Yes, You're Allowed to Fudge Dice

[@jancarlmatysiak4354]

I think you give good examplas for fudging dice as well as against it. However I got one imporant advice for intermediate DMs which should be considered in this discussion: You should only roll dice if you are sure that you can live with the outcome of the dice roll. Otherwise simply explain what happens your are the DM you can decide what is the reality in your world. In my game when the players decide to run from an encounter and they are out of ressources and Hitpoints I don't want to kill them. THe simple fact that we stopped rolling dice in a battle shows that they lost. If you have to fudge a die roll you should later reflect on the situation and evaluate if the die roll was neccessary in the situation.

[@ScenesByOmnic]

Just make smart choices of when and how dice are used. People fudge dice because they're unhappy with the results... of a roll... that they decided needed to be rolled... but now they wish they hadn't. Just reflect on how you're running and really build the skill of only rolling when it matters and all possible results are acceptable. Also, if you're the kind of DM that finds they are fudging dice here and there and that your players don't notice... well, lets just keep that facade and not talk about it then ;) (nice video btw; thumbs up)

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

Yup, if you're going to fudge, it should be done extremely selectively. By no means should you be doing this every session. - AB

[@Force95042]

Kinda like when Boris Johnson called the vote for Brexit, then lost the vote for Brexit, and then everything went to shit...

[@thomas19994]

Wow, remember that time ( 3:00 ) when in the video you’re commenting about they said exactly what you said in your comment but better? Ah ah ah what a blast!

[@samchelms]

@@thomas19994 no need to be rude

[@ScenesByOmnic]

@@samchelms It's quite alright.. We can't all follow conversation or read fully. Some of us want to stand out in different ways. In this case, being a bit of an ass to be honest, and not being able to understand the conversation. Since the warning provided in the second portion is not exemplified within the video we can only hope others read it in full and understand the nuance of the message.

[@pkWreck]

In my opinion, the core of the issue is this; if you're fudging dice roll to 'beat' your players, that sucks. If you're fudging dice roll to increase your player's enjoyment, then I'm all for it. That includes potentially keeping a boss alive, or even killing a player character, if it will increase the stakes and/or serve the story. There's no wholesale 'yes to fudging' or 'no to fudging' answer, but as long as its coming from a place of increasing enjoyment, then it's okay in my books. Like with anything else, DMs will make mistakes fudging dice rolls, but those can be learned from - don't write it off because it went badly a couple times. It's a tool to be employed at the DMs discretion, just like any other DMing skill.

[@pyerter]

Your reference to players rolling dice being a radical idea reminded me of a recent Matt Colville video where he discussed some history of D&D where that came up. I love this conversation and I do really love the topic of “where do the dice belong in the game?”

[@secretlyaslug2325]

The elusive shift video was really eye opening. Mainly because my friends and I only starting eith 5e and BG3. I hadn't realized how "Unsolved" it as a format was back in the day and even is today. There is truly no optimal way to play and RAW is isn't fun for everyone. Even something like 'Should players roll their own dice?' Was a radical idea once.

[@whitepanth3r]

Completely agree. Fudging dice should be the absolutely last resort of a situation that has completely gone off course from what you had expected in an extremely negative way for you and the players and the only way to return things into balance is to change things behind the scene. It should be avoided at all cost except in the most extreme scenario

[@elfbait3774]

Like everything in TTPGs, this really comes down to what you are looking for in your game. I do not like fudging dice. I used to do it as a GM but ultimately I found that it took away from my enjoyment of the game as a DM because i also like to be surprised by the outcomes at the table. I also don't hide my die rolls when I am playing at a table. I roll in the open, so the players can see the drama unfold as the dice weave the strands of fate into the game. I also don't think that PC death or bad outcomes run the fun or create bad games. Much to the contrary, it has been my experience that the low points in the game are often what create some of the best opportunities for story and drama. If a PC is cut down early, then perhaps the rest of the party now needs to go on a side quest to return their friend from the dead and who knows what all that entails. This is why I am often left, feeling a little bleh by how deathproof 5E characters seem to be. I don't think you ruin games by not fudging dice and leaving things to fate. It's a style of play that can be as rewarding as heavily "managed" games. I have heard it referred to as emergent storytelling and it is the one sort of storytelling that can be as fun, with all the twists and turns, for the DM as it is for the players.

[@Hawkeye9165]

I totally understand this argument however as a DM I always roll completely openly. (I've only played on vvt so it's easy to show everyone the rolls). I just feel that this really helps to create a sense of trust between me and my players. I don't believe there is a 'right' way of managing your rolls, it's just what works best for you as a DM. :o)

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

Definitely. The goal with this video is not to convince people to change up their tactics, it's just food for thought. Rolling in the open is completely respectable! - AB

[@schwarzerritter5724]

I roll openly after playing in a game where the monsters almost never missed an attack, critted with every fifth one and succeeded every single saving throw.

[@chrisg8989]

I don't even use a DM screen. I highly recommend it to all DMs. Let the Dice tell the story. Otherwise. What are we even doing?

[@zibbitybibbitybop]

I don't think all rolls should be open, though. In particular, opposed NPC social rolls involving insight on either side should be secret, so that the player can't use metaknowledge of the dice to gauge whether they succeeded or failed. For that matter, I wouldn't even let the player roll their own dice for knowledge checks, I'd roll them secretly so that the player doesn't know whether the info I give them is accurate due to a high roll or outright incorrect due to a nat 1. If the players can't trust me to be honest when it matters, then I don't want to play D&D with them to begin with.

[@Hawkeye9165]

@Mystic-Arts-DM oh yeah. Absolutely. :-) hence why I said there's no 'right' way. I could see fudging being something for more experienced DMs. I think as a beginner, it can potentially set the wrong kind of precedent.

[@marcelwenting1982]

I think there is always an exception to the rule, but the rule definitely should be "never fudge the dice roll". Then again, the game should also bring joy to the players and you as a DM. And some outcomes just don't spark joy, yet you can't always Marie Kondo those outcomes out of the game. So sometimes the most responsible choice is to make the outcome spark joy, however that might be for the group of players you're with.

[@kendiamond7852]

On a side note, I feel the Grognard rolling dice just for the sound is taken out if context. There's a DM tactic for a DM to roll some dice to give the illusion that there's something going on. Like playrrs walk down a hallway and the DM rolls some dice just to get them thinking they might want to be on the lookout for something.

