Poll: fudging rolls, yay or nay or depends

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com

Poll: fudging rolls, yay or nay or depends

  • I fudge often

    Votes: 2 3.1%

  • I never fudge

    Votes: 27 42.2%

  • I sometimes fudge rolls

    Votes: 11 17.2%

  • I fudge once in a blue moon

    Votes: 24 37.5%
  • Total voters
    64
Moracai

Moracai

Dual-wielding hockey sticks
Joined
May 5, 2017
Messages
825
Reaction score
2,186
A poll relating to an adjacent thread. I myself don't fudge.... Almost never. But I've kind of reflexively done it very rarely. I run tens of games each year and I remember fudging once or twice in the last five years or so. When I was a youngling I did it more often and I can't remember the exact circumstances in which it has last happened, so don't ask. Votes aren't displayed publicly.
 
I can't answer this poll without a definition of fudging. If fudging includes ignoring random table rolls for setting up scenarios and/or the setting, then I fudge on the more often side, if it excludes that, but still includes procedural rolls like random encounter checks, then I fudge less, but still some. Without those, I fall into the once in a blue moon because I will change an outcome if a mistake was made (and the table agreed) or maybe maybe maybe if a player would throw a hissy fit if their PC had misfortune.
 
ffilz said:
I can't answer this poll without a definition of fudging. If fudging includes ignoring random table rolls for setting up scenarios and/or the setting, then I fudge on the more often side, if it excludes that, but still includes procedural rolls like random encounter checks, then I fudge less, but still some. Without those, I fall into the once in a blue moon because I will change an outcome if a mistake was made (and the table agreed) or maybe maybe maybe if a player would throw a hissy fit if their PC had misfortune.
Click to expand...
I can only answer in the manner I answer these types of questions in my work: You yourself must define what fudging means to you.
 
Moracai said:
I can only answer in the manner I answer these types of questions in my work: You yourself must define what fudging means to you.
Click to expand...
I guess that still doesn't help, because ignoring the result of a dungeon population roll is still fudging of a kind to me, but it's an acceptable kind of fudging. So to me the poll has less meaning.
 
26e.png
 
Absolutely not. Not ever.

I'm not going to take some ridiculous moralistic stand on it-- for me, it's a simple matter that as long as I never fudge the dice, I'm only responsible for my decision to call for a roll or to not call for a roll. That is the only demand upon my limited fiat authority as an umpire. As soon as I decide that I can overrule the dice when I don't like them... I'm not just responsible for calling for the roll, I'm now responsible for the results of every die roll I call for, because I also decided whether or not to keep them.

I am very good at what I do, and I am very proud of being very good at it, but I'm just not good enough to take that much responsibility for every possible outcome of the game.
 
spittingimage said:
I fudge rolls for under tens. Older than that and you're the dice' plaything.
Click to expand...
I actually hated that as a child. I once threw a full on rage fit at a local youth club because I caught the youth leader letting me win in a boardgame. Funnily enough, nobody did that again. I think this may be a "boardgaming family" thing where "you do not cheat" was drummed into us from an early age.
 
A Fiery Flying Roll said:
I actually hated that as a child. I once threw a full on rage fit at a local youth club because I caught the youth leader letting me win in a boardgame. Funnily enough, nobody did that again. I think this may be a "boardgaming family" thing where "you do not cheat" was drummed into us from an early age.
Click to expand...
My early experience with yahtzee and backgammon might have been influential upon my current stance as well, come to think of it...:grin:
 
Dammit Victor said:
Absolutely not. Not ever.

I'm not going to take some ridiculous moralistic stand on it-- for me, it's a simple matter that as long as I never fudge the dice, I'm only responsible for my decision to call for a roll or to not call for a roll. That is the only demand upon my limited fiat authority as an umpire. As soon as I decide that I can overrule the dice when I don't like them... I'm not just responsible for calling for the roll, I'm now responsible for the results of every die roll I call for, because I also decided whether or not to keep them.

I am very good at what I do, and I am very proud of being very good at it, but I'm just not good enough to take that much responsibility for every possible outcome of the game.
Click to expand...
I forgot about the bolded point, but that's absolutely true.
 
