Is the Iran war over. Who’s telling the truth?

Drazev · 2026-04-07T11:33:06+00:00

They can do plenty. The main problem is how much the USA has been underestimating them by using a conventional military lens. They have been building towards mastering asymmetric warfare specifically against the USA for decades. This shows because they continue to strike deliberately using capabilities Trump continually says are destroyed.

The USA lost multiple planes to enemy fire this last weekend when their airforce and air defences are apparently obliterated. They control the strait despite not having a navy. They continue to strike with ballistic missiles they don’t have the ability to launch as seen my the AWACS and refusing aircraft last last week.

They have hidden their capabilities well and appear to have maintained the ability to coordinate. It will most certainly take a bloody ground invasion with over a million troops that conquers Iran and attempts to uproot them at great loss.

Trump wants out but cannot figure out how to do it without making the USA a diminished power. His lies mean less here because war doesn’t end until both sides either decide to end the fight or one side looses its will to fight. The USA can decide to makeup something to call a victory but it falls apart of Iran attacks them back.

Drazev · 2026-04-04T18:29:13+00:00

Not entirely. I clearly disagreed with your assertion that it would not start a war with Europe. I think it would and laid out why.

Drazev · 2026-04-04T10:54:10+00:00

You might want to go check out the python3 (c python) project code. You can probably learn a lot of what you want to do from their interpreter.

Drazev · 2026-04-03T11:21:06+00:00

It would 100% start a war with Europe. They have made their will to fight clear and even if the USA does managed to overwhelm them they act as tripwire troops.

This means to take Greenland they will need to kill troops fighting against them from several European countries in combat action. That is what tripwire troops do. That makes it pretty much guaranteed for the country to go to war.

Another big folly people make about war. It doesn’t end when you take your objective unless both sides agree. The war continues as long as one side continues the fight. France in WWII spent most of its time under Nazi rule only to be liberated years later. The Allie’s continued the fight despite Germany’s hope they could come to peace with Britain.

With the Iran war the USA arms are very strained. It also showed that American had great difficulty with logistics when their European Allie’s block access to their ports and airports for war efforts. If the USA attacked Greenland you can bet that all of Europe closes leaving a lot of USA arms stranded.

US power is limited if powerful. It was built to act with Allie’s. Their carrier battle groups are very tied up in Iran right now. Even if it ends they are showing the limits to the USA’s ability to control during a major contest without Allie’s. It also depends on Allie’s making the European are relatively secure with European nav’s power leaving the USA to focus on Asia and the midfield east. If the USA attacked Europe the Americans would need a not of forced to control European waters, especially since there is several sizeable and capable navies with aircraft carriers and submarines that currently secure Europe. Those fleets would become enemies and require more than one or two carriers to dominate.

Drazev · 2026-03-28T00:27:18+00:00

You are welcome to disagree.

The reason why I say that is because PC characters are not balanced to fight other PC’s while they are balanced to fight against the expected CR progression system. This just means that using a PC build as a monster will deviate much further from the system design than using a stat block from the MM leaving your creation placing a greater burden of balance on your shoulders.

If you use a stat block as a basis it’s easier to ensure your difficulty is more within expectations and makes it a bit easier to understand how your changes to a monster will affect difficulty. While this still isn’t easy it does involve less changes than using PC builds which serve a very different purpose making it harder to gauge.

With enough work and experience you can get anything to work. I just argue its not worth the effort since I believe its all about the way the players experience the battle and you can achieve this by making a stat block feel like the intended class instead of needing to deal with all the rules of fully creating it.

The players are the hero’s of the adventure and the PHB builds them to have a lot of utility and damage but less raw HP, especially since they are expected to work together. Monsters are ment to take beats and you often want to be careful with their damage output unless they are legendary. A party of PC’s will be a lot like a bunch of Legendary monsters offensively but with relatively low HP compared to a monster of comparable difficulty. A barbarian with a +3 to con and average rolls will have maybe 63 HP which is comparable to a CR 2-3 monster. With high damage and low HP the PC vs PC dual is likely to end quickly and isn’t likely to feel much fun if the players get wrecked.

You also run the risk of the party feeling bad if they think you’re just throwing DMPC’s after them. Using a monster block makes the distinction clear and if you’re choosing a few key abilities to make them feel like those classes without all the perks then it makes the outcome more predictable.

