As a DM, I have fudged rolls. I have only ever done so to improve the fun of the party. This includes things like downgrading critical hits to regular hits (IE treating it as a 19) when the party is in danger of dying to something they should statistically have no major problem with. I have also used it to make the opponents actually hit when I've been rolling 2's and 3's consistently, because if they didn't then the fight becomes low-risk.
I have moved away from this a lot compared to when I started DMing. I used to fudge rolls on the fly, now I have to really justify it - and the justfication to me is player enjoyment. A monster failing a saving throw against a player who is expending a spell slot, knowing that the monster is going to die before it acts again anyway, is an excellent example. With a Monk and Barbarian queueing up to hack and beat it to death and it only having 10hp left, the warlock using a spell slot to force a save deserves the epic final blow, and I will not let the dice deny them.
Curious about how people feel about fudging monster health too. I had a monster with 68hp left, and the barbarian got a critical hit with a magic weapon, and ended up dealing 65 damage to it. I said it died - not least because the barbarian had dealt a huge amount of damage, but also because they had missed 6 attacks in a row, with advantage from Reckless. Do people use the same logic behind this? Is fudging health the same as fudging dice rolls?
@ThorukDuckSlayer I 100% would have done the same thing with the monsters health. I keep very close track of who has landed the killing blow through every session, and encounter. If it is player A's turn and they have not hit or landed the killing blow in while, and I know that it is more then likely the monster will be dead before it makes it back to Player A's turn I will lower the monster's health to however much damage Player A did. I don't do this a lot, but sometimes it is necessary to throw your players a win. In one of the campaigns I am DMing right now there is a player who rarely rolls above a 7 on the d20....it is pretty crazy. So when she does roll high enough to actually hit, I let her take the win. That campaign is coming up on the 2 year mark and she has only killed maybe 5 monsters, probably all because I reduced the HP on her turn so she could have some fun too.
Regarding the "Characters Can't Die" line of questioning, I have a thing in my games where I ask my players, usually in session 0, how they would like death to go if it does go. Would they prefer that the character dies and they make a new one, would they prefer a final chance of survival (deal with the devil, challenge the reaper, that sort of thing) or would they prefer that their character doesn't die. All of these are legitimate options, because they affect the fun of the table. It's also possible to accomodate different playstyles at one table - I have one player who says they want the risk of their character dying and not coming back, and the rest have said they would prefer a last chance to come back. Having one character get a deal with the devil whilst another just dies is not only fine for the game, it is excellent for the narrative - why did they get that chance, and the other did not? Also, what price will the Devil want (oh, there will be a price).
There is a difference between no consequence and no death, because death is the ultimate consequence for the Player (not the Character). It means all the backstory, lore, personalisation, and character building ended. It's death, after all. Failure - the village being destroyed, the princess stealing the dragon, the gates to hell opening - these are high consequence to the Character, but not so much to the Player - the Player will continue to play their Character through this next chapter of the game, having lost nothing they were emotionally attached to. Most players are far, far more attached to their characters than thy are anything else in the game. Death is the ultimate consequence for them.
@JustaFarmer When you say "We have had 6 char (its characters not char, btw :) ) deaths in the past 8 sessions." Do you mean 6 characters have been reduced to 0 hit points, or 6 characters have been reduced to 0 hit points and failed their death saves, and not been resurrected? Just wondering if you are saying six total deaths, gone from the game, player had to make a new character in the last 8 sessions, or just that they "died" in during the course of the game session. I'm also curious as to the levels of the characters who died. Since I'm asking for a bunch of info that has nothing to do with the OP, ill also asked if you would elaborate on the circumstances of your TPK....just because I'm curious.
Thanks
I am talking "dead dead, put the char sheet on the wall of dead chars at the local gaming cafe, roll a new char." Chars were 5th and 6th level over that run of sessions. As for the TPK, the players used 7th level versions of their existing PC's, and at the end of the 2 session "one-shot", they all died facing the Big Bad, which they had collectively reduced to 16 HP from some 48. It was something like a 9th level Wizard, and the group had wiped out all his minions. The players knew that this was a parallel universe, for the one-shot, and those chars would be still available for the campaign. But all the dead chars in the campaign, yeah, they are finito. Of those 6, a couple died due to horribly bad decisions by the players, and one had rolled a 1 after rolling a 9 on death saves. The others, well, we engaged when we should have run.
