Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="barsoomcore" data-source="post: 1266088" data-attributes="member: 812">Absolutely. I don't consider the problem here to be fudging -- the problem is simply poor DMing. Not equivalent ideas.Well, we disagree on the nature of D&D rules. I believe the rules are there simply to provide a random element to the story-telling -- otherwise the heroes succeed at everything they try. Introducing a random element is what makes the story-telling interesting, because nobody can predict what will happen next.Well, in this you are changing the rules, as many skill descriptions explicitly state that the DM should roll the dice in secret so that the player doesn't know what the outcome was.I still find this an extremely vague definition. "The outcome of an event"? "Some other event"? I mean are we talking about fudging a die roll so that the player's cool tactic works well enough that you get to describe something really cool?It SEEMS like your real beef is with DMs who give their NPCs advantages the players don't, just so their pre-determined storylines don't get messed up.And by and large I agree with you on the tediousness of such campaigns. I have encountered very few DMs who do that, but I definitely don't enjoy their campaigns very much. But the problem isn't a lack of honesty or anything like that in the DM -- it's that the DM isn't interested in working WITH me to tell a fun story. They just really want me to act out the part they've already decided on.Which I find dull.Then you shouldn't do it."Qualms" is a pretty loaded word (a feeling of uneasiness about a point especially of conscience or propriety -- Merriam/Webster). You're implying that your style of play is morally superior with a word like that. What you're really saying here is that some DMs have a different style than you do, and you don't like that style -- apparently because you have trouble trusting such DMs, and without that trust you don't have much fun.Which is totally cool. I have no problem with that -- my problem has always been and remains with your continued statements -- just like this one -- that other ways of playing the game are bad. Morally inferior. Stupid.The ONLY thing that matters is that everybody has fun. If everybody has fun, you're doing it right.Oops, as a DM I was not smart enough to realise that my PCs can't handle a threat of this magnitude.Now what? You just hand out a TPK because you messed up on the math? Or do you change things on the fly so that your friends actually have fun?Again, here you are calling people who don't play your way stupid. If you could just describe why you prefer your style and stop insulting people who play a different style, this could be a much more fruitful and pleasant discussion.And what's Smart, anyway? Is it having enough time to prep a session thoroughly? Or is it being able to, off the cuff, spin out a fun and entertaining game session that leaves your players wanting more?You are conflating two ideas -- making up material on the fly, and railroading players into pre-determined storylines. It may be that in your experience the two are commonly associated, but that doesn't make them equal.I don't enjoy being railroaded, either, and as DM I strive mightily to let my PCs guide the story (and believe I am successful in this), but I am more than willing to fudge a die roll, employ "coincidence" or just plain make something up out of whole cloth to make things more fun for everyone. I expect the DMs I play with to do whatever they can to make my gaming experience as fun as it can be. I don't much care how "honest" they are -- except as far as that impacts my fun.Once more, I ask you to refrain from making these sorts of comments -- they only get in the way of what is actually an interesting discussion.</blockquote>

Verification