Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wyrmshadows" data-source="post: 4457004" data-attributes="member: 56166">Brother you are reeeaaacching.&nbsp;Though I offer the smackdown to munchkinism at my table, if something is in the rules it is by default not cheating to use it. Even using the letter of the rule as opposed to the spirit of the rule isn't cheating as such behavior is often exploiting a loophole. Correcting this kind of thing is the DMs job because designers cannot fix every loophole and many DMs don't want them to. That such loopholes are abused in the game is the fault of weak DMs as much as it is te fault of the munchkins.&nbsp;Cheating is a direct and deceitful breaking of agreed upon rules....period. Saying &quot;I rolled a 18&quot; when you rolled a 6 is cheating...period.A player lying about any roll is cheating...period...no matter what the cheater's motivation or psychological state.&nbsp;Allowing one person to cheat is the most egregious form of favoritism. If the DM allows one player to make up rolls as she goes then why shouldn't every player be allowed to decide their own rolls? If that is the case, then why not have everyone just sit around telling each other stories and drop the pretense of rolling dice?&nbsp;Too add, I do not care if cheating causes &quot;objective&quot; damage or not. The whole objective versuse subjective damage thing is a red herring. Cheating damages the subjective enjoyment of the game on the part of the DM as well as that of the players willing to play by the rules. That's it. Cheating doesn't have to lead to kicking someone's dog, keying their car, arson, or eating your sister's baby to be wrong. Cheating is wrong. We know it is wrong even when we can't articulate social contract theories in order to intuit the reality that a player cheating at D&amp;D while everyone else at the table is playing by the rules is wrong.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Wyrmshadows</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wyrmshadows, post: 4457004, member: 56166"] Brother you are reeeaaacching. Though I offer the smackdown to munchkinism at my table, if something is in the rules it is by default not cheating to use it. Even using the letter of the rule as opposed to the spirit of the rule isn't cheating as such behavior is often exploiting a loophole. Correcting this kind of thing is the DMs job because designers cannot fix every loophole and many DMs don't want them to. That such loopholes are abused in the game is the fault of weak DMs as much as it is te fault of the munchkins. Cheating is a direct and deceitful breaking of agreed upon rules....period. Saying "I rolled a 18" when you rolled a 6 is cheating...period. A player lying about any roll is cheating...period...no matter what the cheater's motivation or psychological state. Allowing one person to cheat is the most egregious form of favoritism. If the DM allows one player to make up rolls as she goes then why shouldn't every player be allowed to decide their own rolls? If that is the case, then why not have everyone just sit around telling each other stories and drop the pretense of rolling dice? Too add, I do not care if cheating causes "objective" damage or not. The whole objective versuse subjective damage thing is a red herring. Cheating damages the subjective enjoyment of the game on the part of the DM as well as that of the players willing to play by the rules. That's it. Cheating doesn't have to lead to kicking someone's dog, keying their car, arson, or eating your sister's baby to be wrong. Cheating is wrong. We know it is wrong even when we can't articulate social contract theories in order to intuit the reality that a player cheating at D&D while everyone else at the table is playing by the rules is wrong. Wyrmshadows [/QUOTE]

Verification