Quote from: gleichmanI never fudge dice. In fact I roll them out in the open, even going so far as to toss what could be a killing die roll across the table to land right in front of the player whose character is likely to be whacked.

Again with gleichman.

Rolling in front of the players creates a tension and a risk that is just awesome to behold.

If the players think the conflict is important enough to draw steel, let 'em pay the steel price should things not go their way.

And I play with some brutal systems.  Burning Wheel, Riddle of Steel and Sorcerer aren't kind to those who lose combats but there's always the option to take the PC away when they fall unconscious.

There are worse things than death and what's more important:

There are more interesting things than death too.

Quote from: gleichmanSo how is tic-tac-toe working for you? :heh:

My main complaint with the system is that whoever wins initiative has a serious tactical advantage... which may not sound too bad, until you realize that initiative is determined in a completely arbitrary manner.

Clearly, the rule system is broken!  Broken, I say!  

Quote from: SigmundIt really depends on the situation of course...poor choices will be punished....but if the players are playing their characters true and have good ideas, but my dice hit a hot streak at a really non-critical juncture, I'll fudge a bit.

I never understand that sentiment, punishing players for something. Most of the times, they're not trying to be "stupid", they're just doing things the DM didn't anticipate. Or they're choosing "poorly" because they lack or missed certain information, or maybe they're just not as good at strategic thinking as the DM thought they were.

And if they're clearly trying to test the boundaries, then it's better to go out of game and tell them clearly that what they're doing isn't fun for you. But grudge play, to me, always is a bad idea.

And that doesn't even touch upon the fact that a player might play a character who, some time of the other, makes poor choices.

Quote from: SigmundHowever, there are certain situations where I want the PCs to succeed no matter what (BTW, it is not alway during combat either). If the players come up with a really great plan or idea that get's sabotaged by my rolling a 20 four times in a row (it happened once), then I will fudge a bit. On the other hand, I want combat, any combat, to be a potentially deadly affair, so I only fudge occasionally. Like I said though, I reserve that right when I GM.

Question: If you want the PCs to succeed no matter what – then why do you roll the dice? Why not say "Guys, this is an awesome plan. It works perfectly."

When I roll the dice, there is always the chance for failure or success, no matter how unlikely. But if a player does something so out of the box that I really have to reward him, I let the action succeed, without rolling. That's not what the dice are for, to me.

Quote from: Technicolor DreamcoatSo game [not equal to] referee.

I think the word sport is also included within the definition of the word game - or at least it says so in the Oxford dictionary.

But yeah, i dig the spirit it which you were saying it. RPGs do feel more like a sport when played and thus the term referee seems appropiate when descibing the gm's role in the rules aspect, but i think when describing the endevour(rpgs) in general, game is the proper term to use.

Regards,
David R.

Technicolor Dreamcoat, sorry the above, is further clarification of my position,brought upon by the distinction you made between the words game and sport. sorry if it reads otherwise.

Quote from: gleichmanShort debate. Can I claim da win!?

Go for it. And also add bonus points for describing the general whole self worth issue. But as a caveat, i think this problem affects both sides of the whole role/roll gamer public.

Regards,
David R.

Quote from: David RGo for it. And also add bonus points for describing the general whole self worth issue. But as a caveat, i think this problem affects both sides of the whole role/roll gamer public.

Regards,
David R.

I certainly agree with you about it affecting both sides. The conflict is so deep and has lasted so long, that it is nearly impossible to step away from completely.

I think the best solution is a simple parting of the ways. And I think we're seeing that online.

As for the whole dice fudging issue. Okay, When i say i used to play in a more fast and loose manner, fudging dice was not exactly what i was talking about. I mean, yeah sure, i may have fudged dice roles or even allowed the players to reroll the dice on occasion but that was not the norm.

What i was talking about when i said fast and loose with the rules, i meant that sometimes i skipped certain rules in the heat of the moment, you know jumped a couple of steps. this varied depending on the system, but generally if we thought it hampered the pace of the game, esp the combat, we just skipped.

Modifying rules and such is a whole other issue. It's been my experience that you have to be really familiar with what the system does before you go about changing the rules contained within. Yeah they are guidelines - or at least that's what i think, but you got to know what they do, the impact on the system/game before tampering with them.

