Handling Cheating

[Umbran]

If a friend of mine felt like he had to cheat, then I'm not too sure I want them to be my friends.

Unless you talk it out, you don't know what was going through their head. You don't know what they "felt like". So, you have to be assuming something about their motivations, and then boot them for what you think they were doing, and why, rather than finding out what was actually going on.

You wanna call that friendship, well, I can't stop you. Have fun with that.

Then, those people would be wrong.

Eh. If there was an agreement that the GM play by the rules, then no, they weren't wrong. They were just playing with conventions other than yours.

 

[Elf Witch]

If a friend of mine felt like he had to cheat, then I'm not too sure I want them to be my friends.

It's a character thing. "Character" as in the person's integrity (not his PC) is something I value in a friend.

I'm not going to cut slack on that.

So, yeah. No tolerance. Especially with friends.


Then, those people would be wrong. It's silly to assume a DM can create encounters, decide how many enemies the PCs will fight, how often, and how strong those enemies will be, then say that a DM can also cheat.

A DM cheating is laughable considering he controls the entire game world.

What I don't understand is that you think that a friend who may cheat is lacking integrity and you are not to sure you would want them in your game much less be friends with them but you have no trouble trouble being friends with a person who routinely lies to his wife about playing in your game.

I would have issues knowing that a person I play with and considered a friend was a lair I would have issues trusting anything he or she ever said to me. I might still be friends but I would take everything they said with a grain of salt.

It seems to me that you are picking and choosing what you consider a sign of integrity to be.

Like I have said if a friend was cheating routinely in a game I ran I would want to know why. And depending on that reason I would make a decision on how to handle it.

I would not end a friendship over it I may not play with them but I know that people are not perfect and you need to cut your friends some slack.

 

[FickleGM]

My reaction to cheating depends entirely on who it is. Those who are just fellow gamers, but not really friends, I prefer to jettison, as I'm not invested in the person. For friends, however, I like to talk to the person, understand why and then work out a solution.

 

[Water Bob]

You wanna call that friendship, well, I can't stop you. Have fun with that.

It's another way of saying that the people I call friends would never think of cheating. We share similar values.

Now, I do game with "friends" that aren't really true friends, and I have in the past caught one of them cheating. I usually give them a stern "I don't allow that in my game" brow beating, and if I catch it a second time, I'll boot 'em.

That's only happened once in my gaming career. Usually the person is embarrassed that he compromised his integrity over a roleplaying game.

Eh. If there was an agreement that the GM play by the rules, then no, they weren't wrong. They were just playing with conventions other than yours.

Ah, no, you can't say a person is cheating if he has the power to change the world.

What I don't understand is that you think that a friend who may cheat is lacking integrity and you are not to sure you would want them in your game much less be friends with them but you have no trouble trouble being friends with a person who routinely lies to his wife about playing in your game.

The person you speak of has a lot of integrity. He's had my back several times. He treats his friends honorably. I've seen how he treats his customers (he owns his own business, and he's very honorable in his dealings with them). And, as far as his wife goes, I understand his motivation in not admitting that he games.

He may not be your nominee for husband of the year, but he's been and is a good friend to me.

I'd be shocked if he ever cheated a dice roll in a game.

 

[Elf Witch]

The person you speak of has a lot of integrity. He's had my back several times. He treats his friends honorably. I've seen how he treats his customers (he owns his own business, and he's very honorable in his dealings with them). And, as far as his wife goes, I understand his motivation in not admitting that he games.

He may not be your nominee for husband of the year, but he's been and is a good friend to me.

I'd be shocked if he ever cheated a dice roll in a game.

You could say the same thing about a guy who cheats maybe he has your back and treats his friends honorably. Maybe he treats his customers the same way. Maybe the only bad thing he does is cheat in DnD. Maybe he has a motivation that you can understand so you cut him some slack.

That is the point I am making here that one negative thing does not mean the person is not a decent friend.


I just don't buy that a cheater lacks integrity but a liar doesn't. For a lot of people lying is a sign of a lack of trustworthiness up there with cheating.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I agree with Elf Witch here. I'm not sure how you are ok with your friend making up stories about poker in order to game, but if he cheated on a dice roll you would boot him immediately without talking about it with him.

Surely both situations are things where you sit down and discuss them if these people are supposedly your friends.

Personally I would talk to the cheater, ask them why they are cheating and then explain to them that if they cheat again they will be booted.

If they continued to cheat after that then obviously "winning" is more important to them than what you think, so I would have no issue with booting them at that point.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Umbran]

Ah, no, you can't say a person is cheating if he has the power to change the world.

