad luck occurring should be part of a player's decision-making process as should what to do if the character buys the farm.

As amazing as you seem to be as a DM, I am not sure I could play a game with you. I get way too attached to my characters to think of them possibly dying. I could handle it every now and then, but I would not be able to make backup characters for every session. It would feel too much like what it is, planning for my PC to die.

 

[iserith]

As amazing as you seem to be as a DM, I am not sure I could play a game with you. I get way too attached to my characters to think of them possibly dying. I could handle it every now and then, but I would not be able to make backup characters for every session. It would feel too much like what it is, planning for my PC to die.

Thanks for the kind words. Whether or not your character takes a dirt nap is on you though - what kind of decisions you make in the face of deadly perils. In my experience, when players know the DM isn't going to save them, they play to the hilt. As a result, I don't see a lot of character death, but it definitely happens.

 

[Maxperson]

A recent event in our current game kinda made me think about this thread. Our 6th level party was facing an enemy group, including a pair of trolls. One of the trolls had disadvantage on attacks and then proceeded to hit the monk three straight times anyway. A very low percentage event. Thing is, even with three hits, all he did was hurt the 6th level monk, nothing too serious. Dropped the monk out of about half of his HP.

This got me to thinking, what if that troll had critted three straight times? Well, other than probably dropping the monk to zero HP, nothing. It would be virtually impossible for the troll to outright kill the monk (barring hitting him after he's down). But, that's a CR 5 troll vs a 6th level PC. He shouldn't be able to outright kill that PC. That's exactly in line with encounter design and CR expectations.

So, a 1 in 8000 event (something that is rare enough that it should qualify for Maxperson's criteria of a fudgeable die roll series) would almost never be fudged because there is no need.

There are a number of things wrong with that idea. First, you are assuming a fresh party and monk. If the monk has been beat on for a few rounds, a few crits will be devastating. Second, you are assuming that the crits have to come consecutively. They don't. They can come over a short period of rounds along with a higher than average number of hits. Third, there can be multiple trolls attacking the monk. If there are three trolls, you can have crit, hit, miss, hit, crit, miss, hit, crit, hit, and end up with a dead monk. All at much lower than 1 in 8000 odds. Fourth, you are only looking at trolls. Different monsters do different damage and have different special abilities. Just because trolls don't break with 3 simultaneous crits (and sometimes they do depending on circumstance), doesn't mean that 1 in 8000 is good across the board for all creatures.

 

[TwoSix]

As amazing as you seem to be as a DM, I am not sure I could play a game with you. I get way too attached to my characters to think of them possibly dying. I could handle it every now and then, but I would not be able to make backup characters for every session. It would feel too much like what it is, planning for my PC to die.

Heh. It's funny, but one of the reasons I don't like fudging is because the DM usually fudges things so that I don't die. I don't make multiple backup characters because I'm expecting my PC to live, Mr. DM!

Honestly, if I could figure out a way to play a different character every session without totally messing up any semblance of a coherent story, I would. I just don't get very attached to PCs.

 

[billd91]

There are a number of things wrong with that idea.

And, of course, there are creatures out there with much harsher crits. Take a look at the wraith. Same CR as the troll but its normal damage is 4d8+3 which means the crit is 8d8+3. And, not only might you take that damage, but fail the DC 14 Con save and you'll have your max hit points reduced by the same amount of damage you take. Assuming the monk blows the save, how well is going to handle a hit of approximately 39 hit points and with his max hit points reduced the same amount? Figure the 6th level monk's got 38 hp + 6x Con bonus of maybe 1 or 2? If he doesn't have a Con bonus or was injured even a modest amount, that crit could be laying him out even if he makes the save. Fail the save and he's in a world of hurt. And that's a monster with a CR under his level. I'm going to estimate that's more likely than 1 in 8000.

 

[TwoSix]

And, of course, there are creatures out there with much harsher crits. Take a look at the wraith. Same CR as the troll but its normal damage is 4d8+3 which means the crit is 8d8+3. And, not only might you take that damage, but fail the DC 14 Con save and you'll have your max hit points reduced by the same amount of damage you take. Assuming the monk blows the save, how well is going to handle a hit of approximately 39 hit points and with his max hit points reduced the same amount? Figure the 6th level monk's got 38 hp + 6x Con bonus of maybe 1 or 2? If he doesn't have a Con bonus or was injured even a modest amount, that crit could be laying him out even if he makes the save. Fail the save and he's in a world of hurt. And that's a monster with a CR under his level. I'm going to estimate that's more likely than 1 in 8000.

 

[Maxperson]

And, of course, there are creatures out there with much harsher crits. Take a look at the wraith. Same CR as the troll but its normal damage is 4d8+3 which means the crit is 8d8+3. And, not only might you take that damage, but fail the DC 14 Con save and you'll have your max hit points reduced by the same amount of damage you take. Assuming the monk blows the save, how well is going to handle a hit of approximately 39 hit points and with his max hit points reduced the same amount? Figure the 6th level monk's got 38 hp + 6x Con bonus of maybe 1 or 2? If he doesn't have a Con bonus or was injured even a modest amount, that crit could be laying him out even if he makes the save. Fail the save and he's in a world of hurt. And that's a monster with a CR under his level. I'm going to estimate that's more likely than 1 in 8000.

