Cheating, Action Points, and Second Wind

[Professor Phobos]

Then the CR system is bunk, and should be ignored.

 

[neceros]

It is, though. The rules say that you roll 1d20 and add the BAB to determine the attack roll and compare it against the target's AC to determine if the attack roll hits. If your DM rolls a d20, adds it up, and determines that it was a hit, but decides that he really doesn't want the monster to hit so he spontaneously decides it's a miss instead, that's cheating. Cheating is defined as "To violate rules deliberately, as in a game" and that's exactly what the DM is doing.

Again, I'm not saying it's bad. Too many people see the word "cheating" and their brains translate it to "badwrongevilmustkillKILLKILL!!!!". It's a loaded word. Unload it for the purpose of this discussion. The original poster and his point are talking about the dictionary definition of cheating - violating the rules deliberately - rather than the loaded "all cheaters are evil SOBs that deserve to die" that most people instantly associate with the word.

DMG, pg 18

The DM can't really cheat: they are the umpire, what you say goes. It's not fun to let a random die roll sway the tide of a game. Default rule is don't let a PC die due to a die roll gone awry. The main issue here is that everyone has fun playing the game. If you don't want to cheat then don't, but it's not something horrible if you do.

 

[Rel]

Rule 0 is as stupid in D&D than in Monopoly.

Of course you can change any damn game if all the people around the table agree to it, don't need to write it down anywhere.

You only need to remember that this "changed game" hasn't been tested and that the average player doesn't have the knowlege & experience of the original designer -> YMMV.

I think that Rule 0 is a great tool that you hopefully don't need to use very often. Not because I think that strict adherence to the rules is key, but because there are times when an off the cuff call NOW is much better than a "by the book" call made after 5 minutes of flipping pages. In those situations, I think it's handy for the GM to have something to point to if a Rules Lawyer among the players tries to hassle him.

 

[DonTadow]

I think that Rule 0 is a great tool that you hopefully don't need to use very often. Not because I think that strict adherence to the rules is key, but because there are times when an off the cuff call NOW is much better than a "by the book" call made after 5 minutes of flipping pages. In those situations, I think it's handy for the GM to have something to point to if a Rules Lawyer among the players tries to hassle him.

I agree, its what seperates d and d from settlers of cataan or monopoly. WHenever one of these threads starts up, its usually because a player has experienced a bad time with it. WHen i write modules, i have begun putting in places where a dm can fiat (such as insert previously encountered villian or make this item an item the pcs have encountered in the past.)

 

[marune]

because there are times when an off the cuff call NOW is much better than a "by the book" call made after 5 minutes of flipping pages.

Like in all complex games, board games included ?

 

[Rel]

Like in all complex games, board games included ?

Possibly. There are probably a good many board games that would benefit from having Rule 0 included as well.

But one key difference is that most board games are competitive between the players. RPG's are generally not. One reason why such lattitude is generally given to the GM to make off the cuff rulings is that it is supposed that he's doing it to make the game more enjoyable for everybody.

 

[marune]

Possibly. There are probably a good many board games that would benefit from having Rule 0 included as well.

My point was "every damn game can be house-ruled if all people around the table agree, there is no need to write it down".

But one key difference is that most board games are competitive between the players. RPG's are generally not.

Even if in board games the competition is between each players (instead of players "agains't" DM in D&D) the idea is that if everyone agree at the table for something, of course they can do it. (However, they may well discover later that the change they made broke something else in the game)

One reason why such lattitude is generally given to the GM to make off the cuff rulings is that it is supposed that he's doing it to make the game more enjoyable for everybody.

The problem is he can't do it alone, and that strange idea has caused abusive DM for years.

 

[DonTadow]

Possibly. There are probably a good many board games that would benefit from having Rule 0 included as well.

But one key difference is that most board games are competitive between the players. RPG's are generally not. One reason why such lattitude is generally given to the GM to make off the cuff rulings is that it is supposed that he's doing it to make the game more enjoyable for everybody.

As an even bigger board game collector than i am a dungeon master, i can attest that breaking to look for rules in a board game is the NUMBER 1 way to make sure that game never comes out again, especially with newbies.

Again though, this depends on how competitive you are at d and d. My way of play says d and d is not adversarial, so i don't have players who challenge my interpretation of the rules becuase no ones trying to win at it.

The more i look at it, the more this discussion actually feels like a preference of where your playstyle lies as far as game and roleplaying.

My number one rule as a dm is to never break the emersion. The minute rules begin you stop role playing and begin remembering its a game and we play dungeons and dragons to get away from the board game feel, else there's a dozen rpg board games like runebound and shadow of the emperor we could play.

Because of the large amount of rules in dungeons and dragons, it is not built to be played like a board game.

 

[Professor Phobos]

The problem is he can't do it alone, and that strange idea has caused abusive DM for years.

He can totally do it alone. In fact, it is a necessity of his duties. Now, misused, this power can lead to abuse- but if you can't trust your GM, why play with him?

 

[marune]

He can totally do it alone. In fact, it is a necessity of his duties. Now, misused, this power can lead to abuse- but if you can't trust your GM, why play with him?

Because more than often alone = to ignore what players feel about it.