Cheating - who cares?

[iwatt]

If it helps advance the story line, then I as a player and a DM do not really care if there is minor cheating (or meta-gameing for that matter). Once a player or DM does it to just get all the attention and/or distract from the story line. Then I have a problem with it.

This is my position as well. That's why I said minor fudging.

In our group we have a situation like this, and it drives me nuts. I can see the frustration on my player's faces when they are struggling against an enemy, missing rolls or rolling little damage, and then in comes the cheater with natural 20's every other time, and nearly max damage. Nothing is worse in roleplaying, IMHO, than feeling like a useless appendage to the group. And that's the end result cheaters produce, in my experience.

The above example is of course not minor fudging.

 

[Jim Hague]

This is my position as well. That's why I said minor fudging.

Then I advise playing a system where what you term 'minor fudging' is built in - Eberron, MnM 2e or Spycraft 2.0. A system that incorporates concepts like dramatic editing and Hero Points/Action Points.

The above example is of course not minor fudging.

Ah, but you've said you've got no problem with cheating at the table. Is this the equivalent of a 'sometimes' thing, then? It's ok to cheat a little (which is still a sign of mistrust, dishonesty and a violation of social contract), but not a lot (where the aforementioned problems are simply magnified)?

 

[iwatt]

Then I advise playing a system where what you term 'minor fudging' is built in - Eberron, MnM 2e or Spycraft 2.0. A system that incorporates concepts like dramatic editing and Hero Points/Action Points.

I use action points.

Ah, but you've said you've got no problem with cheating at the table. Is this the equivalent of a 'sometimes' thing, then? It's ok to cheat a little (which is still a sign of mistrust, dishonesty and a violation of social contract), but not a lot (where the aforementioned problems are simply magnified)?

Let me point you to a line in my original post:

This poll is about a particular situation: minor fudging in a group compromised of friends.

 

[antman120]

Definitly care. Had a person playing a cleric who tried to give himself extra hp, sp, and gp. He even once gave himself extra items and levels. Tried to say he ran a solo game for himself.
What he really did was buff his charecter to insane levels. I made hem get rid of the stuff and levels. THen he started getting cocky and saying he could kill anyone in the party if he wanted to. I let him try. Can't cheat when the Barbarian wins inititave and kills you in one turn.

 

[Jim Hague]

I use action points.

Which is good - the use of APs/HPs/whatever changes the social contract to allow for what you term 'minor fudging', which seems to be increased authorial control by the players, as opposed to cheating, which is a violation of social contract by one or more persons for reasons that will vary.

Let me point you to a line in my original post:

See above. And since it's germaine to the topic at hand, I'll briefly touch on Don's problem in the prior thread:

A player in Don's group cheats - she always makes skill rolls, attack checks, etc., dealing maximum or near-maximum damage. The result of this is a growing acrimony in the group, but a passive-aggressive stance in dealing with the problem, since no one seems willing to approach either the player or GM; the cheating player is the GM's girlfirend. The problem is compounded further by the player's cheating affecting the campaign directly - fights are too easy, leading to frustration by the GM and an overabundance of experience points (and power bloat because of it)...not a good situation.

I submit that what you're poll and thread title are about and what you're saying you want to discuss are two different things - 'minor fudging' seems to be defined as increased authorial control by a player, either in a system supporting it through some metagame resource or the player violating the social contract by lying about die rolls or metagaming. Outright cheating is another matter entirely - a deliberate violation of the social contract that includes (but isn't limited to) lying about die rolls, 'forgetting' to mark off hit points or spells and similar ethical failings by the player.

And I'm afraid your stance is hoist by its own petard - friendship (as with any relationship) is based on trust, and one or more people violating that trust by lying on some level is an explicit violation of that trust. While some will argue that it's not as serious as kicking puppies or other similarly dastardly deeds, I submit that it's far more insidious and damaging, ultimately, because it is a violation of trust...and that path leads to some very, very unpleasant circumstances down the road.

