main source of when to fudge... rule 0.
personally... (excluding PC stupidity) i would wave it, yea.
in the case of the second, the answer is a maybe...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I try to never fudge against the PCs. If i arbitrarily raise a bad guys health because the player crit, it essentially negates the critical hit, in my head that is taking the moment away from the player. Let him have the moment, sometimes things dont go according to plan. Fudging so the bad guy gets to 'do something cool' is to my mind getting overly attached to my npcs/monsters. And that leads to all sorts of dm vs player conflicts that I dont want to touch.
As for fudging to avoid a tpk? Probably, just because I dont want like the hard stop that sort of thing puts on the story or even the campaign. Though I do roll behind a screen, so I probably would just have the bad guy miss on the next round, instead of reducing his health arbitrarily.
heh, I have a couple dm's we insist on hiding rolls, just for that reason XD
It depends on the group. Some people would be upset(really upset) at a TPK, but some take it a lot better. I would also take the skill level of the group into consideration.
With that aside I normally let everyone know how I will run the game before it starts.
hit points really doesnt make much sense...
I don't fudge health up because a player crits, but in general if the PCs clear most combats too quickly I'll tend to give monsters max HP.
I almost never roll in front of my players, though usually this is in case I need to fudge my rolls downwards if PCs have been dying too often recently.
I wouldn't fudge in either case.
I especially wouldn't fudge the second case--that totally kills the awesomeness the PCs pulled off.
Also, as a long time GM, I can tell you that it's never necessary for an NPC to get to pull off their cool stuff to be scary. In fact, if the party kills the enemy really fast and they don't get to do anything, it is vastly more likely they will feel great relief that they didn't have to face the enemy's full extent. They often feel like the enemies they kill quickly were the most dangerous, because they didn't get a chance to see otherwise.
I often will have the BBEG "fail their moral check" at times like this, and take non-combat actions (heal potion, retreat, etc)...which then puts the decision on the PC - pursue (and risk missing) or disengage (and live to fight another day). If they decide to pursue, with a few HP, and miss their shot (say rolling a "1"), then they decided and the next turn the BBEG attacks....
In my case it would depend entirely on the situation.
If I'm gaming with a casual group of gamers who are mostly into the story and the camaraderie of the session, then I might fudge the encounter (although I'd probably have fudged something else long before reaching this critical point if I were going to fudge), especially if the group included some newbies that I wanted to get a good gaming memory behind them.
If I'm gaming with a hardcore group of simulationists who want to believe deep in their bones that they earned every single gold piece their character sheet has written on it, and who would be offended to learn that they were "given" anything, then I'd play it out as the dice rolled.
If the situation was somewhere in-between, as most situations are, I'd probably tailor the result more or less to what I thought would give the players the longest term sense of fun from the encounter. And I might well conclude that would be that I don't fudge, even in the face of a near-certain TPK.
TPKs aren't all bad. I think every player should deal with at least one sometime in their career.
I often will have the BBEG "fail their moral check" at times like this, and take non-combat actions (heal potion, retreat, etc)...which then puts the decision on the PC - pursue (and risk missing) or disengage (and live to fight another day). If they decide to pursue, with a few HP, and miss their shot (say rolling a "1"), then they decided and the next turn the BBEG attacks....
I think this is important to remember. Unless the NPC has a spell like deathwatch up, he does not know that the PC will die to one more full attack without metagaming. He might suspect, but he will not know. He is in the exact same position the players are in, does he take one more full attack to try and win? Will he do it knowing that if he fails he will die?
The lack of knowledge about HP totals cuts both ways in a time like this, and an NPC who escapes at 10 HP is an NPC that will show up again at full health.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
GMs: Do y'all thing its OK to cheat the health total of monsters/NPCs in a campaign where all dice are rolled in front of the players at the GM is supposed to avoid fudging?
Here is the scenario so we can deal with specifics instead of abstracts:
The PCs are in a climactic battle with the BBEG. He has 100 health. All dice and damage are rolled in front of the players. BBEG has disabled or killed all of the PCs except one lone fighter. One more hit by the BBEG could easily finish off the fighter and TPK the entire party. The fighter swings his weapon, and lands a solid blow, bringing the damage total on the BBEG to 90 (PCs have no idea what his life total is). If BBEG takes his turn and rolls decently, your party will TPK. Would you then "fudge" the health and say that the fighter's swing defeats the BBEG and hand wave away that last 10 health?
