D&D General Thread about fudging dice rolls

[SableWyvern]

Besides if I'm grabbing monsters more or less at random does it matter when I pick them?

Inasmuch as there are different degrees of random, it definitely matters -- isn't that your point?

• Anything that exists in the game system.
• Anything that exists in this world.
• Anything that can plausibly appear in this part of the world.
• Anything that can plausibly appear in this part of the world, arranged with appropriate probabilities
• Etc

If I'm prepping for for a session I always try to have a good idea of what the PCs could encounter, even if it's just a quick list.

Generally, my preference is having a large, curated list, so that there is a chance I'm completely surprised by the direction things take.

 

[Toe Knee Nose]

Another instance of this sort of thing is the 4e D&D Warlock spell Spiteful Glamour, which does 1d8 + Charisma modifier psychic damage, or 1d12 + Charisma modifier psychic damage to a target at maximum hit points.

I think it's very hard to get a coherent story going about these effects, if they're treated as in-fiction. I think the threshold makes more sense if it is thought of purely through a metagame lens.

Toll the Dead in 5e works the same way. It deals d8 damage if you have full HP or d12 damage if you have lost any HP. How, exactly does that map onto the fiction? A dragon with hundreds of HP takes 1 hp of damage and now suffers an enhanced effect? But, my 1st level fighter who hasn't lost any HP doesn't? Huh?

Of course, the answer is, don't think about it too much.

 

[billd91]

IMO, when DM's forget that narration doesn't actually impact play and start insisting on narration that they have zero actual means of judging, the game really suffers because there becomes a widening gap between what's going on in the DM's mind and what the player's are envisioning.

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of "skilled play" voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

 

[saviirkad]

Of course, the answer is, don't think about it too much.

Or, think about it a lot, come up with an explanation. There's room for both answers.

 

[AlViking]

Inasmuch as there are different degrees of random, it definitely matters -- isn't that your point?

• Anything that exists in the game system.
• Anything that exists in this world.
• Anything that can plausibly appear in this part of the world.
• Anything that can plausibly appear in this part of the world, arranged with appropriate probabilities
• Etc

Generally, my preference is having a large, curated list, so that there is a chance I'm completely surprised by the direction things take.

In any given area the number of potential monsters is not that large. I don't have caves where room 1 has lions, room 2 has tigers, room 3 has bears. Much like the real world the various monsters have their preferred regions. For a specific session the geographical area I need to be concerned about is pretty small and I want different parts of my world to feel unique.

I know a lot of people don't care about that kind of thing, I personally prefer the logic and consistency even if my players wouldn't give a fig. There's lots of different ways to do it.

 

[AlViking]

Or, think about it a lot, come up with an explanation. There's room for both answers.

Or just think about it a little bit. Toll of the dead does more damage if there's injury because it's not starting from nothing, it has an opening and can enhance the effect of the previous injury. It's a game, not everything has to have a detailed scientific analysis.

 

[saviirkad]

Or just think about it a little bit. Toll of the dead does more damage if there's injury because it's not starting from nothing, it has an opening and can enhance the effect of the previous injury. It's a game, not everything has to have a detailed scientific analysis.

Exactly, there's a range of possibility within which you can find your preferred space, from elaborate explanations to just the numbers.

For me, Toll the Dead taps into the fateful energies that surround creatures who are suddenly at risk of death, like the doleful sounds of Death approaching.

The difference between a commoner at full health and an adult dragon who got hit by an arrow is that only one of them is currently participating in that struggle. Whether the dragon is at risk or not, that all depends, but pretty good chances someone is about to die.

 

[DEFCON 1]

IMO, when DM's forget that narration doesn't actually impact play and start insisting on narration that they have zero actual means of judging, the game really suffers because there becomes a widening gap between what's going on in the DM's mind and what the player's are envisioning.

The real purpose of narration (as implied in @billd91 's post) is to create situations where the DM feels comfortable not making players roll dice at all because the narration was felt to be good enough to supplant the need for dice to determine success. This is the push/pull of roleplaying games between the two ends of 'improv' and 'board game'.

The 'improv' end is using standard improv rules and one player making an offer of something occurring, and the other player accepting that offer as true and then continuing the scene. Which in D&D would be one player narrating how their character is accomplishing a task, and the DM accepting that narration as true and moving the scene forward without needing to "check" if it is indeed true via a dice roll.

The 'board game' end is one player deciding on an action in the game as per the game rules, rolling dice to see if that action succeeds or fails based upon those rules, and the DM continuing the next turn of the game based upon the success or failure of that die roll.

Where any particular DM's game falls upon that number line between 'improv' and 'board game' will tell us how important narration and/or dice rolling is to the accomplishment of actions within the scene and story.

 

[Toe Knee Nose]

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of "skilled play" voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

Which would be fine in a system that didn't have concrete resolution mechanics. "Skilled Play" was needed back in the day because there were no mechanics for resolving many tasks. So, you came up with a common framework with your group and created your own resolution mechanics that were largely ad hoc one offs.

And there's a reason that the game has moved away from that over the years. And it's because of exactly what I said - while I freely admit to my own ignorance on how to free climb a wall in armor, I'm pretty sure that neither do you (general you, not specifically @bill91). So, the whole thing falls apart because it's the blind leading the blind. I don't know how to describe free climbing a wall. I have no idea. And that's the honest truth. I haven't the foggiest notion about how a skilled climber would climb that surface. But, and this is the key point, neither did the DM. So, how can someone who has no idea about how to do something judge someone's narration which is based on total ignorance?

Or, to put it another way, when everyone at the table lacks a specific skill, how can there be "skilled play"?

 

[soviet]

Skilled play isn't about knowing how to do the things in real life. It's about knowing how to circumvent random resolution systems by identifying solutions that fall outside their boundaries, and persuading the GM to allow you to succeed automatically.