I see dnd as a story ... Take dr who we all know he won't fully die but we want to see how he escapes death and damnation
D&D (it is not dnd) is NOT a TV show, with a pre-written script, where said char is a hero and can never die.
Well that is just patently false. DnD can absolutely be like a television show where the heroes don't die if thats how that table wants to play it. YOUR way of playing DnD isn't the "right" way to play, it is just YOUR way to play DnD.
I see dnd as a story ... Take dr who we all know he won't fully die but we want to see how he escapes death and damnation
D&D (it is not dnd) is NOT a TV show, with a pre-written script, where said char is a hero and can never die.
You should be more specific. YOUR D&D game is not a TV show where characters are heroes that won't die despite many plot twists and dire situations.
However, that does NOT describe all of D&D or DnD (since honestly who really cares which of the many accepted acronyms are used and this site is specifically dndbeyond :) ). Perhaps not even a significant fraction of actual D&D games since in most of the games I have run and played, player deaths are actually very infrequent and I've never run nor been a part of a TPK. On the other hand, your group has had character deaths in 6 of the last 8 sessions and one TPK. That describes a style of D&D that I, and a lot of other folks, simply do NOT play. Yet, we ARE playing D&D ... your style of game doesn't apply to anyone else except you and your group.
To me this is just another tool to adjust difficulty, usually in a last-ditch effort to adjust other changes I have made.
Don't pretend that written adventures and the CR system are so ironclad that you can always give a party a solid challenge by playing it strictly by the book. I am constantly upping difficulty beyond what is recommended in order to give my players any challenge at all. This includes adding features and abilities to monsters, adding more monsters, increasing monster stats, adding punishing terrain features, adding additional requirements for success or completion, and so on.
As such, in every encounter the party faces I've already "fudged" things heavily in my favor. Any pulled punches are a result of me reevaluating the overblown measures that I've already put out there.
I will say that I rarely do it and when I do I chalk up the encounter as a design failure to learn from. But I think it's wild to call it cheating. This is not Monopoly with hard, thoroughly-tested paths. It is a game of constant guesswork and adjustment. Just because some might leave all that guesswork to the vague guidelines the devs have put out doesn't mean their game is any more solid or honestly challenging.
I'll also say though that I have played with a DM that fudges the game a LOT. All rolls are hidden, and every encounter has a similar trajectory - it starts out dire, looks like we're outmatched, but eventually we always overcome the odds with the DM narrating our improbable successes with great vigor. I appreciate the drama he's trying to inject, but it feels like it doesn't matter what I do in combat or if I'm even there at all. Like any tool, fudging dice can be abused or overused.
Re: That DM that "narrates improbable success", do an experiment. When the next combat comes up, have your PC do the most ridiculous, counter-productive actions possible. If your PC is STILL successful, then it is time to walk away from that table, because the dice rolls are meaningless. Unless you are comfortable with your PC just being along for the ride.
For what it's worth, this particular game is more about enjoying time with friends, and the out-of-combat shenanigans are a lot of fun so I stick with it. I have two other games with different groups that are more "serious D&D" to scratch that itch.
I see dnd as a story ... Take dr who we all know he won't fully die but we want to see how he escapes death and damnation
D&D (it is not dnd) is NOT a TV show, with a pre-written script, where said char is a hero and can never die.
You should be more specific. YOUR D&D game is not a TV show where characters are heroes that won't die despite many plot twists and dire situations.
However, that does NOT describe all of D&D or DnD (since honestly who really cares which of the many accepted acronyms are used and this site is specifically dndbeyond :) ). Perhaps not even a significant fraction of actual D&D games since in most of the games I have run and played, player deaths are actually very infrequent and I've never run nor been a part of a TPK. On the other hand, your group has had character deaths in 6 of the last 8 sessions and one TPK. That describes a style of D&D that I, and a lot of other folks, simply do NOT play. Yet, we ARE playing D&D ... your style of game doesn't apply to anyone else except you and your group.
