Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 2818430" data-attributes="member: 10201">There's a couple of assumptions in there. First, violating the rules might not be violating the social contract. Second, it is possible to cheat in ways that are not for personal gain. Which leads to the point that, without context, there's no way to say whether or not cheating is social lubricant. When you play to well below your actual ability to let a young child win, or merely have a fighting chance at, a competitive game, you're cheating, and you're doing it specifically as social lubricant. [Yes, arguments--good, sound, arguments--can be made that this is not a good thing. It is, nonetheless, a social lubricant.]I'll go with "moreso". That is, enabling another player's disruptive behavior is a problem, almost as much so as the disruptive behavior itself. So, preventing the death is bad. I don't see why it's any more bad if done through cheating.Though i read the example, and the similar situations i've seen personally, as being one where part of the point is that letting the other player know you "let" them get the killing blow would be just as detrimental to their enjoyment as taking it away from them outright.But does it ruin it any more than if another character had killed the demon before the paladin could enact justice, without any fudging/cheating? It seems to me that the problem here is "stealing the kill", not the means used to get there. It's not really a "counter" example, since it's simply the converse result of exactly the same example.But he still chose to take the hit, knowing the possible/likely outcome. And if he did so specifically in the hopes of a negative impact on the other player, the fact that the dice favored him i don't really see as mitigating the action. Or, to put it another way, if he specifically tries to do something to distress another player, and fails because of the dice, does that mean its ok that he was specifically trying to distress the other player?</blockquote>

Verification