I'm pretty sure that was covered by my point number 4.

"Fourth, you are only looking at trolls. Different monsters do different damage and have different special abilities."

You explained it better, though.

 

[Hussar]

That's like saying a medusa needs fudging because a single failed save means dead PC. Some monsters are straight up deadly.

But, I was talking in more general terms. In [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION]'s example, likely the monk goes into negatives but since the troll can't do 40 damage on a crit, he cannot flat out kill the monk. Assuming the monk has 40 hp of course.

Even the wraith isn't killing the monk. He'd have to deal over 40 damage on that crit. Possible but extremely unlikely given he'd have to crit, do above average damage and the monk would have to fail a save. We're well into the less than 1% chance there. Higher than 1 in 8000 but the point still stands. The odds here are very rare.

The existence of an exception does not disprove my point.

 

[BryonD]

That's like saying a medusa needs fudging because a single failed save means dead PC. Some monsters are straight up deadly.

Hear Hear!!!

 

[Maxperson]

That's like saying a medusa needs fudging because a single failed save means dead PC. Some monsters are straight up deadly.

But, I was talking in more general terms. In [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION]'s example, likely the monk goes into negatives but since the troll can't do 40 damage on a crit, he cannot flat out kill the monk. Assuming the monk has 40 hp of course.

Even the wraith isn't killing the monk. He'd have to deal over 40 damage on that crit. Possible but extremely unlikely given he'd have to crit, do above average damage and the monk would have to fail a save. We're well into the less than 1% chance there. Higher than 1 in 8000 but the point still stands. The odds here are very rare.

The existence of an exception does not disprove my point.

First, a hit on a PC at 0 is two failed death saves. Two hits and you are just dead. Period. No need to do 40+ damage. Two hits of 1 point each is sufficient. Second, if the monk goes down rapidly due to the rolls I describe above, then the rest of those hits and crits can easily drop a second or third PC to 0.

Remember, the party can easily have been beat on for a few rounds before the dice get hot and/or cold for the PCs. You are white rooming what we are talking about and combat is not a white room. It's not possible for you to sit back and come up with a simple neat model like you have been trying to. There are too many variables for you to model it.

 

[Maxperson]

That's like saying a medusa needs fudging because a single failed save means dead PC. Some monsters are straight up deadly.

That's like saying, "I'm going to use a Strawman to respond to that post." Some responses just have nothing to do with what we are saying.

The medusa special ability has nothing to do with what he was talking about.

 

[Zak S]

If the monk has been beat on for a few rounds...

If the monk has been beat on for a few rounds there's no conceivable way the outcome afterward could be the fault solely of "extreme bad luck".

An extremely death-averse party has had _multiple rounds_ to run away instead of keep fighting trolls. But they kept on. Whatever happens next, even if it's a max crit and every roll failed, is totally something they had ever opportunity to avoid.

The game didn't break, it did what it was designed to do: punish bad decisions.

....unless you created a railroad encounter with no possible way to flee: which isn't a good idea if you are so invested in (creating or avoiding) specific in-game outcomes that you would fudge to get the players out of them.

 

[Hussar]

First, a hit on a PC at 0 is two failed death saves. Two hits and you are just dead. Period. No need to do 40+ damage. Two hits of 1 point each is sufficient. Second, if the monk goes down rapidly due to the rolls I describe above, then the rest of those hits and crits can easily drop a second or third PC to 0.

Remember, the party can easily have been beat on for a few rounds before the dice get hot and/or cold for the PCs. You are white rooming what we are talking about and combat is not a white room. It's not possible for you to sit back and come up with a simple neat model like you have been trying to. There are too many variables for you to model it.

You're missing my point. I'm absolutely not saying that PC's can never die. Of course not. But, if you start attacking downed PC's, and every attack (at advantage no less) misses, it's pretty obvious that you're fudging. And, I'd go so far to say that if the DM does start attacking downed PC's, then he's very likely not going to fudge, since he's actively TRYING to kill PC's.

It's got nothing to do with theory crafting or white rooming. It's the simple fact that, outside of a couple of exceptions, no monster of CR 5 or less can do enough damage to the monk to flat out kill him. Nothing can do 41 points of damage (minimum required to go from standing to dead for our 40 HP monk). The Wraith is an exception since it removes the buffer of negative HP. You die at zero. Effectively, a wraith is doing double damage on a failed save, since you are twice as close to death compared to any other creature.

