Cheating cheaters

[Fifth Element]

Really? Look, if it’s a single player doing this and everyone at the table knows it, then it’s the same as you announcing: “Hey this player can make up any roll he wants, but the rest of you can’t”. I don’t see how that’s fun for everyone. It’s basically playing favorites which has a negative impact on the game, whether or not your players choose to vocalize it.

Say what? Where did I say only this one player can cheat?

Winning a game is meaningless without challenge.

I guess that's the difference. I don't play D&D to win. My players don't either.

 

[OchreJelly]

Say what? Where did I say only this one player can cheat?

Your example showed that you and your players know that cheating was going on and you challenged everyone on what the big deal is. My point was by doing so you are either green-lighting everyone to use that behavior since it’s “not a big deal”, or telling them to ignore the behavior of said player and let him continue on his merry cheating way. IME ignoring the problem is bad. I will grant you that your second paragraph showed that if players did have a problem with it you would probably work something out, no?

I guess that's the difference. I don't play D&D to win. My players don't either.

Regarding winning, let me rephrase it. I should have seen that coming. People do win at DND all the time, in small increments: Encounters. Losing can be fun too in small doses (horror games come to mind), but really a good game is always full of constant little reward mechanisms. That’s what I meant. It’s when the challenge of getting the reward is removed, either by cheating or broken rules etc., that the reward itself becomes worthless. IME worthless reward = unfun game.

Look my group is pretty carefree too. We play DND to blow off steam, have fun etc. but we are all serious enough about the rules to not tolerate cheating.

 

[Fifth Element]

My point was by doing so you are either green-lighting everyone to use that behavior since it’s “not a big deal”, or telling them to ignore the behavior of said player and let him continue on his merry cheating way.

Yes. Since "cheating" in this way is not a big deal, why would I mind if everyone did it? And if the other players don't mind the one's actions, that's fine too.

IME ignoring the problem is bad. I will grant you that your second paragraph showed that if players did have a problem with it you would probably work something out, no?

Yes, I've mentioned that several times I believe. Everyone needs to have fun, or there's no point in playing.

People do win at DND all the time, in small increments: Encounters. Losing can be fun too in small doses (horror games come to mind), but really a good game is always full of constant little reward mechanisms. That’s what I meant. It’s when the challenge of getting the reward is removed, either by cheating or broken rules etc., that the reward itself becomes worthless. IME worthless reward = unfun game.

But that's just a matter of degree. We all know that by default, D&D encounters are designed such that the PCs have a very good chance of defeating them. So in this case the chance would just go up a bit. That's not a sea change in the reward structure. It's a matter of degree.

 

[OchreJelly]

But that's just a matter of degree. We all know that by default, D&D encounters are designed such that the PCs have a very good chance of defeating them. So in this case the chance would just go up a bit. That's not a sea change in the reward structure. It's a matter of degree.

Agreed on the encounter design weighted for players. That’s part of the social contract of DND that the DM will present fair challenges just as much as everyone is expected to play fairly. Those small degrees add up over time. It may not be one encounter or the next, but if said player tips the scales in encounters enough I personally would find that less fun to play in. I don’t want you to think I’m coming at this as “don’t play that way”. Every group should do what works for them. I just have never encountered a group that would tolerate it. YMMV.

 

[Fifth Element]

Agreed on the encounter design weighted for players. That’s part of the social contract of DND that the DM will present fair challenges just as much as everyone is expected to play fairly. Those small degrees add up over time. It may not be one encounter or the next, but if said player tips the scales in encounters enough I personally would find that less fun to play in. I don’t want you to think I’m coming at this as “don’t play that way”. Every group should do what works for them. I just have never encountered a group that would tolerate it. YMMV.

Fair enough, just remember that different people enjoy different amounts of challenge. Some people enjoy having powerful characters who rarely fail. Others enjoy having to fight for every inch. There's no answer to the question "how much challenge is enough?"

 

[Janx]

Part of the current equation is also friendship. No, I don't tolerate cheating in a convention setting. But I don't lay the smackdown on my friends either. If my friend is cheating, I don't take a hard stance against. At that point the so-called psycho-babble/pop-psychology is important.

I think the key here is anytime your friend does something that you find offensive, you have to weigh challenging the issue versus keeping the friend.

I feel that at some point, the offenses add up and that friend is not worth keeping. And I am not at fault for what happens next, if I didn't create the offenses, particularly ones that are considered commonly accepted social wrongs (hurting people, lying and stealing).

The point then is, be aware that any action you take may sacrifice a friendship. However, the OP has every right to take action, and that's what he seems to be asking (methods to correct the player's behavior).

The OP's problem is "need methods to correct cheating player", and one of the requirements is "cheating must stop". Accepting it is not viable. Now, solve for that.

The cheater's background may be relevant to a solution. Allowing it for a while longer may also be acceptable if it leads to cessation. Allowing cheating should not be acceptable as the final solution to stop cheating.

 

[WetWombat]

Re: Nifft: *snicker*

Obryn:

How about this? Aside from previously suggested options of placing Ms. Cheaty McCheatypants nearby and/or observing her rolls like the proverbial hawk, and gently suggesting that her interperetation of the results should be reexamined should her declaration not agree with the hard facts, why not attempt positive reinforcement?

To Wit: Karma Points
Balance must be maintained. When the Fates frown on a character's actions, causing catastrophic failure, they are obligated to smile unconditionally at some later date. Mechanically, this simply means a failure (especially those with dire consequences, such as favorite items being lost or destroyed.), when accepted (no cheating!), generates a point that can be used in another encounter, to turn a similarly failed attempt into a success instead. (Similar to action points, only this is a mechanic to allow a single unconditional success.)

Sure, this would involve bookkeeping, but the rewards in terms of reduction of cheating might, hopefully, make it worthwhile.

JUST a thought from The Wombat(wet).

 

[Janx]

wetwombat's got a pretty good idea. It seems like it would help folks who always roll bad, by giving them a "critical success" just when they really need it.

 

[Fifth Element]

To Wit: Karma Points
Balance must be maintained. When the Fates frown on a character's actions, causing catastrophic failure, they are obligated to smile unconditionally at some later date. Mechanically, this simply means a failure (especially those with dire consequences, such as favorite items being lost or destroyed.), when accepted (no cheating!), generates a point that can be used in another encounter, to turn a similarly failed attempt into a success instead. (Similar to action points, only this is a mechanic to allow a single unconditional success.)

Nice idea. It's kind of like action points, but has the additional benefit of balancing out bad die rolls, which bother some players.

 

[Storm Raven]

I would also point out the other players are actively contemptuous of how she chooses to play. Since they're in the majority at the table, I guess that's alright.

No, since they are abiding by the rules of the game the group agreed to play, they are in the right.

Seriously, I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to figure out. Playing a diceless game is cool, if you are playing a diceless game. Agreeing to play a game with dice and treating it as if it was a diceless game while everyone else follows the actual rules is not cool. It is a one-way ticket to "outta here".

This is so basic that no one should need to explain it to you.

In addition to the fact that cheating is a sign of hogging the spotlight and otherwise acting unfairly to the other players at the table, someone who believes that it is worth cheating at a pastime like D&D to make themselves feel better, or to have the most powerful character around, or whatever is simply too sad and pathetic to continue to associate with.