Is it okay for the GM to fudge dice?

Typically, if you're fudging dice and lying to your players - you've fucked up somewhere.

Either you didn't plan your encounters correctly or you're trying to railroad the party.

It isn't about it being "okay" or "not okay", it's a symptom of a larger problem.

Unless you don't play that way - some people are playing more narrative games and to a GM of something like that, the dice are more of a suggestion than a rule.

I think if you're running a more traditional GAME of an RPG you're kind of cheating your players if you do it a lot.

^ THIS.

I roll my dice out in the open. My players get pretty amped about it, because they know damn good and well I'm not gonna coddle them with some "Epic Fantasy" bullshit like they were special snowflakes. The game is pretend, but the risks are real. However, I pad it by being as descriptive as possible, so they can even come up with a way out of a possible "save or die" scenario. But even in cases like that, they can pray for divine intervention and the like.

In any case, they have a lot more added (nail biting) fun that way.

I am the GM. Fudging rolls is my prerogative. If you don't like it, start your own game.

> Typically, if you're fudging dice and lying to your players - you've fucked up somewhere.

True.

>Either you didn't plan your encounters correctly or you're trying to railroad the party.

Also true. If I wanted to ride the DM railroad, I'd be reading a fanfic, by myself, instead of sitting at a table.

>It isn't about it being "okay" or "not okay", it's a symptom of a larger problem.

That GM's are often control freaks and fear purely random improvisation. Either that, or they fear their players.

I'd certainly leave a game run by someone with an uncompromisingly assholish attitude like that, even it meant not playing at all.

If we're talking about D&D or similar games, the GM is within his rights to do both. Decent GMs will find themselves in situations where fudging a dice roll in favor of his players helps keep the game fair and the story engaging. These situations are rare, but they do happen.

The GM may lie to players, but only when they are wearing their "Narration" hat. So NPC's lying is fine. Sometimes a player characters' senses and perceptions are inaccurate. Lying there is OK too. They should never lie when explaining rules or mechanics, however.

Good. Less entitled gamers makes for a better hobby.

i will completely agree with this. I have been GMing for years. My new group had a GM that had a fudging habit. I didnt. the new characters they rolled were way less powerful (i think the old GM used higher stats) and they died first session. After that, they came to enjoy the way i ran things compared to him. I made them work for that small tower on the edge of the city. I made them work to earn enough xp to forge their arms and armor. They ended up loving it.

Ye, bu' don' tell nobody.

Breaks kayfabe mang.

The show must go on but the audience mustn't become aware of the movements of the stage-hands.

seriously.

I understand that there is a serious GM deficit in the community, and that people want to play what they want to play.

But playing in my games is a privilege. I have the right to boot you if you refuse to comply/infringe on my role as GM for any reason.

My group are crybabies, so I have to fudge dice.

No, and stop reposting this same goddamn thread.

Disregarding rolls is like using house rules in Monopoly to get the jackpot - the game will never be allowed to end.

Players shouldn't treat their characters as personal avatars of themselves. Character death happens. It's not like you can't roll a new character and start over.

If you fudge dice you're not paying a roleplaying game anymore as your players ability to make decisions for their characters is impaired. So im vehemently against fudging as I feel it destroys immersion for the players if the DM is deciding the luck of the game. To keep players immersed and facilitate roleplaying you need to create a consistent world and fudging dies destroys that consistency entirely and makes the game arbitrary and pointless.

On the other hand I have fudged rolls and hit points myself to my shame. Usually to save a character who was going to die from some attack or let an attack finish off a monster in a fight that's dragging. It will as a rule always be for the players favour , I love it when players get lucky and kill some big bad guy in a sudden blow . But in general I hate fudging and try to avoid it entirely and usually just do it when I'm feeling bad because I think an encounter I made sucks or the players are bored or somebody is about to die. But doing shit because you feel bad is the worst reason to do anything. So don't fudge.

Yes. The GM does what the GM must to make an interesting scenario. If the dice do not offer interesting results, then begone with them. The dice are only a device for randomization, and not every story requires randomization.

That's not just not fudging dice. You're talking about a lot of changes in general

Since when was DM fudging about stopping entitled players? It's usually about pandering to them, unless you're fudging strictly in your own favour. If so, that's hard That DM territory.

