Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6807793" data-attributes="member: 22779">Reading through the last few pages, I got to wondering why the example of taking death off the table doesn't particularly bother me.&nbsp; After all, [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] is right - the DM is changing the outcome of the scenario outside of the established rules.&nbsp; Then it hit me.&nbsp; This example doesn't qualify as fudging.Throughout this thread, fudging has come down to not one, but two criteria:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Changing results.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Keeping it a secret</li>
</ul>And the example under discussion, while it does meet the first requirement, doesn't meet the second.&nbsp; If the DM simply fudged combat results so that the PC's didn't die, he would not tell the PC's (keeping fudging a secret has been strongly established).&nbsp; But, in this case, the DM does tell the PC's.&nbsp; Granted he does so after the fact, in that the PC's wake up stripped of gear and not dead.&nbsp; But, there is no secrecy here.&nbsp; It's in the open.&nbsp; Fudging, according to everyone in this thread, must be kept secret.&nbsp; Even the advice in the DMG says to keep it from the players.&nbsp; But, again, this isn't kept from the players.&nbsp; If they die, they will not be actually killed, but will wake up instead.&nbsp; At that point, the players are told what happened.&nbsp; In order for this to actually be fudging, the DM would instead manipulate the dice, leaving the PC's perhaps unconscious, but, not dead.&nbsp; And the players should never know that the DM did this.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6807793, member: 22779"] Reading through the last few pages, I got to wondering why the example of taking death off the table doesn't particularly bother me. After all, [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] is right - the DM is changing the outcome of the scenario outside of the established rules. Then it hit me. This example doesn't qualify as fudging. Throughout this thread, fudging has come down to not one, but two criteria: [list]Changing results.[*]Keeping it a secret[/list] And the example under discussion, while it does meet the first requirement, doesn't meet the second. If the DM simply fudged combat results so that the PC's didn't die, he would not tell the PC's (keeping fudging a secret has been strongly established). But, in this case, the DM does tell the PC's. Granted he does so after the fact, in that the PC's wake up stripped of gear and not dead. But, there is no secrecy here. It's in the open. Fudging, according to everyone in this thread, must be kept secret. Even the advice in the DMG says to keep it from the players. But, again, this isn't kept from the players. If they die, they will not be actually killed, but will wake up instead. At that point, the players are told what happened. In order for this to actually be fudging, the DM would instead manipulate the dice, leaving the PC's perhaps unconscious, but, not dead. And the players should never know that the DM did this. [/QUOTE]

Verification