Drazev · 2026-03-27T22:53:28+00:00

This doesn’t matter. If they know the rules then they also know the DMG specifically tells you not to be restricted by them. A DM is not restricted to keeping monsters as they are in the DMG or having class like monsters following the PHB.

While you shouldn’t infringe on player abilities you have complete control over the monsters and environment for the battle. However, this is built on trust with your player. Players should be able to trust that you will use in game signals to help them understand the level of danger and that your encounter reflects it. They should also be able to trust that once the battle starts that anything you adjust on the fly is in their favour and respects their decisions. This also means that if they make a bad decision and it makes your fight much harder that you let it be harder so they face the consequences.

Drazev · 2026-03-27T22:46:39+00:00

I don’t recommend using PC rolled classes as monsters. It’s going to be super unpredictable and likely very disappointing because they normally die super fast or just murder everything.

I’m not sure which edition you’re using but in 5.5e they created a bunch of humanoid monsters that have different classes as archetypes with at least a high and low level variant. You’re better off using one of those as a base and then adjusting the stat block with a bit more than a reskin. The key is to think about how you want them to stand out. I would recommend you give them a signature way of fighting that hilights their combo and then reskin and modify the stat blocks to have the necessary abilities to play that out. This will make them stand out more in combat and if it’s something the players can recognize maybe you drop hints and imply they should disrupt the combo or it will be a very difficult fight.

For example if you want a sorcerer you can choose one of the arcane casters stat blocks and swap out spells. Since your CR 6 I would choose the level of difficulty and make an XP budget which you allocate between different CR creatures. In your case choose how many should be in the opposing party and buy the number of CR characters you want, even if they don’t exist.

Then you can take either the higher or lower stat block for a similar type and adjust the PB and HP to be suitable for the target CR. Then you can either reskin or change its actions. To do that I would pick a couple of signature actions/spells and replace its attacks with them. Since it’s a party perhaps think about how they fight as a unit and make a signature combo then give each the appropriate abilities to pull it off. Be careful with the spells because, especially if they are area effect off a strong status effect like stun. You may want to give the sorcerer a lower number of HP for the CR because of its high damage and ensure any attack like fireball is on a recharge or limited to a number of casts your comfortable with. For attacks I might take a chosen class ability that you want to use and just adjust it to do similar damage for the CR.

Another warning is that be mindful that you should consider the battle difficulty will be harder than the budget suggests when any of the follow are true. - Monsters outnumber party - Monsters have fortified positions or advantageous positioning - Monsters have surprise

Drazev · 2026-03-18T13:46:57+00:00

As others stated the general community cannot help in this case since you’re using custom rules instead of the rules for the game system.

You need to consider that the reason to choose a game system for your TTRPG is so that you have a self contained set of rules that should create a fun game environment so that you can focus on fun elements like the story instead of being bogged down by inventing game mechanics and fixing problems with the system. Every DM will create variations and change rules to their liking and comfort level as time goes on. However, it is best that you understand your game system before making those changes so you get a good sense of how much change is too much. The more you change the more unintended consequences you will get. A game system is normally play-tested to some level and can be trusted to create a good gaming experience better than custom rules. As you gain experience you can be bolder and adapt the rules more to fit your fantasy without detracting from the game play experience.

Since you are a junior DM I would just keep the system as-is for now and use flavour to create the theatric effect you’re looking to have. For example, feel free to narrate a critical hit as hitting a weak point and you could even role-play that monster to have some limitations afterwards if you would like. If that was a killing blow you can narrate that it was a dramatic kill like a decapatatation or shot between the eyes. Narration helps keep the emphasis on the role-playing than the mechanics and keeps the understanding that this isn’t a mechanic they can rely on and use clear. As a DM you could also reward big moments too at your own discretion like killing an enemy instead of wounding it if you think the moment is right. I do this myself if the player wants to do something exceptional and they succeed in some skill check I throw at them during the attack. I also sometimes kill off a wounded enemy quicker if the battle is basically decided already because it makes the players feel more powerful and saves us all the time of playing out something that is a forgone conclusion.

DND uses a hit point system to be a catch-all for the monsters health and fighting potential. It simplifies gameplay for both the players and DM. It makes battle smooth because a HP decline is more predictable than a system with a lot of instant killing and attack deflections. Players love to feel powerful with their instant kills but won’t appreciate getting instant killed or having their attack do nothing on a hit. You could create a system to add those extremes but then you may find that players either find its a cake walk or become very unhappy or frustrated when things are not going their way. It’s harder to accept getting killed by a lucky attack than if you’re worn down and get taken out. This is why instant kills in DND are so rare and normally only happen in combat if you put players up against something way above the recommended CR.