LOL....the wall of dead chars the cafe owner has to clear on a very regular basis. But you keep on believing that D&D is some kind of scripted show.
We have had 6 char deaths in the past 8 sessions. (That does not include the TPK in the one-shot I ran when the DM was away). We all understand that PC's can and will die because the setting is tough. It actually follows far more of what is in the DMG compared to other campaigns I have seen.
I dunno. I mean - to each their own, right? You seem to like that style of play, so I'm by no means going to tell you that's wrong.
However, to me that sounds like sheer drudgery. It also sounds like your GM has serious difficulties getting matching encounters to the strength of the party. And it sounds like you'd spend more time rerolling than playing. Also, to die that much you can't spend a lot of time out of combat.
I mean, it's certainly not for me. I'll take a session with no combats over one with two any time. Combat is a necessity of the game, but by far the least interesting aspect. To me =)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
We have had 6 char deaths in the past 8 sessions. (That does not include the TPK in the one-shot I ran when the DM was away). We all understand that PC's can and will die because the setting is tough. It actually follows far more of what is in the DMG compared to other campaigns I have seen.
I dunno. I mean - to each their own, right? You seem to like that style of play, so I'm by no means going to tell you that's wrong.
However, to me that sounds like sheer drudgery. It also sounds like your GM has serious difficulties getting matching encounters to the strength of the party. And it sounds like you'd spend more time rerolling than playing. Also, to die that much you can't spend a lot of time out of combat.
I mean, it's certainly not for me. I'll take a session with no combats over one with two any time. Combat is a necessity of the game, but by far the least interesting aspect. To me =)
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
We have had 6 char deaths in the past 8 sessions. (That does not include the TPK in the one-shot I ran when the DM was away). We all understand that PC's can and will die because the setting is tough. It actually follows far more of what is in the DMG compared to other campaigns I have seen.
I dunno. I mean - to each their own, right? You seem to like that style of play, so I'm by no means going to tell you that's wrong.
However, to me that sounds like sheer drudgery. It also sounds like your GM has serious difficulties getting matching encounters to the strength of the party. And it sounds like you'd spend more time rerolling than playing. Also, to die that much you can't spend a lot of time out of combat.
I mean, it's certainly not for me. I'll take a session with no combats over one with two any time. Combat is a necessity of the game, but by far the least interesting aspect. To me =)
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
Backstories are not important to you. You are not the only DM in the world your opinion is not a fact please quit trying to portray it as such.
We have had 6 char deaths in the past 8 sessions. (That does not include the TPK in the one-shot I ran when the DM was away). We all understand that PC's can and will die because the setting is tough. It actually follows far more of what is in the DMG compared to other campaigns I have seen.
I dunno. I mean - to each their own, right? You seem to like that style of play, so I'm by no means going to tell you that's wrong.
However, to me that sounds like sheer drudgery. It also sounds like your GM has serious difficulties getting matching encounters to the strength of the party. And it sounds like you'd spend more time rerolling than playing. Also, to die that much you can't spend a lot of time out of combat.
I mean, it's certainly not for me. I'll take a session with no combats over one with two any time. Combat is a necessity of the game, but by far the least interesting aspect. To me =)
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
Backstories are not important to you. You are not the only DM in the world your opinion is not a fact please quit trying to portray it as such.
I don't think @JustaFarmer actually DMs, Maybe sometimes when the DM can't? That is based off of replies above where they @JustaFarmer indicated they DMed the one shot TPK, because the DM was gone. @JustaFarmer I don't want to highjack this thread talking with you about the version of DND you play. But it would be lovely if you would start a thread about it somewhere, I am genuinely and sincerely interested, based on the things you post it seems so much different then what most seem to do.
So, for those who play it that chars can't die, do you still track hit points? And if so, why?
