I recall playing a war game against someone at a Con a billion years ago. That dude flipped his dice in a way that they flew through the air and landed generally on 5 and 6 (6 sided dice). No tumbling, more like holding them between finger and thumb and flipping them. A trick. A cheat. It really soured me.
This is why dice need to bump up against a surface in Vegas type dice games. Best if everyone uses a little dice cup--the same for everyone--or a dice tower. Or even a dice program as long as everyone sees it.
I try and give the benefit of the doubt when I can, but I don't care for people who cheat at the game. I'll give a warning, in private, about what behavior is causing a problem and let them know that I'm not interested in excuses or what ifs, just please don't do it again. If it is a mistake, let's not do it again. If it's on purpose, don't do it again.
We had some bad cheating back in the old, old days when you colored in your own dice (remember that?) For people who missed those halcyon days, you'd have a d20 with 0-9 repeated twice, and you'd color them two different colors to indicate 1-10 and 11-20.
One player, who was problematic to begin with, tended to color all his dice in shades that you couldn't tell apart on a bet. He always seemed to manage to get an inordinate amount of high numbers and 20s. Or even better, his dice hit the floor and wouldn't you know it, high number.
We bought him some dice, colored them ourselves and told him he could roll in this box on the table and no where else. He stopped playing soon thereafter.
I was in a game like that once; one of the players refused to sit at the table with the rest of us. He preferred to have a TV dinner tray up next to his chair and would sit apart from the group. He rolled an inordinate amount of high numbers all the time, right up until the point when we required him to sit at the table and roll his dice there. All of a sudden, his dice rolls became more randomized.
It doesn't bother me if people cheat. I think the perception of a fantasy world with objective rules determining the consequences of the PC actions is largely an illusion anyhow.
FWIW, I think the policing of cheating should be part of the DM's job (for pragmatic and social reasons). Therefore, I don't think it's right to push it publicly if the player has "won" the argument, albeit by strength of personality rather than logic. I think it would have been better to bring it up with the DM privately again. He may not like conflict, but I think that's part of the job of running a game (and it's better than a free-for-all, in my view).
Having said all of that - my guess is that your views and actions would be pretty widely held/taken.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As DM, though, I'm usually very careful not to. The BBEG always has rules-legal abilities, strict WBL, and mooks allowable under his Leadership score, for example. NPCs' skill points and other stats are carefully derived. Dice are rolled in the open, no fudging from me. Etc.Heh, I'm running a 5E PbP right now, with a party picked from an open recruitment thread. I announced in the first post of said thread that I owned only the PHB, and therefore all the "GM stuff" like monster stats and environmental effects and so forth would all be shamelessly pulled out of my arse.
We're having a blast. :)
We are. :)
Though we may, possibly be heading into our first TPK... :o
It doesn't bother me if people cheat. I think the perception of a fantasy world with objective rules determining the consequences of the PC actions is largely an illusion anyhow.
FWIW, I think the policing of cheating should be part of the DM's job (for pragmatic and social reasons). Therefore, I don't think it's right to push it publicly if the player has "won" the argument, albeit by strength of personality rather than logic. I think it would have been better to bring it up with the DM privately again. He may not like conflict, but I think that's part of the job of running a game (and it's better than a free-for-all, in my view).
Having said all of that - my guess is that your views and actions would be pretty widely held/taken.
So what if a player instead of rolling dice and pretending to not choose the number he wants just openly does not roll and says I choose a 17 for my roll?
He is doing the same thing the cheater is doing. He is just being open about it. Should he also be allowed to keep his numbers?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
During an experimental one shot, my GM got SO fed up with the extreme effectiveness of my character and his inability to really hurt her that, after the game, he straight up asked me "You've had this character audited on the forums, right? What did they have to say about its legality?"
I told him that "everything in my build checked out as far as I knew, and that the only thing the people on the forums didn't seem to think was terribly kosher was the fact that I crafted most of my equipment using downtime magic capital BEFORE the game had even started--effectively quadrupling my starting gear."
The GM just stared at me in stunned silence.
"But if you have a problem with that, I won't do it again," I stammered.