[@ken.droid-the-unique]

Exactly. I remember rolling dice in a game I was GMing just to ratchet up the tension. The players were sufficiently freaked out: "what was that for?!??". "Oh... No need to worry about that... Yet" You know, the DM is a player, too, and gets to have some fun just like the PCs.

[@RealMrObvious1]

" If you're fudging dice roll to increase your player's enjoyment, then I'm all for it." This!

[@Arrowintheknee702]

If I as a the player knew you fudged,I would see the entire structure upon which the game sits to be a farce and lose faith in your leadership.

[@RealMrObvious1]

@@Arrowintheknee702 You would not be one of my players past session 2 or 3. Your attitude makes it clear you whine and cry a lot. I don't tollerate children in adult cloths in my games.

[@MrGrokNRoll]

When it comes to Attribute/Skill rolls, there is another option I like: Telling the players outright that they will succeed/fail and then let them roll how well / bad they're doing.

[@reubencanningfinkel5922]

sage advice. and it's kind of you to remind players that this is a game of spontaneous, cooperative, shared invention--not merely impartial rolling of plastic dice. I don't think fudging can happen, say, all the time (as you say) BUT! DAMN! we want a grand epic...not a fizzled flop

[@brianmccarty4248]

I am thoroughly enjoying your videos and learning from your perspective. Keep up the great work, and thank you!

[@RobertWSquirrel]

For me the paradigm shift was understanding that dice are essentially an improv randomizer, functionally similar to an audience member at an improv show yelling out a suggestion. So if you’re fighting the dice in order to tell a story a specific way, you might as well fudge. But sometimes if the big villain rolls three 1s in a row, maybe the dice are the improv audience yelling out a suggestion that will spin the story off into an unexpected and interesting direction, as long as you’re quick enough to pick up on it. So that’s what I’ve been trying to work on with my DMing recently, to try to work _with_ the dice rather than fighting against them.

[@Anbaraen]

@@RobertWSquirrel this is merely one way of viewing dice. Dice in an OSR game represent the latent uncertainty in a real world. Some things in life have uncertain results. You have unclear information or you're under pressure of some kind.

[@Hikikodere]

Just don't roll then

[@GreyfauxxGaming]

Not if your into the game aspect, the dice give you real feeling of success, the moment I know fudging is happening, that agency is gone, and I wont be able to have fun at that table.

[@KubinWielki]

Fudging stuff like HP and stuff is useful. Once, a paladin-warlock scored a crit on my BBEG round 1 and obviously used the divine-eldritch smite, basically esting 90% of the boss's HP. I fudged him to have more HP, BUT I also said that that the paladin cut his staff-holding arm off. Imho it still made the crit matter (bbeg lost access to powerful spells) while also not robbing the rest of the table of their cool fight.

[@kerykeion12]

This is why my campaign ending bosses are never just "one guy", unless the have multiple phases and/or forms.

[@lyowin]

The day I went with "All rolls are made in the open" policy is the day I found out how much I loathe that moment when you think if you should fudge or not. By going open it is much MUCH easier to embrace the mindset that you are playing WITH your friends, not against or above them. The only case I deviate from this nowadays is sometimes with knowledge/intuition checks (I give player 3 dice, they roll them all together, but only one is a real result, so they can be super unsure, rather sure or absolutely sure in the result of their checks) The moment when enemy crit hits or crit misses hits so much different when you are not gasping behind DM screen, but observing the die being cast with your players. Honestly, it brings your game to a whole new level. Shout out to Runehammer who found words that convinced me to try this. I urge new DMs to also go open at least as an experiment, you can always go back if you do not like it.

[@nexushivemind]

I understand the concept, and agree that it makes no sense to have characters with huge plots intertwined in the campaing die because you mismanaged the encounter or rolled too many 20... but the cost of the players finding out they cannot trust you is too high.

[@SamLabbato]

Learning when to roll is truly an intermediate DM skill and one of the cornerstones that show you're developing into more than just a mediocre or ok dm and moving into a great dm. a lot of times, like you mentioned about having an outcome predetermined, I'll call for a roll or roll myself for degree of success or failure. Like, nat 1 included, you're going to succeed, let's just see how much of a resounding success it was or if it was lukewarm. my mind kind of thinks of it like crit fishing in combat. when you forgot you had advantage but it's already been confirmed you hit, so you roll again to see if you roll a crit or not. I also use this a ton when a player does something convincingly at the table, like word for word explaining their side of the argument before rolling their persuasion, but they're actually making some really good points that resonate with the npc. I'll still call for the roll, and because of that my players think all that talking beforehand doesn't matter, but really their roll is for degree of success, not fail or succeed (I just don't like invalidating skill monkeys, cause otherwise, when are you going to get to roll your expertise persuasion skill?)

[@Dalenthas]

Thanks for including that clip from the music video, it popped into my head anyway as soon as you said "arrange the blocks".😂

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

I refence it too much! - Daði

[@nickfidler6908]

Nobody rolls more crits than schlub goblins and kobolds against L1 parties.

[@WeissM89]

Ugh, great, another video about fudging dice 😂 I've been trying to hear other people's opinions about the statistics and mechanics of fudge/fate dice, you know, the ones with blank, plus and minus, but all people are talking about on KZbin is whether to lie their players or not. Let's add another video to this endless list, why not. That will make my research easier 😅

[@BenHameen33]

If you commit to rolling dice, use the result. Don't roll the dice then choose the result you want anyway Lately, I've been declaring a DC for a check before rolls are made, and making my rolls in the open. This signals to players that its their own choices and luck that decides the game- not the whim of the DM. That's how you add real drama, real stakes, and real excitement to the game. The default should be never fudging, and any exception to this rule is because of a mistake on the DM's part

[@juicedchannel]

Next time I'm DMing, I will focus on setting my players up for them to make interesting choices. Maybe not the goal of this video, but valuable nevertheless

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

I think that was more the point of this than folks might realize. It's all about what I consider to be the real dichotomy here: Set-up vs. Gameplay. - Daði

[@jamesripley8031]

