In my role as a Dungeon Master, I historically avoided heavy use of chance during my tabletop roleplaying sessions. I preferred was for narrative flow and session development to be guided by deliberate decisions instead of pure luck. That said, I decided to try something different, and I'm incredibly happy with the result.
A well-known podcast utilizes a DM who regularly calls for "fate rolls" from the participants. He does this by choosing a polyhedral and defining possible results tied to the roll. It's at its core no distinct from using a random table, these get invented spontaneously when a course of events lacks a predetermined resolution.
I decided to try this approach at my own session, primarily because it appeared engaging and offered a departure from my normal practice. The results were remarkable, prompting me to reconsider the often-debated tension between pre-determination and randomization in a D&D campaign.
During one session, my party had concluded a city-wide conflict. Later, a cleric character asked about two friendly NPCs—a pair—had survived. Rather than picking a fate, I let the dice decide. I instructed the player to roll a d20. I defined the outcomes as: a low roll, both died; on a 5-9, a single one succumbed; on a 10+, they made it.
Fate decreed a 4. This triggered a deeply poignant scene where the characters discovered the corpses of their companions, still united in death. The group conducted last rites, which was particularly significant due to earlier character interactions. In a concluding touch, I chose that the forms were suddenly transformed, showing a enchanted item. By chance, the item's contained spell was perfectly what the group needed to solve another major story problem. You simply orchestrate these kinds of serendipitous moments.
This event led me to ponder if randomization and spontaneity are in fact the beating heart of this game. Although you are a meticulously planning DM, your skill to pivot can rust. Players often excel at derailing the best constructed plots. Therefore, a effective DM has to be able to think quickly and invent scenarios in real-time.
Employing similar mechanics is a excellent way to train these skills without straying too much outside your usual style. The trick is to apply them for minor decisions that don't fundamentally change the campaign's main plot. As an example, I would not employ it to establish if the central plot figure is a traitor. But, I would consider using it to decide whether the PCs enter a room moments before a key action takes place.
Luck rolls also works to maintain tension and create the sensation that the story is responsive, progressing in reaction to their choices as they play. It combats the perception that they are merely characters in a DM's sole script, thereby enhancing the collaborative aspect of storytelling.
This philosophy has long been embedded in the core of D&D. Early editions were enamored with charts, which suited a game focused on treasure hunting. Although current D&D frequently prioritizes narrative and role-play, leading many DMs to feel they must prep extensively, it's not necessarily the required method.
There is absolutely no issue with doing your prep. Yet, equally valid nothing wrong with letting go and permitting the whim of chance to determine certain outcomes in place of you. Control is a big factor in a DM's role. We need it to facilitate play, yet we can be reluctant to release it, even when doing so could be beneficial.
My final recommendation is this: Have no fear of temporarily losing your plan. Try a little randomness for inconsequential outcomes. It may create that the organic story beat is far more powerful than anything you might have planned in advance.