"No, it's fine since this one shot was for us to experiment with new ideas and rules, but yes, don't ever do that again. In my games all downtime benefits come only after the game has already started."
And that was that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ravingdork, I'm fairly certain that you are the same person as this guy.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It doesn't bother me if people cheat. I think the perception of a fantasy world with objective rules determining the consequences of the PC actions is largely an illusion anyhow.
FWIW, I think the policing of cheating should be part of the DM's job (for pragmatic and social reasons). Therefore, I don't think it's right to push it publicly if the player has "won" the argument, albeit by strength of personality rather than logic. I think it would have been better to bring it up with the DM privately again. He may not like conflict, but I think that's part of the job of running a game (and it's better than a free-for-all, in my view).
Having said all of that - my guess is that your views and actions would be pretty widely held/taken.
So what if a player instead of rolling dice and pretending to not choose the number he wants just openly does not roll and says I choose a 17 for my roll?
He is doing the same thing the cheater is doing. He is just being open about it. Should he also be allowed to keep his numbers?
Well, even that extreme wouldn't bother me, personally (I think. Thought experiments like that can be tough to genuinely answer, no matter how well you think you know yourself). However, I didn't frame it as a "should" thing. I don't think everyone should share my preferences. I suspect most would be unhappy with "pick a number" gameplay, even if it wouldn't bother me and if it impacts on the rest of the group's enjoyment, it's an issue.
As DM (which I usually am) I never audit character sheets or monitor rolls and if people tell me they've drunk a potion or cast a buff spell or something and forgot to tell me - I take their word for it. If a player came to me about another player cheating then I'd see it as my role to sort it out. My personal preferences wouldn't be the overriding factor then.
Being a math and detail impaired player and GM, I always let another player check and advise me on my character or have players check each other every few sessions. As for rules, I stick whoever griped the most last time. Initiative loot and player log all get passed out so I do NOT have to do it.
Having an above average IQ crew in my last two campaigns and another coming, my players often know the rules better than I and police each other. This caused a row a few years back, a Druid ability misunderstanding and stubbornness.
Beyond that, a GM can Fudge in order to advance the story, hand wave long actions that violate the 'fun' rule, etc. What he cannot do is play favorites or deny a player a chance to play their character. (There are more, but these are my current rants) I believe the story is the primary responsibility of the GM and he or she must see it that way. Second come lesser things like marking fire exits, peace bonding player weaponry (yes, we regularly play with more firearms than players with side orders of cutlery), polling players on house and table rules or running fights (usually run by players). I have racked my players on letting my screw up rules, etc. They have gotten to trolling for screw ups and keep me honest and on track with player oriented story lines. All are down with this and are very demanding of other players. They know that having me worry with details can derail a whole session, time none of us old farts has to waste on letting some idiot cheat.
Establishing an open character sheet and the frequent checking levels out cheaters while networking better characters. I am a much more effective 3.5 Cleric due to some of this a few years back. Heck, I raid these boards to all manner of ideas.
As for specific problems:
Hit Points should be standard for every one and thing
Abilities must be rolled in front of the GM and at least half the core players, but point buy is better. I don't mind, but I average better than a 35 point buy with best 3/4.
Dice are rolled in a clear fat glass in our games, or a dice tower (must face the GM). This became mandatory after dice scattered a vital melee. We have a female firefighter who can take any guy at the last table with no dissenting voices and that is her table rule.
Character sheets must be audited and red lined with errors (easy for a prior game, three teachers and a teaching professor). You'd be surprised how red marks upset 50 plus men!
Secret boons, aids, gimmes and such should be GM's eyes only and NEVER on a character sheet. I use index cards, numbered as I give them out and kept in a notebook no one gets to see. Yes, I give out false cards!
I try to talk to players between games, web being the best, primarily to get feedback but also to let problem players of all types have some guidance. An old school teleporting player (bouncing to the rear in every fight but at the front for the loot, but just outside the range of any trap, etc) is my most recent problem child.
Even if a GM is not confrontational I still think it's better to deal with these issues one-on-one outside of the game. Also the word "cheating" is loaded. This person definitely sounds like a problem player, but calling a problem player out in front of the table is not likely solve the problem; in fact, it might entrench them even more.
