Cheating cheaters

[Merkuri]

This sort of cross chatter is very common for my group, so I don't see any problem with a contrived version of same for the OP if it works out for him. I also don't see it as belittling or demeaning the player in question either. In fact (putting on pop psychology hat) I see it as a positive reinforcement to do the right thing even if it results in bad consequences.

My complaint about that option is that, depending on how the group is doing it, it may become very obvious that the cheating player is getting all of the attention when she rolls, which may end up being seen by her as a not-so-subtle way to punish her for cheating. She'll probably realize very quickly that everybody knows she's cheating and that you've talked about it behind her back to come up with this "yell out her rolls" plan - and nobody likes finding out that they've been talked about behind their backs. (Now, I'm not saying this is definitely how it'll play out, just that it's very possible.)

If you're trying to eliminate drama the best (IMO) way to do it is to implement a rule or behavior that affects everyone, not just the cheating player. If you're going to have people calling out rolls for the cheater, encourage them to call out the rolls for other players as well. Doing things that affect everyone will make the cheater feel less like she's being singled out and talked about behind her back.

 

[Rel]

I don't recall if it's been suggested or not but you could just buy her some really big dice.

Rel "not compensating for something" Ooi

 

[El Mahdi]

I don't recall if it's been suggested or not but you could just buy her some really big dice.

Rel "not compensating for something" Ooi

Methinks the Rel doth protest too much!

 

[roguerouge]

I find that my opinion is that it cheats the other players in the group from one chance to be heroes. One common way to be a hero is when the unlikely or plucky PC steps up when all seems lost. The PCs who cheat are making it less likely for genuine player heroics and less necessary for there to be creative risky thinking when the usual strategies don't work. Heroics requires accepting great risks. These players don't accept their characters running big risks to their characters.

Is this cheater fudging roles that another party member could be making? If so, that doubly stinks as that player is deliberately stealing the limelight from another player.

But let me be blunt: if a player cheats, repeatedly, and the players and the DM can't or won't stop it... the social contract just changed to a state of nature. When one person's fun counts more than any other person's good fun, there's absolutely no reason to cooperate with that selfish twit any more. It's every person looking out for their own fun.

I'd get mad and then I'd get even. I'd stop supporting that person's character in combat because, after all, if they always succeed at what they do THEY'RE NOT IN REAL DANGER. I would do everything in my power to get that character killed. "Oops! You're in the fireball radius? I'm sorry. I am sure you can make your save!" Always within the rules.

If repeated warnings and heart-felt conversations don't work, and people won't grow a spine, don't be surprised if one of your players pull out the long knives and administer some frontier justice.

 

[roguerouge]

"If you're talking about cheating on your taxes, I agree with you. Cheating in a game that ultimately doesn't really matter in any important sense? Not the same thing."

Let me get this straight: A behavior that annoys many other people, causing them stress. It requires much agonizing on their part on how to handle it, causing more stress. Several people several times perform the intellectual and emotional labor to brainstorm to be polite and change Ms. Cheaty McCheatypants' behavior, thus taking time away from game prep, social time, and (possibly) work... And you say that there's no harm? None?

She's caused stress and reduced people's fun. And once she did it again after a first warning, she did it deliberately.

 

[roguerouge]

Totally disgree with the first point. Tactful booting: "It looks like you're not having fun, and I don't think this group is a good fit for you. I think it would be best if you not come anymore, but I hope you can find another group to play with. Maybe we could catch a movie sometime?" Un-tactful booting: "You stupid @#%#$%^ #$^%#$%. You're ugly and you're #$%#$ #@$%#$%."

It's exactly like your smoking issue. Tactful: "Oh, I'm afraid I don't allow smoking in this house. You'll have to step outside for that." Un-tactful: "You filthy smoker! You @#%#@$% stink! How 'bout I give you $%#$ cancer!"

For the win. The funniest thing that I've read at EnWorld in months.