I've been on both sides of this issue, both as a GM and as a player. I hold a personal stance on it, and I know GMs who have differing opinions. To me this isn't a good GM/bad GM issue at all, it's just a stylistic choice. I was a player recently in a fight that should have been pretty easy. The knowledge checks that would have given the party an edge against an otherwise tricky monster failed, so "we didn't know how to fight it." And then the monster's dice came out hot while the PC dice came out cold. That resulted in a massive tempo shift, and we had players dying almost immediately, while having done nothing serious to the monster. Fast forward several rounds, and it was a Total Party Kill, and ended the campaign. Dice did that. Not the players, not the GM. And that's OK. One way to look at it is that the situation is a failure, and the story ended prematurely. Another way to look at is that "oh hey, sometimes evil triumphs." There's now a whole kingdom in our world that has been over-run by a tyrant from The First World who has consumed the area with unnaturally verdant and dangerous plants and animals. And someday that's going to have to be taken care of - because the first heroes who dove through a portal into the First World to strike down that tyrant failed. I view the dice as a way to take the story in directions that nobody can anticipate. The GM certainly didn't script a TPK vs the random monster in the random room, but here we are. On the flip side, I once had a fairly challenging fight set up for a party I was GMing for, and it involved a really, really nasty melee boss. She was going to be real trouble. Then the party's druid cast a spell that blinded her on round 1! Oops! Her minions were pretty easy for the party to mop up, and she was no major threat considering the massive miss chance the condition imparted to her. Some people look at that as "a bad fight" because it was supposed to be hard, and it wasn't. Maybe I should have fudged the dice on the save and made the boss blind for only a few rounds, instead of permanently. But I feel like the Druid especially - and the whole party really - look back fondly on that fight because the spell went off to maximum effect. It felt really good for them to have that big momentum shift. Another consideration - After a fight like that, my players trust that I'm not fudging dice. They all knew it was supposed to be a really challenging fight, and they all knew that I COULD have fudged that save, and it was clear that I didn't. So, to the GMs who feel fudging is an asset - all power to you by the way - make sure you let enough "oops that didn't go as planned" results go through that your players still believe that your dice matter.

[@Jindorek]

"I am a river to my people".

[@uptheironschris17]

I am currently running Lost Mine of Phandelver for a group of mostly new players (family). This one time they walked right into Venomfang’s tower and after a brief exchange of dialogue the Paladin attacked. Now Venomfang’s “Poison Breath” would have meant instant death for the player, but luckily its damage roll was very low….

[@wingwalker007]

DnD is a dice game, never fudge the rolls. If you’re going to fudge rolls then stop rolling dice altogether and just tell your players what the outcomes of their actions are so that it fits your story. To me the dice rolls are the most interesting part of the game as just one success or failure can change the whole story.

[@TheBalloonBob]

Thank you. Finally a reasonable opinion...

[@EVL6479]

Another great video, thank you for expanding on player agency, and its limits!

[@mikewells2209]

I absolutely love your videos. I’ve been dming for awhile and find your perspectives wonderfully insightful.

[@Myndmeltr]

Exactly. You fudge dice rolls only when the benefits to the COMBINED narrative being produced by the players and the DM outweigh the loss of chance.

[@GreyfauxxGaming]

And if your table is ok with it..

[@DargorV]

You guys are doing great! Thank you! :D

[@oSo2033]

Love your videos, keep up the good work you two!

[@antoniorezik4072]

I usually just skip the roll altogether and say the results that I want, when a fudging situation comes up

[@Destroyer243]

I had a dm that ran a campaign where he would fudge dice (sparingly) to make some of the most memorable moments in the campaign. He was running his own custom combat system where he rolls and not the players. You had an action roll, and an attack roll. The action can be used to prep a specific reaction, that can be an attack, but the action itself on your turn can't be an attack. (I hope that made sense) It was a mech dnd where as I stared down the enemy, their minigun spinning up for an attack as their reaction the dm asked me 4 simple words, "What do you do?". I chose to dodge as my action, then to fire down upon my enemy. The DM rolled 2 dice, then described the scene. As the minigun spun up completely, I sprint to the left, bullets whissing right behind me. I raise my gun to fire as time seems to slow. You watch as the fourth bullet you fire flies true going straight down the top barrel of the minigun. A massive explosion insues and as the smoke clears, you see the right arm of your opponent's mech blown apart, completely noncunctional. What were the rolls for such a breathtaking scene? A 12 to hit and a nat 20 to dodge. The opponents AC was 13, so I was 1 face of the dice off from suceeding. The dm decided in that moment that to properly honor the nat 20 to dodge, he would allow the attack roll to also hit to the same extreme. This dm greatly appreceates combat roleplay (describing in depth what you're doing and why) and will give you bonuses when you do. This was my bonus for using combat roleplay to make the most out of a fight with a superior opponent who up to this point had me on the rails.

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

That sounds like a dramatic moment that really had an impact on you! Love to hear stories like this. That's what TTRPG's are all about :) - AB

[@rathenn6959]

Another awesome video on a well discussed topic.

[@AlpacaLips39]

My stance coming into this video is that the narrative is my responsibility, the rolls dictate fate, and the players are the variable authors of the world. If two of those forces at work want something to happen, that’s the majority vote. From what I’ve seen of very famous DMs like Mercer and Mulligan, they are happy to set an arbitrary DC but they also seem to understand not everything *needs* a roll. You can just say something happens. Also in combat terms, if the crit brought the fodder enemy to 1HP, that enemy is dead. I feel like DMs need to respect time investment with inevitable outcomes.

[@sirhamalot8651]

Players should have agency, but, so should the DM. The DM is not just a guy who wastes hours of his time to entertain you; HE has a role in shaping the world as well. Even amongst players, when presented with some decision to make, the party can discuss and debate on how to proceed and in the end a decision is made that some of the PCs are against doing. Do we give agency to every PC at every moment? No. If we did every PC would simultaneously be the main character going in whatever direction they choose. This would be utter chaos and impossible for a single DM to manage. • Thanks for another great video Daði! (+10 XP for spelling you name correctly?)

[@SlyBlueDemon]

"Do we give agency to every PC at every moment? No. If we did every PC would simultaneously be the main character going in whatever direction they choose. This would be utter chaos and impossible for a single DM to manage." It's called a Sandbox and is the best way to play. Let your players actually play and not be stuck on a railroad.

[@sirhamalot8651]

@@SlyBlueDemon I agree, but you can't let 5 PCs each go in their own direction at all times. At some point a consensus must be had among the PCs about what to do. Sometimes the story highlights the Barbarian and the cleric takes a back seat, sometimes the cleric is in the spotlight and the barbarian passively watches on. Imagine playing a Legend of Zelda game with 5 different players all playing their own Link character in the same game and they all split up and do what each wants to do. How does a DM handle this? OK, it's "sandbox" but how interesting is that if you have to wait for hours before the DM gets to your personal story because he has to give the other 4 PCs their personal story some time? TTRPGs beg for the party to stick together and work as a group most of the time.

