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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 5698592">It doesn't matter. It is entirely a matter of preference. However I feel it is more fair to the players and creates more consistency if the GM refrains from fudging results.   I think that is a reasonable use of fudging if the PCs are losing because you mismathed their opponents, but in my own games we operate with the understanding that some encounters will be overpowered and the PCs should avoid combat or retreat in these circumstaneces. So in this case they would probably just back off. If the dice just turned against the PCs, I don't think the GM needs to cut the slack. In fact as a player I prefer GMS who don't. It diminishes the significance of our victories if the GM is protecting us from these sorts of things.   I don't believe it is fudging in the strict sense. I do think it is a kind of fudging, but most people take fudging to mean changing die results, HP totals, etc. What you suggest is something I wouldn't do however. If the adventure is too easy, then it is too easy and the PCs breeze through. Some of my adventures take 4 sessions to play some take an hour.   No, ad-libbing is not fudging at all. I prepare hardly any events for my sessions. Everything is based around the characters (NPCs and PCs) or they are based around something like an investigation.     In my opinion, absolutely not. Fudging is about altering results in order to achieve the outcome the GM wants. Even when what he wants is in the interest of the players, I think fudging is bad GMing. First, eventually the players figure it out. It takes a while, but once they know the GM is fiddling with things it can really ruin things (at least in my experience).    No, because a good GM doesn't just make arbitrary choices. He has NPCs behave in logical ways and has events that flow naturally from what is occuring in the setting. A good GM doesn't just decide when the monster dies in battle, he allows the dice and the system to act as a consistent playing field. At least in my view. I am not saying a GM can be 100% objective, but he should at least strive for impartiality and consistency. Fudging flies in the face of that.</blockquote>

Verification