In technical terms, PC's can die. But I've not seen a PC death in my gaming group since ... oh, I'm going to say 2005. That's close enough for jazz.
Why track hitpoints? What, you think they're there to measure when you die? No. They're there as a tension builder. They measure not when you die, but when you potentially lose the fight. And of course there are consequences. But we're not playing a war game. We're playing a role playing game. That's important. If you die, the role is no longer playable. Or rather, the long, slow decomposition in the cold, dark earth is a ... rather different story than the one about heroics told heretofore.
So. You lose the fight, you either run or are taken captive or fail to protect an objective, or some other thing happens. The story takes a turn. That's the consequence.
We have had 6 char deaths in the past 8 sessions. (That does not include the TPK in the one-shot I ran when the DM was away). We all understand that PC's can and will die because the setting is tough. It actually follows far more of what is in the DMG compared to other campaigns I have seen.
This thread, as all others on fudging rolls, has taken the left turn into "You're doing it wrong" territory, which is a dead end, pointless discussion. Anyone who knows and understands TTRPGs will know that there are literally hundreds of ways to play, and as long as everyone at the table is enjoying themselves, it's the RIGHT way to play. Belittling those who enjoy a different style of play isn't productive or useful to be honest and shows an elitist attitude that can and should be ignored.
Also to note, those who say fudging the odd roll here and there show a narrow mindset and an inability to understand the difference between fudging a roll on occasion to ignoring every number that shows up on the dice. They are convinced that EVERY encounter is nerfed by the DM to allow the players to cake-walk it. I realize most of them take a lot of pride in being "hardcore" or "purist" but in truth, they are laser focused on THEIR opinion and seem to fell that anyone who doesn't agree is an idiot.
Summary - The only time you're NOT playing DND (I did that on purpose) right is when the people at your table are not having fun. EVERYTHING else is "right", no matter if you have 2 character deaths per session, or none in the entire campaign. The important thing to remember is to find folks who enjoy the same style as you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
We have had 6 char deaths in the past 8 sessions. (That does not include the TPK in the one-shot I ran when the DM was away). We all understand that PC's can and will die because the setting is tough. It actually follows far more of what is in the DMG compared to other campaigns I have seen.
I dunno. I mean - to each their own, right? You seem to like that style of play, so I'm by no means going to tell you that's wrong.
However, to me that sounds like sheer drudgery. It also sounds like your GM has serious difficulties getting matching encounters to the strength of the party. And it sounds like you'd spend more time rerolling than playing. Also, to die that much you can't spend a lot of time out of combat.
I mean, it's certainly not for me. I'll take a session with no combats over one with two any time. Combat is a necessity of the game, but by far the least interesting aspect. To me =)
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
Backstories are not important to you. You are not the only DM in the world your opinion is not a fact please quit trying to portray it as such.
I don't think @JustaFarmer actually DMs, Maybe sometimes when the DM can't? That is based off of replies above where they @JustaFarmer indicated they DMed the one shot TPK, because the DM was gone. @JustaFarmer I don't want to highjack this thread talking with you about the version of DND you play. But it would be lovely if you would start a thread about it somewhere, I am genuinely and sincerely interested, based on the things you post it seems so much different then what most seem to do.
So, for those who play it that chars can't die, do you still track hit points? And if so, why?
In technical terms, PC's can die. But I've not seen a PC death in my gaming group since ... oh, I'm going to say 2005. That's close enough for jazz.
Why track hitpoints? What, you think they're there to measure when you die? No. They're there as a tension builder. They measure not when you die, but when you potentially lose the fight. And of course there are consequences. But we're not playing a war game. We're playing a role playing game. That's important. If you die, the role is no longer playable. Or rather, the long, slow decomposition in the cold, dark earth is a ... rather different story than the one about heroics told heretofore.
So. You lose the fight, you either run or are taken captive or fail to protect an objective, or some other thing happens. The story takes a turn. That's the consequence.
We have had 6 char deaths in the past 8 sessions. (That does not include the TPK in the one-shot I ran when the DM was away). We all understand that PC's can and will die because the setting is tough. It actually follows far more of what is in the DMG compared to other campaigns I have seen.