I'm beginning to think you're just an aimless shitposter making up silly things, user.

Yeah, nah. You're just a virt-tier asshole.

That's unfortunate. At least you cough to it. I can support this more than the two dickholes above, since it's your player group that has the problem.

Yes to both.

I usually run my games more narratively, making up things as I go along anyways. Takes away some immersion when they players can see all of the stats and everything I have planned for them, so why should I show them dice?

Yes and yes.
The goal of the game is to have fun. If lying and fudging rolls makes everyone have more fun, you're doing it right.

I've gone the complete opposite way. I roll all the dice and calculate all the results myself, it seems to get my players more involved and thinking of the game rather than the rules. They get so involved they forget I'm actually rolling stuff sometimes.

Remember that fudging isn't just win or lose, it's also adding bonuses/penalties to rolls at the GM's discretion. The reason fudging is considered bad is due to bad GMs.
DO do it for:
-Maintaining/changing the pace of the game where required
-Giving the players a set piece resounding victory after they've gone through hell for it
-Entertaining play
-Creative play
-Good role play
DON'T do it for:
-Killing players by fudging
-Punishing players just because you feel they deserve it
-Entertaining/creative/good role play

With 3.pf I would reward my players with XP for the good things, it just didn't work well. Rewarding their actual roll and seeing the results immediately works much better for my players enjoyment.

It helps I'm running PARANOIA: High Programmers, so my players are too busy arguing with each other and being overloaded with other information to worry about what I'm rolling. My players are well aware that I fudge, and it has done nothing but increase my players enjoyment, since they know being creative and entertaining will get them better chances at success.

tl;dr: Fudging is just another tool a GM should have, and know if/when to use.

Unless you're playing Paronoia in which case you are explicitly allowed and actively encouraged to lie to both the players and the characters about how the game works.

Sure.

But why have rules if you won't follow them?

How about players? Can they lie about rolls as well (purely for dramatic effect of course, never out of more selfish considerations)?

Are you playing a game, or are you pretending to play a game but really it's something else? Is winning a game worth breaking a game? Why even have rules when we could just vote on every issue directly?

In the end, ignoring the rules puts every instance of following them into question. Doing it secretly adds deceit to the mix. If your players enjoy being duped, have at it. But it's a dangerous game to play, when it comes out the whole sense of importance evaporates and everyone just does whatever tickles their wish fulfillment without any investment.

Maybe you should be wondering why you feel the need to subvert the rules at all. Are they not helping you tell a story? Maybe you're just using the wrong mechanics for your game.

And really, it's just lazy. Why lower yourself and the game to the level of fake rolling dice? Instead use the story. Combat threatening to overpower the party? Suddenly: unexpected allies, shifted tactical situation, or something else happens to disrupt the fight.

Be a GM.

Fudging dice rolls is dishonest and will upset many players if they ever find out, invalidating any campaigning they've done thus far , and previously running any satisfaction about future sessions.

archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/48402740/#q48402740

I'd advise against it.

As a GM, I only occasionally fudge the rolls, and only with the intention of making it more fun/interesting for the players.

>Save-or-Die
Either the BBEG is a genius enemy, in which case he'll have contingencies for that sort of thing, or he's a bad ass enough dude to be a threat and will be tough enough to tank anything the party's got for at least a round or two before attrition settles in.

If it's not the BBEG, it doesn't matter. Let the party win.

>Is it okay for the GM to fudge dice?
No, if you a specific outcome just say it happens, don't roll for it.

>Alternatively, is it okay for the GM to lie to the players?
Sure

>Is it okay for the GM to fudge dice?
>Alternatively, is it okay for the GM to lie to the players?

Absolutely, as long as it:

>improves the story
>doesn't make it less fun for the players
>doesn't rob the players of a meaningful consequence of their decisions, positive or negative
>doesn't trivialize the dangers the players face

No, if you're not going to play by the rules you might as well be playing cops & robbers.

If you need to fudge dice to get the play experience you want, then you're playing the wrong game.

A well-designed system needs no fudging. If you find yourself fudging, then either:
1. The system is not well-designed
2. The system is not right for the experience you want to have

If you cannot stop fudging, you should be playing a different game.