Same scenario except the PCs do massive damage in first 2 rounds to BBEG and deal 100 damage to him immediately before he's really had the chance to do anything cool or challenge the PCs. Do you fudge his health up to 130?
I try not to do it often, but in the scenario you just described I totally would. I also usually fudge the health of a monster or BBEG UP a bit if the party seems to have defeated it too quickly (IE, if I meant the combat to last 5 rounds and it seems like they're gonna kill him in one, i'll add ~15-20% more health on the fly to keep him alive for a round or two).
I do not cheat/fudge the HP 99.99% of the time (I would not say 100% because I'm sure I have at some point) but it's not anywhere near the norm.
However, I will adjust the HP of the creatures ahead of time. I do this quite often. I don't usually do the 4 fights per day, I usually do one fight per week, or something, with the occasional double/triple fight in a short period to keep people honest.
To keep things interesting, I usually boost the HP by about 50% on the bad guys. Really big singleton bad guys I'll up to double it (like a dragon or a giant) due to action economy and AC penalties from size.
I also usually tend to run 5 players, not 4, so the extra HP helps keep the CR on target.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a PC:
I'd rather die and TPK than live because the DM decided to let us live and have the NPC die.
As a PC: I'd rather one-round shot the BBEG before he did anything "cool" than have him live through DM fiat for two, three, or four rounds when he should already be dead.
We're playing dice, folks. Its the point of the game. We live by 'em and we die by 'em. If you aren't going to go by the dice- good or bad- then just put the dice away and have Storyteller Hour or something. I am personally not interested in a game where I say what i want my PC to do, roll some die, and then have the DM decide what happens. Why roll the die? just ask the DM. "I attack the orc. Did I hit it? Ok. i attack it again. Did I hit it? ok. Is it dead yet? No? I attack it again. Ok, that was all of my attacks.".
The game would go so much faster without dice. If you are going to ignore them, then just ignore them.
I TOTALLY get that it sucks to have a TPK. Its alot of work for the players, and its alot of work for the DM.
I also get that its irritating to have the BBEG get one-rounded by the PC's. (note to DM- no more throwing 1 bad guy at the players, eh? 4 full round actions > 1 full round action).
But what would suck worse is for the DM to just arbitrarily decide what works and what doesn't and when things are hurt or die just because of some idea of cinema or something. "But it wasn't a dramatic death!".
Yeah, well.. thats part of adventuring. Some deaths are only memorable because they aren't particularly memorable.
Live by the dice. Die by the dice. Put fudge in the oven to enjoy after the game. (or during it, if folks can keep chocolatey hands off minis and books!)
-S
hmm... i'd say the second is the simplist, broadest definition. all the others kinda fall under that.
There is something to be said about being honest with deadly encounters. At least to the point to where your players believe they can die. After all if there is no threat of them loosing... whats the point? Your basically letting them play on easy mode with cheat enabled.
Nothing wrong with the occasional fudge when things go drastically wrong for the party... but making a habit of it can cause your party to fear nothing. If they fear nothing, then it takes the edge of the game away and will cause boredom for many groups.
BBEG rock max HP as a rule of thumb anyway, in my games, i find that works out pretty good as far as giving the fight some breathing room.
Other than that it's not really about cheating hp, it's about allowing players to realize they are in over their heads and having a fair chance at retreating when things go horribly wrong. If things go horribly wrong for me then grats to the players for kicking butt.
It depends on the encounter "level" if you will -
If it's a campaign ending BBEG - No (my PCs will die) and Yes (Though I design my BBEG fight with support, so the party will not be facing just one person the entire fight, so it's unlikely I'll need to do this anyway).
If it's a major sub-plot BBEG - Yes (Although this is critically important, a TPK is a real downer) and Yes (if it's as bad as you say - if the fight literally goes a round, I'll up it to 2 or 3).
If it's a mid-boss BBEG - Yes (It's a mid-boss) and No (If the party one-offs him, he was a mid-boss, so who cares? Party get a feel-good moment of bad-assery).
Then again, I don't roll dice in front of the PCs so I don't have to fudge HP, of all things. If I did, I wouldn't fudge a thing, most likely.
|
I wouldn't fudge his number, but I might fudge his attitude. If he gets down to 10% (or one shot away from a TPK), perhaps say something like "I am bested for now! I shall retreat and allow you to win the day! We shall meet again! MUAHAHAHAHA!" - or if he is winning by a landslide "YOU ARE BENEATH MY CONCERN!" of course, he has to have some way to escape in his turn or this kind of doesn't work (the player will attack him again next round, almost without fail). This allows a "soft win" and avoids the TPK. The player then has a choice to try to follow or start saving their friends (reminding them of this before that next round can be important as well).
