When does a DM Cheat?

[tennyson]

I find that the game is much more fun when die rolls are not fudged. However, there is that rare time when a certain point needs to be put across and a certain check needs to be made.

 

[John Smallberries]

I'm a referee first, storyteller second. It would be inappropriate for me to cheat, so I don't.

 

[Trevalon Moonleirion]

I usually fudge rolls if i throw something too tough for the PCs to handle and they're not being stupid and/or foolish. Until recently, I had forgotten that CRs were meant to challenge a party of 4....and i was sending my party of 8 against them....so I fudged a lot in my favor just so combats would last more than 2 rounds.

 

[jgbrowning]

A DM cheats when his actions take the fun out of the game. Everything else is solely to facilitate fun.


joe b.

 

[hong]

I think I do the opposite to a lot of people. Most times I roll the dice behind the screen (in a box, really), and now and then I'll fudge some results. If there's a die roll with the potential to kill somebody, though, I roll it out in the open.

There are easier ways to ensure the party survives than fudging rolls.

 

[jdavis]

my personal guidelines to DM's fudging rolls.

Rule 1: Never ever ever let on that a roll has been fudged or a encounter has been changed or that anything abnormal has happened. If you have to fudge a roll to stop a TPK then do it and get on with the game, keep your mouth shut about it and never ever let the players know about it. Two things can happen if you do and they are both bad, the first is that the players start expecting you to "Guardian Angel" their characters when they are in trouble and stop thinking there is a risk of dying in the game or they start to think the DM fudges every roll and is leading the game by the nose. A good DM will keep his mouth shut about what goes on behind the screen. Even if players know that you will fudge a roll from time to time they still don't need to know which rolls they are. A good magician never lets on how he does his magic.

Rule 2: The DM cannot win the game. I hate it when I hear about DM's who think it is them against the characters, the DM is also the judge and the referee they can't play to win against the PCs. If you are the DM and you are playing against the PC's then you will end up cheating which is different than DM fudging in so many ways.

Rule 3: Don't make a habit of it. Changing a roll should only be done if there are dire consequences to the game, or to fix a DM mistake in game design (such as creating too powerful of a encounter for the party and not catching it until combat has started). There is a big difference in fudging a spot roll so the characters get a clue they might of missed and fudging a attack roll in order to stop a campaign ending TPK.

Rule 4: Keep the game fun. Every DM judgement should involve keeping the game entertaining for the players. If the players are not having fun then the DM is not doing a good job.

 

[Buttercup]

By definition, the DM can't "cheat" as you ask in the title of this thread.

However, the DM certainly can fudge dice rolls. Whether or not this is a good thing depends on the situation. I've been known to fudge rolls--for example, if it is essential that at least one person in the party make a save to notice a trap that would result in a TPK, then someone will notice it. (Or I'll tone down the trap on the fly.) I've been known to fudge random encounter rolls too. But I roll combat rolls in the open, so I really can't fudge those. That's how my husband's character ended up dead a few months back.

But as long as the players don't feel abused, and everyone is having fun, I see this as a non-issue.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I killed off my father's ranger today.

The party had been chipping away at the dragon for a few rounds, and were taking their toll on its hit points, although they were taking a beating in the process.

Unfortunately, a few of them ended up in a nice straight line, with the dragon's action coming up soon... only the ranger left to act. He figured the only course he had was to step up and pray he dropped the dragon in one shot... since the only move that would allow him his swing would also put him in that same straight line, and he was down to 9 hit points...

And he rolled a greatsword critical. Enough damage to drop the dragon all the way down... to two hit points.

The dragon breathed, the ranger fried, the two people he was protecting made their saves and took damage, but survived... and the dragon flew away.

It would have been a lovely dramatic moment if that critical had been two points higher. I'm still wondering if it would have been a better session if I'd simply dropped the dragon's total by two...

-Hyp.

 

[S'mon]

The dragon breathed, the ranger fried, the two people he was protecting made their saves and took damage, but survived... and the dragon flew away.

It would have been a lovely dramatic moment if that critical had been two points higher. I'm still wondering if it would have been a better session if I'd simply dropped the dragon's total by two...

I'd suggest that maybe a dragon at 2hp might be too damaged to get airborne, at least from a standing start, ie the survivors might better have been given a chance to kill it, and their comrade's sacrifice wouldn't have been in vain. I'd tend to think that a poor or clumsy flyer would have trouble taking off if badly injured.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'd suggest that maybe a dragon at 2hp might be too damaged to get airborne, at least from a standing start...

It sets a dangerous precedent, though.

Starts to lead to house rules for badly-injured spellcasters having to make Concentration checks to cast because they're in pain... wounded rogues not being able to tumble to safety because their injuries prevent them somersaulting, etc etc...

Where does one draw the line?

-Hyp.