It is just a generally good rule in life to not call people out on things in front of groups of people unless it's truly important. In game rules violations aren't important enough. If you need to get the whole group involved discuss it calmly before the next game. Otherwise, wait until you have moment alone after the game or just send them a polite email.
You are telling him how to deal with a reasonable person. Some people just try to take advantage of this type of process. He also never called him a cheater in front of the other players. He just pointed out errors on his character sheet. If they are just errors there is no reason to be mad if he is not guilty. Getting people together outside of a game session can sometimes also be difficult. Not everyone responds to the "nice way" of doing things. In general, I agree with you for how to handle this issue, but sometimes you just have to handle things in a different manner at times in order to fix them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or even better, his dice hit the floor and wouldn't you know it, high number.
We bought him some dice, colored them ourselves and told him he could roll in this box on the table and no where else. He stopped playing soon thereafter.
I had that problem once. I had a "baby dice" at the time (they were really small - I got them because I'd lost my other dice, and they were the least expensive available), and it always rolled off the table and onto floor, and almost always had a high number*.
The table made me use different dice (which was fine by me), and it was slightly more randomized, but daggum were my dice over-all very "hot" for that game. Eventually, there was a tray set, so I used my own dice again, and got more consistently higher numbers than when it hit the floor.
I was banned from using that dice for the next game** (though eventually I was allowed, as I just didn't have the funds to buy a new one).
(It has never been that "hot" ever again.)
* Though, in my defense, they had a "don't re-roll it" policy that was strictly enforced and I never touched the dice before declaring it - I always encouraged anyone who wanted to look at it, and kept my hands as far away as possible to hopefully avoid any appearance of cheating (though it didn't work). It was very slightly nerve-wracking too, because they had those old board floors on their back porch, and I was always worried that it'd fall through a hole and be lost forever before I got to it.
** And, in fact, for the last "action" of the game, since my dice were so daggum great, the GM made me play a game of 21 with Uno cards against a deity who could blatantly cheat (and did so all three times he was allowed^) to see who won. I lost by one point, when I hit 22 after he hit 20.
^ He was always allowed to look at the next card before he drew, and was allowed to discard or replace the top card with one in his hand up to three times. He used them all to get to 20 without breaking 21. The GM was sweating so daggum hard.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a DM, I am consistently rolling high. I roll a ton of natural 20s. My players hate it. One of my players rolls consistently low.
To test it, one day we traded dice. I still rolled consistently high, and that one player still rolled consistently low.
That player has even joined a PBP game with me. He has yet to roll above a 12 with the forum's dice code, and only twice has he rolled double digits.
He's just cursed, and I think his curse causes me to roll high when I DM for him.
I have a long running group. We tend to frown on cheating overall. The other players help number stacking double-checking each other if someone seems unsure. We occasionally josh each other about good or bad dice. (not rolls) As DM i have and will ask for a numerical audit if something mentally doesn't add up to me on my side of the screen. Several times i am right, but i have also been wrong. Either result is a no-drama for either side and play continues forwards.
It doesn't need to be handled in a confrontational manner.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am constantly surprised when people believe they are bad/good; lucky/unlucky; cursed/blessed rolling dice. If you roll the d20 long enough everything evens out; people just remember the extremes.As a DM, I am consistently rolling high. I roll a ton of natural 20s. My players hate it. One of my players rolls consistently low.
To test it, one day we traded dice. I still rolled consistently high, and that one player still rolled consistently low.
That player has even joined a PBP game with me. He has yet to roll above a 12 with the forum's dice code, and only twice has he rolled double digits.
He's just cursed, and I think his curse causes me to roll high when I DM for him.
Generally true. Statistics are like that.
But when a PBP game has not a single roll above a 12 for one single character, it does go against the odds a bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am constantly surprised when people believe they are bad/good; lucky/unlucky; cursed/blessed rolling dice. If you roll the d20 long enough everything evens out; people just remember the extremes.As a DM, I am consistently rolling high. I roll a ton of natural 20s. My players hate it. One of my players rolls consistently low.
To test it, one day we traded dice. I still rolled consistently high, and that one player still rolled consistently low.