[@dswenneker]

Good video again! Considering a holiday to Iceland for a game with you 😂

[@Bralor89]

Ohhhh a fellow Crusader King.... Nice example

[@hasmhas]

If players ever start to suspect you are fudging dice, you will absolutely kill any immersion they had. I'm not going to tell you not to fudge, but be very wary of when and how you do it if you choose to do it at all.

[@FocusDisorder]

You weren't kidding about never admitting to fudging rolls. I tried to watch this video with my GF who is also one of my players and now we're having a full blown relationship argument over it.

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

I am so sorry. - Daði

[@NevisYsbryd]

Well, yeah, he was fundamentally incorrect in his claim about what the disagreement over this is. It underpins the entire social contract of the activity and trust between participants, both diagetically in the game and by logical extension, extra-diagetically to the relationship in general, as apparently the person is willing to lie and break agreements to you. Fudging rolls is a great way to end play groups and entire relationships.

[@FocusDisorder]

@@NevisYsbryd it's a collaborative storytelling game. Generalizing it to human relationships that actually matter is WILD. Like, I'm the kind of person who will not even lie to tell you an outfit looks good, but my job at that table is to enable the creativity of my players, put challenges in front of them, make their choices matter, and keep the game moving and everyone having a good time. If the mechanics of gameplay get in the way of those goals, they get bypassed.

[@NevisYsbryd]

@FocusDisorder And those sorts of assumptions cannot be made. Some people will lie about little things and not small things; some will lie about small things and not big things. However, once the person knows you lie to them, they no longer know with real confidence if and where you draw that line. They cannot read your mind or intent, and to some extent, it does not matter, because regardless of intent, you lied regardless. As it pertains to ttrpgs, it retroactively invalidates the experience for them because much of their agency (including the ability to choose outcomes with undesired consequences) was compromised for the sake of a desired outcome, and then they are left doubting the entire game involving you not only in the future, but in the past. If you do not adhere to the mechanics, then you are not playing a game at all but are telling a story while deceiving your players that they are playing a game. It is a violation of the agreement. While it nets you the benefits of using game mechanics in the players' experience in the immediate moment without many of the undesired consequences of using game mechanics, it risks the entire premise collapsing the moment they suspect, let alone confirm, that the GM fudges. Like, my condolences for this, and I hope you get through it. It is an entirely reasonable and predictable thing for her to react this way to, though. Most social animals _despise_ those who violate the agreements of games, and with this, you are also adding in what can easily be interpreted as a form of personal betrayal. Regardless of whether or not it is blowing things out of proportion, those are the risks that you incur with fudging dice and you forfeit any grounds to complain if that is a serious infraction to the other participants.

[@cookiedudegaming]

"You'll never roll only nat 1s in a session." Will Wheaton: "Bet" They've gone and done it again again again again again again and again

[@hjaltos]

The fear I feel when I dump con on my wizard and Gary the goblin marches up to me is palpable! I might play with fire, but damn is it fun!

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

Gary the Goblin is coming and you know it!

[@johncasebeer179]

Another great video! Please keep them coming.

[@jamricsloe]

I open roll all of my rolls. Ever seen a table all lean in to see if a player hits or passes a do or die save in a desperate situation? Open rolls create the opposite effect. They need me to miss, the die is cast, they all lean in, the drama, the anticipation, and the suspense plays out in the real time, in the open. I love to let the dice tell the story in dice rolling situations. Let go!

[@RoughGalaxyYT]

I've seen people argue that running cutscenes remove player agency because they can't affect the scene, but my players respect that the cutscenes are my play time and it sets up big dramatic/scary/exciting events for them to partake in. As for fudging? sure, did that attack leave the mob at 1 hp? not if it's dramatically appropriate for them to go down.

[@gunsbulletsheroin]

one hp could easily be read narratively as knocked out/disabled. in fact that's maybe more interesting than dead. do the players mercilessly finish them off or leave foes to maybe pose a threat in the future??

[@MrTDawg135]

Fudging dice does not directly remove player agency. After all, the players don't choose the die result. And, while players make decisions knowing the consequences are random, humans are terrible at understanding odds. Many people see 90% as basically a sure thing, instead of a 1 in 10 failure rate. Because of this disconnect between expectation and reality, fudging die results to match the expectations the players had when they made their decision is increasing player agency, not taking it away.

[@chrisg8989]

@@MrTDawg135 fudging dice is a crutch for weak DMing. Get good.

[@MrTDawg135]

@chrisg8989 You must hate video games then. They fudge all the time. Mario has a frame or two after leaving an edge where the player can still make him jump. Fallout's VATS system makes sure that 90% on screen is actually 99% in engine. All of this is done to ensure that the experience people are expecting is the one they're getting, even if reality has to be massaged.

[@lpjdrummer12295]

"D&D is just collaboratively lying to each other." I'm using this from now on.

[@DnTironfilms]

I relate to many of your dming ways. The videos always give me a feeling of supporting my Dming style

[@MattMillerMacLeod]

I run games where fudging is only possible in the narrative - "The alien leaps onto your comrades, shredding them to pieces" so the PC isn't target, etc. This is because the game's I run are either player facing (so they roll all the dice) or don't have a randomizer (and thus, everything is based on player+GM choice and resource management). It's actually pretty nice.

[@vickieden1973]

At one point, a fight was getting same-y and boring but the enemy was only at half hit points. So I decided to have him undergo a spontaneous transformation sequence (and erupt into flames), and gained new attacks and a fly speed. The players thought it was awesome and had no idea that wasn't intended from the start :P Not exactly on topic, but sometimes random chance gets a bit uncanny. I've watched my husband roll five natural 1s in a row. Three consecutive rolls during two combat turns, a fourth just to see what would happen, and then the fifth when he tossed the die aside and it landed next to another player. That player picked it up, claimed it needed to be purged with holy water, and dropped it into a cup of Mountain Dew (which he'd brought along as a joke). It's been the "Black Die of Dew Not" ever since.

[@no_b_roll]

All rolls are in the open at my table. Hell, plenty of time I have the players roll for me! The game isn’t about dice rolls, it’s about managing and reacting to the randomness of dice rolls. The challenge I set for myself as the DM is to make scenarios where this is fun. Good and bad rolls lead to something for the story. I can have 12 people at my table at times. It’s chaos in a bottle. The dice are just the stirrer in the mix. If my players are sitting calmly instead of standing in excitement around my table, I’ve fallen short of my goals.

