Community

Feb 2, 2013 -- 7:31PM, YagamiFire wrote:

If, as DM, you do not mind occasionally invalidating player choices to fit your pre-conceived notion of what is better (usually because it is necessary for your 'plot' or 'story' or whathaveyou) would you have an issue posting here in admittance of that?

 This includes fudging dice or die results to make things "better" (of course in your own opinion) 

I agree with Jonathan_Sicari's notion of reskinning an encounter to apply to whatever choice the players made.  I don't see it as a "Magician's Switch" as much as  DM working with the player's choices and making an encouter that fits with that plotline.  It's easier for the DM to reskin the encounter, however it's probably better for the DM to have a new/different/better encounter available for whatever the players decide.  For the many DM's that don't have the time to prepare separate encounters for the major choices the players could take, reskinning seems appropriate to me.  We're not Batman-DM, we don't have 5 plans for the player's actions and 5 plans for each other choci ethe palyers could make.

And yes, I have fudged Die rolls to make things "better."  sometimes it's been to avoid a second crit on a PC that would knock that character out or kill them outright.  Sometimes it's been to make a near miss into a hit, for both players and enemies.  If a player misses by 1, I may turn that into a hit  because it helps speed combat along just a little bit.  Every once in a while. I'll make an enemy's miss into a hit.  I often roll in the open, and I've told my players who have had near misses, or drop enemy to <5hp "Eff it, rule of cool, you hit/kill it." And then I ask "How do you kill that enemy?"

I see the problems inherent in fudging rolls, but I don't care.  I believe that the mark of a great DM is creating engaging sessions.  We can argue about it and get mad about it, but what matters in the end run is whether the particular DM's players are having a good time in the campaign.

I'm very curious about how Iserith and Centauri run their games, and based on what I've heard of Lunar Savage's games, I don't think I'd have fun as a palyer there, but his players have a lot of fun.  I won't argue against that playstyle, but it's not for me.  I'm nost sure if Iserith and Centauri's playstyle works for me either, but I don't know since I've never played in it, and I learn best by doing rather than talking about it.  I don't know about YagamiFire's playstyle, I think it could be engaging and fun, but I don't know until I play in the game or see more about how it's done.

Feb 2, 2013 -- 7:31PM, YagamiFire wrote:

If, as DM, you do not mind occasionally invalidating player choices to fit your pre-conceived notion of what is better (usually because it is necessary for your 'plot' or 'story' or whathaveyou) would you have an issue posting here in admittance of that?

I know that I used too when I was a younger less experienced DM. I find invalidating players choices would be even more work for me than allowing my players to take the game in new and intrestering directions.

Feb 2, 2013 -- 7:31PM, YagamiFire wrote:

This includes presenting options that do not actually matter.

I've been in games like that and didn't appreciate it, so I do my best not to do it to them.  But I'm not going to lie and say that I've never done it.

Feb 2, 2013 -- 7:31PM, YagamiFire wrote:

If so, and you are willing to admit to it openly on the thread, would you also be willing to direct your players to this thread?

I feel that if you can't talk your players about stuff like this, that's half the problem.  As useful as these boards can be I at times sense a hint of Gamer Mentality not only from myself but from other posters.

I'd direct my players here.  They read different ideas and perhaps a a few new ones of their own.  My players need to know how I run so they can comment on what I do as a DM and help me become a better DM for them.