Cheating - who cares?

[TheAuldGrump]

So, I've only had one player who consistently cheated.

Heh, cheaters like that give all cheaters a bad name...

Pretty close to my own experience with the cheaters that have been in my game too.

The Auld Grump, grumble, grumble, cheaters....

 

[Jim Hague]

I don't think anyone is saying that cheating is good, just that some fudging so that the poor shlump sitting in the old papasan chair who always rolls bad, has some fun isn't evil. Some do feel the need to cheat more then others, but in the long run I'm not going to ruin a night with the guys calling out my buddy on cheating. If he is having fun, and the rest of the group is having fun, so be it. If he starts to become such a distraction that anyone is upset, I would say something, albeit, tactfully, with just the cheater and I. Other then that, having fun is all I want out of RPGs. I am not there to be the moral authority. It is just a PnP, RPG game, not Texas Hold 'em with $10 riding on it.

Actually, you're there to ensure a fair, equitable and fun game for everyone - and, as I've said previously, cheating prevents that. The cheater hoses the players who're being honest because they've got an unfair advantage...which is your job as GM to prevent, so everyone has fun.

What puzzles me in a lot of responses is that I'm seeing the same passive-aggressive stance a lot of gamers, and specifically GMs, seem to take with problems at the table - "No, no, it's not worth it to confront them" seems to be just about the worst tactic to take when someone is breaking the rules, whether they're social rules or actual game rules. But it seems to be the most common response to problems, and usually ends up being followed some time later with posts about how terrible the game is becoming, and why oh why won't someone do something. Just an observation.

 

[painandgreed]

I said "other". Of course, "cheating is bad, ...mmmkay" in the absolute sence but as the conintuous alignment arguements indicate, we rarely live in an absolute world. For me, it depends on the situation. If somebody I don't know and have never gamed with showed up and cheated, I wouldn't like it. Even with freinds, depending who they were and how enjoyable it was to game with them at all, it woudl factor down to just that, how enjoyable it is to game with them. I've had good friends who cheated in RPGs, usually when the chips were down and on the verge of TPK. They'd get a few too many conspicuous "natural 20's" but they weren't going directly against other people, so what do you do? If it gets too bad, they may get called on it or there may be remarks about their "luck" but in the end, it's just a bad trait they have like another player who won't close his mouth when eating at the table. If it gets so bad that it simply isn't enjoyable to game with them, then they simply are left out of future games.

I've seen at least one other post talking about how it is ok for the DM to cheat, and I have to say that even as a DM, I disagree with that philosophy. I prefer an objective game, but still as a DM, I cheat at it, sometimes in favor of the players and sometimes not. There have been times that monsters grow some extra hit points or abilities in the middle of combat (as well as times that monsters end up missing or hitting a different player than what the dice indicated). For the most part this compensates for the metagameing that happens at the table. Metagaming and use of OOC info could be seen as cheating but since we aren't our players and it becomes a drag to constantly write notes and drag people to areas away from other players to play (if you even can find one) there's no way to avoid it. If I feel that a player is cheating unduely, then I'll tend to cheat back till I think things are equal. But I've been in games where the DM would confront a player about whether he actually had the item needed at the moment written on his character sheet and with proper encumberence. Such "discusions" beyond a simple confirmation asked by the DM with an answer taken at the player's word don't serve the game or the other players at all and are usually more destructive to the game than letting the other player cheat and enrich his character even at the expense of the rest.

 

[Jim Hague]

But I've been in games where the DM would confront a player about whether he actually had the item needed at the moment written on his character sheet and with proper encumberence. Such "discusions" beyond a simple confirmation asked by the DM with an answer taken at the player's word don't serve the game or the other players at all and are usually more destructive to the game than letting the other player cheat and enrich his character even at the expense of the rest.

So, confronting the cheating player who's enriching themselves at the expense of others is...bad?

See, this is what I don't get - I'm not advocating grabbing someone by the scruff of the neck and tossing them outside like it was a cheap Western. Confrontation should be assertive, yes - but assertive doesn't equal being a jerk. As a GM, you are on the sharp end - you're creating adversaries and being the players' advocate. You create interesting situations and arbitrate them. If need be, you're the intermediary between the players. It's a difficult, often perplexing and frequently paradoxical relationship...but it's also necessary for most games.

So, drifting a bit - why is it that so many people have problems with confrontation, especially when someone is doing things that discomfort others, that damages the enjoyment of the game, that breaches what should be a convivial atmosphere at the table? Again and again, I keep seeing the same responses - 'it's not worth it'. And again, almost inevitably, it's the same folks who come back and complain later that their games are screwed up because a situation that could have been dealt with in a mature, assertive manner instead got patched with excuses like 'it's not worth the friendship'. Folks, if calling someone at the table is going to destroy the friendship, maybe it's time that the one doing the confronting and the one who's cheating take a step back, take a break from the table.

After all, as is another popular maxim - 'it's only a game'.

 

[James Heard]

So, confronting the cheating player who's enriching themselves at the expense of others is...bad?

It's not assertive, it's confrontational. It's rude. Calling someone a cheater isn't something you do with your friends, unless you're through with them as being their friends in my book. It's a loaded word with loaded connotations. It's in no way perpelexing or arbitrary: Do I want to still retain someone as a friend or do I want to have a fight with them, or at least risk having a fight with them? Sure, someone can cheat enough that I DON'T want them as my friends anymore, but in most cases those people never make it to friend status in the first place. Why bother playing with someone routinely whose presence isn't worth disregarding occasional social lapses over?

So, drifting a bit - why is it that so many people have problems with confrontation, especially when someone is doing things that discomfort others, that damages the enjoyment of the game, that breaches what should be a convivial atmosphere at the table? Again and again, I keep seeing the same responses - 'it's not worth it'.

I don't have a problem with confrontation. I have problems with starting fights and risking friendships over some stupid game that really is the least important aspect of my life in general. Why is it that some people are willing to confront people when doing so discomforts others, risks the enjoyment of people that you may have known for years, that breaches what should be a relaxed social atmosphere amongst friends? Again and again, I see responses that say "It's worth it," and I can't help but wonder what sort of friends someone has when they're worth risking for the sake of the roll of a die.

And again, almost inevitably, it's the same folks who come back and complain later that their games are screwed up because a situation that could have been dealt with in a mature, assertive manner instead got patched with excuses like 'it's not worth the friendship'.

I hope you realize how rude and presumptious that sounds? I don't have any problem with my games, and I don't really recall the last time I really had a problem with my games being screwed up since my sophomore year in highschool. Stop being an jerk about this subject, please. Is that assertive enough?

Folks, if calling someone at the table is going to destroy the friendship, maybe it's time that the one doing the confronting and the one who's cheating take a step back, take a break from the table.

And some people can take that step back at the table and get over it. It's called being mature about a game enough to recognize that nothing that hardly anything that happens in imaginary RPG-land is worth getting so upset about that you toss your friends over.

Sure, if you're running a game with someone you don't know and they're a problem, toss 'em. New players are a dime a dozen sometimes. I've known some of the people I play games with for almost two decades now, babysat their kids as they grew up, been their best man at their weddings, and drove them home drunk after their divorces. If they want to pee on my kitchen floor while I'm watching, they've earned the right to do it (once or twice at least). If they're doing something that looks like cheating, or even IS cheating, they've earned the right to be trusted through whatever weird mental tick they've got going on.

It's a game, and they can't do much that damages what goes on external to the game by messing around internal to the game. Dealing with cheating, on the other hand, is about broaching the game and making a broader statement with implications about the general state of trust between friends, it's not in the game because the game stops to accuse people of cheating. It looks like cheating, could I be wrong? Could it be a mistake? Is it that important to me? What exactly happens to relationships when you casually bandy about terms and implications like "you cheated me", "you're lying to me", and "you've betrayed me." Sure, if that's what's going on then that's fine; but I've got some people that could lie to me forever and I'd trust to have my best interests at heart. And yeah, I know some friends that, lets face it, I'm never quite certain if they're just dumb about the rules or cheating during a game often - that I think would probably jump in front of a bullet for me.

 

[Ds Da Man]

Hey Jim,
I do tend to take a non-assertive role. As I said in all my post, if the cheating gets too disruptive, and it takes from the others gameplay, then, and only then will I say something. I am not the morality police. I gain nothing by potentially pissing off a player (albeit, even a cheater). Now, if I gamed in a group that I wasn't close friends with, maybe I'd be quicker to jump the gun.
I have had this come up in the party numerous times, and have always found the best thing to do is not be direct, but talk about cheaters from my military days. I talk about the clear dice, the hidden roll, etc, then that in turn explains how I got my roll, the arm-held-high-drop. Generally, without confrontation, this has fixed every episode of cheating, without me playing the Morals Police.

 

[ThirdWizard]

It's not assertive, it's confrontational. It's rude. Calling someone a cheater isn't something you do with your friends, unless you're through with them as being their friends in my book. It's a loaded word with loaded connotations.

Firstly, you don't say "Hey, cheater, stop it." You say "I saw that that was a 4 you rolled, don't do it again." Nobody's saying you have to be rude. There are ways to nip cheating in the bud without insulting the guy.

Also, they should be the one appologizing to you. I don't even see how this could end a friendship. We've had one instance of cheating in the past 8 years and still make fun of the guy for it, just like with everything else. I called a friend of mine a jerk last session, and he had no choice but to agree. If you can't rib your friends, who can you?

 

[Jim Hague]

It's not assertive, it's confrontational. It's rude. Calling someone a cheater isn't something you do with your friends, unless you're through with them as being their friends in my book. It's a loaded word with loaded connotations. It's in no way perpelexing or arbitrary: Do I want to still retain someone as a friend or do I want to have a fight with them, or at least risk having a fight with them? Sure, someone can cheat enough that I DON'T want them as my friends anymore, but in most cases those people never make it to friend status in the first place. Why bother playing with someone routinely whose presence isn't worth disregarding occasional social lapses over?

And you're making an assumption - you can confront someone without being rude. That's what being assertive is, James. And again, if they're going to react so badly as to have a fight, then I think it's time they stepped away from the table.

I don't have a problem with confrontation. I have problems with starting fights and risking friendships over some stupid game that really is the least important aspect of my life in general. Why is it that some people are willing to confront people when doing so discomforts others, risks the enjoyment of people that you may have known for years, that breaches what should be a relaxed social atmosphere amongst friends? Again and again, I see responses that say "It's worth it," and I can't help but wonder what sort of friends someone has when they're worth risking for the sake of the roll of a die.

Because it's about everyone's enjoyment, not one person's selfishness. What happens when someone else, not the GM, catches them and makes an issue of it? Again, being assertive isn't being rude - it's taking charge and defusing the situation. And as an aside, I'm getting mightily tired of you pseudo-quoting me, apparently to get a rise. Cut it out.

I hope you realize how rude and presumptious that sounds? I don't have any problem with my games, and I don't really recall the last time I really had a problem with my games being screwed up since my sophomore year in highschool. Stop being an jerk about this subject, please. Is that assertive enough?

Ok, this conversation with you is over, James. Goodbye.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I said "other". Of course, "cheating is bad, ...mmmkay" in the absolute sence but as the conintuous alignment arguements indicate, we rarely live in an absolute world. For me, it depends on the situation. If somebody I don't know and have never gamed with showed up and cheated, I wouldn't like it. Even with freinds, depending who they were and how enjoyable it was to game with them at all, it woudl factor down to just that, how enjoyable it is to game with them. I've had good friends who cheated in RPGs, usually when the chips were down and on the verge of TPK. They'd get a few too many conspicuous "natural 20's" but they weren't going directly against other people, so what do you do? If it gets too bad, they may get called on it or there may be remarks about their "luck" but in the end, it's just a bad trait they have like another player who won't close his mouth when eating at the table. If it gets so bad that it simply isn't enjoyable to game with them, then they simply are left out of future games.

I've seen at least one other post talking about how it is ok for the DM to cheat, and I have to say that even as a DM, I disagree with that philosophy. I prefer an objective game, but still as a DM, I cheat at it, sometimes in favor of the players and sometimes not. There have been times that monsters grow some extra hit points or abilities in the middle of combat (as well as times that monsters end up missing or hitting a different player than what the dice indicated). For the most part this compensates for the metagameing that happens at the table. Metagaming and use of OOC info could be seen as cheating but since we aren't our players and it becomes a drag to constantly write notes and drag people to areas away from other players to play (if you even can find one) there's no way to avoid it. If I feel that a player is cheating unduely, then I'll tend to cheat back till I think things are equal. But I've been in games where the DM would confront a player about whether he actually had the item needed at the moment written on his character sheet and with proper encumberence. Such "discusions" beyond a simple confirmation asked by the DM with an answer taken at the player's word don't serve the game or the other players at all and are usually more destructive to the game than letting the other player cheat and enrich his character even at the expense of the rest.

As you may guess, I rather disagree with this - I have found cheating players to be as disruptive to the game as talking to the player and telling him to stop it. And frankly, I felt the game was better served by them leaving than their remaining in the game if being confronted with it bothered them that much.

The Auld Grump

 

[Jim Hague]

As you may guess, I rather disagree with this - I have found cheating players to be as disruptive to the game as talking to the player and telling him to stop it. And frankly, I felt the game was better served by them leaving than their remaining in the game if being confronted with it bothered them that much.

The Auld Grump

Quoted for truth.