And you would be wrong in your assumptions. I DM a 1e game, DM a 5e game, play in a Pathfinder game, AND PLAY in another 5e game (which I DM'ed the one-shot). In NONE of those games is cheating on dice rolls allowed, all have char death.
Seeing a lot of needless nitpicking corrections here (correcting "Char" to "Characters", and "dnd" to "D&D", when it's not really necessary). That sort of behaviour makes is a needlessly hostile place to be, and that's less fun for everyone!
As a DM, I have fudged rolls. I have only ever done so to improve the fun of the party. This includes things like downgrading critical hits to regular hits (IE treating it as a 19) when the party is in danger of dying to something they should statistically have no major problem with. I have also used it to make the opponents actually hit when I've been rolling 2's and 3's consistently, because if they didn't then the fight becomes low-risk.
I have moved away from this a lot compared to when I started DMing. I used to fudge rolls on the fly, now I have to really justify it - and the justfication to me is player enjoyment. A monster failing a saving throw against a player who is expending a spell slot, knowing that the monster is going to die before it acts again anyway, is an excellent example. With a Monk and Barbarian queueing up to hack and beat it to death and it only having 10hp left, the warlock using a spell slot to force a save deserves the epic final blow, and I will not let the dice deny them.
Curious about how people feel about fudging monster health too. I had a monster with 68hp left, and the barbarian got a critical hit with a magic weapon, and ended up dealing 65 damage to it. I said it died - not least because the barbarian had dealt a huge amount of damage, but also because they had missed 6 attacks in a row, with advantage from Reckless. Do people use the same logic behind this? Is fudging health the same as fudging dice rolls?
0% agree with this.
The game is made to use with dice. Taking this away and making the results what you want removes the dice totally.
At this point you might as well let the players decide their dice rolls as well.
If you do not want the player to go down then attack a different player. Or preferably let then go down and start making death saving throws as that is built into the game.
If they die then let then die and let others bring them back as that is also built into the game.
If none of that is to your liking then have someone show up and help as that is built into the game.
Fudging rolls (to me) is not in the spirit of the game at all.
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
And as I said: It sounds to me like you're not playing an RPG, but a tactics game. That's entirely fine, but I do feel that for such a purpose, D&D is a sadly lacking system.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
And as I said: It sounds to me like you're not playing an RPG, but a tactics game. That's entirely fine, but I do feel that for such a purpose, D&D is a sadly lacking system.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
And as I said: It sounds to me like you're not playing an RPG, but a tactics game. That's entirely fine, but I do feel that for such a purpose, D&D is a sadly lacking system.
Funnily enough, when I read through hundreds of pages in the DMG, PHB, XGTE, MM, etc, I see 90+ percent talk about tactics and mechanics, and scant few pages about how to role play the backstory of a PC. D&D IS a dice based tactics game that was designed where the dice rolls are critical to detailing what happens in the game. When players and DM's cheat on rolls they are denying the very essence of the game.
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
And as I said: It sounds to me like you're not playing an RPG, but a tactics game. That's entirely fine, but I do feel that for such a purpose, D&D is a sadly lacking system.
Funnily enough, when I read through hundreds of pages in the DMG, PHB, XGTE, MM, etc, I see 90+ percent talk about tactics and mechanics, and scant few pages about how to role play the backstory of a PC. D&D IS a dice based tactics game that was designed where the dice rolls are critical to detailing what happens in the game. When players and DM's cheat on rolls they are denying the very essence of the game.
That's actually fairly common for TTRPGs... the roleplaying generally doesn't have as many hard and fast rules compared to combat, largely because it doesn't need it as much. But those rules are still there, and the story and character interaction is a key part of the game. How much so depends on the table... some gamers treat their characters purely as functional units, while others treat them as a character they're playing in a long-running improv. Most gamers end up somewhere in the middle... but the game doesn't fully cater to either extreme. I will agree that the game is more built around combat than character interaction, but the current version of the game was designed with roleplay in mind as a primary function. 4e tried to go much harder and prioritizing combat over all else, and it's now the least-liked edition in D&D.
