God damn it. Stop. You can't be this based. I have only fudged dice rolls in one session and it left a bad taste in my mouth (even though it was a game with exploding dice and my players were all going to die in the first round of combat if I hadn't). The dice simulate the world. The dice are god. Respect the dice.
I sometimes fudge rolls when I miss an attack 😎 three rounds of missed attacks really drains all tension. I'm fine with a game without combat, but not with a game that has tensionless combats.
If you only call for perception checks in cases where it could be dramatic, such as when the characters are hanging out around a campfire at night and they're being stalked, but not otherwise, I could see that easily telegraphing danger, so that even in they fail the check they'd still be alert. With an ideal group the players would still accept the roll and continue on as if unaware in character, but I'm not sure if it's realistic to assume. What about calling for perception checks even if there's no danger just to keep it a bit mysterious? Or rolling them for them in secret.
I think player should not roll for perception, the GM should. Same for investigation, deception and shit like that. Whenever there are infos revealed through a roll, the player should not know wether or not they are true IMHO. I know it may feel bad for some players and GM not to have all the controll over their character but I think it would get a better realism and immersion. For things like stalkers and ambushes I would let them know and remind whenever they enter and stay in an area where the NPCs warrant for such a preoccupation. Moreover describe to them that there are places that accomodate an ambush, just so an eventual surprising demise feels justified. If a stalker fails stealth, let them know, make an opposed roll against party perception in secret. As long as you are fair with the rolls, I don't think your player will feel offended nor betrayed by it.
@jacopodondi2372 Absolutely, the GM should always make those rolls, and in secret! (This is why it's important to have copies of the players' character sheets, or at least notes of their awareness-related skills).
I've been ok with fudging dice in combat to correct a miscalculation of balance. I've not been able to get my group together since I've discovered your "one true way" yet, though I'm convinced in theory that it's right. With your system there would not be any need to fudge dice.
Lots of great points, its surprising more people aren't discussing what you guys do in your videos. Do you have a Black Lodge Discord channel? Or just twitter?
Also - my own style has now moved to full player opacity to mechanics. But even if you don't go that far, we've always worked to unite the players minds with their PCs. Therefore, any rolls related to perception are done by the GMs (hidden), & the GM relays what they perceive/believe. This has serious benefits for immersion; the players don't have to pretend they don't know that they rolled well/poorly because they have no idea. They only know what the GM describes.
Watching your backlog on spotify, and thought Id come comment on here. Im agreement with most of what you guys are saying in these videos. I first came into the hobby around when ander was making a lot of videos, so I remember Matt from around then. I took a lot of that advice to heart. As to this video topic, im definitely trying to call for less rolls, I think I called for around 10 tonight. I feel a little bad when I call for too little (like one or two) because I'm mininizing the game too much. It's a pretty fine balance that I'm still working on. It's kind of weird running a playtest in this style because you want to engage with the mechanics as much as possible to test them, but doing so is a disservice to the game because it would make it worse.
@blacklodgegames Thanks :) Gave you 5 stars, I love that it's on there. It's a lot easier for me to use. Also, I agree with you guys, I don't understand why fudging is so accepted in this hobby. I find it ridiculous. If people are having issues with that sort of thing, they should just use meta currency. I don't like meta currency, but at least it's not cheating. Clearly, they need it.
I like traveller because you can essentially gauge skill levels vs each other as a end-result, instead of rolling. C&C is an improved 2eAD&D with general attribute rolls in primary/secondary levels, streamlining that need of skill lists, so I like using that. Any mechanic that makes the game run fast and closer to movie cinematics works for me!
Just a free unasked for tip: maybe while making videos like these reduce some of the criticism for aspects of the game that might seem obvious. I imagine that there are quite a few people, both players and GMs alike that don't realize they are doing some of these things. An example I would point to in the video is where you are talking about when players ask if they can do a perception check. You might be unintentionally driving away the very people it seems as if this video is made for. Anywho, take the advice or leave it. Either way, best of luck on the growth of the channel. =)
I understand what you are saying, but it's not our nature to mince words. We do this podcast as a way of sharing the types of conversations we actually have with each other and if we sugar coat things we'll sound phony. This is more for people who find this sort of conversation interesting or entertaining, even if they disagree. If they are put off by our style, that's just the way the cookie crumbles.
Yeah, at like 4:49 right? That jumped out as being so glib and rude. People can be drawn to D&D for the fantasy elements, or the puzzles, or the progression, without being initially good at acting/role playing.
On Perception; many times I roll it unasked… because sometimes I’m not sure what my character might take from the situation. It’s a check on how the Player and the Character are different. A lot of “smart” players play dumb characters. And unfortunately dumb people like to play “smart” characters. God help us all. But that perception (me just doing it on the side without saying a word) tells me what my character sees. Not what I see.
There is never a legitimate reason to fudge your dice rolls as a Dungeon Master. Convince me why I'm wrong (pro tip: you can't)
If you really really wanna cheapen chance and ruin your game it’s a pretty solid idea to fudge dice
@@Phred1994 yeah if you want to rob your players of agency and make their actions meaningless, it's a great way to do things.
God damn it. Stop. You can't be this based. I have only fudged dice rolls in one session and it left a bad taste in my mouth (even though it was a game with exploding dice and my players were all going to die in the first round of combat if I hadn't). The dice simulate the world. The dice are god. Respect the dice.
