What happens when you think everything is a level-appropriate encounter

[Koo Rehtorb]

No, the GM's objective is to run a fun game session that holds the focus of and entertains their crop of easily-distracted players.

Okay... you're ignoring context. I was clearly talking about in the context of a certain circumstance. The GM has more than one objective in a game.

Beyond that, though, I still kind of object to the assertion that the job of the GM is to be a cat wrangler. It's insulting to both the GM and the players.

I'm afraid I completely disagree with this. Both as a player and a DM, I find saving the PCs via Deus ex Machina cheapens the experience far more than fudging some roles, not least because the players are actually aware that the Dues ex Machina happened.

Which doesn't mean that I won't do such a thing when narratively appropriate or the whole party ets knocked put. I've gotten plenty of use from the "you all regain consciousness in a cage" out in the past, when plausable. (If a player fails their death saves or the enemies are wolves or ghouls or something, then, sorry, they're dead, nothing I can do.) But I think fudging some rolls and HP counts on the sly is definitely the lesser of two evils here. There's only so many times the players can wake up in chains or get rescued by the calvary before they start rolling their eyes.

I think people are misinterpreting what I said. I didn't say "Every time the PCs lose a fight, save them with narrative." I said, "It is an option" Obviously it should only happen when narratively appropriate. Most of the time you should probably be relying on the PCs being cunning enough to have the means and will to retreat from a losing fight.

I think a better way to word this, while keeping the same idea, would be: "In an encounter [if the GM's objective is to run a verisimilitudinous game] a GM should play NPCs such that they are always trying to 'win', to accomplish whatever goal they have, and use all available resources".

I hope I interpreted what you're saying correctly; I just think the "GM should try to 'win' an encounter" statement carries a meaning you didn't mean to communicate (namely, that the GM is looking to defeat the players).

I think I worded it clearly enough, but yes that's also a fine way to put it.