If there are three trolls, you can have crit, hit, miss, hit, crit, miss, hit, crit, hit,

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=6816107#ixzz3zF9rlEkr

The point is, the odds of that actually happening are still about 1 in 8000. (Ok, they're slightly better than that, but, not by very bloody much). This would be a once in a campaign level event. If this sequence occurs more than that, there's something going on. Like I said, probably using a more difficult encounter vs the party to give that "one and done" feel to the campaign. But, the results you're getting are DEAD ON what is predicted by the system. 3 trolls vs a 6th level party of 5 PC's is Deadly. You should have dead PC's in this encounter. The DMG defines Deadly as:

DEADLY - A deadly encounter could be lethal for one or more player characters. Survival often requires good tactics and quick thinking, and the party risks defeat

This isn't an example of extreme luck making the encounter wonky, this is an example of the rules working exactly the way they are supposed to. If you feel you have to step in at this point and "adjust" the die rolls, why did you use an encounter that the game is telling you is quite possible to kill PC's? And, again, this is speaking directly to my point. The DM is using encounters above the weight class of the party, the encounter goes sideways, and now the DM feels compelled to step in.

It's almost like the game underwent a couple of years of development by a bunch of smart guys that actually understand math. What a shock.

 

[Maxperson]

If the monk has been beat on for a few rounds there's no conceivable way the outcome afterward could be the fault solely of "extreme bad luck".

I can conceive of it quite easily. The multiple crits and hits, coupled by bad luck missing on the part of the players can come rounds into a fight that should be easy to beat, only to destroy them based solely on extreme bad luck. When the bad luck strikes is irrelevant. It's still the sole reason they died in a fight that they should have won.

An extremely death-averse party has had _multiple rounds_ to run away instead of keep fighting trolls. But they kept on. Whatever happens next, even if it's a max crit and every roll failed, is totally something they had ever opportunity to avoid.

Running away pretty much requires DM fiat to work, since monsters are generally faster.

 

[Maxperson]

You're missing my point. I'm absolutely not saying that PC's can never die. Of course not. But, if you start attacking downed PC's, and every attack (at advantage no less) misses, it's pretty obvious that you're fudging. And, I'd go so far to say that if the DM does start attacking downed PC's, then he's very likely not going to fudge, since he's actively TRYING to kill PC's.

I'm not missing your point. You point just keep being completely off base. Nobody, myself included, has ever even hinted that he attacks PCs while down and then fudges the rolls into misses.

It's got nothing to do with theory crafting or white rooming. It's the simple fact that, outside of a couple of exceptions, no monster of CR 5 or less can do enough damage to the monk to flat out kill him. Nothing can do 41 points of damage (minimum required to go from standing to dead for our 40 HP monk). The Wraith is an exception since it removes the buffer of negative HP. You die at zero. Effectively, a wraith is doing double damage on a failed save, since you are twice as close to death compared to any other creature.

It doesn't have to kill him outright. All it has to do is knock him unconscious a lot faster than the game math intends. That allows a lot more damage to be placed on the rest of the party. Knock them all out and they will never wake up if fighting trolls. You keep fixating on instant death and multiple crits in a row where those things have never been a requirement. That means that all of your arguments that are based on those things are off base and not going to be effective.

The wraith is also not an exception at all. Monsters have special abilities and those abilities are part of the math and both good and bad luck.

The point is, the odds of that actually happening are still about 1 in 8000. (Ok, they're slightly better than that, but, not by very bloody much). This would be a once in a campaign level event. If this sequence occurs more than that, there's something going on. Like I said, probably using a more difficult encounter vs the party to give that "one and done" feel to the campaign. But, the results you're getting are DEAD ON what is predicted by the system. 3 trolls vs a 6th level party of 5 PC's is Deadly. You should have dead PC's in this encounter. The DMG defines Deadly as:

They're significantly better than 1 in 8000.

 

[ArlenFrostlockes]

general rule for our games - DM's open roll - no behind the screen rolls ever - that being said, we DM's where I play and DM do not actively seek to TPK - take AL adventure 3-10 we had a lvl 4 fighter and Paladin, a lvl 3 wizard and archer, and lvl 1 warlock and barbarian average party lvl was 2.6 rounded up to 3 with 6 pc's instead of 5 for a determination of a strong party. The very first encounter nearly wiped us. Bad rolls on the PC's part and good rolls on the DM part coupled with we had no magic weapons so when the melee did hit it was halved. So yeah, after that the adventure got downgraded to average. As it was the two lvl 1;s were always down.So we may not fudge the dice rolls, but we sure do adjust things accordingly when we see things to be a bit out of balance.

 

[Ristamar]

Given the amount of potential options available to most seasoned parties that allow them to stabilize, heal, and revive fallen allies during the course of battle, a series of hot rolls from the DM should not easily break an encounter. Additionally, a party that is conditioned to never have to willingly retreat and regroup is far more likely to succumb to "unlucky" dice.

If death is not an acceptable outcome, then it should not be part of an encounter's design. Proper planning on the part of the DM alleviates the need to fudge before any dice ever hit the table.