Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

To my fellow DMs - Do you Cheat/Fudge?

Azure-Yuki

Azure-Yuki

Star
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
I enjoy watching YouTube vids on DnD/RPGs and this came up as a topic I found interesting.

Do you other DMs fudge your dice rolls? Do you change things on the fly in the middle of a game? If so, what will you change and why?

Personally, I'm not a fan of doing these sorts of thing. I think it takes away from the players and their ability to make decisions and carve their own path.
 
Typically the only time I Fudge a roll is when the party takes an extreme amount of damage that would probably result in a TPK. I just bump the damage down to a more reasonable number, no-one likes going from 120 to 12 on Turn 1.
 
I haven't fudged a dice roll in a long time, but changing things on the fly is something I don't mind doing at all. Sometimes the players end up having a cooler idea than what I thought was cool for the adventure and I'll just improv it into the new direction.
 
Basically, I go with whatever is fun for my party. Sometime's I decide to say fuck it and roll out in the open for a session. My Player's really don't care and it's a matter of reading your table.

This is an issue that is easily reigned in if you decide to play a Success based or Percentile based system, if it's something that really hangs you up.
 
Yes, and almost exclusively to the benefit of the players. Assuming this is a power fantasy game like DnD most people are looking for a good story and fun characters. If it's a hardcore game that's a different story but with 90% of the groups I've played with over the years they don't get enjoyment out of a combat taking ten rounds because I wanted it to be a hard bows and they've been rolling low.

Your mileage may vary but in general I'll change anything on the fly that seems to be taking away some enjoyment from my players. In my experience the vast majority of players only want the illusion of danger and difficulty, and I can't blame them considering the way DnD combat is set up. I consider myself beholden to my players and mostly they just want to play with their characters and enjoy themselves, I'll tweak anything that interferes with that unless explicitly discussed and agreed upon with the entire group before the game begins.
 
Honestly I was gonna make a post on here but JuniorWizard kinda beat me to my points.

Agreed with all of the above. Tailor to your players, best a DM can do.
 
Generally put when I run, I do not. But it depends on the situation. I give players plenty of warning when they're about to do something stupid, and they have multiple times to not do something stupid. If a group of level 4's want to fight a CR 10 demon that they know out classes them, I assume it's really how they want their character to go.

But in general, I don't gun for the players either. If a player dies, it's at least partially on their fault. They did something silly, and it bit them in the behind. But to be honest a good chunk of the time when I run, players are usually stronger than the average encounter so even if they're rolling poorly it's not going to end *too* badly for them unless they are rolling nothing halfway decent whatsoever. It's only during high stakes encounters that I expect them to bring their A-game.
 
No. But then, I run a Warhammer fantasy game right now. Players have Fate points and can burn fate to stay alive: that's their lifeline. I do not need to save them. In Legend of the Five Rings, too, I am lenient enough to give players the option to choose a flaw that is related to their body instead of dying.

And in MAID... well, in MAID I don't need to fudge rolls, since maids can't die.
 
I've been running a campaign for about two years now. It's the third I've ever run, and it comes from a big 1-20 module that has... issues. The number one problem I've run into is the players being overpowered - the module was written only with Core 3.5 involved, and without any thoughts towards optimization. I've given my players a wider variety of source books to pull from, and as many 3.5 players know, 3.5 has... bad power-creep problems. I also have one player who aggressively min-maxes, but I'm still working out what to do there.

Anyway, all of the CRs are entirely fucked. My first step of fudging was doubling all enemy HP. Battles were otherwise ending in the first round, which was fun for no-one. I've also been increasing most enemy bonuses and abilities by a few CR's worth. This isn't "fudging" in the traditional sense - it's deterministic, rather than changing dice rolls for dramatic effect. But it's also a form of DM "foul play", albeit one chosen to make the campaign fun and interesting. The players appear to be having a lot of fun, so I'm not too worried.

I have fudged a few dice rolls here and there, always to avoid a TPK. But it's very rare. I'm generally OK with letting my players do pants-on-head stupid things, often to hilarious effect.

The real problem I'm having is a player who is fudging his rolls, and isn't as sneaky about it as he thinks he is. But that's for another thread.
 
Depends on the players, you can typically get a decent read of the kind of vibe they want depending on how they act as well as what they like about the system you're running. That being said it's mostly for fun and for a lot of the people I play with, player death isn't always part of it unless they go out in a really badass way.
 
