31
submitted 3 weeks ago by mr_noxx@lemmy.ml to c/rpg@ttrpg.network

For me, it was: "If it's going to help your players have more fun, cheat. Fudge a die roll. Make shit up. The dice don't tell you what needs to happen, your players' reactions do."

Obviously, many people will disagree with this, but I've always appreciated this advice, and I believe it has made me a better GM.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] flavonol@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

I agree that many seem to have a narrow view of combat outcomes. I've seen in a couple of threads that Basic Roleplaying, for example, is described as a "lethal" system unless player characters get double the hit points. This is in spite of the game engine document stating that characters can surrender or flee from a fight. Granted, death is mentioned far more often in that document than surrender, and it's a long document, so I'm not sure I can blame anyone for missing it. Fleeing is mentioned more frequently and there are several pages dedicated to chases.

I wonder how many tables would benefit from the game master simply asking players if they want to run away.

[-] kichae@wanderingadventure.party 1 points 2 weeks ago

flavonol@lemmy.world Many, I imagine.

I spend... too much time on the Pathfinder 2e subreddit, and it is so painfully clear from how quietly obsessed that space is with class build optimization, that the idea of fighting for anything but a decisive, 100% kill outcome (on either side) is unimaginable to most people there. I think the most recent thing I saw could be summed up as "what's the point of Hexploration if the outcome is just moderate difficulty fights?"

Even the idea of non-combat encounters or worldbuilding encounters are becoming alien to modern TTRPG fans, it seems.

this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2026
31 points (97.0% liked)

rpg

4740 readers
10 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS