Re: [DL] Fudging

[Jason Young <jason_d_young@yahoo.com>]

--- Greg Vose <kitsune@xmission.com> wrote:
> The exact same thing holds true here.  The GM screwed up.  It is all
> about
> suspense. It is all about the "good death."  It is all about the story. 
> It
> is not in the slightest bit about the die rolls.  It means that you have
> to
> be a good Marshall/DM/GM (this applies to all RPGs) rather than a
> mediocre
> one.  And the mediocre GM is always the one who relies on those die
> rolls.

I don't know if I would go quite that far in characterizing GM's as good
or bad in this way, as it's a matter of style.

Here's the question to ask yourself: If the GM shouldn't have let you die
when these rolls came up, why were you rolling all those other times when
you succeeded? You say it's all about the story, but if you aren't willing
to permit randomness and an occasional detrimental result, perhaps even a
catastrophic result, why roll dice at all? 

But many of the games I play are from Pinnacle, and so have a mechanic for
getting out of those situations (Fate Chips and bennies). If you fail at
something, chances are it's going to burn chips and you'll end up weaker
in the big fight, but you'll at least get there.

Although I agree that there was no need to end the campaign there. I can
think of many, many ways to get the players (if not the characters) back
to the climax of the campaign. I'd agree that the GM failed in that
respect.

My 2 coins.

Jason

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online
http://webhosting.yahoo.com