Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8596273" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Okay. Here's an important thing though: The DM did not need to do anything requiring "an open and honest conversation."I am not saying this because anything is "needed" in game design (because I know nothing is; I've made that point many times on this board). Instead, I am highlighting this because the exact same ends--cinematic story beats and avoiding un-fun consequences--can always be avoided without the use of anything that would require a before- or after-the-fact open and honest conversation.Fudging is, to put it very mildly, controversial for a fair portion of people. I think we can agree that, if one can achieve the exact same end via either controversial means, or entirely uncontroversial means, with relatively minimal difference other than the likelihood of controversy, it is preferable to choose the uncontroversial means in every case. In this case, the entirely uncontroversial means sometimes require some extra effort, but again it is generally understood that a higher-effort but lower-controversy approach is preferable to a lower-effort but higher-controversy approach in essentially all cases.If it is always possible to avoid fudging and still achieve the desired aim, which AIUI several people have agreed that that is true (via agreeing that fudging is never necessary), then what is the value of fudging instead of avoiding it?</blockquote>