 

[cougent]

My complaint about that option is that, depending on how the group is doing it, it may become very obvious that the cheating player is getting all of the attention when she rolls, which may end up being seen by her as a not-so-subtle way to punish her for cheating. She'll probably realize very quickly that everybody knows she's cheating and that you've talked about it behind her back to come up with this "yell out her rolls" plan - and nobody likes finding out that they've been talked about behind their backs. (Now, I'm not saying this is definitely how it'll play out, just that it's very possible.)

If you're trying to eliminate drama the best (IMO) way to do it is to implement a rule or behavior that affects everyone, not just the cheating player. If you're going to have people calling out rolls for the cheater, encourage them to call out the rolls for other players as well. Doing things that affect everyone will make the cheater feel less like she's being singled out and talked about behind her back.

I quite agree, and this is not the preferred method I would use either, I was just trying to demonstrate that the OP's idea could work. In essence my group makes it work on their own without even trying.

I think there needs to be some detailed tweaking. For instance the "caller" does not really need to announce every roll... a natural 20 is fine to stand on its own. It might only be limited to the single digits (I believe the OP mentioned 7 becoming 17?). A carefully placed "Oh crap that really sucks!" without even revealing the number rolled for sa y a 1 -5 might suffice. The "caller" could also employ these tactics on his / her own rolls and occasionally on other players to keep the cheater from being isolated as well.

 

[Delta]

For the win. The funniest thing that I've read at EnWorld in months.

Ha!

 

[Parlan]

My complaint about that option is that, depending on how the group is doing it, it may become very obvious that the cheating player is getting all of the attention when she rolls, which may end up being seen by her as a not-so-subtle way to punish her for cheating. She'll probably realize very quickly that everybody knows she's cheating and that you've talked about it behind her back to come up with this "yell out her rolls" plan - and nobody likes finding out that they've been talked about behind their backs. (Now, I'm not saying this is definitely how it'll play out, just that it's very possible.)

If you're trying to eliminate drama the best (IMO) way to do it is to implement a rule or behavior that affects everyone, not just the cheating player. If you're going to have people calling out rolls for the cheater, encourage them to call out the rolls for other players as well. Doing things that affect everyone will make the cheater feel less like she's being singled out and talked about behind her back.

I see what you're saying, but doesn't that run the same risk? If you're instituting a new table rule shortly after she's been caught cheating, isn't she likewise going to put two and two together?

I think if I were the cheater, I'd put 2 and 2 together in either case, but be greatful that we didn't have a whole awkward conversation about it. At least I would be after calm reflection.

If the OP really thinks this player would get embarassed etc., a more devious method would be to have a plant. Ask *another* player to start doing something underhand, like picking up dice waaaay too quickly. After that happens once or twice, use that as the excuse to implement a "DM must see it" rule. That way the rule is still implemented for all players, but it's not immediately obvious that the cheater was the cause.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I've only skimmed the thread, reading maybe a quarter of the posts, but has the OP mentioned the age of the player? If she's young, maybe it's just a matter of waiting.

When I first began playing D&D, I cheated. Not so much at the table, but (even worse) away from the table. I'd up my PCs' ability scores, invent effects of supposed wishes, claim more wealth than I'd earned, and so on.

I grew out of it within a year or so. Maybe the OP's player will, also.

I have a player who "cheats" simply due to a combination of wishful thinking and a failure to write things down as they're used. (For example, he never seems to run out of action points. Ever.) Occasionally, I just tell him that since he's not keeping track, I'm guessing at what resources he has left, and then I guess deliberately low. I figure eventually he'll figure out to track stuff, since I know he's not deliberately cheating.

FWIW, I'm with the "cheating isn't a valid playstyle" camp. The social contract we have at the table is that we play by the rules, unless there is an explicit exception made (or if I fudge as DM, which I almost never do). I also agree that the OP's solution is a pretty smart one, though (as a very direct person), I'd probably explain to the player why she's being baby-sat.