Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fudging: DM vs player preferences
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Unwise" data-source="post: 6805997" data-attributes="member: 98008"><p>In a game where the DM decides everything about an encounter, how tough the enemies are, what abilities they have, how many HP, how many there are of them etc, I kind of don't see "fairness" as a factor. To me it can be a bit like saying that spaghetti is "unfair", I can't even see the context of how fairness is relevant to the object in point.</p><p></p><p>I have recently started to understand that position though. After playing a bit of the old Space Crusade and Hero Quest games, I can see how a dungeon crawl can be challenge to be overcome. One guy designs it as best they can and you go hammer and tongs to beat it. That can be fun too. It takes a well designed dungeon though, or you spend a couple of hours doing something very boring if it is too hard or too easy.</p><p></p><p>I suspect that however you start playing the game, will dictate your point of view on this and I suspect it is rather hard to change. I can fully see that if I started playing under a certain style of DM, using a certain system, or had previous experiences with other "fair" games, my points of reference would be vastly different and I would feel strongly against fudging.</p><p></p><p>I could not even tell you if I am fudging half the time as a DM. That kind of implies that I have some sort of stone carved commandment that has to be obeyed. I tend to wing things a lot more than that. I am not even sure where the line is. Don't get me wrong, I'd be a better DM with more preparation, but my players literally turn up at my house for a game without telling me quiet often.</p><p></p><p>I know that the PCs have burst into a guard room and will fight 8 guards, if the fight looks easy and I add in two more guards coming into the room, is that fudging? What if I had not decided who was in the next room yet? What if I had and changed my mind? How do I know when I am "cheating"?</p><p></p><p>The PCs are fighting a Wizard, in my head he is "pretty powerful" but I have not picked out spells for him in advance. If he pulls out a feather fall when kicked out a window, is that fudging? If I am using an adventure module and and the designer did not give him a spell, but I use it, am I bad? Is it the adventure designer that decides if I am fudging? Do I enter into a contract to run the book the way it was written?</p><p></p><p>In most cases, I have no written stats for NPCs, if I decide on a to-hit bonus for them on the spot, is that OK? Is it somehow only authoritative if I had written it down in a notebook before hand? What if I change the notebook? At what point have I breached a contract with my players?</p><p></p><p>If I design a tough fight with a Barbarian lord and the HP total I had in mind does not make it a tough fight, can I change it to be accurate to the description, narrative and in-world consistency or do I abide by a mathematical mistake? What if I had not put an exact number down before hand? I'm just not sure at what point I am fudging, is it when I decided to use a character not in the Monster Manual? Is it when I wrote it down on a notepad and didn't stick to it? Was it the act of writing it down the made it authoritative?</p><p></p><p>How do fudge-free PCs and DMs feel about creatures having abilities that are not in the rules? As a couple of examples:</p><p>- PCs came across a monk who did a death-touch attack. He hits you, con save or fail a death save. No damage done, you are still fine, but one death save is down. Don't let him hit you three times.</p><p>- PCs came up against Lord Soth and found he simply could not be killed at all, he would never drop below 1HP. They had to unravel the curse that bound him to his domain to have a hope of defeating him.</p><p>- In one campaign, PCs came across people who had certain fates that they could fortell e.g. Will die by drowning in sea water. They could not hope to defeat that particular enemy without some sea water. Every attack that would have dropped them below 1HP auto-missed regardless of the roll.</p><p>- A swordmaster who never misses. If he would have missed every attack on his turn, he instead did a dodge maneuver, or was feinting, giving him advantage next time.</p><p></p><p>I guess I am just curious if the concept of fairness comes into encounter and power designs, or just the playing out of the encounters once designed, regardless of their construction?</p><p></p><p>All in all, I am actually really inspired to run an old-school style game, like Ravenloft or Tomb of Horrors and just play it completely without fudging. See how many PCs it takes to finish the adventure module.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Unwise, post: 6805997, member: 98008"] In a game where the DM decides everything about an encounter, how tough the enemies are, what abilities they have, how many HP, how many there are of them etc, I kind of don't see "fairness" as a factor. To me it can be a bit like saying that spaghetti is "unfair", I can't even see the context of how fairness is relevant to the object in point. I have recently started to understand that position though. After playing a bit of the old Space Crusade and Hero Quest games, I can see how a dungeon crawl can be challenge to be overcome. One guy designs it as best they can and you go hammer and tongs to beat it. That can be fun too. It takes a well designed dungeon though, or you spend a couple of hours doing something very boring if it is too hard or too easy. I suspect that however you start playing the game, will dictate your point of view on this and I suspect it is rather hard to change. I can fully see that if I started playing under a certain style of DM, using a certain system, or had previous experiences with other "fair" games, my points of reference would be vastly different and I would feel strongly against fudging. I could not even tell you if I am fudging half the time as a DM. That kind of implies that I have some sort of stone carved commandment that has to be obeyed. I tend to wing things a lot more than that. I am not even sure where the line is. Don't get me wrong, I'd be a better DM with more preparation, but my players literally turn up at my house for a game without telling me quiet often. I know that the PCs have burst into a guard room and will fight 8 guards, if the fight looks easy and I add in two more guards coming into the room, is that fudging? What if I had not decided who was in the next room yet? What if I had and changed my mind? How do I know when I am "cheating"? The PCs are fighting a Wizard, in my head he is "pretty powerful" but I have not picked out spells for him in advance. If he pulls out a feather fall when kicked out a window, is that fudging? If I am using an adventure module and and the designer did not give him a spell, but I use it, am I bad? Is it the adventure designer that decides if I am fudging? Do I enter into a contract to run the book the way it was written? In most cases, I have no written stats for NPCs, if I decide on a to-hit bonus for them on the spot, is that OK? Is it somehow only authoritative if I had written it down in a notebook before hand? What if I change the notebook? At what point have I breached a contract with my players? If I design a tough fight with a Barbarian lord and the HP total I had in mind does not make it a tough fight, can I change it to be accurate to the description, narrative and in-world consistency or do I abide by a mathematical mistake? What if I had not put an exact number down before hand? I'm just not sure at what point I am fudging, is it when I decided to use a character not in the Monster Manual? Is it when I wrote it down on a notepad and didn't stick to it? Was it the act of writing it down the made it authoritative? How do fudge-free PCs and DMs feel about creatures having abilities that are not in the rules? As a couple of examples: - PCs came across a monk who did a death-touch attack. He hits you, con save or fail a death save. No damage done, you are still fine, but one death save is down. Don't let him hit you three times. - PCs came up against Lord Soth and found he simply could not be killed at all, he would never drop below 1HP. They had to unravel the curse that bound him to his domain to have a hope of defeating him. - In one campaign, PCs came across people who had certain fates that they could fortell e.g. Will die by drowning in sea water. They could not hope to defeat that particular enemy without some sea water. Every attack that would have dropped them below 1HP auto-missed regardless of the roll. - A swordmaster who never misses. If he would have missed every attack on his turn, he instead did a dodge maneuver, or was feinting, giving him advantage next time. I guess I am just curious if the concept of fairness comes into encounter and power designs, or just the playing out of the encounters once designed, regardless of their construction? All in all, I am actually really inspired to run an old-school style game, like Ravenloft or Tomb of Horrors and just play it completely without fudging. See how many PCs it takes to finish the adventure module. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Fudging: DM vs player preferences
Top