Isn't it kind of cheating to post here?

[Oryan77]

I see this quite a bit here. People post looking for advice on how to overcome a challenge in their game or to solve a puzzle. I understand if a DM is looking for ways to spice up his game and keep his players on their toes, but when players are asking for advice on how to beat an encounter, it seems like cheating. And the weird thing is that I see so many people give them advice on how to "beat" their DM's encounter.

I guess if they play the more "player vs DM" game and everyone at their table is cool with that, it's ok. But it makes D&D seem nothing more than a video game, "How do I defeat the boss on level 4?" And what would the DM think about that if he knew his players were asking for advice on how to thwart an encounter? It just seems like metagaming to me. It takes the "character" out of the PC and makes it seem like the PC has all of the answers.

I would be disapointed if a player in my game asked for advice on how to kill something the next time he encounters it. We are basically making life harder on the DM by giving advice to his players...the players will be defeating his encounters easily now and he has to work harder to challenge them even more.

Is this a valid concern?

 

[Mark]

Isn't it kind of cheating to post here?

I see this quite a bit here. People post looking for advice on how to overcome a challenge in their game or to solve a puzzle. I understand if a DM is looking for ways to spice up his game and keep his players on their toes, but when players are asking for advice on how to beat an encounter, it seems like cheating. And the weird thing is that I see so many people give them advice on how to "beat" their DM's encounter.

I guess if they play the more "player vs DM" game and everyone at their table is cool with that, it's ok. But it makes D&D seem nothing more than a video game, "How do I defeat the boss on level 4?" And what would the DM think about that if he knew his players were asking for advice on how to thwart an encounter? It just seems like metagaming to me. It takes the "character" out of the PC and makes it seem like the PC has all of the answers.

I would be disapointed if a player in my game asked for advice on how to kill something the next time he encounters it. We are basically making life harder on the DM by giving advice to his players...the players will be defeating his encounters easily now and he has to work harder to challenge them even more.

Is this a valid concern?

Sometimes, when it is really obvious that someone is using the forums as a "shortcut book", I'll point that out and suggest they give their dilemma a little more thought. Especially when it is a puzzle or riddle that has them stumped.

 

[Narfellus]

Hmm. I suppose it could be valid if certain players are constantly investigating ways to defeat the DM's bad guys. But in the same vein, they could secretly memorize every monster manual (hey, some people have the time and inclination) and effectively "cheat" that way without ever posting here.

To play devil's advocate, if the DM has unjustly confronted players with a challenge too hard, or done it too often in the past, they might feel justified in balancing the odds. As a DM though, I wouldn't want players memorizing the MM. As for cultivating strategizes, within reason that is a real fun part of the game and i don't have a problem with it, so long as they are not priivy to knowledge the character would never find without appropriate research.

 

[Crothian]

It depends on what the question is. Sometimes it is obvious that it is a player trying to figure something out in game and they do get called on that. Most of thje time though they deal with social problems or DMs trying to improve their games.

 

[Jdvn1]

Well, we do the same thing at the table. "Oh, you should really try this out... " "Oh, you got a new spell? Did you look at ..."

I think it's just a natural part of trying to get better and more creative with the game.

 

[ST]

I think we've got to remember that different groups have different focuses. Not everybody's about the pure visceral intellectual challenge of navigating and manipulating the rules, and if they're not, there's no sense of "cheating" that challenge.

I trust my players to separate player and character knowledge. You pretty much have to -- the players have read the rulebooks, and the character's havent. (Well, the characters are fictional, so of course they haven't.)

Here's a question -- any of you folks out there more interested in other parts of the game than the challenges of combat and puzzles? Would you rather just get past that part, and do other things? (My guess is that if you're not into the vagaries of wargaming-style play, you probably play something other than 3.x, but it's a question worth asking.)

 

[mark_j]

How do you cheat at a game that has no "winner"? I guess they are cheating themselves, maybe.

I think most people post questions here because thinking and sharing ideas about RPGs is just damn good fun.

 

[Crothian]

How do you cheat at a game that has no "winner"? I guess they are cheating themselves, maybe.

I think most people post questions here because thinking and sharing ideas about RPGs is just damn good fun.

The game does have winner and losers. If I die in a campaign, I have obviously lost. If I succeed and get through an adventure or module, I have won. It is just the game doesn't have to stop after that victory, I can keep going.

 

[Jdvn1]

The game does have winner and losers. If I die in a campaign, I have obviously lost.

Unless in order to win, you have to sacrifice your life.

 

[Crothian]

Unless in order to win, you have to sacrifice your life.

There are acceptions of course