Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6788675" data-attributes="member: 6790260">But &quot;7 Luck,&quot; &quot;8 Luck,&quot; &quot;400 Luck&quot; are all part of the possibility space. You are choosing to let that possibility space apply. You don't get to &quot;choose&quot; 6 Luck or any other &quot;amount&quot; of luck--it just happens. You do, however, have some amount of choice over how sensitive the scenario is to unusual events, the &quot;margin of error&quot; in your words. You chose a degree of sensitivity to &quot;long odds,&quot; and then dialled back when those long odds happened--I don't see any way of not calling that &quot;reining in&quot; unwanted-yet-chosen results.Well, it's not like going with static damage makes the situation completely non-random. Just removes one particular axis thereof. As would the &quot;force monsters, but not PCs, to confirm crits&quot; suggestion.But with that said, more power to you. If this gives you the game you like, do it. How I feel about the way you choose to game doesn't mean much for what you can or should do in the future, unless I'm a player in your games. But I can say, unequivocally, that it would still drive me up the wall to know that whether my character succeeds or fails is, even partially, conditionally, and infrequently, dependent on your whim rather than on the information available to me and the game's resolution system. Because all of that &quot;partially, conditionally, and infrequently&quot; stuff is also dependent on your whim--and means I can never completely trust the results of the actions I take.And that's part of why I think most DMs shouldn't fudge--a very sizable chunk of players (as this very thread has shown) absolutely hate the idea that their successes or failures are dependent, even partially, on &quot;DM whim&quot; (or &quot;DM oversight&quot; or &quot;DM fun-boosting initiatives&quot; or whatever you wish to call it) rather than an &quot;impartial&quot; adjudication of their decisions. And yes, I do think there is a difference between an as-impartial-as-possible adjudication and &quot;DM oversight&quot; or whatever.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 6788675, member: 6790260"] But "7 Luck," "8 Luck," "400 Luck" are [I]all part of the possibility space.[/I] You are [I]choosing[/I] to let that possibility space apply. You don't get to "choose" 6 Luck or any other "amount" of luck--it just happens. You do, however, have some amount of choice over how sensitive the scenario is to unusual events, the "margin of error" in your words. You chose a degree of sensitivity to "long odds," and then dialled back when those long odds happened--I don't see any way of [I]not[/I] calling that "reining in" unwanted-yet-chosen results. Well, it's not like going with static damage makes the situation completely non-random. Just removes one particular axis thereof. As would the "force monsters, but not PCs, to confirm crits" suggestion. But with that said, more power to you. If this gives you the game you like, do it. How [I]I[/I] feel about the way [I]you[/I] choose to game doesn't mean much for what you can or should do in the future, unless I'm a player in your games. But I can say, unequivocally, that it would still drive me up the [I]wall[/I] to know that whether my character succeeds or fails is, even partially, conditionally, and infrequently, dependent on your whim rather than on the information available to me and the game's resolution system. Because all of that "partially, conditionally, and infrequently" stuff is [I]also[/I] dependent on your whim--and means I can never completely trust the results of the actions I take. And that's part of why I think most DMs shouldn't fudge--a very sizable chunk of players (as this very thread has shown) absolutely hate the idea that their successes or failures are dependent, even partially, on "DM whim" (or "DM oversight" or "DM fun-boosting initiatives" or whatever you wish to call it) rather than an "impartial" adjudication of their decisions. And yes, I [I]do[/I] think there is a difference between an as-impartial-as-possible adjudication and "DM oversight" or whatever. [/QUOTE]

Verification