My DM just told me he fudges rolls....

[The Shaman]

If I did have a player like that and he was on board for everything else then I would tell him that I would not ever fudge on his character and I would stick to that.

As a player that's all I would ask for.

 

[Elf Witch]

You wanna know what I find rude? Passive-aggressive behavior.If you have something to say to me or about me, please, don't resort to "some people," particularly when you're ascribing things that were never said. Say it, use "The Shaman" in the post, and throw some Mention tags around it, and we'll actually have an exchange of ideas.

That said, in the spirit of comity, here's something on which we can both agree, without reservation or qualification.

First of all I was not just talking about you when I posted the non fudgers comments which is why I didn't name you specifically. And I was also talking about my experiences with all posters on this topic at other times on this and other boards which is why I used the word some people.

One of those comments I posted right under the comment I was quoting. And it wasn't you.

It was never my purpose to single you out except for the comments about lazy DMs and such because in that case no one else had gone that far.

 

[Elf Witch]

You've clarified, but The Shaman was still correct. We can agree to disagree on that if you want to.


Sure, and some people early in the thread can't accept that some people may not want to fudge. It goes both ways. The Shaman was a little more insulting than others are, sure, but when I hear you say that me not fitting your ideal description of flexibility means I'm missing a sign of a "good" GM, can't you see how that could be insulting? I'm not insulted by it, but I don't define my personal value by what others think of me. I do think that your statement, while more diplomatic, is still potentially insulting, however, and obviously objectively false.

I have no hard feelings towards you, or towards your style. You know my mantra. However, I don't like seeing The Shaman getting piled on for people taking his quote out of context. I also don't see the discussion going anywhere productive, so it's probably wise to move on. As always, play what you like

Yep we will have to disagree with that because I know what I meant and how I feel about this and if you don't want to take my word for how I honestly look at something well there is no point in continuing to discuss this because we are not close to being on the same page.

And yes there may be people who can't accept not fudging but I am not one of them. I have always said that it is up to each DM and the group he plays in as a matter of fact that is my base answer for any discussion like this.

And since you like semantics so much I want to point out that I did not say good DM I said great DM. You are the one who is choosing to change it to good. I don't consider myself a great DM I am far from that I am good DM. But I stand my my comment that truly great DMs are flexible. A great DM can be flexible and never once a fudge a dice. The opposite of great is not bad so I am not sure why you are leaping to that conclusion.

As I have pointed out I only fudged twice and gave my reasons for doing it. My games have things in place to keep the lethal aspect down like action and fate points. I expect that there will be some deaths as a matter of fact we have had one where the they had to be reincarnated. But because I have seen where fudging made a session better the two times I used it I won't say I will never use it again. Like I keep saying I like to keep my options open and I tell that to my players.

Honestly do I think someone who says I will never ever fudge no matter what the reason is a great DM no I don't. But I don't think they are a bad DM because of it.

I think there are only a few great DMs the rest being either good, mediocre or just plan bad. I think truly bad DMs are as rare as great DMs. A lot of so called bad DMs are just bad for that group and would be good for another another.

I have don't think either you or The Shaman are bad DMs because you don't fudge now you can choose to accept my statement on that or not.

Maybe The Shaman would not be being piled on if he didn't feel the need to label other DMs as lazy. Just saying.

 

[The Shaman]

It was never my purpose to single you out except for the comments about lazy DMs . . . .

I called fudging a "lazy practice," but I never called anyone a "lazy DM."

If you want to keep tossing that at me, at least report my words correctly.

 

[Elf Witch]

I called fudging a "lazy practice," but I never called anyone a "lazy DM."

If you want to keep tossing that at me, at least report my words correctly.

You are right you did phrase it that way. But do you realize that saying something is a lazy practice implies that the person doing it is lazy.

Now if that is not what you meant then I accept that you didn't mean to sound so insulting and put it down to internet communication not being the best.

 

[enrious]

I called fudging a "lazy practice,"...

"...that creates really bad habits for both referees and players."

How can a DM who is not lazy employ a lazy practice, out of idle curiosity? Under what circumstances can a energetic and/or hard-working DM utilize a lazy practice?

Can you give some examples?

 

[ggroy]

There was one game where I was asked to be the DM. I brought up the issue of fudging and DM discretion.