I sometimes fudge rolls when I miss an attack 😎 three rounds of missed attacks really drains all tension. I'm fine with a game without combat, but not with a game that has tensionless combats.
If you are learning and realize you shouldn't have called for a roll
Aw man yeah my favorite topic, MECHANICS! In all seriousness, mechanics are very important
Yep, they can make or break the gameplay
If you only call for perception checks in cases where it could be dramatic, such as when the characters are hanging out around a campfire at night and they're being stalked, but not otherwise, I could see that easily telegraphing danger, so that even in they fail the check they'd still be alert. With an ideal group the players would still accept the roll and continue on as if unaware in character, but I'm not sure if it's realistic to assume. What about calling for perception checks even if there's no danger just to keep it a bit mysterious? Or rolling them for them in secret.
I think player should not roll for perception, the GM should. Same for investigation, deception and shit like that. Whenever there are infos revealed through a roll, the player should not know wether or not they are true IMHO.
I know it may feel bad for some players and GM not to have all the controll over their character but I think it would get a better realism and immersion. For things like stalkers and ambushes I would let them know and remind whenever they enter and stay in an area where the NPCs warrant for such a preoccupation. Moreover describe to them that there are places that accomodate an ambush, just so an eventual surprising demise feels justified.
If a stalker fails stealth, let them know, make an opposed roll against party perception in secret. As long as you are fair with the rolls, I don't think your player will feel offended nor betrayed by it.
I have stealth, sense motive and perception written down behind my GM screen, as well as saves. I don't use it all the time, but it's a great tool!
@jacopodondi2372 Absolutely, the GM should always make those rolls, and in secret! (This is why it's important to have copies of the players' character sheets, or at least notes of their awareness-related skills).
This is why taking 10 or taking 20 was a thing.
I'm going through Lion & Dragon right now and taking a 10 is still in there.
I had to look up what that even was. Not only is it ghey roleplay. The mechanic is ghey.
@@SHONNER Only for players who don't like losing.
@@Lobsterwithinternet Plot dice.
I've been ok with fudging dice in combat to correct a miscalculation of balance. I've not been able to get my group together since I've discovered your "one true way" yet, though I'm convinced in theory that it's right. With your system there would not be any need to fudge dice.
Lots of great points, its surprising more people aren't discussing what you guys do in your videos. Do you have a Black Lodge Discord channel? Or just twitter?
In my game, the players were chasing a van, they caused the van to crash but failed a drive roll and also crashed
Also - my own style has now moved to full player opacity to mechanics. But even if you don't go that far, we've always worked to unite the players minds with their PCs. Therefore, any rolls related to perception are done by the GMs (hidden), & the GM relays what they perceive/believe. This has serious benefits for immersion; the players don't have to pretend they don't know that they rolled well/poorly because they have no idea. They only know what the GM describes.
Watching your backlog on spotify, and thought Id come comment on here. Im agreement with most of what you guys are saying in these videos. I first came into the hobby around when ander was making a lot of videos, so I remember Matt from around then. I took a lot of that advice to heart. As to this video topic, im definitely trying to call for less rolls, I think I called for around 10 tonight. I feel a little bad when I call for too little (like one or two) because I'm mininizing the game too much. It's a pretty fine balance that I'm still working on. It's kind of weird running a playtest in this style because you want to engage with the mechanics as much as possible to test them, but doing so is a disservice to the game because it would make it worse.
Very much appreciate you making your way through the show. Which reminds me, I forgot to add the latest episode to Spotify
@blacklodgegames Thanks :) Gave you 5 stars, I love that it's on there. It's a lot easier for me to use.
Also, I agree with you guys, I don't understand why fudging is so accepted in this hobby. I find it ridiculous. If people are having issues with that sort of thing, they should just use meta currency. I don't like meta currency, but at least it's not cheating. Clearly, they need it.
Gigachads never fudge. Normies be packin' it every day. lololol
I like traveller because you can essentially gauge skill levels vs each other as a end-result, instead of rolling. C&C is an improved 2eAD&D with general attribute rolls in primary/secondary levels, streamlining that need of skill lists, so I like using that. Any mechanic that makes the game run fast and closer to movie cinematics works for me!
Traveller and C&C are definitely on my list of games to check out soon
Good stuff, gents. We also believe in "Reason over randomness".
Just a free unasked for tip: maybe while making videos like these reduce some of the criticism for aspects of the game that might seem obvious. I imagine that there are quite a few people, both players and GMs alike that don't realize they are doing some of these things. An example I would point to in the video is where you are talking about when players ask if they can do a perception check. You might be unintentionally driving away the very people it seems as if this video is made for.
Anywho, take the advice or leave it. Either way, best of luck on the growth of the channel. =)
I understand what you are saying, but it's not our nature to mince words. We do this podcast as a way of sharing the types of conversations we actually have with each other and if we sugar coat things we'll sound phony. This is more for people who find this sort of conversation interesting or entertaining, even if they disagree. If they are put off by our style, that's just the way the cookie crumbles.
Yeah, at like 4:49 right? That jumped out as being so glib and rude. People can be drawn to D&D for the fantasy elements, or the puzzles, or the progression, without being initially good at acting/role playing.
On Perception; many times I roll it unasked… because sometimes I’m not sure what my character might take from the situation. It’s a check on how the Player and the Character are different. A lot of “smart” players play dumb characters. And unfortunately dumb people like to play “smart” characters.
God help us all.
But that perception (me just doing it on the side without saying a word) tells me what my character sees. Not what I see.