Is this fair? -- your personal opinion

[Sound of Azure]

I think we all know what the real trap here was. :\


Darn Mind-affecting traps.

 

[Raven Crowking]

In and of itself, it is neither fair not unfair. I've said that multiple times.

However, I don't think that the OP was concerned with whether it is absolutely fair or absolutely unfair (because that doesn't exist). I don't think the question in and of itself was the important part. The question, I think, is what our games consider fair and unfair, and in my game, this trap would be completely unfair.

Well, then, that is fair.

In fact, the only difference between the above statements and my opinion is that I make a presumption of fairness where you do not. I view fair/unfair as an either/or state. Something is either fair or it is not. When one adds components to form a complex system, all of those components must be fair for the situation to be fair, but even fair components can be compounded to create an unfair whole.

I suppose, in a way, you are applying a Schrödinger's cat-type logic to the problem of ethics: for you, the thing is neither fair nor unfair until it is "observed" in the context of a game. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_cat) Of course, while ethics are not physics, I would argue (paraphrasing from the Wikpedia article) that the rules of ethics are no different for an act of observation than for other situations.

Celtavian's post, above, seems to suggest that he neither views the trap as fair, nor as part of any fair playstyle. I could be wrong, of course, about what he means, but if this is what he is implying, then I would say that this is a fairly objective statement. In fact, if this is what he is implying, then where we differ would be on our ideas as to what constitutes a reasonable standard regarding what is, and is not, a fair playstyle.

It is what seems to me to be wishy-washy about your statements that I disagree with. When you say "This Trap + My Playstyle = Unfair" I do not object. But you apparently also mean to claim that "This Trap + Other Playstyle X = Fair". Yet, how can this be if the trap itself is not fair?

I imagine that this might be because I see "unfairness" as an additive quality. A situation or thing is fair until enough circumstances are added to make it unfair. If you were somehow able to express circumstancial elements mathematically, adding up those elements would give you a threshold number over which the entire complex would cease to be fair. As a result of this viewpoint, anything which, in and of itself, exceeds this threshold is unfair and would not normally be part of a "fair" complex...no matter who was the DM or what playstyle is involved.

Of course, there are circumstances in real life, such as self defence in the case of killing or harming another person, or even a handicap in a sport, where a circumstance might have a "subtractive" value that renders a thing which would be intrinsicaly unfair part of a fair complex. I would agree that such a "subtractive" circumstance might occur in the context of a D&D game/playstyle, especially if you were catering to the lowest common denominator (i.e., handicapping one or more players in the same way that one might have a golf handicap). OTOH, I cannot think of any way in which such a consideration would apply to make the trap in the OP part of a fair complex/playstyle were it not already below the "fair" threshold.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Here's a trap. DC 25 to find/disarm, 2d6+12 damage, Reflex save for half (DC 28)

Is that fair or unfair?

The trap is fair. That does not imply that using it under any circumstance is fair.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

That just screams "unbeatable trap" to me, which is why I feel it was unfair.

See, though, that is a rational observation, and it is subject to test.

The three criteria that I posted earlier, that ThirdWizard accepted (and then rejected), were designed to test exactly that premise.

RC

 

[wayne62682]

See, though, that is a rational observation, and it is subject to test.

The three criteria that I posted earlier, that ThirdWizard accepted (and then rejected), were designed to test exactly that premise.

RC

You'll forgive me for not reading your critiera.. do you happen to remember what post number it was so I can see what you have to say?

 

[ThirdWizard]

Celtavian's post, above, seems to suggest that he neither views the trap as fair, nor as part of any fair playstyle.

I read it more as him saying he could never enjoy that playstyle, since he didn't use the terms fair or unfair in his response.

It is what seems to me to be wishy-washy about your statements that I disagree with. When you say "This Trap + My Playstyle = Unfair" I do not object. But you apparently also mean to claim that "This Trap + Other Playstyle X = Fair". Yet, how can this be if the trap itself is not fair?

I don't see how a trap can, itself, be fair or unfair, without a context. How can you tell if there is a lack of bias if you don't know the context? How can you tell if the trap is impartial without the context?

