Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site uwvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!uwvax!dave From: dave@uwvax.ARPA Newsgroups: net.games.frp Subject: Re: Fudging the Dice Message-ID: <343@uwvax.ARPA> Date: Thu, 19-Jul-84 10:22:24 EDT Article-I.D.: uwvax.343 Posted: Thu Jul 19 10:22:24 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 21-Jul-84 03:11:50 EDT References: <293@daemon.UUCP> Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept Lines: 30 > I fudge the dice only to insure randomness. That is, if an incredible > streak of bad (or good) luck threatens to make the game uninteresting > (Yawn. another dragon?) then it seems appropriate to keep the players > off guard. Most monsters (we're talking monsters worthy of a party which fights dragons) have a great deal of non-randomness about them. Who is to say what method of attack a minor daemon (like lpd for example :-) will take. Most often they'll start of toying with the party. If this proves dangerous, the party gets pounded. Also, dragon breath can work in the same way (except the dragon may breath first and ask questions later). The DM should be impartial, but when s/he is playing the monster, the monster shouldn't be impartial. That dragon is out to protect his treasure! > I agree with the person who said that a player's character > should live or die more by that character's skills rather than an > incredible streak of rolls. Ideally the players will never know when > or if you are altering rolls; it should be that subtle. I couldn't agree more. In the group with whom I often play (play, not DM), we've had a couple challenges to the DM's 'die rolls' in such cases the rolls have been true (leaving one very red-faced person on the other side of the screen). If he has actually fudged his dice, (he won't admit to this), its been very subtle. -- Dave Cohrs @ wisconsin ...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,ucbvax,uwm-evax}!uwvax!dave dave@wisc-rsch.arpa