[@onetruetroy]

Terrific video. I love dice and have more than I would ever use…or do I? - Rolling dice is great when there is a chance of something unexpected or crazy happening. These are rare events and randomness is fun. Gamers have gotten so accustomed to relying on the exact odds of achieving success in a specific situation, that uncertainty isn’t an option. With those incredible expectations of the mini-game trumping any narrative, roleplay becomes a math expression. Only two outcomes are allowed: success or failure. I absolutely loathe that play style in which an epic adventure pivots on a die roll. - As a player, I don’t get to roll dice enough so I use them to roleplay the character. This is especially true when there is a chaotic streak, distraction, or when I know they will not behave as I (the player) would. It’s fun and something interesting may happen. - As a GM, I’m all about setup and randomness in those areas that make sense. I pay attention to the players, characters, and interactions with NPCs. I roll dice when there is a chance that something specific aids or hinders the party or character. And what happens can be generated from a random table. - In my non-humble opinion, I think the greatest flaws are rolling dice when they aren’t required, and assuming every combat is a fight to the death. If a character is attempting something for which they are trained and skilled then just have them succeed. Done. Before combat ensues, consider the encounter and the scene. The perceived enemy may not want to fight and instead wants to talk. When the player thinks the character must fight and win, then they have just railroaded themselves. So, yes, the GM will need to fudge dice rolls if the players aren’t expecting their characters to lose and die. In that type of game there really is no need to roll dice. Just calculate the odds of success taking into consideration mods, weapons, armor, action economy, number of healing potions, blah, blah, blah, and tell the players the number of combat rounds required to succeed contrasted with how long it may take for them to fail. It does sound boring but you just saved hours of real time. - I think dice are a terrific way to show what a character can do, and they don’t necessarily have to roll them. Instead of having to constantly reference a bunch of numbers on a sheet, just create those dice pools and place them on the table. It’s easy to glance around the table and see what the characters can do. More dice of a larger type means more power and skill. Now, the players can pull out those cool dice and show them off.

[@AvonofTalamh]

I *do* want to give away information other DMs consider vital. I'll decide the DC for all the traps, locked doors, perception checks, etc. in a dungeon, then set down a d20 with that number on it where everyone can see. If I ask for a check, all of my players know the target number, no hesitation. I do the same with monster AC, attack bonuses, hitpoints. I tell my players numbers and let them formulate around it. I do it at the beginning of a fight and watch their gears turn as they try to figure out the best way to remove obstacles. I don't think this type of information being hidden has ever elevated my game. I recommend trying this out to anyone curious, but of course I recognize this way of GMing isn't for everyone.

[@Hikikodere]

"Surely there's a middle road here" Indeed. It's to only roll dice when all the numbers they could show are acceptable and to not roll them, or pretend to roll them, when that is not the case.

[@PJZ]

Billions of comments, hundreds of billions of hours wasted. D&D is whatever you want it to be. If you DM, you make the rules. Full stop. Literally nothing needs to be said after that. Worst part of D&D isn't WotC....it's all the gatekeepy / well-I-know-better people. Happy that isn't you. Love your content...keep up the great work.

[@ablindwatchmakerUT]

I'll also say that the answer to this question depends entirely on the kind of players you have. I usually end up with hardcore power gamers (PF1), and they would be furious if I fudged. Should a combat be too hard and they die because of bad encounter design, they want to be able to critique me afterwards 🤣. Also, PF1 players tend to be very weak roleplayers and don't care much about it, so fudging for the sake of narrative doesn't fly for most of them. Keeping them alive would piss them off. I had to flat-out execute an unconcious PC once when it wasn't needed just to make sure the players would take me serious. Overall, I think being brutal every once in a while is good, as it ensures the level of tension is always high, and the combats tend to be more rewarding for them. The minute players think you will routinely go out of your way to keep them alive, they'll lose interest in your game.

[@ISpiers]

Do whatever you want, but, for me, fudging dice rolls violates the social contract of our table. The heroism of the characters is directly proportionate to the challenges they face. DM’s can provide players with enough trust and agency to let them dig their own graves. If a DM is pitting players against challenges the players cannot overcome, outwit, or simply choose to avoid, maybe that DM should reevaluate their approach to the game, as opposed to relying on deception.

[@ablindwatchmakerUT]

@@ISpiers I don't fudge dice rolls. If I make a combat too easy, I'll either add more enemies I have prepped in advance, or I'll string another combat encounter to deplete them more in the future. If it is too hard, I usually make fleeing a reasonable option, which is built into the encounter design. If all else fails, they simply die and need a rasie dead if they want their char back. I've never had a tpk, but come very close a few times, and I've killed a lot of PCs.

[@TheVTTDM]

I'm one of those grognards who doesn't fudge dice rolls but I DO fudge ac, hp, and sometimes purposefully use questionable strategy. Of course, I play mostly virtually and my players expect to see my die rolls. But I see where you're coming from. I find that die rolls are great for building excitement and tension, especially when seen publicly. And the occasional PC death is acceptable. But that's just me and my table and my players. Mileage may vary.

[@theriveryeti2426]

Interesting, I don't think I've played in a campaign in the last 30 years where you could see the DM's die rolls.

[@cthomashand]

Your team does amazing work. Keep it up.

[@lukasbernhardt6720]

I think i didnt fudge Dice or only pretty rarely did it, but i have lowered the DC for successes of the players, just do be narratively fluid. It is not always, that fudging is to create or flee from a good situation, but it is a product of if you can work with the thrown roll narratively. My focus is on telling a Story, and to find compromises in low rolls from the player is a skill i am focusing on. Most of the dice I throw as a DM is combat, and there i pretty rarely fudge, because getting to the edge of death is an experience wich never gets boring. This impacts their mood, and they love it. They start to think 200 times more than ever and that is satisfying for me to watch :D. My key is to not fudge the dice, but to narratively make my way through bad or too good rolls. Thats the part i love!

