Handling Cheating

[Water Bob]

How about some page refs and quotes on that, then?

Well...I'll be doggone if I didn't find a page number for you...

Check out the 3.5 DMG, pg. 18, under the title DM CHEATING AND PLAYER PERCEPTIONS.

Second paragraph, first sentence: Do you cheat? The answer: The DM really can't cheat.

Then, it goes into, blah, blah, blah, all the other things I've been saying on this thread.

I'm sure the "DM Can Cheat!" crowd will have something to say about that, even though, there it is, right there in black & white.

The GM can't cheat.

 

[Water Bob]

Your follow-up seems unrelated to this question. Can you tell me how it's related?

It should be obvious that, because every GM does lie to his group in one way or another, that you're singling out a specific lie to disagree with and accepting others.

Which tears apart the foundation of your argument.

But, really, there should be no more discussion after my post above point to where the DMG specifically states the the GM cannot cheat.

Anything else is a house rule.

 

[JamesonCourage]

It should be obvious that, because every GM does lie to his group in one way or another, that you're singling out a specific lie to disagree with and accepting others.

Which tears apart the foundation of your argument.

I'm talking about which lie. That's the context of the social contract. Is it within the rules to lie? If so, then lying is not cheating. Is it against the rules to lie? If so, lying is cheating. Are some lies against the rules but others not? If so, then deliberately lying on the subjects where it's against the rules is cheating.

Context matters. With respect, my argument doesn't fall apart. Rules are created by the social contract, or the mutual agreement of all participants. If you break that agreement, you're cheating. If the agreement is that it's okay to lie once the game begins, then it's not cheating to do so.

The difference in the lies I'm talking about? Pre-game (to establish the rules) versus in-game (once the game is being played). If you break the pre-game agreement, you've broken the rules, and that is cheating.

But, really, there should be no more discussion after my post above point to where the DMG specifically states the the GM cannot cheat.

Anything else is a house rule.

A house rule is a rule. I've detailed that with quotes from the dictionary. I can point you to them again if you'd like. As always, play what you like

 

[Elf Witch]

Well...I'll be doggone if I didn't find a page number for you...

Check out the 3.5 DMG, pg. 18, under the title DM CHEATING AND PLAYER PERCEPTIONS.

Second paragraph, first sentence: Do you cheat? The answer: The DM really can't cheat.

Then, it goes into, blah, blah, blah, all the other things I've been saying on this thread.

I'm sure the "DM Can Cheat!" crowd will have something to say about that, even though, there it is, right there in black & white.

The GM can't cheat.

I am not sure why you are beating this to death. And I am not sure why you can't accept the idea that if the group agrees to something and the DM breaks that agreement then he is cheating.

It is a game there are rules everyone agrees to play by certain rules either official or house rules if someone knowingly breaks the agreed upon rules that is cheating.

There is also a big difference between the DM having an NPC lie to the party and the DM lying to the players.

If the agreement is that all dice rolls stand no matter the consequences then if a player or DM lie about the roll then they are cheating because they are breaking the agreed upon rules to govern play. And it does not matter that the DMG says a DM can't cheat. Because in the circumstance he is cheating.

It is really very simple don't lie to your players, and don't agree to things you have no intention of following.

 

[S'mon]

Every GM Cheats. Every one of 'em. No matter the play style.

Now, let's see the horde of you post a couple of pages about how you don't cheat.

This is getting dangerously close to trolling.

 

[S'mon]

Well...I'll be doggone if I didn't find a page number for you...

Check out the 3.5 DMG, pg. 18, under the title DM CHEATING AND PLAYER PERCEPTIONS.

Second paragraph, first sentence: Do you cheat? The answer: The DM really can't cheat.

Then, it goes into, blah, blah, blah, all the other things I've been saying on this thread.

I'm sure the "DM Can Cheat!" crowd will have something to say about that, even though, there it is, right there in black & white.

The GM can't cheat.

Thank you.

 

[S'mon]

It should be obvious that, because every GM does lie to his group in one way or another...

Maybe most do. I don't.

 

[Water Bob]

A house rule is a rule.

Sure. But, if you bring in House Rules, there is no discussion. A House Rule can cover anything.

You can say, "The rules say that the GM can't cheat, but our House Rule says he can," which is what you are saying, in essence.

You can say, "We're going to play where the GM's word isn't Law, but when a disagreement comes up, the group as a whole is going to vote on it." And, that's definitely not how the game is described in the DMG. It's a House Rule.

You can say, "We're going to call our House Rule a Social Contract, and everbody is going to abide by it. It will reign supreme over the rules in the book." Again, a House Rule.

But, THE RULES say the GM cannot cheat.

Sounds to me like we're at the end of the discussion.

 

[S'mon]

But, THE RULES say the GM cannot cheat.

No they don't. I have a book that tallks about GM cheating. You have a book that says GMs can't really cheat. In both cases it is in the advice sections of GM guides; guidance is not rules.

But this is certainly a pointless discussion. You clearly have a lot invested in your POV.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Sure. But, if you bring in House Rules, there is no discussion. A House Rule can cover anything.

That is exactly my point.

You can say, "The rules say that the GM can't cheat, but our House Rule says he can," which is what you are saying, in essence.

Yes, it is. That, and that not everyone runs games out of the 3.5 DMG. You say "a DM/GM can't cheat" as something universal, and cite the 3.5 DMG. I don't use that DMG. It does not apply to me. GMs can cheat.

But, THE RULES say the GM cannot cheat.

No, a book says the GM can't cheat. It is not a default rule. Flat-footed is a rule. Initiative has rules. The passage you quoted is advice. In the 4e DMG, it says an encounter with gate guards isn't fun. That isn't a default rule. That's advice.

I happen to disagree with both, and the English language agrees with me. You don't agree, and that's fine. But, all I'm pointing out is what a "rule" is, what "cheating" is, and showing that it is entirely possible for a GM to cheat. The advice in the 3.5 DMG is just that, too: advice.

Sounds to me like we're at the end of the discussion.

That's up to you. I think I've gone to some pretty good lengths to show my point, while you've quoted a passage that doesn't contradict it, and tried to pass off "house rules" as somehow less than rules (even though the passage you provided doesn't apply to 3.5, as it's not a rule, nor does it apply much to any other game out there). If you want to agree to disagree, I'm okay with that. Your call, and if you want to, let me know -you can have the last word. As always, play what you like