@ThorukDuckSlayer I 100% would have done the same thing with the monsters health. I keep very close track of who has landed the killing blow through every session, and encounter. If it is player A's turn and they have not hit or landed the killing blow in while, and I know that it is more then likely the monster will be dead before it makes it back to Player A's turn I will lower the monster's health to however much damage Player A did. I don't do this a lot, but sometimes it is necessary to throw your players a win. In one of the campaigns I am DMing right now there is a player who rarely rolls above a 7 on the d20....it is pretty crazy. So when she does roll high enough to actually hit, I let her take the win. That campaign is coming up on the 2 year mark and she has only killed maybe 5 monsters, probably all because I reduced the HP on her turn so she could have some fun too.
Regarding the "Characters Can't Die" line of questioning, I have a thing in my games where I ask my players, usually in session 0, how they would like death to go if it does go. Would they prefer that the character dies and they make a new one, would they prefer a final chance of survival (deal with the devil, challenge the reaper, that sort of thing) or would they prefer that their character doesn't die. All of these are legitimate options, because they affect the fun of the table. It's also possible to accomodate different playstyles at one table - I have one player who says they want the risk of their character dying and not coming back, and the rest have said they would prefer a last chance to come back. Having one character get a deal with the devil whilst another just dies is not only fine for the game, it is excellent for the narrative - why did they get that chance, and the other did not? Also, what price will the Devil want (oh, there will be a price).
There is a difference between no consequence and no death, because death is the ultimate consequence for the Player (not the Character). It means all the backstory, lore, personalisation, and character building ended. It's death, after all. Failure - the village being destroyed, the princess stealing the dragon, the gates to hell opening - these are high consequence to the Character, but not so much to the Player - the Player will continue to play their Character through this next chapter of the game, having lost nothing they were emotionally attached to. Most players are far, far more attached to their characters than thy are anything else in the game. Death is the ultimate consequence for them.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
I am talking "dead dead, put the char sheet on the wall of dead chars at the local gaming cafe, roll a new char." Chars were 5th and 6th level over that run of sessions. As for the TPK, the players used 7th level versions of their existing PC's, and at the end of the 2 session "one-shot", they all died facing the Big Bad, which they had collectively reduced to 16 HP from some 48. It was something like a 9th level Wizard, and the group had wiped out all his minions. The players knew that this was a parallel universe, for the one-shot, and those chars would be still available for the campaign. But all the dead chars in the campaign, yeah, they are finito. Of those 6, a couple died due to horribly bad decisions by the players, and one had rolled a 1 after rolling a 9 on death saves. The others, well, we engaged when we should have run.
Well that is just patently false. DnD can absolutely be like a television show where the heroes don't die if thats how that table wants to play it. YOUR way of playing DnD isn't the "right" way to play, it is just YOUR way to play DnD.
You should be more specific. YOUR D&D game is not a TV show where characters are heroes that won't die despite many plot twists and dire situations.
However, that does NOT describe all of D&D or DnD (since honestly who really cares which of the many accepted acronyms are used and this site is specifically dndbeyond :) ). Perhaps not even a significant fraction of actual D&D games since in most of the games I have run and played, player deaths are actually very infrequent and I've never run nor been a part of a TPK. On the other hand, your group has had character deaths in 6 of the last 8 sessions and one TPK. That describes a style of D&D that I, and a lot of other folks, simply do NOT play. Yet, we ARE playing D&D ... your style of game doesn't apply to anyone else except you and your group.
For what it's worth, this particular game is more about enjoying time with friends, and the out-of-combat shenanigans are a lot of fun so I stick with it. I have two other games with different groups that are more "serious D&D" to scratch that itch.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
LOL....the wall of dead chars the cafe owner has to clear on a very regular basis. But you keep on believing that D&D is some kind of scripted show.
I dunno. I mean - to each their own, right? You seem to like that style of play, so I'm by no means going to tell you that's wrong.