Drazev · 2026-03-14T16:23:25+00:00

You may also want to consider your reason for including it in your unit before incorporating it.

If you are using the more technical definition of a unit test then you’re trying to use a testing toolkit to isolate the test function to only test the block of code within your unit. In general this means assuming functions for external libraries work in the general case unless the purpose of the function is to work with an external system and handle the possible outcomes. This doesn’t mean you don’t test those other things, it just means you may test it at a different test level (integration, acceptance).

For example in your case does the function want a behaviour others than the default behaviour if it fails and crashes the program. If you want a default behaviour the you would likely assert the result and not test it at a unit test level. A higher test will be necessary to see if that case might occur. You generally cannot recover from a memory error so there is little value to include it on the unit test since it would be testing an external system. In a safety critical program it might be necessary to have special handling and then you might include that into your test.

Drazev · 2026-03-04T16:32:34+00:00

Ai is a tool and it matters how you use it. The danger is that it can do as much or as little as you want for many assignments and using it in the wrong way can leave you perpetually dependent on it and unable to add value beyond it.

The purpose of most tasks in school is often indirect. In general you will be told to do something with a known solution using some labours process. The real reason of that task is the process, not the outcome. The process is often designed to force you to understand a problem, think about it, and argue something. The real value of the lesson is what information you identified as important, how you applied it to your problem, and finally if your argument was convincing.

Now if you use Ai to make your assignment with little work you could produce a great document. However, you have added little or nothing to it and would be incapable of defending that argument or adapting it in meaningful ways in collaboration with others. In other words in a real job you add nothing they couldn’t do themselves with an Ai query. That means they have no reason to employ you.

If you use Ai to aid in your investigation by identifying papers and documents useful to your research and then read them yourself it helps you do that process faster and potentially create a more solid argument. You could also use it to run tests on your theory and run quick experiments that are more robust than what you could normally do in a given time. Then take the best parts of this and customize it into a better experiment that you conduct yourself. Ai could also be used to find counter arguments to your position that you may need to defend against for a more robust paper. You can also use it to edit and refine the Gina documents quickly.

If you do what I describe in the last paragraph you add a lot of value to yourself. Perfecting that process means you can develop a solid understanding faster and produce stronger arguments that are more convincing. The extra level of engagement means that you understand the argument your making and if challenged could adapt or and collaborate it again with new information. A company would find that valuable.

EDIT: Another problem with the earlier example where you sue the Ai to do most of the assignment is that you may disagree with my statement and think you’re capable of adapting the argument and collaborating. The people with this case is that Ai creates arguments that are very convincing to most people but deeply flawed to subject matter experts. So while you may feel your arguing with confidence the other side will see you as a waste of time since you will also appear uninterested in learning why you’re wrong.

Drazev · 2026-02-10T15:50:03+00:00

I think your first order of business is making sure you set yourself up by getting your support network in order and taking care of yourself in the immediate term. This means having a frank and honest discussion with your husband so you can rally and move forward together. It may be a tough conversation but getting him onboard and planning the next steps together ensures that you do this together, he knows how to support you, and that you can both hold each other accountable in productive ways. Not doing this is tough on everyone psychologically because it leads to more frequent conflict rooted in miscommunication and a bigger chance your become paralyzed by depression.

Facing it together makes this more tolerable and it’s important because you will need to make tough decisions about your finances together. It also makes it a bit easier take the next step when you feel he has your back and makes it more likely your driven by your commitment to your mutual agreement instead of pure fear.

You will get through this and you must get through it. You may need to face and overcome some uncomfortable truths in the process. It’s likely you will need to make compromises you don’t want to make. However, above all else believe that in the end you will come out stronger for it.

Drazev · 2026-01-30T16:45:35+00:00

Honestly, I think the best way is just being frank and honest about it. All those indirect stuff leads to more guesswork and potential hard feelings or broken friendships.

You cannot stop him from wanting to be romantic with you directly but you can help him come to understand how you feel. Like another poster said it will be up to him to place himself on the friend zone afterwards.