That player has even joined a PBP game with me. He has yet to roll above a 12 with the forum's dice code, and only twice has he rolled double digits.
He's just cursed, and I think his curse causes me to roll high when I DM for him.
Generally true. Statistics are like that.
But when a PBP game has not a single roll above a 12 for one single character, it does go against the odds a bit.
Luck also comes into play 'when' the dice choose to roll particularly high or low. They can average out in the long run just fine, but in example: we have one player in my group that we jokingly declare has a Vulnerability to Petrification(the player.)No matter what character he is using, if he has to make a save vs petrification, he runs a roughly 95% rate of getting a 5 or less on his die roll for the save. Roughly 50% of his rolls have been 1's and 2's for them. Like any good friends, we tease him mercilessly about it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Preventing cheating / fixing mistakes on a player's character sheet is important, but there are far more important things for a GM during gameplay at the table.
I find that the payoff for pointing out cheating / mistakes during gameplay costs far too much. It immediately breaks versimilitude for players focusing on RP. It takes up precious game time. It derails the plot because nobody remembers what they were doing after a table argument, and thus it messes up the game's flow.
Preventing cheating / mistakes is important, and I try to prevent it. But I don't try to fix it during game, unless the cheating / mistake is exceptionally game breaking.
Indeed. My first rule of GMing is to keep the game flowing and moving forward if at all possible. As long as the cheating/mistakes aren't causing serious problems within the game, it's really not worth grinding play to a halt just to tell someone that his +5 should be a +4.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I had a player one who had a crit streak with a 20 x3 weapon like you wouldn't (and as you may guess from being in this thread, shouldn't) believe. He sat at a chair separate from the table, and on the opposite side of the room.
Then again, I've also had a player tell me that they botched a stealth roll just for comedic effect.
As long as the players and I are having fun, I don't worry about it too much. Instead, I insist on seeing rolls for critically important things, and don't sweat the small stuff.
We're a casual rule of cool/fun kind of group though, and I fully agree that it's appropriate to put a stop to that in a more serious group.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Luck also comes into play 'when' the dice choose to roll particularly high or low. They can average out in the long run just fine, but in example: we have one player in my group that we jokingly declare has a Vulnerability to Petrification(the player.)No matter what character he is using, if he has to make a save vs petrification, he runs a roughly 95% rate of getting a 5 or less on his die roll for the save. Roughly 50% of his rolls have been 1's and 2's for them. Like any good friends, we tease him mercilessly about it.I am constantly surprised when people believe they are bad/good; lucky/unlucky; cursed/blessed rolling dice. If you roll the d20 long enough everything evens out; people just remember the extremes.As a DM, I am consistently rolling high. I roll a ton of natural 20s. My players hate it. One of my players rolls consistently low.
To test it, one day we traded dice. I still rolled consistently high, and that one player still rolled consistently low.
That player has even joined a PBP game with me. He has yet to roll above a 12 with the forum's dice code, and only twice has he rolled double digits.
He's just cursed, and I think his curse causes me to roll high when I DM for him.
Generally true. Statistics are like that.
But when a PBP game has not a single roll above a 12 for one single character, it does go against the odds a bit.
This is how statistics is. Roll enough times and you get and average with a typical bell curve for a deviation. This takes thousands of rolls, so when you average it out amongst a long time it many players, you get the typical average.
Randomness is a much higher factor with a random skewing in a random direction when you apply the statistics to a small set of rolls, like in a particular game or a particular player.
This is one of the issues when determining averages for damage (typically when people try to determine which build is better). Sure, over a long run you'll get to that average eventually, but in the short term the variability may not go towards the average (yet). And yet, every single time I've seen someone point this out, they get shouted down by those who insist that standard bell curves for random variability apply even with small subsets of numbers. I've also seen this issue in the sciences when people try to do studies with a small sample size; or when people try to use a study with a small sample size as if it were the end-all-be-all for the topic. They don't realize that small sample sizes can skew wildly just based on randomness alone.
