Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6728387" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Since I'm violently, rabidly, pathologically anti-fudge, well, my advice should be clear. But being anti-fudge and being anti-change--not the same thing. That is: "fudging" is when you roll a die, and then decide "y'know what, no, that's not what happens." I really, really, really dislike doing that--changing the rules of the fight, whether for or against the players, while it's happening. This isn't the appropriate place to get into why. "Change" is when you deviate from the plan in a way that (a) is consistent--or at least not inconsistent--with the stuff the players already know, and (b) the players COULD conceivably learn, once you change your mind, prior to the actual fight and thus prepare appropriately.I have a big bugaboo about "making informed choices." Fudging prevents being informed, and subverts choice. Change allows (but doesn't force) players to be informed, and preserves choice--both making it, and dealing with the consequences thereof.So--don't, please please please don't, "fudge" the combat halfway through to ensure that it goes in the party's favor. But, if you're worried that the fun will come to a crashing halt with an encounter that hasn't happened yet, and you have some ability to tweak it to fit the challenge level you WANT from it--by all means, do so. Preferably also come up with ways that, *if* the players *try* to, they can learn something of the forces they'll face and can plan accordingly. That alone will improve their odds of survival.</blockquote>

Verification