I find it difficult to believe that you're personally advocating lying to friends, so perhaps you should clarify your position further to avoid confusion or misunderstanding.

 

[diaglo]

unfortunately, i care.

having played with a guy who cheats on every single roll. it was laughable funny most of the time. but got to be down right annoying when the chips were down and the rest of us were playing on the up and up.

 

[Frozen DM]

This poll is about a particular situation: minor fudging in a group comrpomised of friends.

I think the big problem, and why I find even minor fudging to be aggrevating, is that this is a slippery slope. At what point is it no longer minor fudging?

Sure, saying you got a die roll of 15 when it was really a 10 is probably minor. But is saying it's a 20 when it was a 7 significantly better or worse? How often before it becomes a major issue? Once per session? five times?

Is minor fudging inflating your ability scores a bit, or "rolling" maximum hit points once in a while.

And for players who only fudge occasionally, why stop there? Is there a difference between fudging die rolls when fighting goblin lackeys versus the bugbear boss?

The problem I see is that the person cheating probably only considers it a minor fudge, but other players might not.

I use action points.

I also introduced action dice into the game to help alleviate this issue, by providing a legal "out" for players who like to fudge rolls. You know what happened? The only player who doesn't use the action dice is the player everyone assumes is cheating. Which of course still causes frustration and aggrevation amongst everyone else.

I say no cheating, no matter how "minor" it may be considered, should be left out of the game. This is even more true amongst friends, since this type of behaviour is the type of thing that can hurt friendships, even in small doses.

 

[Teflon Billy]

I care if they cheat, becasue I spend a fair amount of time trying to design things that are a challenge, but are still something doable.

I keep hearing things like "It's only a game" and I agree, that's all it is.

But if my hockey team caught you using giant goalie pads and a 4 foot blocker glove and you tossed out "It's only a game" you'd get booted out damn fast.

That's the background that spawned me, and the mindset lives on

 

[Infiniti2000]

In my groups we are friends first and gamers second. I tend to assume that this is true for most of us as well (I might be very wrong here though). IMO, introducing friction into a friendship by accusing somebody of cheating at something that isn't really that important (IMO) isn't worth the potential hassle.

Accusing? Is the "friend" cheating or not? If you're unsure, that's a totally different story. I think the assumption in this thread is that you KNOW the friend is cheating. The only potential hassle is that you confront the friend and they either deny it, lying to you even more, or fess up and apologize. On the latter point, everything would be okay and no more cheating would occur. On the former point, that's not a friend.

If a friend steals from you, is that also okay because you can't handle the conflict of confronting him?

 

[swrushing]

Since you are getting hung up on lying to friends, maybe that can serve to show the differences in a way to get across the issue.

practically everyone i ever met lies to their friends. most of these would be called "little white lies" and sometimes even "lies of omission" but they are lies and frankly, most social norms are not based on total vrutal honesty. Thats a nice theory, the never lie to friends, often expressed when kids are looking for philosophical black/white worlds, but whether it comes down to politeness or courtesy or any number of decent reasons to not be totally truthful with people you like at all times, it happens.

If you want to equate "lies" with "cheating" in some sense, the impression I got was he was aksing about "little white cheating" not "bald face benefit me to hurt you" cheating.

Now, above someone mentions how cheating is bad when it is done to steal or hog the limelight. Well, i would suggest that someone stealing or hogging the limelight is just as bad when its done legally. Its not "how you stole the limelight" but that you did. Certainly cheating can be used to accomplish goals that are detrimental to the game play for everyone, but legal means can do the same. Whether its stealing the limelight, undermining the other players actions, or whatever other "messes with other players" goals... its not the how but the what that is the problem. if the problem occurs, deal with the problem, not the "how".

Some people for instance might feel differently about a player fudging his own dice rolls if the roll was to stabilize another PC at the last minute (preventing the other's PC death) rather than it being done to slam the dragon at the last minute.

not everyone of course.

As I have said before, IMo fudging dice can be considered rules-lite action points.