Any trap, no matter what, can be fair or unfair given a proper context for the trap. Do you agree with that?

If you agree with that, then how do you determine where to draw the line? How can a trap be contextless?

If you disagree with that do you think that there is an intrisinctly unfair trap? Can people enjoy an unfair game?

The three criteria that I posted earlier, that ThirdWizard accepted (and then rejected), were designed to test exactly that premise.

Nah, the three criteria are perfect for my game. I'm just not going to say that they are perfect for all games. I'm perfectly willing to use those criteria in my own game. It isn't my place, though, to say that they apply to, say, Quasqueton's game.

EDIT: I accepted them before I realized you were trying to create an objective fairness.

I'm still curious about how you would answer this:

Person A is designing the standards that will be used in the fairness of testing 2nd grade students. Person A believes adamantly that it is fair for there to be trick questions on tests. He believes that trick questions are some of the best way to make sure the person knows the material well. A collegue, Person B, thinks that trick questions are bad, and that 2nd graders probably don't have the capacity to understand the concepts of trick questions.

Would it be prudent for Person A to:

1) Decide that he is right, and that trick questions are fair. The ability of 2nd graders to answer trick questions isn't of consequence.

2) Decide that he is right, and that trick questions are intrisinctly fair. 2nd graders should be abe to answer trick questions well enough for it to be fair, because trick questions are intrisinctly fair.

3) Do studies on whether or not 2nd graders are capable of answering trick questions with enough ability for these questions to be deemed fair.

 

[Barak]

RC, just to verify.. You are saying that, basically, virtually any trap is fair (bearing the extreme crazy stuff), but it might not be fair to put them in certain places. For example, the OP's trap is fair, but it might not have been fair to put it there.

 

[Slife]

RC, just to verify.. You are saying that, basically, virtually any trap is fair (bearing the extreme crazy stuff), but it might not be fair to put them in certain places. For example, the OP's trap is fair, but it might not have been fair to put it there.

I'll agree with that. For example, the sun is a instakill save-or-vaporize trap, but it's so far off that it doesn't matter.

But a GM who put the sun in 10x10 room wouldn't be playing fair at all (barring divine intervention, of course)

 

[Raven Crowking]

Nah, the three criteria are perfect for my game. I'm just not going to say that they are perfect for all games. I'm perfectly willing to use those criteria in my own game. It isn't my place, though, to say that they apply to, say, Quasqueton's game.

Well, I would certainly agree with that.

I'm still curious about how you would answer this:

Person A is designing the standards that will be used in the fairness of testing 2nd grade students. Person A believes adamantly that it is fair for there to be trick questions on tests. He believes that trick questions are some of the best way to make sure the person knows the material well. A collegue, Person B, thinks that trick questions are bad, and that 2nd graders probably don't have the capacity to understand the concepts of trick questions.

Would it be prudent for Person A to:

1) Decide that he is right, and that trick questions are fair. The ability of 2nd graders to answer trick questions isn't of consequence.

2) Decide that he is right, and that trick questions are intrisinctly fair. 2nd graders should be abe to answer trick questions well enough for it to be fair, because trick questions are intrisinctly fair.

3) Do studies on whether or not 2nd graders are capable of answering trick questions with enough ability for these questions to be deemed fair.

What are the tests supposed to do?

If the tests are supposed to measure the knowledge and capabilities of 2nd grade students, then (1) and (2) would seem to be part of (3).

If the tests are designed to measure understanding of particular material, then I would say any of the above would work if you were measuring on a curve, and (3) would be the best choice if you were not. It might be true that "trick questions are intrinsicly fair" but that does not make them appropriate for all contexts.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

RC, just to verify.. You are saying that, basically, virtually any trap is fair (bearing the extreme crazy stuff), but it might not be fair to put them in certain places. For example, the OP's trap is fair, but it might not have been fair to put it there.

Absolutely, assuming that by "the extreme crazy stuff" you mean "the stuff that would be unfair in virtually any fair context imaginable".

I also agree with Slife's response to your post.