I don’t agree with the options. They implicate the intent of fudging, which from what I’ve read by most “fudgers“ is not really the case.

I think better options would be:

A) I am open and willing to fudge in certain situations.
B) I never fudge, under any circumstances.

I don’t think I’ve seen anyone advocating fudging with wild abandon. (Maybe I missed a post - I stopped reading the other thread a day or so ago.)
 
Nakana said:
I don’t agree with the options. They implicate the intent of fudging, which from what I’ve read by most “fudgers“ is not really the case.

I think better options would be:

A) I am open and willing to fudge in certain situations.
B) I never fudge, under any circumstances.

I don’t think I’ve seen anyone advocating fudging with wild abandon. (Maybe I missed a post - I stopped reading the other thread a day or so ago.)
Click to expand...
A) 1. my players know I might fudge.
A) 2. I treat my players like mushrooms
 
sharps54 said:
A) 1. my players know I might fudge.
A) 2. I treat my players like mushrooms
Click to expand...
Yes, thank you for the indictments of immorality. It’s good to know that I and my players are all having fun wrong. We shall all strive to change our heathen ways so that we may be double plus good according to your opinions.
 
Nakana said:
Yes, thank you for the indictments of immorality. It’s good to know that I and my players are all having fun wrong. We shall all strive to change our heathen ways so that we may be double plus good according to your opinions.
Click to expand...
I appreciate that :hehe:
 
Can you provide a reason not to let your players know that you might fudge a roll at some point during the game, say in session zero or when organizing a game?
 
sharps54 said:
Can you provide a reason not to let your players know that you might fudge a roll at some point during the game, say in session zero or when organizing a game?
Click to expand...
If I was going to play that stupid game with you I would have done so in the other thread. I won’t be a part of turning this thread into a spiral of self-righteous fundamentalism.
 
I have fudged rolls on rare occasion, but recognise that it’s due to some failure on my part as GM or a truly unforeseen situation. Ultimately dice rolls should be respected but they don’t override the will of everyone at the table.
 
I’ve made dummy rolls on occasion just to fuck with people when there is nothing actually happening but I want to instill some paranoia or just play up on somebody’s existing paranoia. But actual dice rolls? Not since I was a dumb preteen.

If a situation ever comes up, where I wouldn’t want to accept a result, then there’s just no roll and I go with fiat.
 
A Fiery Flying Roll said:
I actually hated that as a child. I once threw a full on rage fit at a local youth club because I caught the youth leader letting me win in a boardgame. Funnily enough, nobody did that again. I think this may be a "boardgaming family" thing where "you do not cheat" was drummed into us from an early age.
Click to expand...
The only children I've run for are my nephews, and I've carefully calibrated my game to their feelings about losing. (They're not in favour.)
 
I don't think GMs can fudge, but assuming that they can, I reserve the right to fudge whether or not I have ever done so and it's no one else's business. I support the right of other GMs to do what is called fudging here to their hearts desire and it's none of my business as a player. I support the right of players to ask and choose to play or not based on any potential answer or non-answer a GM may give to any question they have.
 
I’m like Dammit Victor Dammit Victor above in that I don’t fudge, but it’s because after decades of running all kinds of RPGs, I know when to call and when not to call for a roll.

Also, I play with a group who prefers to see the dice rolls and they feel a thrill when the shit hits the fan and they have to find some way to extricate themselves from a really bad situation without relying on the dice being friendly.

They’ve surprised me more than once in those situations, which has led to some great gaming that wouldn’t have happened if I had fudged the rolls.

But that’s my group and our preferences. Your mileage may vary.
 
AsenRG said:
Same:thumbsup:!


I have only played very rarely with under 10s, but then even I can see that::honkhonk:!
Click to expand...
I warned my (8ish year old) niece about the dangers of sending her 1st level mage into melee with the giant rats, but she wanted to mix it up along with her brothers.

She was promptly swarmed and eaten. No fudging at my table.

Later that day, she was reminiscing fondly about how it all went down.
 
Sable Wyvern said:
I warned my (8ish year old) niece about the dangers of sending her 1st level mage into melee with the giant rats, but she wanted to mix it up along with her brothers.

She was promptly swarmed and eaten. No fudging at my table.