[@beardyben7848]

The GM has so much control over what just works and over foreshadowing and many options for introducing characters or creatures(or mysterious strangers who help you out and disappear immediately to become a legend). You have so many things you can introduce into the world, so many options and magic that I really don't understand why you would need to fudge a roll. If your players can't let their characters die then that's a completely separate issue. If a player fails consistently then maybe make them use a dice Tower so that they aren't rolling the dice weird. If the rules as written in this game are too capricious, or if combats are too swingy to maintain the tone that the rest of the game sets, then that's a problem either with people's expectations of how this game works or the problem is with the game itself. There are other game rule sets with different expectations than the one you play. Try a different roll set for the same setting or change games. You may not get all the cool kid merchandising in a different setting, but at least the rules will help you out rather than make you sad all the time. The dice aren't fair. They are dice. Learn to play with the expectation of failure, of loss, or of disappointment for without those things there is no one succeeds, wins, or has reason for joy. It's your table, and you can avoid failure, if that makes you happy. Honestly, if things can't go wrong in your game, unplanned, you're either playing with children or you're doing theater. And that's probably not fair considering how many things can go wrong with theatrical performance, lol. If you read this far, thanks. Go forth and learn to deal with disappointment and failed expectations. It's an excellent opportunity to flex your creative muscles and learn your dm skills better, and to set boundaries and expectations on social interactions. Stay safe out there!

[@NevisYsbryd]

Fully agreed. And this is all before addressing the matter of trust.

[@mish00lika]

This! Why fudge a roll to avoid a TPK? The monster stops attacking, raises its snout, sniffs, and runs away. You wonder what could scare it away like that. And you all wounded and out of spells ... oh, my! Fudge to avoid a cakewalk? Oh, what's hidden behind that rock? A cleric minion casting Healing Words, of course. As I already said in another comment, fudge preparation, not rolls.

[@slimedemigirl]

"the girl we thinks likes about us" at <a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="636">10:36</a> fried my brain a little 😂 it took me a few seconds to recover and I had to go back to check if I heard it right. Irl Stunning Strike 😂 Anyway, great video, as always :3

[@Smeelio]

As a little practical tip, also practice fudging discreetly; of course, no-one should admit to fudging and it's relatively easy to fool players who've never sat in the hot-seat and might not even know what fudging is, but what if you are playing with other DMs who know about fudging, or just really suspicious players in general? Don't do that thing where you roll and don't look at the dice before announcing the result; do everything the same as you otherwise would for any dice roll, and substitute the fudged number(s) for the one(s) you actually read on the dice. Similarly, pick a variety of numbers, don't just go 'oh that's a nat 1/20'; throw in some 17s, some 4s, stuff like that, and also describe HOW you are getting the numbers, i.e. 'so he rolled a 14 and has a plus 3 so that's 17', for verisimilitude. I believe some digital tabletops even have a fake dice roll option, so you can punch in a number and then have it "rolled" visually on everyone's screens Sure, you are actively being more deceitful by doing this, but you're doing it to preserve the illusion even for the knowledgable and perceptive players at your table, thereby increasing their immersion and fun. Of course, this advice applies specifically to when you are fudging sensibly and reasonably as the video describes, which should also be in service to fun; remember you can't ACTUALLY know whether the best outcome for the table's fun is the fudged or non-fudged outcome, you can only make an educated guess, so be careful (that's why I personally NEVER fudge, of course)

[@LyleAshbaugh]

I personally don’t care if my DM fudges dice rolls. I choose to believe all the announced results as real chance. I know when I’m having fun or not

[@TheFischsalat]

I want to mention the option to fudge the dice in favor to the player agency. if there is a thing, the players want badly and it is cool and fun and dramatic, but there is a roll required, that could potentially ruin the whole thing everyone is hoping for and there comes no idea to mind, making the outcome of a failure kind of cool... just fudge the damn dice to make everyone including you happy

[@Hax268]

Agreed, and this extends to players too. If it's not fun for me to roll a fail on an attack or saving throw, I'll secretly fudge it so it's better for the story :)

[@Sadturnip]

I've always subscribed to the perspective that encounter balancing is a fluid thing that can take place midfight. Players hit like a truck, boss has a bit more hp, the ability I made accidentally just kneecapped half of the table? Maybe the save DC is a bit lower next time. It's always in the name of bettering the group experience.

[@ThatRobHuman]

Also: I admire the communities restraint in not referring to you as Daði the D&D Daddy....

[@ablindwatchmakerUT]

I never fudge dice in combat, but I do build-in an adjustable valve, of sorts. I usually make sure the PCs can escape in some fashion if they bite off more than they can chew. Occasionally they might get help from a predetermined NPC in the area if it makes sense, or the monsters might decide to capture the PCs instead of finishing them off, if applicable, to avoid a TPK. Sometimes a monster might have less health than I originally decided on. If the monster turns out to be too strong, I might decide it doesn't have an ability it's supposed to have, or that it has a limited number of uses. I am also very careful about using enemies with high crit threat ranges or excessively high damage, preferring to increase the accuracy of monsters and lower the damage. I run PF1 on VTT, for what it's worth.

[@AMRosa10]

I think that one of the things that people often forget is that most games define the Game Master as a player as well… The 2024 rules of Dungeons & Dragons seem to be less clear about this distinction, however, in the 2014 rules it says “One player, however, takes on the role of the Dungeon Master (DM), the game’s lead storyteller and referee.” So that should mean that all of the things that you mentioned about players and player agency go for the game master as well… I think that instead of framing these sorts of discussions as fudging we should think of it more in terms of the game master is given the discretion by the rules to make certain choices that players controlling characters are not given. It is this discretion where choosing narrative choices over random chance falls.

[@grizzlednerd4521]

I was running a Champions RPG session and introducing a new character's nemesis. The PC's defenses were particualrly strong against the new villain, but the villain was otherwise lethal to normal human. However, during the villain's opening attack against the PC, the villian rolled almost maximum damage and stun, taking the PCs out of the fight in a single, lucky blast. I "let the dice fall where they may" but, in hidesight, always felt like I should have fudged the damage roll to keep the *player* in the combat. This was a key moment for their personal narative, and the dice robbed them of it...and I was complicit. Over the years, I try to only fudge as a 'guard rail' against wrecking the story. PCs and key NPCs can die, but some stuff just doesn't make sense in the shared narative.