(for the record, saying that my friend is cursed is an ongoing joke, and may or may not apply to what each individual actually believes. After all, individuals may believe in a wide variaty of things that may or may not be true. )
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Randomness is a much higher factor with a random skewing in a random direction when you apply the statistics to a small set of rolls, like in a particular game or a particular player.This is one of the issues when determining averages for damage (typically when people try to determine which build is better).
I think most of realize this, and most of us realize that average damage is only one of many indicators of success. The idea with DPR is damage potential since it also assumes full attacks which may not even take place, depending on the enemy. My current character is doing pretty bad on attack rolls, and is not close to matching his DPR on paper. However for the first 3 sessions the dice were hot in combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So far, I believe the closest I've come to cheating was in one of the first sessions of Pathfinder I gm'ed, when my players voluntarily sought out a tavern to stir up some trouble. I hadn't planned anything for such an encounter (Yes, I should have known better. xD ) so when it came time to bring out the tavern's bouncer, I just pulled the stats for a CR 5 Expert Bodyguard from the PRD. The party consisted of 5 characters, all level 4, so I figured it would be a winnable fight, but tough. However, due to how new we all were at PF, it actually didn't take long for the bouncer to subdue them and hand them over to the town watch.
Does pulling a tough encounter out of thin air count as fudging?
I hate illegal builds, but as a GM if a player came to me with one I might allow it. I myself wished to play this horrid hybrid alchemist, but two of the abilities modified bomb, one altered bomb damage up a scale against a certain breed of enemy and down for everything else. It conflicted with the Vivisectionist Archetype that gives sneak attack. I was perfectly willing to accept a similar change of damage dice on that. I was told no, but if a player came to me with something like that, I might allow it. But if they snuck it past me... cave in on character the second I can reasonably pull it off.
Now, if they're fudging there rolls constantly with a low number that might be a hit or might not, I'm not likely to call them on it. If they're rolling nat 20s every turn on the other hand... For me, it's the type of cheating.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think most of realize this, and most of us realize that average damage is only one of many indicators of success. The idea with DPR is damage potential since it also assumes full attacks which may not even take place, depending on the enemy. My current character is doing pretty bad on attack rolls, and is not close to matching his DPR on paper. However for the first 3 sessions the dice were hot in combat.
Randomness is a much higher factor with a random skewing in a random direction when you apply the statistics to a small set of rolls, like in a particular game or a particular player.This is one of the issues when determining averages for damage (typically when people try to determine which build is better).
I agree with you. However, I've also seen people here "shouted down" for bring up that dice in pathfinder don't always play to the averages within a single campaign; it's as if they were wrong for bringing up that a small sample size doesn't reflect the averages.
(Not really shouted down, but I couldn't think of an appropriate phrase)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does pulling a tough encounter out of thin air count as fudging?
I think it does (which is part of the reason I'm so sanguine about cheating and regard the "fantasy world of an RPG, governed by objective rules" to be an illusion).
To me, there's no difference between deciding that the low level mooks all roll higher than is statistically possible or deciding that a higher-than-expected-CR-monster happens along to "provide more of a challenge".
The latter is far more socially acceptable though, it seems to me (and hence superior).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with letting people cheat if it's 'fun', is that the type of people who will cheat in something that doesn't matter like Pathfinder are not the type of people that I want to spend my free time with.
I feel that if it's so inconsequential that it doesn't make sense that someone would bother to cheat, it's also so inconquential that it's not worth the time and energy being troubled by their cheating.
That said, we use Herolab. The app flags any irregularities so, aside from any bugs, characters are automatically vetted for the DM. As well, no one is shy about asking about bonuses etc. and we look at each others' characters often so cheating in our group is mostly limited to fudging rolls and poor arithmetic. I might feel differently if I was playing in group full of guys like bookrat describes.
|
The problem with letting people cheat if it's 'fun', is that the type of people who will cheat in something that doesn't matter like Pathfinder are not the type of people that I want to spend my free time with.I feel that if it's so inconsequential that it doesn't make sense that someone would bother to cheat, it's also so inconquential that it's not worth the time and energy being troubled by their cheating.
If it's a mistake - I totally agree with you. If I know that it's cheating - either by direct evidence or a long history of 'mistakes' all in their favor - that person is someone I'd want to avoid.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It all depends on the sort of social contract a group has.