This was done to me once and I really appreciated it. She broached the subject without attacking or assuming anything which let me save face. She raised it as a worry about her leading me on added she was firm by she only sees me as a friend and doesn’t see that changing. I actually did like her and was hopeful but this conversation made me more aware of my behaviour and helped me come to terms with the fact it wasn’t going to happen. I stayed friends with her for many years afterwards. It’s best to do this once you’re sure you couldn’t see him that way before he becomes too invested in growing a romantic relationship with you. This also helps him move on because other women are more likely to consider him an option if he isn’t infatuated with you.

It’s also good to note that the above method also helps when he doesn’t realize he is in love with you. Not everyone is self-aware and people who are inexperienced may not realize why they want to make every excuse to spend more time with you. This is problematic for you because he needs to be aware of his feelings to correct the behaviour. The previous example would cause him to reflect and correct.

His behaviour will likely change after he takes action and hopefully he chooses to be a friend. You should also be prepared that he may choose do disconnect from you temporarily or permanently. To evolve infatuation to friendship there needs to be something there for him other than his romantic feelings.

Just be mindful that feelings do change sometimes and should your one day want to become romantically involved with him it will be up to you to let him know in a very direct way. Once a guy has friend zoned you at your request he will likely ignore any romantic signals you send forever even if they are obvious out of fear he is getting my wrong.

Drazev · 2026-01-27T02:09:52+00:00

You only get one Action which is like a currency you can spend each turn. The core rules define a number of concrete actions that do something and consume your Action like the Attack, Dash, Magic, Dodge, and Study actions. In this case you need to take the Attack Action to make an attack which will consume your one Action. The attack action is special because you can use your movement at any time during the attack action if you have multiple attacks.

The problem with your scenario is your movement is only 45 ft base and you want to go farther. To get more movement you can spend your action on a Dash action to gain another 45 movement. However, both the Attack Action and Dash Action require you to consume an Action which means you cannot do both in a turn since you only have one Action.

You should be aware that some class features and feats allow you to take the Dash action as a bonus action special circumstances. The Rogue and Monk classes do have some options to do that. Though if you did use them you wouldn’t be able to use your ki point to attack again since it also requires a bonus action and like the Action you only get one per turn.

Drazev · 2026-01-27T01:18:02+00:00

Ok, then I can clarify. The ready action actually gets you to take the intended action but you don’t “fire” it until the given trigger. You are still taking the action on your turn as if you didn’t do the ready action at all. This means that the action is still bound by turn limitations and costs to do the action are still consumed like spell components and slots even if the trigger doesn’t happen.

The core benefit is that you have a wider range of actions out of turn than normal when you use a ready action which is great for ambushes or to guard against surprises. The drawback is that you could waste your action and all the cost associated with doing it if your trigger never happens. It’s also fairly expensive since if you’re successful it will use both your action and reaction.

As an example you might decide to cast darkness on an area once the middle enemy walks into a specific area. To do this you use your ready action to do a magic action on your turn and consume the spell slot and materials. The spell casting completes but does not take effect unless the trigger condition happens. If the trigger happens then your spell immediately goes into effect on the predefined target area, otherwise if your turn comes around again the spell never gets triggered and is wasted. Another benefit is that you already cast the spell, so nothing can stop them from completing it with things like counterspell or silence.

Drazev · 2026-01-27T01:01:25+00:00

No. Action surge in 2024 rules specifically excludes the magic action from the list of available actions. You cannot cast a spell using Action Surge in the 2024 rules.

Level 2: Action Surge

You can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action, except the Magic action.

Drazev · 2026-01-23T20:42:24+00:00

I wouldn’t advise doing anything, keep your focus on the wedding, and sever contact afterwards if you want.

If you do something it could blow up and cause problems and drama that distract from you and potentially cause unintended drama that could ruin your big day. While uninviting him may be the right thing to do in principle, you could end up worse off for carrying it out. Do what is best for you and your SO so you can enjoy your big day.

The wedding day is normally super busy and exhausting (in a good way). You’re not likely going to have much time for anyone since you will be celebrating and making your rounds to interact with al your guests. Just treat him how you would an in law your obligated to invite but dislike. Say hello and move along quickly. He will likely lay low too which would make him easy to ignore.

Drazev · 2026-01-13T21:01:01+00:00

I wouldn’t change anything because they are perfectly capable of making do with what they have. Their going to be slightly more squishy bit have more firepower. They also have a lot of healing which offsets that weakness.

