Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 6808799" data-attributes="member: 6778044">There are a few assumptions there, but that's because the situation wasn't fully described. The encounter with the bear was designed to be with the first character that separated themselves from the group in the woods. It happened to be a wood elf barbarian. The bear attack was always intended to be a single attack, not using all of it's possibilities, and then it would turn and lope into the woods. So the likelihood that it would result in a character death was slim. I was pretty sure it wouldn't come to that anyway. The entire thing was based off of a time when I decided to take a walk in the woods, while my daughter was at a class. A helicopter flew overhead, and I heard a snap behind me. I turned to see a bear, not more than 20 feet away, push off from a tree that it had its front paws on, and run off in the opposite direction. I had no clue it was there. At all. We've certainly seen what bear attacks can do, and this type of mundane encounter is often missing in a lot of campaigns. So I figured it was a good enough starting point to set the stage. And it worked very well.The fudge was pre-prepared in that I had decided it could not score a critical or kill a character. I don't segregate creatures by level. If you're wandering around in the woods, you might come across something too powerful, and you should be prepared to run. That's just the way it is. I figured that the first encounter should make the point (although it could have come later if the situation didn't present itself). I just didn't want to kill a character right out of the gate. "Tough, perhaps too tough, but get used to it."This was the initial session for a public campaign, with people who had never played with me. I highly doubt that anybody would have suspected that I had rolled a critical even if I had, because the situation was clear that it was not an attack to kill, but an attack by a surprised animal that defended itself so it could get away. I suppose that I didn't consider that some people might jump to the conclusion that 'we can't die' or some lesser variation of that. I don't think that anybody probably would have with the way it played out, but who knows?Ultimately, I guess I can say I understand that some people dislike that some DM's fudge. I don't quite get why they are so against it, but that's partly due to my indifference to it, combined with the fact that it's always been part of the game that I've known. So I don't think I'll ever see it as an outright failure either.But the public campaign is a good as place as any for me to try something different. More importantly, for public campaigns, the RAW (even though fudging is one of them) is the standard to start with. I'm still maintaining a number of house-rules, so it's not strictly by the book, but it is as written since I provide those to all the players. Don't know if I'll ever run a AL or at a Con, but it's good to get the chops up to do it. I have no idea if it's the 'standard' approach now, but it's certainly worth being prepared.I've always told the players that anything is up for discussion. Not during the game, of course. I'll make my ruling, usually in the favor of the PCs if there's any question, and we'll revisit it after the session if needed. I can't guarantee that the result will be the same the next time, but from that point forward they'll be consistent. And I've stated it before in this thread, if the players object to DM Fudging, then I'd take that into account, and try to find something that works for all of us. If that means no fudging, I can live with that.Ilbranteloth</blockquote>

Verification