Outside of PFS, my groups expect a little fudging of rolls by the DM, at certain, but rare times, for dramatic effect.
What infuriates me, is when a player, or DM, breaks that social contract.
So, if a DM suddenly begins fudging rolls on a consistent basis, or fudges rolls in favor of a particular player, over others, the contract is broken.
When a player does it, he violates the social contract by ignoring/creating his/her own rules.
For me, no cheating is allowed, or tolerated, unless everyone is cheating, in the same agreed upon way.
In this way, it becomes a houserule, and is no longer cheating.
Yeah, he was right, you were wrong. First, you should have discussed it with him. Then the DM. Once the DM did nothing- that's exactly what you should have done. Or- walked.After announcing every little thing wrong with the character to the entire group the player got mad at me for doing something that was the job of the GM. He didn't like that another player would look at his character sheet.
That's actually what Bookrat did.
When I brought it up to the GM, he tried to do something about it, but this GM is really bad at confrontation and the player just kind of ignored the GM. So I stepped in.
No, like it sez "So I stepped in.". A Player doesn't "step in", Player to Player. Ever. Either the DM handles it, or the players as a group discuss it.
At that point in time, Bookrat should have brought up the issue to the group, in a non-confrontational way. "Hey one of us has some major mistakes on his sheet- what does the group wanna do about something like that?" If the other players go "Meh", then sit down and shut up or walk out of the game.
If the other players say "Yeah, lets put everyones sheets out in the open and audit all of them", then great!
The point here is that it's never a one player decision to accuse another of "cheating". If the other two players are OK with it and just wanna get back to rolling dice and having fun, then being confrontational is disruptive.
It all depends on the sort of social contract a group has.
Outside of PFS, my groups expect a little fudging of rolls by the DM, at certain, but rare times, for dramatic effect.
What infuriates me, is when a player, or DM, breaks that social contract.
So, if a DM suddenly begins fudging rolls on a consistent basis, or fudges rolls in favor of a particular player, over others, the contract is broken.
When a player does it, he violates the social contract by ignoring/creating his/her own rules.
For me, no cheating is allowed, or tolerated, unless everyone is cheating, in the same agreed upon way.
In this way, it becomes a houserule, and is no longer cheating.
You know, I have a board game (technically a card game, I guess, but it feels like a board game to me) where the game's instruction manual actually states that cheating is allowed as long as you don't get caught.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As DM, though, I'm usually very careful not to. The BBEG always has rules-legal abilities, strict WBL, and mooks allowable under his Leadership score, for example. NPCs' skill points and other stats are carefully derived. Dice are rolled in the open, no fudging from me. Etc.Heh, I'm running a 5E PbP right now, with a party picked from an open recruitment thread. I announced in the first post of said thread that I owned only the PHB, and therefore all the "GM stuff" like monster stats and environmental effects and so forth would all be shamelessly pulled out of my arse.
We're having a blast. :)
We are. :)
Though we may, possibly be heading into our first TPK... :o
Pffft, those goblins are dropping like flies, and your melee force has barely even gotten started! What could possibly go wrong? :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, he was right, you were wrong. First, you should have discussed it with him. Then the DM. Once the DM did nothing- that's exactly what you should have done. Or- walked.After announcing every little thing wrong with the character to the entire group the player got mad at me for doing something that was the job of the GM. He didn't like that another player would look at his character sheet.
That's actually what Bookrat did.
When I brought it up to the GM, he tried to do something about it, but this GM is really bad at confrontation and the player just kind of ignored the GM. So I stepped in.No, like it sez "So I stepped in.". A Player doesn't "step in", Player to Player. Ever. Either the DM handles it, or the players as a group discuss it.
At that point in time, Bookrat should have brought up the issue to the group, in a non-confrontational way. "Hey one of us has some major mistakes on his sheet- what does the group wanna do about something like that?" If the other players go "Meh", then sit down and shut up or walk out of the game.
If the other players say "Yeah, lets put everyones sheets out in the open and audit all of them", then great!
The point here is that it's never a one player decision to accuse another of "cheating". If the other two players are OK with it and just wanna get back to rolling dice and having fun, then being confrontational is disruptive.