Also changing rules because you are unfamiliar with the system is a big nono, even with my old crew who played hard and fast with the rules. "Don't change it, if you do not know what it is you are changing simply because it would be more convenient" - that was our thinking. That and the fact if you were running the game you had to really understand the rules....which always was my problem, thankfully this problem can be overcome with a little bit of discipline.

Regards,
David R.

Quote from: Technicolor DreamcoatI never understand that sentiment, punishing players for something. Most of the times, they're not trying to be "stupid", they're just doing things the DM didn't anticipate. Or they're choosing "poorly" because they lack or missed certain information, or maybe they're just not as good at strategic thinking as the DM thought they were.

Because poor choices can sometimes have severe consequences. Perhaps I should say instead that if the characters make an error in judgement, then they can possibly suffer dire consequences. I think you are taking the word "punish" differently than I meant it, so hopefully my rephrasing has cleared that up. The group I play with has traditionally preferred to play this way. I've gotten no complaints so far. Also, to this date I have never had a TPK, so I don't see myself as a "killer GM" either. The fact remains that sometimes bad stuff happens, we like our games to have a very definite risk involved for the characters. This is why, although I do occasionally fudge, it's not very often.

QuoteAnd if they're clearly trying to test the boundaries, then it's better to go out of game and tell them clearly that what they're doing isn't fun for you. But grudge play, to me, always is a bad idea.

This is not what I said, or what I meant.

QuoteAnd that doesn't even touch upon the fact that a player might play a character who, some time of the other, makes poor choices.

That is true, sometimes it means the character doesn't last long. Usually, though, it means the other characters have to watch out for that character, and each other. I once played a 1/2 orc fighter (2E) with an int of 4 and str 19. He was like a child and the rest of the party was his family. He fought fiercely on their behalf and in return the took good care of him. It was a blast.

QuoteQuestion: If you want the PCs to succeed no matter what – then why do you roll the dice? Why not say "Guys, this is an awesome plan. It works perfectly."

When I roll the dice, there is always the chance for failure or success, no matter how unlikely. But if a player does something so out of the box that I really have to reward him, I let the action succeed, without rolling. That's not what the dice are for, to me.

Because many times there are varying degrees of success. Just because I want them to succeed doesn't mean I don't want them to have the opportunity to succeed "under their own steam" so to speak. I never understand why as soon as I admit on a message board that I occasionally fudge the dice if I feel it's needed at least one person has to light into me like a pitbull about it. I do it because I've found it to work for me, in my game, and my players have so far not complained about it. If it's not for you then more power to ya.

Quote from: SigmundBecause poor choices can sometimes have severe consequences. Perhaps I should say instead that if the characters make an error in judgement, then they can possibly suffer dire consequences. I think you are taking the word "punish" differently than I meant it, so hopefully my rephrasing has cleared that up.

I probably got caught up on "punish" here. If you were simply talking about consequences in the manner of "You charge the army? Alright, then the army charges back", then I'll withdraw my criticism.

QuoteI never understand why as soon as I admit on a message board that I occasionally fudge the dice if I feel it's needed at least one person has to light into me like a pitbull about it.

If that's how you felt, sorry. I'm not against you fudging; having an action automatically succeed is just another way of fudging, after all. Rest assured that if I pitbull you, I'll use harsher words.

Quote from: Technicolor DreamcoatI probably got caught up on "punish" here. If you were simply talking about consequences in the manner of "You charge the army? Alright, then the army charges back", then I'll withdraw my criticism.

That is indeed what I meant.

QuoteIf that's how you felt, sorry. I'm not against you fudging; having an action automatically succeed is just another way of fudging, after all. Rest assured that if I pitbull you, I'll use harsher words.

Well, I apologise if I'm being overly sensitive, this is an issue I've gotten attacked over before in other venues. Some people just can't seem to allow others to have their own style apparently.

As for pitbulling, I suppose I'll know it when I see it then, which is ok I guess because I know some harsh words too. I can yank a choke-chain when I need to, verbally-speaking.  

I do realize that auto success is a type of fudge, and it's ok for some things I suppose, but it seems to be more satisfying to the players when their plan goes off because the roll made it, instead of just because it was cool. It's an illusion, I know, but if it make 'em happy then I'm all for it.