The GM has the power to change a fictional world, but he of she does not have the power to change the real one. If the GM makes an agreement with players - a real-world agreement between real-world people - not playing by the rules set out in that agreement would be cheating.

Many people, and many games, use the term "referee" instead of GM. Powerful though they may be, referees have rules by which they must abide.

Now, maybe you never make such agreements. That's fine. Then *you* cannot cheat in your game. In my current Deadlands game, I cannot cheat, because I explicitly told my players I might fudge on occasion.

But "never" doesn't hold here, because the GM/player agreements vary from table to table. You don't get to speak for other tables.

 

[ggroy]

If a friend of mine felt like he had to cheat, then I'm not too sure I want them to be my friends.

It's a character thing. "Character" as in the person's integrity (not his PC) is something I value in a friend.

I'm not going to cut slack on that.

So, yeah. No tolerance. Especially with friends.

I have an acquaintance who thinks just like this.

One time I caught this acquaintance in a blatant lie. Instead of fessing up, this person "pleaded the 5th".

 

[Water Bob]

I agree with Elf Witch here. I'm not sure how you are ok with your friend making up stories about poker in order to game, but if he cheated on a dice roll you would boot him immediately without talking about it with him.

Surely both situations are things where you sit down and discuss them if these people are supposedly your friends.

Personally I would talk to the cheater, ask them why they are cheating and then explain to them that if they cheat again they will be booted.

I said above I would bring the cheating blatantly to the cheater's attention first, then boot 'em on a second offense.

The GM has the power to change a fictional world, but he of she does not have the power to change the real one. If the GM makes an agreement with players - a real-world agreement between real-world people - not playing by the rules set out in that agreement would be cheating.

What does that mean "playing by the rules set"? Not flubbing a die throw? Not playing an NPC enemy to his fullest? Throwing 4 baddies at the players when the "ref" originally decided to send in 6?

I still call bogus on this. I, personally, do not flub any die rolls. I just don't like to do it. But, I will effect the game in other ways, always to craft a good, enjoyable story for everyone.

Yeah, there's no way the GM or ref can cheat. It just not possible.

Maybe you agree to roll in the open and not flub die rolls or modifiers. Fine. But, there's so many other areas where the GM, ref, DM, whatever you want to call him, can effect the game that, if the GM wanted to play "GM vs. the Players", the GM would win, every doggone time.

Therefore, the ref cannot cheat.

Now, maybe you never make such agreements. That's fine. Then *you* cannot cheat in your game.

No, it's in every game, even one where there is a referee rather than a GM. Why? The ref makes the calls on what's legal and not legal.

Whether you acknowledge it or not, it's just plain impossible for the GM to "cheat" becuase of the type of job the GM does for the game.

 

[fanboy2000]

What does that mean "playing by the rules set"? Not flubbing a die throw? Not playing an NPC enemy to his fullest? Throwing 4 baddies at the players when the "ref" originally decided to send in 6?

Actually, it's "rules set out in that agreement". Here is what it means:

Potential DM: I want you to be a player in my game.

Potential Player: Only if you promise to always roll in the open and not fudge any die rolls.

Potential DM: O.k.

If, during the game, the DM rolls a die in secret and fudges the roll, then he is not playing by the rules he agreed to verbally (well, assuming this didn't happen via email, text message, etc...).

But you seem to already have an answer for that.

Maybe you agree to roll in the open and not flub die rolls or modifiers. Fine. But, there's so many other areas where the GM, ref, DM, whatever you want to call him, can effect the game that, if the GM wanted to play "GM vs. the Players", the GM would win, every doggone time.

Therefore, the ref cannot cheat.

Your argument, if I understand it, is that it's pointless to make a GM promise not to fudge rolls since a GM could simply find some other way to achieve what they want.

I agree that a GM can achieve anything they want via methods other than fudging die rolls, but I think that's the point of such agreements. If the GM makes an encounter harder or easier by adding or removing monsters, then players may feel that's more fair than if they make it easier or more difficult by fudging die rolls.

It's not the end result such agreements are about, their about the method used to obtain the result.

No, it's in every game, even one where there is a referee rather than a GM. Why? The ref makes the calls on what's legal and not legal.

Well, their are limits. For one thing, if the group (players + GM) agrees to play Shadowrun and the GM starts running Paranoia (I'd love to see what happens when the players catch on...) then the GM has broken the agreement. Sure, technically the GM can establish rules, but a wholesale switching of games without player input, could be a breech.

Whether you acknowledge it or not, it's just plain impossible for the GM to "cheat" becuase of the type of job the GM does for the game.

Just remember that if the GM goes to far with this, he or she may not have any players.