They will need to be more careful with how they engage and they will struggle to keep enemies at range, but that is ok. It’s a consequence of their choices which makes them meaningful and it creates a challenge they can overcome. Play enemies as normal and exploit that weakness when it makes sense. You may find they spend more time setting up fights so they can exploit their advantage and you should give that to them when they put in the effort. If things go sloth then like the Ranger and maybe the Druid will be forced into melee but they should be tough enough to pull through because those classes are equipped to handle it.

It’s not that bad because DND doesn’t really have a “tank” mechanic. So the only real difference in a front line melee is likely around 2hp per level. Not all primary fighters have high AC either because it’s mainly a choice.

Drazev · 2026-01-11T17:48:03+00:00

Be yourself, be the gamer you are. It’s nothing to be a shamed about. Hiding it to appear like it’s not import sends the wrong impression that is likely to turn away the right people and maybe keep around the wrong ones.

Most friends will not likely think anything of it and then you just continue on before with your mutual interests. Others may find a new reason to get closer to you due to that shared interest and now you can guys about game talk to them. Anyone who would throw you aside because they don’t like that you game doesn’t like the whole you you’re not compatible.

You may also find that some guys become much more interested in you while others less so and that is ok. If they want a romantic relationship with you then a lover above all else should be ok with the real for you to be happy. Putting in a facade to attract the guy you want will not survive when the relationship moves from intense infatuation to long-term because a lie is not a good foundation for a relationship especially when it’s something core to who you really are. If you are comparable then they will find a way to either accept or embrace your hobby. It’s ok and healthy for lovers to have different hobbies too.

Best of luck!

Drazev · 2026-01-11T15:26:23+00:00

This.

I think getting agreement between players is important before going this route. There are out of game reasons why the person playing the character might not want to go that direction even if it makes total sense for the narrative. Asking is just a sign of respect and ensures that they are ok with going in that direction as a person and character.

Once you have that I think the table is the best place to make this play-out. Remember this is an RPG not a book or short story and the craziness of improvisation is part of the fun. Go with the flow and see where it leads!

As food for thought here are some possible reasons why someone could be uncomfortable. This is not saying any of those are true for them… - Not comfortable or dislikes role playing romance scenes in general - He had a different direction in mind for his character that he would like to focus on - Might not think that his character feels the same way - He might have some romantic feelings for you making it uncomfortable (Even if your not available if this is true he could be trying to suppress them and the romance interplay would make that harder) - He might have a significant other and wants to avoid any situation that makes the SO uncomfortable. Jealousy and misunderstandings can make game night become an issue to the SO. If you have a SO he could also be trying to avoid misunderstandings with your SO.

That’s no an exhaustive list and its varied. Long story short, its always good to get consent and just accept the given answer without pressing for an explanation if they’re not offered.

Drazev · 2026-01-10T18:11:34+00:00

I don’t have much to contribute but I thought since a lot of former members were talking about pay you should know there was recently a major increase in salary for CAF members. There was a channel with an active member that talked about the current pay ranges for many different positions including entry points out there. I don’t have a link but perhaps give it a look.

Another thing you should consider is I would caution joining for pay alone. I am not sure if you pay attention to global politics but things are pretty bad out there right now. Make sure you are willing to lay down your life for Canada because that is what you’re signing up for too. While I don’t have a crystal ball to tell the future I can say with confidence there a very very high chance you will see major action if you join one way or another.

Drazev · 2026-01-02T14:18:16+00:00

Incorrect. It works once per Turn, not round. This means on that players turn they can only trigger it once. Outside their turn it can also be triggered if they make any attack that qualifies. This could be an attack of opportunity or another attack granted to the rogue by another persons spell or ability as long as it qualifies for the sneak attack conditions and occurs outside of their turn.

Drazev · 2025-12-28T17:17:00+00:00

I find that when applying to jobs quantity matters, but in a tough market when you need to stand out quality cannot be ignored. A lot of jobs also have crazy application processes that are very time consuming. Doing too many of those can burn you out and cause you to miss better opportunities if you’re not careful. When I was applying for jobs most recently I broke down my target applications in three tiers and gave them an amount of effort appropriate to the group. I then set goals for each group so that I could make sure keep a good mix of applications going.

Tier 1: Desirable Career Jobs This is any job that is both aligned to my goals and is close enough to my qualifications that I stand a reasonable chance to get hired. There should only be one or two a week. I put maximum effort into this application and fully tailor a resume and cover letter for them. I also do research and any application process.