It turned out the players wanted me to fudge the dice rolls in their favor all the time, and where all DM discretion was done in their favor. (This particular group was not very experienced with D&D). At that point I just told them they wouldn't need any dice, if they wanted constant fudging and DM discretion to always be in their favor. But they were still insistent on it.

In the end, I turned down the DM job.

 

[enrious]

There was one game where I was asked to be the DM. I brought up the issue of fudging and DM discretion.

It turned out the players wanted me to fudge the dice rolls in their favor all the time, and where all DM discretion was done in their favor. (This particular group was not very experienced with D&D). At that point I just told them they wouldn't need any dice, if they wanted constant fudging and DM discretion to always be in their favor. But they were still insistent on it.

In the end, I turned down the DM job.

That's less fudging and more narrative storytelling, as you point out.

Me, it sounds like a first-round TPK in the making, but that's just me.

Then as I was walking out the door, I'd say, "Oh by the way? Shane died at the end."

 

[JamesonCourage]

Yep we will have to disagree with that because I know what I meant and how I feel about this and if you don't want to take my word for how I honestly look at something well there is no point in continuing to discuss this because we are not close to being on the same page.

I'm not attacking you, nor calling you dishonest. I'm saying that it seems like you're looking at this in one light, and when The Shaman addressed a point tangential to yours, you've steadfastly refused to acknowledge it.

And yes there may be people who can't accept not fudging but I am not one of them. I have always said that it is up to each DM and the group he plays in as a matter of fact that is my base answer for any discussion like this.

And I always say to play what you like.

And since you like semantics so much...

Context and semantics are two different things.

...I want to point out that I did not say good DM I said great DM. You are the one who is choosing to change it to good. I don't consider myself a great DM I am far from that I am good DM. But I stand my my comment that truly great DMs are flexible. A great DM can be flexible and never once a fudge a dice. The opposite of great is not bad so I am not sure why you are leaping to that conclusion.

Well, sorry for downplaying it, but that means your statement (taken within its original context) implies that you cannot be a great GM without being open to more options. That's incredibly close-minded, in my opinion.

As I have pointed out I only fudged twice and gave my reasons for doing it. My games have things in place to keep the lethal aspect down like action and fate points. I expect that there will be some deaths as a matter of fact we have had one where the they had to be reincarnated. But because I have seen where fudging made a session better the two times I used it I won't say I will never use it again. Like I keep saying I like to keep my options open and I tell that to my players.

I'm not attacking your play style. I've said that it's fine to play that way. I'm not sure why you're so defensive. You've made a slightly inflammatory statement, and I've said I think it is, just like I said I thought The Shaman's was worse.

The fact that I don't adhere to your thoughts on GM flexibility precludes me from ever becoming a "great" GM is definitely inflammatory. If I don't meet your requirements, I'm not doing it as well as someone who does it that way. That is faintly badwrongfun, in my mind, though I don't think you meant it offensively. I hope you can see why it might come off that way, though.

Honestly do I think someone who says I will never ever fudge no matter what the reason is a great DM no I don't. But I don't think they are a bad DM because of it.

That's what I'm talking about.

I think there are only a few great DMs the rest being either good, mediocre or just plan bad. I think truly bad DMs are as rare as great DMs. A lot of so called bad DMs are just bad for that group and would be good for another another.

I have don't think either you or The Shaman are bad DMs because you don't fudge now you can choose to accept my statement on that or not.

I really don't think you can judge my style at all. And, no offense to your opinion, but any judgment won't mean much. My players definitely regard me as a "great" GM, if that's about as high as the praise can reach. I'm happy taking their view on it over yours, but regardless, I'll always end up GMing in a way that I can greatly enjoy anyways. That just apparently jives well with them.

Maybe The Shaman would not be being piled on if he didn't feel the need to label other DMs as lazy. Just saying.

Maybe I wouldn't feel the need to defend him if people took his comments in context, and didn't force a hard label on him (or me, for that matter) that precludes him from being a "great" GM. Just saying. As always, play what you like

 

[enrious]

FWIW, I think there can be great non-fudging DMs just as I think there can be great fudging DMs, but that's because I think fudging or not fudging is such an insignificant part of being a DM that all of the other aspects drown it out.


And there's been a lot of arguments based on items not in evidence (this thread) - perhaps moving forward they be kept strictly to things said in here and not on other boards, by other people?