It depends on the encounter "level" if you will -
If it's a campaign ending BBEG - No (my PCs will die) and Yes (Though I design my BBEG fight with support, so the party will not be facing just one person the entire fight, so it's unlikely I'll need to do this anyway).
If it's a major sub-plot BBEG - Yes (Although this is critically important, a TPK is a real downer) and Yes (if it's as bad as you say - if the fight literally goes a round, I'll up it to 2 or 3).
If it's a mid-boss BBEG - Yes (It's a mid-boss) and No (If the party one-offs him, he was a mid-boss, so who cares? Party get a feel-good moment of bad-assery).
Then again, I don't roll dice in front of the PCs so I don't have to fudge HP, of all things. If I did, I wouldn't fudge a thing, most likely.
That is a good approach! I personally follow the same general rule, but decide on the fly depending on:
- mood of the party - do they need a wakeup call?- have they had their moment of glory already today? If it's late, and they have not yet been challenged, I add hp. If it's late, and they already had their suffering, I let someone die quickly.
- Are they really playing smart tactics? I don't add hp.
- Mood of the adventure. sometimes I add hp on the fly even to underlings, if the mood calls for some gritty encounters.
- My personal mood. That's not a recommendation for you, just an observation. I try hard not to bring this into the adventure, but I don't always succeed.
|
Ultimately the DMs job is to be both storyteller and judge. I tend to take the storyteller role a bit more seriously - if the lone fighter standing manages to "kill" the monster, that makes for a much more dramatic story, one that will leave that player talking about it for a long time. If you TPK, however, you're likely to have a table full of disappointed and disheartened players.
I generally give out max HPs since i dont limit my pcs much. We roll high stats (4d6 drop lowest reroll 1s) and i let them role a few sets. So i expect characters to be rather buff. So max hps for all enemies.
well, first off, my chief villians have a tendancy to have a vast quantity of health. For instance, from mage to lich the HD changes from d6 to 12 and they get bonuses based on charisma, so you are looking at at least 18d12 + 90. If they are created in an especially desecrated place, they get +4 hp per HD, or another 72 health. You get the idea. Thats over 300 health with average rolls, almost 400 if you max it. Dracoliches are worse.
To answer your first question, maybe, probably yes. If it were a regular campaign, I would fudge it. I might have the big baddie back off and ask for a truce, for instance. Even my most evil guys don't want to kick it if they do not have to. If it were a pick up game with more than a few munchkins, probably, but maybe not.
In the second case, if the players came in and got lucky or did some outstanding planning, I would give them thier victory. It would be well deserved. If it were a case of munchkinism, I would up the health of target to make it a bit more challenging. Sorta meet your munchkinism and raise you.
Example of munchkinism. Two fighters show up in ridiculous plate everthing and far exceed the rest of the party. Polite requests to not wear it, or tone it down, go nowhere. Rather than argue, the game continues. The party runs into fire giants in leather armor, setting off alarms amongst those who know they should be wearing plate. The two munchkins charge while the rest of the party is getting organized. The giants throw rust monsters at the munchkins and run away. The munchkins are now stuck under a pile of rust monsters and rust. When more proper armor is donned, the adventure resumes.
Did I make the fight to hard is the question I ask in these situations. If yes I fudge roles. If not the party had more then a fair chance and either bad planning, tactics, or luck lead to there down fall and I let them die(if the BBEG wants them dead). I never make encounters harder because the PC's are doing well. I will on occasion ad an extra wave of late arriving bad guys or ad additional encounters after the to easy one if it feels anticlimactic.
I absolutely 100% fudge rolls and HP. I like to use the minion system from 4th edition as well as a way to litter the battlefield with real challenges without overwhelming my players.
I also use a "hits" system where monster A has say 15 hits. If a wiz does 5dmg dice on a spell, and a fighter has a 2d6 greatsword with weapon spec (3hits), and the rogue pulls of a 3d6 + weapon SA, then they have done a total of 12 hits against monster A. It may not be fair to high dmg builds, but its fun, and easier to keep track of monster HP.