However, to me that sounds like sheer drudgery. It also sounds like your GM has serious difficulties getting matching encounters to the strength of the party. And it sounds like you'd spend more time rerolling than playing. Also, to die that much you can't spend a lot of time out of combat.
I mean, it's certainly not for me. I'll take a session with no combats over one with two any time. Combat is a necessity of the game, but by far the least interesting aspect. To me =)
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Re-rolling a PC takes about 10 minutes, plus we all have backup PC's ready to go. Backstories are totally irrelevant to a game, so as I said, it take 10 minutes.
Back stories are irrelevant to a game if you are just completely ditching the RP of TTRPG.
Backstories are not important to you. You are not the only DM in the world your opinion is not a fact please quit trying to portray it as such.
I don't think @JustaFarmer actually DMs, Maybe sometimes when the DM can't? That is based off of replies above where they @JustaFarmer indicated they DMed the one shot TPK, because the DM was gone. @JustaFarmer I don't want to highjack this thread talking with you about the version of DND you play. But it would be lovely if you would start a thread about it somewhere, I am genuinely and sincerely interested, based on the things you post it seems so much different then what most seem to do.
This thread, as all others on fudging rolls, has taken the left turn into "You're doing it wrong" territory, which is a dead end, pointless discussion. Anyone who knows and understands TTRPGs will know that there are literally hundreds of ways to play, and as long as everyone at the table is enjoying themselves, it's the RIGHT way to play. Belittling those who enjoy a different style of play isn't productive or useful to be honest and shows an elitist attitude that can and should be ignored.
Also to note, those who say fudging the odd roll here and there show a narrow mindset and an inability to understand the difference between fudging a roll on occasion to ignoring every number that shows up on the dice. They are convinced that EVERY encounter is nerfed by the DM to allow the players to cake-walk it. I realize most of them take a lot of pride in being "hardcore" or "purist" but in truth, they are laser focused on THEIR opinion and seem to fell that anyone who doesn't agree is an idiot.
Summary - The only time you're NOT playing DND (I did that on purpose) right is when the people at your table are not having fun. EVERYTHING else is "right", no matter if you have 2 character deaths per session, or none in the entire campaign. The important thing to remember is to find folks who enjoy the same style as you.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
And you would be wrong in your assumptions. I DM a 1e game, DM a 5e game, play in a Pathfinder game, AND PLAY in another 5e game (which I DM'ed the one-shot). In NONE of those games is cheating on dice rolls allowed, all have char death.
100% agree with this.
0% agree with this.
The game is made to use with dice. Taking this away and making the results what you want removes the dice totally.
At this point you might as well let the players decide their dice rolls as well.
If you do not want the player to go down then attack a different player. Or preferably let then go down and start making death saving throws as that is built into the game.
If they die then let then die and let others bring them back as that is also built into the game.
If none of that is to your liking then have someone show up and help as that is built into the game.
Fudging rolls (to me) is not in the spirit of the game at all.
And as I said: It sounds to me like you're not playing an RPG, but a tactics game. That's entirely fine, but I do feel that for such a purpose, D&D is a sadly lacking system.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
There's always 4E :)
There's that, yes =)
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Funnily enough, when I read through hundreds of pages in the DMG, PHB, XGTE, MM, etc, I see 90+ percent talk about tactics and mechanics, and scant few pages about how to role play the backstory of a PC. D&D IS a dice based tactics game that was designed where the dice rolls are critical to detailing what happens in the game. When players and DM's cheat on rolls they are denying the very essence of the game.
That's actually fairly common for TTRPGs... the roleplaying generally doesn't have as many hard and fast rules compared to combat, largely because it doesn't need it as much. But those rules are still there, and the story and character interaction is a key part of the game. How much so depends on the table... some gamers treat their characters purely as functional units, while others treat them as a character they're playing in a long-running improv. Most gamers end up somewhere in the middle... but the game doesn't fully cater to either extreme. I will agree that the game is more built around combat than character interaction, but the current version of the game was designed with roleplay in mind as a primary function. 4e tried to go much harder and prioritizing combat over all else, and it's now the least-liked edition in D&D.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium