GMing: How to fudge NOT using the dice.

[Thomas Shey]

What is the "hardcore version" of "we generally stay together"?

When the "generally" is removed. Which to be fair, it on some level almost always is because few GMs want to run a separate campaign for the one or two guys who split off. But I've even seen cases where its considered bad form to replace a character because you don't think the old one would continue hanging around with the rest of those yahoos after Incident X.

 

[Bagpuss]

While you do roll dice on random monster tables, it always felt a bit fudgy to me.

Picking rather than rolling on random monster tables could be considered fudging but most random tables suggest picking as an option so not sure if it is really fudging.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Picking rather than rolling on random monster tables could be considered fudging but most random tables suggest picking as an option so not sure if it is really fudging.

With a properly set up set of random monster encounter tables, everything ought to be something that's reasonable to encounter in the environment anyway. Then the only issue can become if the things on the table have a wide swing in danger level.

 

[Reynard]

Picking rather than rolling on random monster tables could be considered fudging but most random tables suggest picking as an option so not sure if it is really fudging.

With a properly set up set of random monster encounter tables, everything ought to be something that's reasonable to encounter in the environment anyway. Then the only issue can become if the things on the table have a wide swing in danger level.

This is why I think fudging requires intention in the roll AND in deciding to override the roll. You can roll for inspiration on a random encounter table and have it not be fudging if you choose to roll again or pick something else. but if you, as GM, intend to keep the roll and backtrack after, that is fudging IMO.

 

[SteveC]

I do one big thing that I don't even think is fudging, but I'm sure some people do. I don't roll the dice for a long of things that characters are skilled in, I just let it happen. If a character has the appropriate skill, I just let them do the thing that relates to that skill. If they have expertise, I go even further.

There are so many things you can roll over, since a character could very well fail at them. I don't roll. Want to know info on a magical creature and you have Arcana skill? Okay, here's the info. Want to do athletic derring-do and you have Acrobatics or Athletics? Okay, there you go.

I still have plenty of times for characters to roll the dice when they need to do something they aren't good at, so let's let the tension be for those cases.

 

[Reynard]

I do one big thing that I don't even think is fudging, but I'm sure some people do. I don't roll the dice for a long of things that characters are skilled in, I just let it happen. If a character has the appropriate skill, I just let them do the thing that relates to that skill. If they have expertise, I go even further.

I don't think that is fudging in most games. Most games tell you to roll only if things are uncertain, and if you decide, as GM, that the result is a foregone conclusion, that's within your rights.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I do one big thing that I don't even think is fudging, but I'm sure some people do. I don't roll the dice for a long of things that characters are skilled in, I just let it happen. If a character has the appropriate skill, I just let them do the thing that relates to that skill. If they have expertise, I go even further.

There are so many things you can roll over, since a character could very well fail at them. I don't roll. Want to know info on a magical creature and you have Arcana skill? Okay, here's the info. Want to do athletic derring-do and you have Acrobatics or Athletics? Okay, there you go.

I still have plenty of times for characters to roll the dice when they need to do something they aren't good at, so let's let the tension be for those cases.

I'd say that entirely turns on the kind of things you make them roll for and the kind you don't. There are a lot of games that routinely tell you to not bother to roll if failure isn't particularly meaningful or expected. If it looks like something that seems pretty similar to another roll you just let go, it can look a lot like throwing failure at the PCs when you don't like their success, but that's not an automatic consequence of that.

 

[payn]

Picking rather than rolling on random monster tables could be considered fudging but most random tables suggest picking as an option so not sure if it is really fudging.

I guess the definition I’m going with is a dice roll overruled by GM which was often the case in my experience. I’m sure some folks use them to better effect.

 

[CleverNickName]

In some of the older adventure modules and rulebooks of older editions, it was common to see the phrase "roll or choose from the table below" for random encounters, magic items, treasure hoards, weather, and such. I continue to do so even today: I'll roll the dice (which the players can see on the VTT display), pretend to consult a random table (which the players can't see), make a dramatic face on the webcam, and announce the result I wanted all along.

I probably do this at least a dozen times per gaming session. I think the illusion of chance is a lot more important than the reality of chance, in most cases.

 

[thefutilist]

Right. particularly for players that enjoy the challenge of solving whatever the GM presents -- be it combat or a puzzle or an NPC -- "fudging" is generally off-putting because it means the situation CAN'T be solved. it only resolves when the GM says so.

I do not buy that "illusionism" is the definition of GMing or even the standard of play. Illusionism eliminates player agency, which is the primary defining factor of an RPG compared to other games.

I think the permanence of stuff is such a big deal that the tables relationship towards it creates fundamentally different modes of play.


Roads to Rome: What Brennan Lee Mulligan does. Essentially a mix between quantum ogres and responsiveness with more emphasis on the quantum ogres.


Narrative: What John Harper does, and what I think @innerdude is advocating for. Very similar to Roads to Rome but more emphasis is placed on responsiveness.


Challenge sim: What Questing Beast does. Stuff is fixed and needs to be fixed for the mode to make sense given how challenge focused it is.


Story sim; What Ron Edwards does. Stuff is fixed and needs to be fixed for the mode to make sense given it's whole orientation towards resolving a situation.


I think it's easy to be misled by stuff that might be kind of superficial. So a Call of Cthulu detective scenario where the players have well drawn characters and are trying to figure out the mystery (with a chance to actually fail), is far more similar to an OSR pawn stance dungeon crawl than it is to Critical Roll. Even though, superficially, it looks far closer to Critical Roll.



CONTENTIOUS BIT

If you think there are fundamental differences in mode, like I do, then agency is a red herring. General game advice is not fungible across modes, it only appears so because the community tends to treat role-playing as very similar with just a few different procedure preferences. In actuality what's considered agency in one mode is utterly irrelevant in another.



Sandra's Blorb principles got mentioned a few pages ago:

Blorb Principles

I'm a story sim kind of guy, I have a lot in common with Sandra but some of the stuff I do would totally destroy play for her. What bits are solid and how, pretty much constitutes the rpg medium. I think of it like a canvas. Sandra wants to paint a beautiful landscape but I've dipped the canvas into a glue water mix and handed her paper mache. She can't use the medium to do what she wants to do.

Likewise I feel @innerdudes frustration. Fixed pieces destroy or severely compromise the medium and thus player agency in his mode.

The exception is that illusionism is just bad because it involves the GM pretending we're in one mode when actually we're in another. The fact that illusionist advice is so widespread in the hobby shows how broken it is.