D&D General How do players feel about DM fudging?

[Cadence]

There is nothing "diegetic" about inspiration dice. And, it's still one person at the table deciding to change the results, so, whether that one person is the DM or a player doesn't really change the fact that it's still fudging.

I'm just thinking of the first google definition of diegetic, and am imagining the characters literally hearing dice rolling every time there's a reroll now.

Fighter: "What's that sound?"

Rogue: "Well it's either our souls putting out extra effort to alter our fate for the better, or if the gods are for us it could be them altering our fate for the better too."

Fighter: "And if the gods aren't for us in this?"

Rogue: "Do you believe in reincarnation?"

 

[Hussar]

This seems to have mistaken what I said, because you've gone on a tangent I wasn't touching on at all. When I say "invoke" I mean that you've called for the system to adjudicate a conflict at the table -- you've rolled an attack roll, or rolled a ability check, or rolled for a random encounter. You've actually used the system. And then decided that the result the system provided from your invocation of it isn't what you want to happen, and so you change it. This is fudging -- choosing the outcome because the system didn't deliver the one you wanted. House rules or judgement calls or whatever aren't fudging because they aren't invoking the system and then deciding to change the outcome.

I'm rather taken aback that you are allowing @robus to clearly fudge - changing HP - without a single comment. He's quite clearly fudging by your definition.

So, again, because I want to be clear, is it okay for me, as the DM, to secretly change everything else EXCEPT a die roll? That fudging only applies to die rolls?

Because the definition of fudging seems to get fuzzier and fuzzier. First it was changing things. Then it was changing die rolls. Then it was changing die rolls in secret. Then it was changing anything in secret. But, now we're apparently back to only changing die rolls in secret. It's perfectly acceptable, apparently, to change results, but only if it's done in the open.

Which rather counters your whole invoking the system thing. Since I can, according to many in this thread, absolutely change die results at any time, so long as I do it in the open, and it is 100% acceptable, but, if I do it in secret, it is not. Where does invoking the system come into that? If I can't change results when calling for the system to adjudicate a conflict at the table, then doing it in the open, at any time, shouldn't be acceptable.

But, then we run into the player fudging mechanics which allow players to constantly change the results of mechanics... which is running counter to the intentions of the game... except that it's not... but.. it's okay because it's not a secret... but, if I do it then it's wrong...

These are some pretty convoluted concepts here.

 

[Ovinomancer]

IT's bascially just passive-agrssive bullying people out fo the game for playing different/having different preferences.

If someone is making a change to D&D, they're using D&D and it isn't their responsibility to get everyone else's blessing for it.

It's not. I apply it to myself. How can I bully myself out of the game? And what does the game really have to do with it -- is there some special award for being "5e"?

I 95% agree with your last statement. Changing the game is absolutely something you can and in many cases should do. Just be clear where you've changed it when it matters. 5e has plenty of space without changing a rule for there to be tons of different games. But when someone has a major hack of the system and says that it's still 5e and that 5e is the reason they could have such a great hack, that's just giving design credit where it isn't do -- that's yours, own it with pride!

 

[Ovinomancer]

That's your personal bugaboo that I really don't care about. It's justified fudging, maybe, but, it's still changing the die roll because you didn't like the original roll. Fudging by definition.

There is nothing "diegetic" about inspiration dice. And, it's still one person at the table deciding to change the results, so, whether that one person is the DM or a player doesn't really change the fact that it's still fudging.

Do you know how you can tell someone didn't read all of your post? They level an attack against you that you specifically addressed. Try again if you think the Inspiration points lands anywhere except showing you didn't read the post.

And it's a good thing I wasn't describing your experiences. I was describing mine. We had paladins anytime someone wanted to play one. I never saw a fighter type that didn't have percentile strength in the 20 years I played AD&D. So one and so forth. Why? Because everyone I knew, whether I DM'd or played, including with groups with absolutely no connection to each other, fudged chargen. Which is my point. Fudging wasn't some rare thing that never happened. It happened all the time. It happened so often that we actually invented a word for it.

You're generalizing your experience to make a broad argument. I was saying that your experience isn't sufficient to make that argument.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I'm rather taken aback that you are allowing @robus to clearly fudge - changing HP - without a single comment. He's quite clearly fudging by your definition.

I haven't responded to @robus. My not responding is not my agreeing with any points made robus made. I am not required to respond to every post or be assumed to accept their positions. You really don't want that standard to be applied to you, I'm quite sure. So,
don't put words in my mouth so you can strawman me. Which is what the rest of this is.

So, again, because I want to be clear, is it okay for me, as the DM, to secretly change everything else EXCEPT a die roll? That fudging only applies to die rolls?

Because the definition of fudging seems to get fuzzier and fuzzier. First it was changing things. Then it was changing die rolls. Then it was changing die rolls in secret. Then it was changing anything in secret. But, now we're apparently back to only changing die rolls in secret. It's perfectly acceptable, apparently, to change results, but only if it's done in the open.

Which rather counters your whole invoking the system thing. Since I can, according to many in this thread, absolutely change die results at any time, so long as I do it in the open, and it is 100% acceptable, but, if I do it in secret, it is not. Where does invoking the system come into that? If I can't change results when calling for the system to adjudicate a conflict at the table, then doing it in the open, at any time, shouldn't be acceptable.

But, then we run into the player fudging mechanics which allow players to constantly change the results of mechanics... which is running counter to the intentions of the game... except that it's not... but.. it's okay because it's not a secret... but, if I do it then it's wrong...

These are some pretty convoluted concepts here.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I'm just thinking of the first google definition of diegetic, and am imagining the characters literally hearing dice rolling every time there's a reroll now.

Fighter: "What's that sound?"

Rogue: "Well it's either our souls putting out extra effort to alter our fate for the better, or if the gods are for us it could be them altering our fate for the better too."

Fighter: "And if the gods aren't for us in this?"

Rogue: "Do you believe in reincarnation?"

Yeah, google does everyone a disservice by putting that up top -- that's diegetic in relation to sound, not diegetic in general.

 

[Fifth Element]

It is not. My players know immediately when I choose not to roll the dice (or, rather, when I choose not to have them roll the dice). Usually because I tell them.

Wait, you tell your players every time you roll for wandering monsters? Since that's what I was referring to.

Do you know how you can tell someone didn't read all of your post? They level an attack against you that you specifically addressed.

That or they think your explanation was insufficient.

 

[Fifth Element]

Yeah, google does everyone a disservice by putting that up top -- that's diegetic in relation to sound, not diegetic in general.

It"s more commonly used in relation to music, that's all.

 

[Hussar]

Yup. Time to move on. This is just spinning wheels which can be fun for a while but not really productive.

We’re just not speaking the same language. When fudging is considered a major hack and compared to murder, it’s just not possible to have a conversation.

 

[iserith]

Wait, you tell your players every time you roll for wandering monsters? Since that's what I was referring to.

I'm not EzekielRaiden, but I certainly do tell my players. It's rolled in the open, too.

When they're down on resources and trying to escape the dungeon to rest, you can bet all eyes are on that die.