[@djake_marthall]

<a href="#" class="seekto" data-time="498">8:18</a> To the point of fudging Hit Points, I'm currently running a Pokémon D&D Campaign, set in Hoenn. A few weeks back, I trapped them in a cave with an Absol, who used Perish Song on them before I made them roll for Initiative. Essentially, they had three rounds to kill this thing or else everyone who failed the Constitution Save, both party members and their Pokemon alike (all but one party member failed) would die, resulting in a TPK. Now, we're like 6 sessions off facing the BBEG, of course I wasn't going to TPK this close to resolving everyone's stories, and naturally, they outnumbered it 5 to 1, so they obliterated it in the first round. However, I lied about its HP and kept the Absol alive, drew out the three rounds by throwing in some other cave dwelling Pokémon like Zubat and Onix as obstacles to get through to get to the Absol, and knew that it wasn't until the final player's turn right before round 4 started that I would tell them they had killed it. As the last player in the Initiative told me they had dealt 19 damage, the room went quiet, everyone stared at me, leaning forward on the table. I smirked and held the moment of silece to really let them simmer, before showing them a piece of paper "I had written before the attack" (wink wink nudge nudge) that said it had exactly 19HP left. Everybody sighed a massive breath of relief, fell back into their chairs and gave each other props for working together so well. Ending it in the first round still could've been fun, don't get me wrong, but just drawing out those three rounds, building that anticipation of an imminent TPK, giving them obstacles to get around in the form of other wild Pokémon - it led to a much more tense encounter and as such, a more satisfying victory. PLUS it helped me pad a bit of time because they blasted through the encounter I threw at them at the beginning of the session that was meant to last all night, all because I didn't fudge the Nat 1's I was rolling then. So it all balances out a little on the Fudging Karma Scales 😅

[@DeanSals1]

Great video Dadi. Story trumps dice every time.

[@swbrett]

I don't fudge die rolls. If I need certain things to happen for the story, there's simply no roll. HOWEVER, if it doesn't serve the fun if the game, I grant advantage, or disadvantage, or set a DC that is low/high enough that the roll's results are so close to assured that if it doesn't work, it comes up as a total plot twist; even for me!

[@maximerignault8827]

Love the video and totally agree on what is said ! I don't understand how fudging a dice roll to make a scene or a fight more dramatic is considered "removing players agency", when a completely random dice roll (which players have no control on) can dictate the fate of a character. I occasionnally fudge dices at my table when I'm rolling really bad in fights and it's just anticlimatic for the players because there's no challenge when enemies just forgot their glasses that day !

[@chrisg8989]

"Why let a random dice roll dictate the fate of a Character." Wow.... So, none of your combats actually have any stakes? If your players knew that their rolls and yours don't matter, I doubt they would return. People want to play a game. Not story time with Max.

[@benjaminmckay6983]

It’s removing agency because the decision the player made to accept random chance is being overridden by the GM. The player made a decision, and the decision ultimately didn’t matter at all - hence a removal of agency. Now this isn’t an indictment of fudging. I think a lot of groups prefer if the GM does this, and quite frankly don’t care for “player agency” as much as a reddit hivemind will have you believe. But fudging is by all accounts a removal of agency, and certain types of players will definitely be put off by the implications of fudging. I’m personally not a big fan, but ultimately it’s just about knowing your group.

[@BeardedDevil-cn9tw]

Fudging dice = lying. Full stop.

[@tmonkeyking2424]

I do fudge rolls, HP, abilities, etc... always with the aim of creating a better player experience or telling a better story. Even so, I sometimes think I don't fudge often enough. Sometimes, I take my hands off the steering wheel for important things, and let chaos decide. I tell myself it's out of a misguided sense of 'fairness', but it's really just indecision, and I often regret taking the "easy way". To be pedantic, I suppose the -dice- are what "remove player agency"... not necessarily the DM fudging of said dice. But we accept and acknowledge the power of capricious chance to either enable or deny our attempts to control our fate. By that same logic, then I guess fudging dice to facilitate player success is actually -reinforcing- their agency, breaking the 'rules' to allow them to succeed where normally they would fail. On the other hand, I suppose a DM who chooses when to fudge or not ends up being arguably the only one with true agency. :/ Anyways, nice think piece.

[@matthewwade8849]

Once you get to know the party and all their abilities/stats, you can create encounters numerically designed not to need fudge....usually.

[@GMJosh-sw9hp]

Love it! Great video! Well said.

[@natejansen3063]

I'm a brand new DM with a DM friend at work who insisted I fudge dice rolls. This video is VERY helpful with a balanced and purposeful perspective

[@mxx720]

There's an alternative to fudging, and that's changing the _scope_ of rolls. If you have a skill or ability IRL, you're not hilariously screwing it up 5% of the time, and then 5% of the time you're suddenly a master artisan. But that's what a d20 system does, and that's kind of silly. So if your character has a high stat or bonus, I'll change what rolling 1-20 actually does: Low rolls just mean the task is more difficult and takes more steps to complete. 20 means you get it on the first try.

[@grizzlednerd4521]

Maybe it was just my tables, but I've been playing since white box in the late 70's and I don't recall the DM rolling for players...at least not often. Also, at least for me, the DM screen was to hide the map of the dungeon I was running for than anything else.

[@heycato-l4t]

I guess I'm of the opinion that if you feel the need to fudge stats or dice, it's likely a different system than D&D 5e would be more suitable. Maybe something with less "swingy" dice results, like PbtA, Savage Worlds or Fate. I play D&D BECAUSE of the gamble. Those 1's and 20's tell a chaotic/unpredictable story, and as someone who's "Playing to find out what happens", that's my jam.

[@magickt610]

The truth is, if you are willing to fudge "some" then it is almost no different than fudging ALL the rolls. The rolls DMs most want to fudge most are the important ones. (Character death, boss survival, mission success/failure) Because you are most likely fudging these rolls, then the players immediately lose agency whenever it matters. I am a DM who does not use a screen and rolls 100% public. But in all honesty, I would NOT suggest this manner of DMing to anyone. I actually believe in the premise of this video, that MOST DMs should fudge. However, we shouldn't fool ourselves into thinking the players only lose "some" agency when we fudge "some". Just accept that they in fact, do lose MOST of their agency. You had an outcome in mind, the outcome happens regardless. The outcome you wanted was likely at a dramatic point, (thereby a very important point). The players think they have agency in a world that is actually a story you pre-wrote for them. The joy they get is from the "illusion of agency" NOT actual agency itself. This is fine as long as they never find out.

[@MirrorscapeDC]

My problem with fudging dice has never been with player agency. It's with kneekapping the dice's power. One of the things that makes ttrpgs unique is that they are an eternal push and pull between three forces: The DM, the player, and chance. So many great stories only happen because the dice did something unexpected. Sometimes the result will suck. Sometimes a result that sucks leads to the best stories. Let the dm do dm things and the dice do dice things.

[@jonash.8139]

@@MirrorscapeDC Often times when you need to fudge a roll thats because you need a certain outcome for the story. Maybe just skip that roll in the first place. If I want my players to notice something I just tell them. Dont roll for essential movement, Information and Items is my rule of thumb after... After dming 2 games, but Im on it!

