Quote from: RPGPundit;976338"Player facing" rules and players-only dice-rolling are some examples of that, because they remove the opportunity for the GM to just alter the rules, and create a sense of player entitlement, where they feel like they would be legitimately justified in objecting if the GM just altered the game.

And yet this thread was prompted because of the "gazillion" variants people have put out for it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;976339Not as such. But it does prevent the GM from having some of the same latitude to just DIY wing-it in terms of what dice mechanics he chooses to use, or if he simply chooses to fudge.
One of the reasons for the GM Screen was so the GM could roll dice and then not actually bother to even look at them.

"The GM can't fudge dice rolls"  is a pure positive for me. I don't think it ever serves a game to call for a call for a dice roll then ignore the result because it didn't fit with the narrative you are you are trying to tell.  

However, if you like fudging dice rolls, the Black Hack still give you plenty of opportunity. In your review of Kaigaku, you state, "The Black Hack system has several features I strongly dislike. More than that, distrust. Because they are the kind of things Forge assholes came up with. First: the GM isn't allowed to roll dice." This simply isn't true, and I am not the first person to state it in thread, but you keep insisting on it.

According to the rules, the GM makes damage rolls, so you can still use hidden rolls and protect players from untimely deaths if that is your thing. The GM also makes wandering monster checks as well, so you can always use that as an excuse to rattle your dice pointlessly and not look at them if your game needs fake drama to keep players invested.

There is no place at all in the book where the GM is forbidden from rolling dice.

Quote from: RPGPundit;976338"Player facing" rules and players-only dice-rolling are some examples of that, because they remove the opportunity for the GM to just alter the rules,

How, exactly?

Logically speaking, you must be claiming that it's impossible to fudge the results or alter any mechanic which involves the players rolling the dice. But that's obviously not true. And even if it were true, such a conclusion would need to extend to ANY system featuring player rolling, not just player-faced mechanics. The only mechanics you would find acceptable would be GM-faced mechanics in which only the GM rolls the dice.

We'd also have to logically conclude that, if fudging / mechanical alteration is dependent on the GM rolling dice, that diceless systems would be unalterable for the GM. Which is also clearly nonsense.

Quote from: RPGPundit;976339Not as such. But it does prevent the GM from having some of the same latitude to just DIY wing-it in terms of what dice mechanics he chooses to use, or if he simply chooses to fudge.

I never thought that you would defend GM fudging.

Because, what could be reasons for a GM ignoring rolls?

• The result runs against his story. (Storytelling)
• The result kills his favourite NPC. (Mary Sue)
• The result kills a PC. (Playing favourites)
• The result deviates from his prep. (Lazyness or railroading)
• The result deprotagonizes the player (and the GM is a fan of the players).
• The roll was never called for, as the result was already in the mind of the GM. (Illusionism)

I can see good reasons for fudging some rolls ... like on a random table where I have a hard time applying the result (because I can't rationalize it, or I don't have the stats ready, or another line in the table immediately catches my imagination and the game would continue more smoothly if I just went with it).
Neither of which were made impossible or verboten by The Black Hack.

QuoteOne of the reasons for the GM Screen was so the GM could roll dice and then not actually bother to even look at them.

I am a defender and propagator of GM screens, but my screen is mainly used for

• hiding my notes, monster stats, and maps!
  
• sticking Post-its with PC info to it
• having often-needed tables handy
• hiding rolls that PCs know nothing about (stealth, surprise, detection, disarming traps)

Btw, The Black Hack Kickstarter came with a screen...

Quote from: Baulderstone;976402And yet this thread was prompted because of the "gazillion" variants people have put out for it.

Have you seen any variants that change the system to bring back monsters actually rolling to attack?

Quote from: Justin Alexander;976547How, exactly?

Logically speaking, you must be claiming that it's impossible to fudge the results or alter any mechanic which involves the players rolling the dice. But that's obviously not true. And even if it were true, such a conclusion would need to extend to ANY system featuring player rolling, not just player-faced mechanics. The only mechanics you would find acceptable would be GM-faced mechanics in which only the GM rolls the dice.

The point is, again, it creates an EXPECTATION in the players of the rules going a certain way. THEY, not the GM, are in control of the rolls, THEY have the system on their side if they want to cry foul at some GM ruling.

To change something, the GM would have to openly enter into conflict with his players, and this immediately take the game OUT of Immersion, and into the realm of people squabbling over rules here in the  material world.

Quote from: RPGPundit;977053Have you seen any variants that change the system to bring back monsters actually rolling to attack?

I have not. I have only read the core book. And as I have said repeatedly, there is nothing wrong with disliking the game because you as a GM want to roll the monster attacks. I like to roll for monsters myself.

I only got into this thread because you were flat out lying about the game.

Quote from: RPGPundit;977054The point is, again, it creates an EXPECTATION in the players of the rules going a certain way. THEY, not the GM, are in control of the rolls, THEY have the system on their side if they want to cry foul at some GM ruling.

