Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 6120045" data-attributes="member: 22424">I'm surprised by this. I would have thought it was very clearly 'cheaty' to go against the rules as agreed upon. After all, they're the rules that are agreed upon!Now that, of course, is a rather different matter. If the rules don't cover something, of course it will necessarily be up to the GM (perhaps in cooperation with the players) to come up with a suitable ruling. That's part and parcel of the game, because there will always be holes.But there's a difference between "making a ruling to cover a hole in the rules" and "directly violating the rules as agreed". If the group (including the GM) agrees that the GM won't fudge dice rolls, and then the GM rolls a '7' and declares it as a '17', that's pretty clearly cheating, IMO.(It's probably worth noting, though, that I don't expect too many groups to actually have that conversation. Certainly, I've never been in a group to discuss the matter, nor have I heard of a group to do so (excepting online discussions). It seems to be one of those topics where everyone just brings their own assumptions of what's going to happen to the table, and most of the time it's a non-issue. But in that very small minority of cases where it becomes an issue, suddenly it's a massive issue because people were working from differing assumptions. (c.f. Paladin threads))</blockquote>