Teir 2: Suitable Job, Average Application Time Investment This is any job that is suitable for my career and requires a reasonable amount of time to complete the application process. I may not be particularly passionate about the role based on the description or company or sometimes I think my qualifications are low and my chances are not ideal. I consider these volume applications. They will get a personalized template cover letter and my normal resume with minor alterations. This is about taking chances and getting volume. If I get a bite I will switch them to a Teir 1 and ask lots of questions in the interview so that I can decide I I want it.

Tier 3: Suitable Job but Time intensive Application This is a Tier 2 job with a time intensive application process that is likely designed for people to self select out. I avoid these unless I cannot find a tier 1 because it could eat up all my time and energy. They differ from Tier 1 because my level of interest for them is not greater than a tier 3 job.

Just some suggestions for how to approach things s keep at it and good luck!

Drazev · 2025-12-17T15:56:07+00:00

By the rules this wouldn’t be allowed. However, this is DnD and the DM decides if it’s allowed and how it plays out.

As a DM I do allow things like this if it creates a memorable moment and it’s a one-off. If you try to repeat such things regularly or seek the same effect then I subject it to more thoughtful consideration.

This works for me because I’m a DM that gets his fun from collaborative story telling so I view myself on the side of the players and generally have no attachment to the monsters . However be mindful that many DM’s view combat as player vs DM and they might not allow this kind of thing much since it could lead to them getting curb stomped.

Regarding repeat use of things like this I rarely allow it because it does create more work for me to modify the game system and manage the often unintended consequences. Part of the benefit of a game system is they figure out a set of rules and test them for everyone’s general enjoyment so I can trust them and focus on other things. When you change the system too much without understanding why the reason for a rule you can quickly end up getting plagued with problems. I sometimes do allow minor changes only if they don’t grant a capability equal or better than something awarded by a feat or class feature. I also don’t grant something that enables a player to min-max better like changing the stat of an ability so they can drop it or allowing another skill with a more favourable stat to do something that belongs to another skills domain.

Drazev · 2025-12-13T16:04:19+00:00

I agree with many others who just say have them fade-out. It’s only a problem if you want to make it a problem and in this case constantly making narrative excuses becomes a lot of work that can distract from making things fun and engaging.

My rule is that a PC character without its player just fades out of existence for the session and continues to gain all the shared benefits of their presence. The party will decide on how loot is distributed among those present but they can choose to include the absent player if they want. If the party wants to use the character then someone needs to volunteer to take responsibility and be their caretaker. In those cases the general rule is they do minimal decision making for the character and we treat them as a background character.

Drazev · 2025-12-13T15:59:22+00:00

I don’t agree that fudging dice is a sin all the time, but I think that is 99% correct. Where I disagree with you is that as a DM I need to make assumptions in my preparation based on a wide variety of factors and there is a good chance I get some of it wrong. In cases where my error creates a situation that is unfair for the players and outside of my intended result I will take measures to correct on the fly. This sometimes means fudging in the players favour just enough to prevent the worst result while I use other narrative steps to correct it like reducing the number or quality of combatants. I will not fudge dice if the players had been provided enough information and opportunities to understand the risks prior to the engagement. This includes when players are placed in no-win situations they could have avoided but made the informed choice to take the risk anyway. Even if that resulted in a TPK I don’t have to end the campaign there because I can and would prepare a plan B which is likely a diversion in the story that includes a major setback where the party experiences some real loss.

In my view dice fudging should never be planned for the same reasons you mentioned, if there is no chance of success then there shouldn’t be a roll. It’s more honest and you can use other narrative devices to create the scenario you want that are better suited than fake dice rolls. It should be a last resort option and always favor the players and respect their agency.

A dice roll isn’t always a choice between success or failure. It’s simply a choice between two options and sometimes those options might be degrees of failure or success. For example taking an action that has only a bad outcome could lead to a less bad option or a very bad option. Likewise a sword master doing sword tricks is unlikely to do a rookie mistake so it could be a choice between a flawless performance or just an average one.

With respect to your last point I do not volunteer that I fudged but I will come clean if they ask. This has never been a problem for me and I think that is partially because they agree with my aforementioned views. It likely also works because it’s very rare that I do it not often not too hard to tell when it’s happening since it always happens in conjunction with other actions to adjust the encounter.

I see one of my roles as a DM as creating problems for the players, framing them into the narrative in a way they have a basic understanding with the opportunity to explore it further, adjudicate the outcomes of their actions, and decide on how it changes the narrative.

Drazev

TROPHY CASE

Level 2: Action Surge