To change something, the GM would have to openly enter into conflict with his players, and this immediately take the game OUT of Immersion, and into the realm of people squabbling over rules here in the  material world.

You are actually afraid to openly make a ruling at a table as a GM when dealing with people face-to-face? The only way you can try and control your game is to skulk behind a GM screen, fudging dice and hoping nobody notices what you are doing?

But since you are afraid the game won't let you change things, maybe this quote will make you feel better:

Quote from: David BlackIn the DIY community tradition the GM is encouraged to grow the game in the direction that suites [sic] them and their table.

There. The designer has granted permission for the GM to change the rules.

Quote from: Baulderstone;977068I have not. I have only read the core book. And as I have said repeatedly, there is nothing wrong with disliking the game because you as a GM want to roll the monster attacks. I like to roll for monsters myself.

I only got into this thread because you were flat out lying about the game.



You are actually afraid to openly make a ruling at a table as a GM when dealing with people face-to-face? The only way you can try and control your game is to skulk behind a GM screen, fudging dice and hoping nobody notices what you are doing?

It isn't about fear. It's about the breaking of Immersion. You know, the single fundamental point of the RPG experience?

QuoteThere. The designer has granted permission for the GM to change the rules.

Lovely, but then what's the point if the rules changes required to make the game effective for Emulation mean that you would no longer be playing the Black Hack?

Quote from: RPGPundit;977642Lovely, but then what's the point if the rules changes required to make the game effective for Emulation mean that you would no longer be playing the Black Hack?

Because it's fun?

The thing is about house ruling is at what point does it stop being fun and start being 'work'.  This threshold is different for everyone.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;977673The thing is about house ruling is at what point does it stop being fun and start being 'work'.  This threshold is different for everyone.

That's true enough. Same can be said for the rules bloat we saw in D&D2e and 3rd - 3.5. Only so many supplemental systems can be enjoyed before they become overbearing.

Quote from: Baulderstone;977068You are actually afraid to openly make a ruling at a table as a GM when dealing with people face-to-face? The only way you can try and control your game is to skulk behind a GM screen, fudging dice and hoping nobody notices what you are doing?

Pundie's support of fudging is a matter of record. What he appears to be claiming is that he can't figure out how to fudge a result if the players are rolling the dice: Like, he's never figured out how to have a PC in D&D "miss" an orc they should have hit; or given the orc a few extra hit points so that it doesn't die when it was supposed to.

I'm sure he thinks he's making some sort of point about the game. But all I'm hearing is someone describing their own gross incompetence. I'm completely baffled how someone could spend decades supposedly running RPGs while being a proponent of fudging, but have no idea how to do some of the most basic versions of it without... how did he put it? Openly entering into conflict with his players and squabbling over the rules?

Utterly bizarre.

Quote from: RPGPundit;977642Lovely, but then what's the point if the rules changes required to make the game effective for Emulation mean that you would no longer be playing the Black Hack?

You argue that this game somehow stops the GM from altering the rules and this is a problem. I point out the the designer actively encourages the GM to mess with the rules. You are now arguing that if the GM changes a rule, he is no longer playing the same game and this is a problem. Your position is completely incoherent.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;977694Pundie's support of fudging is a matter of record.

I find fudging and wanting strict immersion are incompatible. In a group with fudging, the players usually figure it out at some point. I know I often do. That's always the complete death of any immersion for me. I'm fine with "rulings not rules" as a GM style, but when a GM rules that dice are being used, I expect the dice to decide the matter. If the dice are simply being used as a prop, my belief in the whole system of the game evaporates. It's all just a narrative the GM is making up.

I'm fine with 'monsters always hit, roll to defend' (ala Black Hack and Whispering Vault)... but as a Player I don't want to be rolling for the monsters' attacks, not all the time anyway. It's a subtle difference but I want my mental space and actions and dice rolling to be focused on my character(s) alone.
As a GM I want to roll for the monsters because it's fun.
So Black Hack sounds interesting/fun to me... but DW stuff not so much.
Is it that hard to change DW to have the GM roll the monster attacks?

As for fudging, I definitely do not like it... but I do like GMs making secret rolls and, sometimes, making rolls with no purpose just to put Players on edge.

Are you sure players roll for monster attacks in DW? That's weird. I thought it was like other PbtA games where NPC damage is a fixed number applied when moves dictate.

Quote from: Simlasa;977832As for fudging, I definitely do not like it... but I do like GMs making secret rolls and, sometimes, making rolls with no purpose just to put Players on edge.

I'm fine with hidden rolls. They certainly have their uses. I'm iffy on purposeless rolls. A GM behind the screen rolling dice and looking stuff up can sometimes just end being the equivalent of a video game load screen. There are times it can build tension, but I think GMs can overuse it. As you say, "sometimes" it can be good.

Quote from: Itachi;977892Are you sure players roll for monster attacks in DW?

I'm not sure of anything about DW, never read it or played it, but that's how it was described to me. If Players aren't making dice rolls for their opponents then that's one less thing keeping me from it as a Player... though I think there are other reasons I wouldn't enjoy it as a GM.