[@NevisYsbryd]

​@@jonash.8139 If you are unwilling to accept the result of a RNG method of arbitration, do not use a RNG method of arbitration. It is okay to say an outcome occurs without using dice.

[@SomethingWellesian]

I think avoiding fudging is good advice for new DMs, especially those who are less confident. I fudged rolls in a lot of the early combats I ran because I was way too worried about killing a PC, but I almost always regretted it. As I got to know the game better and trust my players better, I stopped doing it. (Though I’m not above “oh the monster happens to have exactly the minimum of its possible hit point spread” if I notice a combat drawing out too long.)

[@SomethingWellesian]

(Posted here after an utterly bizarre bug caused this comment to go under an unrelated short I watched earlier. Which, come to think of it, might explain where some of my other recent comments have gone.)

[@karlirahae5267]

You can fudge the dice... until you are caught or suspected - then the trust is broken and you have damaged your integrity as a DM. It is better to never fudge and just don't roll the die when you want a certain outcome.

[@edwardcardinal4328]

Somewhere in one of the 3.5 DMGs, I'm pretty sure there is a line about how the DM is allowed to add a situational +2 bonus an arbitrary number of times to either side of any roll. I'll see if I can find it again, the style of writing in the section really stuck out to me. The way it's presented almost feels like it's there specifically so rules lawyers can't argue fine-print RAW against a DM who wants to do something other than let (math) rocks fall as they may.

[@ThatRobHuman]

I wonder if there's any value in an extreme variation of this as an exercise - one where you run a *without* dice rolls *at all* (obviously with the buy-in from your players). The objective would be to strengthen the "In the service of the story" muscle. If you can maintain collaboration and agency with your players, and avoid railroading, during that exercise, then you've pulled it off.

[@willowparker-ct3pq]

Pretty much everyone who advocates in favor of dice fudging seems to agree that it should be kept secret from the players. That, to me, is an indication that they recognize they shouldn't be doing it. If you feel the need to hide it, it's because on some level you know your players wouldn't want you to be doing it if they knew. If you've all agreed, as a group, that you're ok with fudging under certain circumstances and don't want to know specifically when it's happening, then fine, do what works for you. But, if you haven't made that agreement and you want to fudge a roll, ask yourself "if I told the players what I just rolled and asked them if they minded if I just changed the result, would they say I should?" If the answer is no... maybe don't? I dunno. Just seems rude to do something knowing your players wouldn't want you to do, and then try to hide it from them.

[@magley64]

Concur 100%... The dice serve the story, and if they don't, they lose their authority.

[@MrBurnthetrees]

I don't really fudge dice not because of the players or personal beliefs, I just think it's fun. Same reason we moved to players rolling. It's just so much more fun not knowing what is going to happen. Also if I really need something to happen it just happens, I'm the GM I don't feel the need to trick my players.

[@colmbright9822]

I rarely fudge dice . But if my players have an amazing or original attack and they almost kill a creature I just give them the glory and the kill

[@speejoink1]

The only time Ive had to fudge dice is when playing D&D. The game is so hard to balance encounters compared to other games its exhausting

[@MrDavidKord]

If I fudge dice, it's rarely in combat.

[@Vasarcdus]

I've been wondering if I should fudge my dice rolls because I roll terribly constantly, so even when I'm trying to make my party feel pressure, they end up getting out with a few scratches at best. 😅

[@jvy012896]

Never fudge dice. It's like rigging a boxing match. Roll dice in front of players! It'll teach you to craft stories that don't hinge on passing a few checks. Imagine if you were a player how you'd feel if the GM fudged important rolls

[@j8000]

Yep. If you can't accept a particular outcome, then don't roll! If this isn't the kind of story you're looking to tell, then embrace that.

[@reubencanningfinkel5922]

Nah. Depends on the table, really. Again, there are SO few hard and fasts with dnd. also, like, do you know much bout' the history of boxing?? lol. a deeply "rigged" sport

[@jvy012896]

​@reubencanningfinkel5922 The history of boxing doesnt matter. It's the principle of people showing up expecting a truthful game (like how people expect a fair fight even tho the history is convoluted). Most players would not be happy with fake rolls. Of course some players are fine with fudging but 95% of players feel cheated. Just invite friends over for an improv experience or world building session if you plan to fudge

[@j8000]

@@reubencanningfinkel5922 exactly! If you're rigging the match, you are, in a very real sense, no longer looking at boxing, but theatrics. Fudging the dice in a dice game is an admission you're no longer playing the game you agreed to play. If you run into the situation often, then either incorporate it in the explicit social contract or consider playing a game that doesn't make you want to unilaterally stop playing the game. I would personally much prefer a game with integrity. even if it's not as cinematic as boromir dying, the point is that that was what happened. Give me an unspectacular but real outcome, over the cutscene the DM imagined.

[@SacchieILU]

There is only one hard rule with roleplaying-games. You and the players are there to have fun. If fudging a die helps in that goal, its worthwhile. If it doesnt, it isnt.

[@MrGrokNRoll]

There's also another choice if you're unhappy with the frankly ridiculous odds in DnD of a professional not making a skill roll: Choose a game with different mechanics :) There are systems where the DM *never* rolls, where the players do all the rolling. DnD skill system first and later its classes are what made switch to different systems.

[@GabeDelaSoul]

I can't imagine being in a table with a DM that has such zealotry for "HONESTY ABOVE FUN" If you wanted your game to accidentally end to an abrupt TPK, why'd you decide to become a DM in the first place, if you're a DM who's enslaved by math rocks? A cheap death group death doesn't drive fun, it halt the game for another 2 hours while everyone writes some bland new character as their original plan has gone to shit. Wow, fun!

[@Definetly_not_a_BOT]

Let's fudge them all!🎉

[@Mystic-Arts-DM]

Fudging ALL of them probably isn't a great idea....

[@ninjunc]

Well said. The first time I ever fudged dice was for a game I ran for two first-timers. The roll should have caused a TPK but I didn't have the heart to snuff out that sparkle in their eyes of discovering this new thing called TTRPG. So instead I delt some wounds and a couple permanent disabilities (missing limbs) and acted shocked that they had survived against all odds. They were enthralled, giddy, and challenged to be creative in their attempt to finish the quest, now handicapped. That said...I don't fudge dice. I do occasionally manipulate mechanics to guarantee maximal enjoyment for the players.