Fudge, because d20 a shit.

Don't lie. It will only create confusion.

>Game about creating make believe fantasy
>Acting like the reality of a die roll matters

Fudging is just re-balancing on the fly.

The entire point of playing is to have fun. Whatever is most fun for you and your players is what you should aim for.

If they're cool with a good or terrible roll now and then, or a miscalculation in encounter difficulty making this significantly harder or a huge setback, then good! Roll with it.

Or if a few unlucky rolls are about to result in the what should have been a mediocre encounter becoming an imminent TPK, and no one at the table is going to go home happy, then fudge it if that's what makes it work.

As an addendum, this goes both ways too.

Sometimes the BBEG just can't swing worth shit and fails every save. Turns out he was all talk or the heroes are just much bigger badasses than they realized.

Or maybe his really cool ability recharged a bit quicker so he has another chance to actually be threatening.

Seriously, whatever floats your boat.

>Is it okay for the GM to fudge dice?
Generally no, at least not casually.
Fudging should be saved for moments when the game-rule's rolling systems turns up results that don't make sense or harm the over-all game. What counts as harm to the game obviously depends on the kind of game that's being run and ultimately comes down to a judgement call on GM's part.

However it is preferably to pick a system that suits the group's play style well enough that fudges are not necessary, or at least barely necessary at all. I also find it is better to only roll in situation where you would never fudge anyway, where the roll itself really counts, however many systems are not entirely friendly to this.
And if all else fails and a fudge is to be made the GM should follow Futurama's God rule
>"if you do something right, they won't know you did anything at all"
any sort of change has to be subtle and natural

Fudging is one (very specialised) tool in the GM toolbox. It should only be taken out when it's needed and the good GM will take it out very rarely.
It's there to patch up holes, to hold a whole game together.

>is it okay for the GM to lie to the players?
Players are bound to encounter hallucinations, illusions and trickery, dishonest NPCs and obscured perceptions. That's just part of play. These are all totally justified reasons for the GM to "lie."

Unless you mean the GM saying "This was the plan all along!" when it was never actually part of his plan. But that doesn't have much of an impact on the game itself.
Mid-game changes are thing, but as long as they follow the above God rule I think their mostly fine. Improvisation is part of the job.

I'm not sure what other reason the GM would have for lying.

sage
>not* to hold a whole game together.

I have to agree with this guy. If you're fudging because you don't like something a character did then that's wrong. But if you're fudging to end a fight that shouldn't be a big deal and you notice players losing interest then that's fine.
Handy tip tho, give a reason for it, not just making the numbers change. "Your last hit against the general broke his breastplate, allowing you additional openings to hit him." Then you can lower his ac to quickly end an encounter. suddenly its gameplay, and not the dm making stuff up. The player might feel more accomplished by this feat as well and then they can create their own dramatic twist. "I will run my sword through the break in his armor impaling the general"

Don't fudge for dramatic feats. The players can do these actions on their own which actually makes them dramatic

fuckups are inevitable

dont let the door hit you on the way out

I do something similar but instead I use or improvise game mechanics.
If there is some trade defence for offence option, I might have a mook use it recklessly and narrate him leaving himself open. If that would make sense of course.

It works better in games where the combat mechanics are flexible. Ideally it's a fair trade or possible meneuver that's just poorly implemented by a low level, cocky or ignorant opponent.

This way gives a solid reason for the character's victory and it informs new players players of the possibilities of combat. They might work harder to keep track of possible openings in enemy tactics or try to use the move themselves for a better effect.

It's killing two birds with one stone: avoiding a fudge and teaching newcomers

Spot on mate. Interesting and descriptive combat helps a ton. Instead of the orc swings his axe. The orc swings his axe into the ground with both hands helps the players decide things and ask questions which helps in the gameplay like
>since he just slammed axe is he bent over?
> Yes he is
> Can I knee him in the face then.
> yes although there'll be a penalty for a called shot.

Then i can say that the orc is stunned by the face shot and players can kill him quicker (if its a dragging fight) Also its alot more engaging and dramatic then I swing my sword at the orc.
I also have great players who like to ask questions which helps me out a ton.
Easy ways to change something without fudging