Am I being unreasonable?

[Nifft]

He's a dirty cheating scumbag.

You're totally validated.

However, if you want to keep him in your game (and it seems you do, what with 18 years of this stuff), I'd recommend being less confrontational. Let him save face if you can. Liars really like saving face -- I think that looking better than they feel is why they lie in the first place, so cutting him down on one front will just make some other cheating crop up (to compensate, to make him feel better about looking bad).

Cheers, -- N

 

[DragonLancer]

Doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Probably could have done without the slight tone in the mail, but fair enough.

 

[Aus_Snow]

I didn't read it as that Aus_Snow. I read it that the OP was not aware of the fact that the player was already doing things wrong.

That is an important difference.

Yeah, that's fair enough. Sorry 'DoD', that was probably a bad call (of mine.)

 

[delericho]

What you are wanting to do with your game is entirely reasonable. Your email, though, could have stood to be a bit more... diplomatic.

However, the rules gaffes are a matter of some serious concern to me.

>>>>>So lets just go with the rules as they are written rather than any re-interpretting/re-writing you may wish to do because you wanted the 2-weapon fighting but didn't want it to be inferior to 2-handed weapons. As it is you're already getting away with using a hand-and-a-half weapon in the off hand. Many folk would find that to be a bit OTT.

ANd by the way I think you'll find the versatility of 2 weapon fighting makes up for the slightly less damage. Certainly you get the benefit of using 2 bucklers. You could also get the benefit of the extra attack in terms of hitting a different opponent, using it to feint or trip etc.<<<<<<<

In 3.x rules, there is no such thing as a "hand-and-a-half weapon". The bastard sword and the dwarven waraxe are one-handed weapons. The key question is: does the character have the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat with the weapon in question (note, Dwarven Fighters, Rangers, Paladins and Barbarians get the feat with the dwarven waraxe 'for free' in the 3.5 revision). If not, he shouldn't be using these weapons with one hand at all. If he does, then he's fine with what he's doing. (Remember, though, that the attack roll penalties with two one-handed weapons are -4/-4.)

As others have mentioned, two-weapon fighting doesn't allow the use of multiple bucklers, and has no bearing on feinting.

(Since you mention not understanding it: a feint is a standard action. The character makes a Bluff check, opposed by his opponent's Sense Motive check. If he succeeds, his opponent loses his Dex bonus to AC against the next melee attack you make against him. Typically, the option is of limited use to characters other than Rogues, although it can be good if the opponent has a huge Dex.)

In response to accusations of rules misinterpretations: I stand guilty. When this campaign started I was brand new to 3.X. (I'd actually been overseas and away from gaming for several years.) Not so the players. I asked all the players to be honest and not rort the system on me. A pretty simple catch-all sort of thing to ask. I also said I would rely on them getting the rules for their characters right in the first place: I didn't want to have go and audit all the PCs later on.

The sad truth is that you can't trust this player to do so. He is either making mistakes, or is deliberately cheating. If the latter is true, I wouldn't play with the player any more... if I can't trust a player then they have no place at my table. However, you may choose to do otherwise.

In any case, there are clearly problems with at least one character in your group. At this point, I would be inclined to use the arrival of a new player to do a full audit of all the characters "to better get a feel of how you really stack up in terms of power". Check every character thoroughly for rules errors. (The reason for checking all the characters? Two fold: if allows you to catch anyone else who has 'forgotten' a key rule, and it doesn't single out the problem player for special treatment.)

Truth be told I've learnt a lot of the rules from here on Enworld. The rule books are the same old mess they've been since for ever but unlike when I was a kid I don't have the time or inclination to plough through them all and cross reference everything. Lazy? Yes but I have asked for help with the rules from the players. It'd be nice if that help would be a bit more honest.

You probably don't want to hear this, but I'm going to say it anyway: you must read through the core rulebooks in detail at your earliest opportunity. Your lack of rules knowledge is undermining your authority as DM. Get the rules under control, and everything else will become that bit easier.

