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
How do players feel about DM fudging?
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="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8607139" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Not exactly. More that an urge to tinker, in the context of TTRPGs, is almost never satisfied with a <em>single</em> change, done once, tested thoroughly, and then left as-is forever.</p><p></p><p>That is, tinkering, DIY in a gaming context, usually reflects a critical eye and an urge toward improvement....and every system, even the systems I love dearly, has areas that can be improved. I'm sure you've heard someone say something to the effect of "if we required [novels/games/papers/movies/etc.] to be perfect, nothing would ever get made." At some point, a creator has to throw up their hands and say "good enough!" Consumers with an interest in tinkering/DIY are not subject to such pressures. We can keep iterating <em>indefinitely</em>, because the only cost is our personal time and energy, and we (myself included!) find that "expense" joyously worthwhile....but continuous tinkering has a tendency to produce what programmers call "spaghetti code," and spaghetti code is <em>very</em> difficult to clean up.</p><p></p><p>Now that I think about it, actually, spaghetti code is an excellent example of exactly this effect in action. "Software rot" is a real, extant phenomenon that <em>plagues</em> many developers unless they actively uphold countermeasures, but your logic here would dismiss it as a slippery slope. It isn't. It really happens. Game design tinkering is similarly liable to such changes, because who's gonna tell you <em>not</em> to tinker with anything (and, thus, <em>everything</em>) that rubs you the wrong way with a system you <em>overall</em> like?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, I can't speak for "most people" [citation needed?] but I've already quoted a fairly significant slice of people in this thread who consider secrecy to be a fundamental part of "fudging," and looking through links posted previously by Umbran, this pattern holds at least as far back as 2010 on ENWorld, and seemingly much earlier in general, based on other textual references I have seen/read.</p><p></p><p>It might not be the case that <em>everyone</em> thinks secrecy is essential for something to be "fudging," but for a fair chunk, it is. I personally said that several times earlier in this thread, and no one got all up in my grill about the secrecy <em>then</em>, so it's a little weird that more than one person is <em>now</em> declaring that secrecy isn't a valid restriction.</p><p></p><p>Now, to be fair to your points, if I saw that a DM was openly rerolling (because, again, I don't consider this <em>fudging proper</em>) to an excessive degree--e.g., if it happened at least once in most sessions--I would see that as a cause for concern. But, because I'm allowed to <em>know</em> that it's happening, I can do something about it. I can talk with the DM (away from the game, of course) and try to find out why they're choosing to intrude on the game mechanics so often. Assuming we have a productive conversation, this means we can actually get on the same page and find a solution that works for everyone involved, rather than having the DM unilaterally deciding what is best for me as a player.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8607139, member: 6790260"] Not exactly. More that an urge to tinker, in the context of TTRPGs, is almost never satisfied with a [I]single[/I] change, done once, tested thoroughly, and then left as-is forever. That is, tinkering, DIY in a gaming context, usually reflects a critical eye and an urge toward improvement....and every system, even the systems I love dearly, has areas that can be improved. I'm sure you've heard someone say something to the effect of "if we required [novels/games/papers/movies/etc.] to be perfect, nothing would ever get made." At some point, a creator has to throw up their hands and say "good enough!" Consumers with an interest in tinkering/DIY are not subject to such pressures. We can keep iterating [I]indefinitely[/I], because the only cost is our personal time and energy, and we (myself included!) find that "expense" joyously worthwhile....but continuous tinkering has a tendency to produce what programmers call "spaghetti code," and spaghetti code is [I]very[/I] difficult to clean up. Now that I think about it, actually, spaghetti code is an excellent example of exactly this effect in action. "Software rot" is a real, extant phenomenon that [I]plagues[/I] many developers unless they actively uphold countermeasures, but your logic here would dismiss it as a slippery slope. It isn't. It really happens. Game design tinkering is similarly liable to such changes, because who's gonna tell you [I]not[/I] to tinker with anything (and, thus, [I]everything[/I]) that rubs you the wrong way with a system you [I]overall[/I] like? Well, I can't speak for "most people" [citation needed?] but I've already quoted a fairly significant slice of people in this thread who consider secrecy to be a fundamental part of "fudging," and looking through links posted previously by Umbran, this pattern holds at least as far back as 2010 on ENWorld, and seemingly much earlier in general, based on other textual references I have seen/read. It might not be the case that [I]everyone[/I] thinks secrecy is essential for something to be "fudging," but for a fair chunk, it is. I personally said that several times earlier in this thread, and no one got all up in my grill about the secrecy [I]then[/I], so it's a little weird that more than one person is [I]now[/I] declaring that secrecy isn't a valid restriction. Now, to be fair to your points, if I saw that a DM was openly rerolling (because, again, I don't consider this [I]fudging proper[/I]) to an excessive degree--e.g., if it happened at least once in most sessions--I would see that as a cause for concern. But, because I'm allowed to [I]know[/I] that it's happening, I can do something about it. I can talk with the DM (away from the game, of course) and try to find out why they're choosing to intrude on the game mechanics so often. Assuming we have a productive conversation, this means we can actually get on the same page and find a solution that works for everyone involved, rather than having the DM unilaterally deciding what is best for me as a player. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How do players feel about DM fudging?
Top