A bit of information that you likely do not know for my particular scenario:
My "stepping in" was to bring it to the group's attention. I listed all the things that were wrong with the character sheet that I could find on our group's forum. But by the time I got to 15 different items, I stopped looking for more and just posted what I found.
Additionally, all of our character sheets are posted on a website for any member of the group to look at. Even with this, the player was annoyed that I looked at his character sheet.
On a different note:
I do find it a bit interesting that I'm being chastised by two different people for opposite things; one person is chastising me for not bringing it to the group's attention and another person is chastising me for bringing it to the group's attention and not keeping it private.
Now, I do understand that no one here knows the whole story, so I'm not going to argue against or berate anyone for berating me on my actions. For those who have criticized me; depending on the scenario I would likely agree with what you have to say. In fact, each and every person who has berated me has gotten a nod of agreement from me while I read their posts (and so have multiple others here). Each scenario is different and I try to play it out as best I can, but being human I too make mistakes and can let my emotions get the best of me. Because of this, I'm trying really hard not get mad at anyone who is criticizing me here, but instead take their advice as best I can.
So thank you for responding to my posts and giving me your opinion. I do, truly, appreciate it.
I was just made aware that I am often made to roll behind the screen. The original reason was 10 stirges nearly wiping a party of 5 level 4-5 characters, but last campaign one players claimed I was getting too many hits. After the next encounter, he was begging me to roll in secret (23 or 24 attacks of under 50 percent for 19 hits, 7 threats none better than 20 percent for 4 crits). Yeah, I was hot! Wish I could roll that way with my Cleric! Technically, it could be called cheating, but I hate TPKs.
I think most of realize this, and most of us realize that average damage is only one of many indicators of success. The idea with DPR is damage potential since it also assumes full attacks which may not even take place, depending on the enemy.
Randomness is a much higher factor with a random skewing in a random direction when you apply the statistics to a small set of rolls, like in a particular game or a particular player.This is one of the issues when determining averages for damage (typically when people try to determine which build is better).
Presumably, it provides a useful benchmark when evaluating two potential paths of development for a specific character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, he was right, you were wrong. First, you should have discussed it with him. Then the DM. Once the DM did nothing- that's exactly what you should have done. Or- walked.After announcing every little thing wrong with the character to the entire group the player got mad at me for doing something that was the job of the GM. He didn't like that another player would look at his character sheet.
Diametrically opposing this. I'd be happy for any and anyone to
A: Check my sheet AND
B: Announce any errors to the table.
Why wouldn't I? Because it may prove me fallible? I'm up for that. No ego here. Sure it could be annoying if it happens all the time, but someone doing it all the time only proves there are errors to find, and there isn't enough others for sufficient oversight - if your group is even interested in this kind of thing.
It's not invigilation, or prying. It's helpful. Up to a point. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The worst I ever did was 4 sessions into the game I realized I never rolled an intimidation check, but had put 3 ranks into it. So I took my three ranks out and put em in a different skill >.> <.<
You know, I have a board game (technically a card game, I guess, but it feels like a board game to me) where the game's instruction manual actually states that cheating is allowed as long as you don't get caught.It all depends on the sort of social contract a group has.
Outside of PFS, my groups expect a little fudging of rolls by the DM, at certain, but rare times, for dramatic effect.
What infuriates me, is when a player, or DM, breaks that social contract.
So, if a DM suddenly begins fudging rolls on a consistent basis, or fudges rolls in favor of a particular player, over others, the contract is broken.
When a player does it, he violates the social contract by ignoring/creating his/her own rules.
For me, no cheating is allowed, or tolerated, unless everyone is cheating, in the same agreed upon way.
In this way, it becomes a houserule, and is no longer cheating.
Illuminati?
I think I know what card game you are talking about.
Thing is, everybody has agreed to a social contract, that cheating is part of that game.
For that matter, if it's part of the rules of the game, it's not really cheating.
Yeah, it's illuminati. Fun game.
But I agree with you, BBT - it's part of the rules of that game, not a part of the rules of Pathfinder nor a part of the social contract that we abide by.