Oh, and certainly don't allow any (more) supplements until you've got a handle on the core rules.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

You might have worded it differently, but the facts speak for your decision, and the being angry part can be explained by you finding out he's taking advantage of your ignorance. I'd say that people like that have it coming if someone gets angry at them.

 

[roguerouge]

Trouble is he's been doing this sort of thing for the entire time we've gamed together (18 years or so) and it does get me angry. He know's it makes me angry. Yet he keeps doing it. Ah well, I can't change him but I can at least make sure he plays by the rules.

Perhaps some lines from Adaptation might help you with your issue:

Charlie Kaufman: Then, when you walked away, she started making fun of you with Kim Canetti. It was like they were making fun of *me*. You didn't know at all. You seemed so happy.
Donald Kaufman: I knew. I heard them.
Charlie Kaufman: How come you looked so happy?
Donald Kaufman: I loved Sarah, Charles. It was mine, that love. I owned it. Even Sarah didn't have the right to take it away. I can love whoever I want.
Charlie Kaufman: She thought you were pathetic.
Donald Kaufman: That was her business, not mine.


You should enforce the rules, as the DM. But getting angry about it is just letting that guy's insecurity be in control. The cheating—and why it happens so many times over the years—is his business, not yours.

 

[werk]

I think there is a very aggressive and adversarial tone in that email snip you posted in the OP. Lots of insults and accusations in there.

I'd tell you to go eat a part of your own anatomy, personally, just for attitude.

Now, as far as rules...
-Yes, the off-hand grants ½strength bonus to damage. I use a house ruled Ambdexterity to restore that. It hasn't seemed over-powering, and a feat is a pretty steep price.
-I don't know what you are talking about a hand and a half weapon in his off hand. If he is using a bastard sword without proiciency, then you are doing it wrong. If he has proficiency, then he is -4/-4 rather than -2/-2 to attck while dual weilding.
-Two bucklers is right out.

But again, I have to stress that I think the real problem is your relationship.

 

[Black_Swan]

Sometimes it's better to compromise than it is to simply enforce the rules. Even in today's society deals are made and the rules are stretched to make things work between individuals.

It sounds like your player is still getting a pretty sweet deal and the new player will as well.

Good job on compromising instead of needlessly arguing to a stand still.

After all, this is just a game and people will treat it with varying levels of seriousness. Understanding that and coming to terms with each other is much more important than following the rules as they are written.

 

[Deset Gled]

Sometimes it's better to compromise than it is to simply enforce the rules. Even in today's society deals are made and the rules are stretched to make things work between individuals.

Compromise only works if both sides know it's happening.

It seems to me that the TWFer is getting a pretty sweet deal by being allowed to use two bucklers. That's a pretty powerful ability. I would think that the DM taking away the full strength damage but letting the player keep this is a big compromise. But if the player thinks that the rules allow two bucklers, he only sees the nerf, and not the compromise.

 

[Treebore]

As for your "attitude" or "tone", I think your justified in that too.

This has been an issue between the two of you for 18 years. He obviously was knowingly cheating yet again, after you specifically asked everyone to make an extra effort not to cheat.

He is totally in the wrong and has been for many years.

I would say your long over due to give him some attitude and tone.

As for the rules, the most critical ones are in the PH. So I suggest you do get "unlazy" enough to read and understand the rules in that book. Maybe getting the rules compendium would also be worth your while, especially if your not in any hurry to switch to 4E.

Still, I understand your pain. I hate AoO, Grapple, Bulls Rush, etc... I even bought the Fiery Dragon Battle Box that had all the critical rules on little "flash cards".

I got tired of it all, which is why I don't DM 3E anymore, and hadn't for the last two years. However, I am DMing for this Saturdays World Game Day. They are first level scenarios, so it shouldn't be bad.

Anways, your friend is in the wrong and has been for 18 years. Its time to put your foot down. Its time for your friend to get over his petty childish cheating ways. Its time for him to play like a mature adult is supposed to play games. By the rules. Maturely.