Showing posts with label fudgification. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fudgification. Show all posts

12 June 2025

Fudgifying the Fairly Obvious

From the moment I read the Basic Role-Playing pamphlets included in my copies of Stormbringer and Call of Cthulhu in the early 1980s, I was fascinated by the skill-based system, but it had one major flaw: common abilities started far below what would be normal for an average person in the real world. Skills reflecting ordinary communication, the senses, or knowledge of one's place of birth were extremely low and unlikely to improve unless they were used frequently (and at a slow rate at that). Granted, I normally do not require rolls for very easy tasks such as observing things, using common modes of transportation, remembering facts about one's local community, or doing things that any able-bodied person can reasonably be expected to do under normal circumstances, but for those cases that do warrant a skill check, I feel that characters ought to have a fair chance of succeeding without having to devote valuable character creation points to those standard abilities. And by a "fair chance" I mean a Fair chance.

Any heavily skill-based role-playing system that is burdened with unnecessary common skills (that is, skills that everyone has) can benefit from a little fudgification. Simply replace the score of any common skill (such as See, Listen, Drive, Climb, Swim, etc.) with an appropriate Fudge trait level. In most cases, make it Fair. If the character has an obvious disadvantage for whatever reason, make it Mediocre. If the character has an obvious advantage, make it Good. Use the normal action resolution rules for any other skills that are used, but whenever these common skills come into play, use the Fudge rules to resolve them. The distribution of results will be more realistic, and the player can spend more points on specialized skills (in systems that use that form of character creation).

In short, Fudge rules are not just for Fudge. If your favorite game flounders in some respect, fudgify it.

02 April 2022

The Might of Gods Cannot Be Quantified by Mortals

As much as I prize my mint condition copy of Deities & Demigods (with the Cthulhu and Melnibonéan Mythos intact), and as much as I enjoy the illustrations, I find its gaming content mostly useless. I do not endorse the treatment of gods as mere monsters (unless it is a monster being worshipped as a god), nor do I approve of describing them with statblocks, especially if they purport to quantify their attributes on the same scale as player characters. No god in any world of mine will deign to be compared to mortals. Any mortals in my campaigns will either be unaware that they have encountered a god (for it is said they walk amongst us in disguise when it suits them) or they will be awestruck. Watch Jason and the Argonauts (1963) for a lesson in how to handle such encounters.

Nonetheless, it is interesting and informative to know how the attributes of gods compare with one another on their own scale without tempting players to see them as potential experience point awards. To this end, I recommend describing their attributes in Fudge terms. Fudge uses adjectives instead of hard numbers to compare traits (attributes, skills, and sometimes powers). Traditionally, it uses the following progression:

Superb
Great
Good
Fair
Mediocre
Poor
Terrible

Scale is used with Mass, Strength, and Speed to further differentiate beings. A pixie, for instance, is on an entirely different scale than a human being, but their attributes would still range from Terrible to Superb in comparison to one another. By that same logic, gods within a pantheon may vary in strength, wisdom, charisma, etc., but the weakest of them will still be capable of crushing the strongest mortal like an ant.

To illustrate the possibilities, here are four Greek gods and their basic attributes (all of which are Scale: Divine).

Athena

Strength: Fair
Intelligence: Superb
Wisdom: Superb
Dexterity: Good
Constitution: Good
Charisma: Superb

Aphrodite

Strength: Mediocre
Intelligence: Fair
Wisdom: Mediocre
Dexterity: Good
Constitution: Good
Charisma: Superb

Ares

Strength: Great
Intelligence: Mediocre
Wisdom: Poor
Dexterity: Great
Constitution: Great
Charisma: Great

Hephaestus

Strength: Superb
Intelligence: Superb
Wisdom: Good
Dexterity: Great (manual dexterity); Terrible (agility)
Constitution: Good
Charisma: Poor

Role-playing the interaction of gods with one another can be accomplished by using the basic Fudge rules, which can be obtained for free here (at my own Fudge site) or at FudgeRPG.com.

[This article was previously posted here in Applied Phantasticality on 30 September 2013.]

30 July 2020

Fudging It in Non-Fudge Games

If all role-playing games used the action resolution rules of Fudge, would it change those games fundamentally (for good or ill), or would it simply make more sense? Even if a given role-playing game yields only binary results (success or failure), one could ignore the finer aspects of the trait ladder and simply indicate success or failure based on whether the roll equals or exceeds the difficulty of the action. Translating a character's ability to the appropriate trait level is easy, and if you need a conversion chart, you can consult my Trait Conversions for Fudge for suggested equivalents.

It may even encourage players to try Fudge itself...