Anticlimax is a good reason to fudge. As a general rule I don’t want any the BBEG to be a SWEG (Small Weak End Guy). Sure every so often it’s fine for the Players to take down a foe before they get to act, but I do think it’s anti-climactic when that is anything but rare. As both a player and a DM
Of course my reaction to that is "If its not rare, there's something wrong with your GMing, the system you're using, or both."
Suspense is a good reason to fudge. The mystery scenario can fall flat when the player just happens to look in the right place and happen to check for the right thing, for no other reason than dumb luck (or having cheated and read the notes). Session over, sorry guys time to finish for the night.
Hard for me to assess the value as I'm not that big a fan of mysteries that that seems a good reason.
Training is a good reason to fudge. It’s not a problem to go easy on a new character while they find their stride. You can reduce is as they learn the rules. That second crit on the first round of combat that takes the new player out before they have acted isn’t necessary.
I half-agree; I think its better if a system has a built in buffer for this, but if that's absolutely off the table I'd give this one a pass.
Common Decency is a good reason to fudge. If you’ve heard the phrase, don’t kick a man when he’s down. The wizard has a fireball left but casts a scorching ray because if he casts fireball that downed character who was taken out on the first round and who has failed two death saves is dead. It’s gratuitous, it isn’t necessary
Eh. While I think there can be catastrophic failure states, bluntly, if I don't want ones like this to be an issue, don't use a system where its possible. That sort of decision seems a perfectly legitimate one for events to force to me.
Balancing other Players Excesses is a good reason to fudge. If one player is spamming abilities and overshadowing players maybe resistance, appropriate spells, immunity to conditions etc might appear on the monsters stats.
Again, sounds like the signs of a broken system in action if there's that much difference. Patching it after the fact rather than upfront seems a bad reason to do this, and in fact, is a step down the road of turning it into a battle between the player and GM. Better to have gone "Look, this particular kind of character build is overpowered and is going to make other characters look weak, could you not do this?" when the player started to do it.
I agree that fudging is an occasional necessity. But at least some of these seem like using it a band-aid to avoid fixing other problems.