LordEntrails
Hero
Makes me feel like I'm on a railroad. Very negative. Don't like it. Why bother rolling if the GM is going to change the results to fit their pre-written story?
First, the DM can't cheat. He can only abuse his authority. Second, fudging =/= "so they could 'win'." Several people here have mentioned many reasons to fudge that have nothing to do with the DM trying to win or gain advantage.I hate it. I will leave a game. I HAVE left games. I want a DM to adjudicate the game fairly, the fun will take care of itself.
Roll out in the open* where everyone can see, let the dice land where they will. That's the game part of it. Not completing a scenario because the dice crapped out doesn't make it less fun, but knowing the DM coddled the players by 'helping' them does. Or worse - knowing the DM cheated so they could 'win' is really, really bad.
*where possible, there are legitimately some rolls that should be done hidden away. This is not a license to fudge!
Yeah, THAT'S bad.A few months ago, I had quite a discussion on a French forum about the same topic. One of the "pro fudge side" was whining that without fudging, his storiesight end up too early to see the end and all his work would go down the drain.
A few months ago, I had quite a discussion on a French forum about the same topic. One of the "pro fudge side" was whining that without fudging, his storiesight end up too early to see the end and all his work would go down the drain.
First, the DM can't cheat. He can only abuse his authority. Second, fudging =/= "so they could 'win'." Several people here have mentioned many reasons to fudge that have nothing to do with the DM trying to win or gain advantage.
Have you even read most of the reasons in this thread and the other about why DMs fudge? I don't think you have, because nothing you just said touches in those reasons at all.I'm against it as I'm against the whole idea.
The DM has a dragon attack the PCs....and a couple of rolls later, oh no, 25 damage to character Zarok will kill him. But the weak DM does not want Zarok to die as his player Bob will be sad so they fudge and say "oh just 10 damage".
I say: just let the character die. Let Bob be sad, cry in the corner, slam doors and do whatever.
If your the DM, and you did not want Bob's special snowflake character to die....then you should just alter game reality to make it so. Don't waste time EVER having Bob's character in combat, just tell Bob he "won D&D or whatever".
You accept dice rolls, or do NOT make them.
Some kinds of fudging are an abuse of authority. Others are not. I do not fudge to favor either myself or the players. In the extremely unlikely event that A) the players made no bad decisions, B) the players are having extreme(not just plain ole) bad luck, and C) I am having extreme(not play ole) good luck, I will fudge a bit to allow them a fighting chance at survival. A TPK should not happen due to extreme die luck. That's not an abuse of authority. That's just good DMing.It's really just semantics and the result is the same - whether you call it cheating (I do) or abusing your authority (also true), it destroys trust. I don't want to play with that DM because at the very least I know I can't trust them.
I do not fudge to favor either myself or the players.
In the extremely unlikely event that A) the players made no bad decisions, B) the players are having extreme(not just plain ole) bad luck, and C) I am having extreme(not play ole) good luck, I will fudge a bit to allow them a fighting chance at survival. A TPK should not happen due to extreme die luck. That's not an abuse of authority. That's just good DMing.