I generally find this only works up to about level 10. After that most of those things are useless if you over do it.
GMing: How to fudge NOT using the dice.
- Thread starter Reynard
- Start date
GMMichael
Guide of Modos
By OP definition, I'd call non-dice-fudging "game mastering."
You're thinking of story-focused play versus simulationist or gamist play.
This is fair (don't forget the "deus-"), especially since the adjusting-AC-or-HP suggestions are effectively the same as fudging dice.
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
I suppose one thing the DM can do is ad hoc a monster ability into existence that modifies their performance- as long as the players don't have the actual stat block, of course. I rarely use any monster "as-is", and while I used to tell the players what they were up against, I stopped doing so once I realized they could only retain so much information, lol.
I'm sure most DM's aren't quite that transparent. So you could say that a pair of Bugbear brothers have a variant of Pack Tactics, one gets enraged when the other is bloodied or downed, or has a once per day ability that they save for "special occasions".
You could decide a monster owns a minor magic item- sure the PC's get it as treasure, but your monster might get a lot more use out of a sword that prevents healing than the players ever will, especially if it requires attunement!
I'm sure most DM's aren't quite that transparent. So you could say that a pair of Bugbear brothers have a variant of Pack Tactics, one gets enraged when the other is bloodied or downed, or has a once per day ability that they save for "special occasions".
You could decide a monster owns a minor magic item- sure the PC's get it as treasure, but your monster might get a lot more use out of a sword that prevents healing than the players ever will, especially if it requires attunement!
overgeeked
Open-World Sandbox
Fudging is the polite label for cheating. The referee can cheat in all kinds of ways. Some mentioned already, some not.
An incomplete list. Railroading. Quantum ogres. Skewing DCs. Adding monsters. Adding hit points. Removing monsters. Removing hit points. Protecting PCs from the consequences if their actions. Punishing PCs for not doing what you as the referee wanted them to do.
Basically anything that is outside the referee’s prep or what makes sense in the fiction.
Though a lot of antagonistic referees will try really hard to justify their cheating in the fiction.
If you write down there’s 15 orcs in the room, there’s 15 orcs in the room. Doesn’t matter how hurt the PCs are or how rested they are. Doesn’t matter if you wanted them to go into another room first. If all you wrote down was 2d6+3 orcs and want to wait until the PCs enter to roll, then you roll. End of. Deciding it’s 15 instead of committing to rolling is also cheating.
An incomplete list. Railroading. Quantum ogres. Skewing DCs. Adding monsters. Adding hit points. Removing monsters. Removing hit points. Protecting PCs from the consequences if their actions. Punishing PCs for not doing what you as the referee wanted them to do.
Basically anything that is outside the referee’s prep or what makes sense in the fiction.
Though a lot of antagonistic referees will try really hard to justify their cheating in the fiction.
If you write down there’s 15 orcs in the room, there’s 15 orcs in the room. Doesn’t matter how hurt the PCs are or how rested they are. Doesn’t matter if you wanted them to go into another room first. If all you wrote down was 2d6+3 orcs and want to wait until the PCs enter to roll, then you roll. End of. Deciding it’s 15 instead of committing to rolling is also cheating.
aco175
Legend
I must fudge all the time.
I kind of look at not doubling all the dice on a critical or the bad guy happens to have a potion of healing/invisibility or such. Designing encounters is hard and does not take all into account. When the PCs encounter it, I'm not sure I am done making it, since there was no playtest. I'm guessing professional designers have that ability to playtest.
I add more monsters if it feels right, or add HP to the big bad if I think it makes more sense to have him last one more turn. I tend to red circle monsters when they have one hit left on them. It could be smaller creatures with 20hp and the players deal 8-15 per turn. The monster gets a hit for 12 and I just red circle them to prevent me from tracking more things. Next hit kills them, even if it deals 2 points instead of 8.
overgeeked
Open-World Sandbox
That’s why you set it and forget it. You don’t need to tune the encounter to the PCs. Let them make the call. If it’s too tough, they can run. If they’re too stubborn to run, they can die. Unbalanced encounters are so much easier to run and so much more fun to play on either side of the screen.
well that's a nice black and white way of looking at it. Over the last 40 years I've had far more players lose it when I didn't fudge and just killed them, ( Not counting the dragon lance player that kept losing his naughty word because the players weren't doing what the books did.), than players losing their naughty word because I fudged to let them live or make the encounter a bit more exciting. You call it cheating I call it continuing the game. But you do you. We'll do us... Peace out.
hmmmm naughty word no.......but you do you. Sometimes I don't have time to tune naughty word. Sometimes I make mistakes. I'll cheat, fudge, whatever I have to do to keep the game fun. If you want to step on the players like they were eggs to make a point. have at it.
No, that's what you are thinking of. You can still fudge in story games if you ignore some mechanical result and instead insert your own preferred result.
If you look at the "succeed at a cost" result and decide, nah, it's "fail forward" instead, you have fudged the result.
The only requirement for you to have "fudged" is that you went around the system to change the outcome at the moment.
Pretending this is only about [meaningless category] versus [meaningless category] is just an attempt to denigrate one and elevate the other.