Later that day, she was reminiscing fondly about how it all went down.
Click to expand...
Kids are often tougher than we think
 
I will say, I have absolutely no compunction about bending (or ignoring) the rules as the umpire-- but I look my players in the eyes when I do it, and I give them the chance to object. Doing it openly paradoxically preserves both the players' faith in the rules, and their faith in me as an impartial arbiter; it partially distributes the burden on my fiat authority to the players by asking them to take some responsibility for it.

It's not about integrity, it's about reliability. Players have to be able to trust how their actions will be adjudicated to make meaningful choices about them.
 
I chose "once in a blue moon." I roll dice in the open, so whatever is rolled is rolled, but there are times that I'll "pre-fudge" a roll. For example, a couple of years back this happened when I was running The Hyqueous Vaults (AD&D1e module) for a group of mostly-newbies in our library game. The large group blundered into a situation where a pyrohydra's breath attack, dealing a flat 40 damage, would have outright killed everyone in the party. In a moment of weakness/mercy, I fudged the damage to be a 5d8 roll instead. (Half the party still died...)
 
When preparing a session for play I don't hold myself to any random rolls. I set up the scenario as I would like and present it to the players. Once play starts, if I roll the dice for anything affecting play then the roll stands. Combat rolls are made in the open, no reason to hide them. Sometimes players may gain knowledge from observing these rolls and that is intentional. " Holy crap that guy hit you with a 7! I told you we shouldn't have messed with him." The excitement the players experience as they watch the dice fall I wouldn't trade for anything. There was one adventure I ran a few years ago. One of my players nephews played with us in a B/X game. I was running B5 Horror on the Hill. The party was exploring the hill and stumbled onto the giant ant hill. The party was first level and giant ants are super deadly. One of the fighters got dropped on the first hit, and the nephew kid's elf charged in to distract the ant while the cleric dragged the fallen fighter out of the battle. The elf was on fire with the dice scoring hit after hit. The elf was hit once taking him down to 1 hit point. He fought on for three rounds with a single hit point as the ant kept missing him. He unbelievably killed the ant and survived. Every player knew that the outcome of that battle was genuine due to the open rolls. That kind of magic loses something if fudging is required to make it happen.
 
I do wonder what the percentages are fudging wise for GMs that run scripted scenarios versus those that run pure open world games where there is no specific ongoing plot or storyline outside what the party does.

Yes, in an open world game the NPCs have plans and goals but those will happen as planned unless the PCs intervene. In that sort of game the GM shouldn’t design a NPC goal that the PCs have to stop, otherwise they are just doing an elaborate railroad.
 
sharps54 said:
I also wonder how much the idea that the GM is there to entertain the players, which I strongly disagree with, plays into fudging
Click to expand...
An enormous amount, IME.

And rather than scripted, perhaps "limited scope" might be a better descriptor.

In any case, yes, I think both of those are major factors.
 
That makes me wonder what the Venn Diagram looks like between GMs that are ok fudging with those that feel it is their job to craft a story and entertain their players.
 
sharps54 said:
That makes me wonder what the Venn Diagram looks like between GMs that are ok fudging with those that feel it is their job to craft a story and entertain their players.
Click to expand...
Probably fairly high.

I wonder where the character-players fit into this?

More directly, I seriously doubt this phenomenon is one-sided, but more the result of a feedback cycle.
 
Last edited:
DeadBob said:
Probably fairly high.

I wonder where the character-platers fit into this?

More directly, I seriously doubt this phenomenon is one-sided, but more the result of a feedback cycle.
Click to expand...
Well sure, it is a joint feeling on the group’s part in the roles of the participants. If everyone feels the GM is there to entertain them for the evening that adds enormous pressure on said GM.
 
sharps54 said:
Well sure, it is a joint feeling on the group’s part in the roles of the participants. If everyone feels the GM is there to entertain them for the evening that adds enormous pressure on said GM.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

I also think this part of RPG culture must have developed fairly early on as well.
 
DeadBob said:
Exactly.

I also think this part of RPG culture must have developed fairly early on as well.
Click to expand...
I think it has changed over the years, I have seen numerous discussions that it isn’t the GM’s job to entertain so hopefully that culture of play is changing or at least people are learning it isn’t the only way to play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top