Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hot Take: Uncertainty Makes D&D Better
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="DMZ2112" data-source="post: 8923450" data-attributes="member: 78752"><p>I haven't really been addressing your posts because I feel like we play very different games. I've been playing D&D since 1986 and running (for real) since 1991, and your style is not one that has ever interested me. That doesn't mean I don't respect it -- I suspect we both firmly believe the other is missing out, and that is one of the great things about the game.</p><p></p><p></p><p>In short, because 99% of rolls don't <em>need</em> fudging (from our perspective), but from a philosophical standpoint, because it is important to maintain the illusion that every roll and numerical construct is legitimate. That's where players' fun comes from, the perception of risk. On that point, at least, I think we agree.</p><p></p><p>Let me remove dice from the equation to try and explain my opinion in another way. As dungeon masters we make a lot of decisions that impact the players without the benefit of randomization, particularly when we are asked to improvise content because a player choice has taken the session in a direction we did not expect. </p><p></p><p>We decide if the NPC innkeeper in town doesn't like or rent to adventurers, and whether there's a goblin scout camp in the copse of trees just outside town the party has opted to investigate for their own camp. We decide if those scouts set a lookout, or set up punji sticks. All of these decisions fall under the categories of "worldbuilding" or "encounter design," we do them to keep the game interesting for our players.</p><p></p><p>What's more, the players have to trust that we are being fair. That we are prepared to expand the fiction to explain the innkeeper's attitude and allow for mitigating it, if the players press the issue. That they won't be surprised by a goblin patrol at melee range that didn't exist while they were watching the trees from a distance. That the goblins have set traps is not contingent on the party not looking for them. That the challenges we pose to them are merciless without being cruel, and that the rewards we provide are commensurate.</p><p></p><p>But this fairness is largely an illusion, and it becomes more so the further we are required to range from our session notes, as we are forced to react rather than rely on preparation. Even when we succeed, we may be dependent on the quantum ogre principle, and when we fail, we could decide the innkeeper is intractable because it simplifies the scene, or stick the fighter with a punji stick because their player is being a jerk and the rogue didn't think to check. As far as the players are concerned, these things could have been our intent all along, and the only test they have for our fairness is the time they've spent with us and the trust we've built with them.</p><p></p><p>So, then, why does the arbitrary involvement of a cheaply manufactured chunk of bubble-filled plastic suddenly absolve us of this responsibility to build that trust and uphold the illusion of fairness?</p><p></p><p>Reasonable minds can absolutely disagree as to whether fudging should be done. My position is just that it is a tool that dungeon masters -- particularly new dungeon masters -- should be encouraged to <em>recognize</em> in their arsenal. No moral judgment should be laid here; it's a game we play with friends. If everyone at the table is having fun, the goal has been achieved.</p><p></p><p></p><p>You'll like this -- it happened to me the other night. I was gleefully preparing to roll damage, and the player says, "You made those rolls with disadvantage, right?" I'd forgotten about his Cloak of Displacement. <em>:: deep sigh ::</em></p><p></p><p></p><p>I was specifically trying to avoid a description of a situation where I was taking up an antagonistic position to the players to avoid controversy, but I've absolutely done this too. It's not about ensuring the PCs win easily, or win at all, it's about keeping things entertaining. Again, that is a definition that varies table to table and even player to player, just like showmanship varies audience to audience.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DMZ2112, post: 8923450, member: 78752"] I haven't really been addressing your posts because I feel like we play very different games. I've been playing D&D since 1986 and running (for real) since 1991, and your style is not one that has ever interested me. That doesn't mean I don't respect it -- I suspect we both firmly believe the other is missing out, and that is one of the great things about the game. In short, because 99% of rolls don't [I]need[/I] fudging (from our perspective), but from a philosophical standpoint, because it is important to maintain the illusion that every roll and numerical construct is legitimate. That's where players' fun comes from, the perception of risk. On that point, at least, I think we agree. Let me remove dice from the equation to try and explain my opinion in another way. As dungeon masters we make a lot of decisions that impact the players without the benefit of randomization, particularly when we are asked to improvise content because a player choice has taken the session in a direction we did not expect. We decide if the NPC innkeeper in town doesn't like or rent to adventurers, and whether there's a goblin scout camp in the copse of trees just outside town the party has opted to investigate for their own camp. We decide if those scouts set a lookout, or set up punji sticks. All of these decisions fall under the categories of "worldbuilding" or "encounter design," we do them to keep the game interesting for our players. What's more, the players have to trust that we are being fair. That we are prepared to expand the fiction to explain the innkeeper's attitude and allow for mitigating it, if the players press the issue. That they won't be surprised by a goblin patrol at melee range that didn't exist while they were watching the trees from a distance. That the goblins have set traps is not contingent on the party not looking for them. That the challenges we pose to them are merciless without being cruel, and that the rewards we provide are commensurate. But this fairness is largely an illusion, and it becomes more so the further we are required to range from our session notes, as we are forced to react rather than rely on preparation. Even when we succeed, we may be dependent on the quantum ogre principle, and when we fail, we could decide the innkeeper is intractable because it simplifies the scene, or stick the fighter with a punji stick because their player is being a jerk and the rogue didn't think to check. As far as the players are concerned, these things could have been our intent all along, and the only test they have for our fairness is the time they've spent with us and the trust we've built with them. So, then, why does the arbitrary involvement of a cheaply manufactured chunk of bubble-filled plastic suddenly absolve us of this responsibility to build that trust and uphold the illusion of fairness? Reasonable minds can absolutely disagree as to whether fudging should be done. My position is just that it is a tool that dungeon masters -- particularly new dungeon masters -- should be encouraged to [I]recognize[/I] in their arsenal. No moral judgment should be laid here; it's a game we play with friends. If everyone at the table is having fun, the goal has been achieved. You'll like this -- it happened to me the other night. I was gleefully preparing to roll damage, and the player says, "You made those rolls with disadvantage, right?" I'd forgotten about his Cloak of Displacement. [I]:: deep sigh ::[/I] I was specifically trying to avoid a description of a situation where I was taking up an antagonistic position to the players to avoid controversy, but I've absolutely done this too. It's not about ensuring the PCs win easily, or win at all, it's about keeping things entertaining. Again, that is a definition that varies table to table and even player to player, just like showmanship varies audience to audience. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hot Take: Uncertainty Makes D&D Better
Top