I'm surprised by the number of people saying they'd never fudge dice rolls, I do it quite a lot by comparison! imo giving the players a good time and collaborating on creating the story is far more important than following the rules 100%, otherwise I'd just read the rulebook and not get together with other people.
 
Inkybus said:
From this I infer that you think that cheating leads to a more fun experience than rolling in the open. Did I understand that correctly?
Click to expand...

I'm saying when the two come into conflict, I'd prefer that the players have fun over following a strict, orthodox interpretation of the rules. Fudging dice rolls for the sake of plot/fun is different to cheating.
 
Trish the Nugg Queen said:
I'm saying when the two come into conflict, I'd prefer that the players have fun over following a strict, orthodox interpretation of the rules. Fudging dice rolls for the sake of plot/fun is different to cheating.
Click to expand...
Similarly to you implying that sticking to one's guns is less fun than cheating, I am referring to it how I see it. Because it is not an objective truth: in reality, some people prefer to lose and/or win fair and square. Just like you erroneously, I might add think that cheating will result in the players having fun at all times, I am of the firm belief that certain groups of people enjoy the safety of fudging dice, whilst others have more fun in being presented with a tough situation where they have to play in a manner that is tactically sound in order to get that W.
 
It isn't about "following the rules", I make new rule arbitrations all the time. It's about sticking to the emergent drama the dice creates over the curated drama of constantly fudging rolls. I feel if fudging is a regular occurance, then it might be time to find a more narrative system.
 
I do sometimes but only if it makes the game more fun for the players. For me it is more about creating the illusion of a challenge than a real one. I like to keep it balanced between dead serious and god simulator as the two fit perfectly, strenghtening each other.
 
Azure-Yuki said:
Do you other DMs fudge your dice rolls?
Click to expand...

Occasionally.

Azure-Yuki said:
Do you change things on the fly in the middle of a game?
Click to expand...

Absolutely!

Azure-Yuki said:
If so, what will you change and why?
Click to expand...

Table top RPGs are ultimately a game, and the entire point of a game is to have fun. If DM's put their thumb on the scale too heavily, in either the favor of the player or against them, then player actions have no real consequence and they are not really playing a game as much as just waiting to be told what happens in a story that is only loosely their own. But no one enjoys 'losing' because of a terrible streak of luck.

The main advantage that table top RPGs have over video games is the creative element, the human running the game that is able to adapt what happens in the world to the player's actions in ways that a scripted encounter could never predict. Running an RPG Module strictly as it is printed is most likely going to be less fun for both the DM and the Players than if they had simply run the same adventure (with less time and energy put into it) in a video game. It is the adaptation and creative elements that make it all worth while!
 
I used to be into Grail Quest and Fighting Fantasy books and would cheat relentlessly! Dice rolls? Why bother when I knew I would prevail!
 
I think this needs to be discussed. I fudged when I played the "your adventure" thing and yeah I'm fine with making it more enjoyable
 
Sometimes, yeah - but generally to let the story flow better.

I don't often fudge to save players from their own stupidity, though. If they die because of their choices, that's on them.
 
I think the age-old fudge/no-fudge debate really hinges on what kind of game is on the table, and really what kind of players you have.

If I'm going for an old school vibe, I would absolutely, totally, not fudge and let the dice fall where they may, roll everything open even. Character death or mishap is part of the fun in that kind of setup.

If it was a campaign game, or highly narrative/plot based, I don't see how a GM would not be tempted to at least fudge on pivotal points because the desired outcome just leads to better drama or furthers the plot. Also, I have seriously lost a friend or two over character deaths I caused by not fudging dice. I've learnt to not check in with people more and be more sensitive about that since.

I think most importantly, you and your players need to be on the same page. Then fudging or no fudging isn't really even an issue.
 
I do, and in a narrative game every DM should.

If you play some kind of battle royal tournament concept sure - if it's more of a sport fudging & cheating would be a bad idea, but most games simply aren't designed with that kind of balance in mind anyway.

In your normal game the GM isn't the 'world', although the players should see him as such; in reality, he's the director. Realism isn't the goal, it's a tool for believability & drama. Realism is important of course, and the suspension of disbelieving only works if the players think you are fair, but lying is totally alright here if it, for example, prevents a cheap and narratively unfulfilling PC death or would mean the big cinematic villain get sone shotted.

Usually a good story, good scenes, 'coolness' is more important than impartiality
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom