D&D General Poll: As a player, I am always justified in pursuing every advantage I find, no matter what.

[CreamCloud0]

As stated above: My goal was never to parade around and say "look, everyone agrees with me!" Because that's not only pointless preening, it's doubly pointless because a self-selected online poll where people are allowed to change their votes is a poll with near-zero merit.

My whole purpose was to determine how common such sentiments are, among ENWorld folks who visit the D&D subforum. I chose the expression I did because it reflects an actual opinion stated to me recently by a user here, which some others either agreed with, or disagreed with but said that their players agree with. Hence, I was curious exactly how common such opinions are. I cannot conduct a true survey, so the data is merely for my own "amusement," after a fashion. But I was still curious.

Should a debate about the merits of exploiting advantages crop up in the thread, all the better, so long as it remains civil.

Sure, but wouldn’t a 5 point poll more along the lines of never/rarely/sometimes/usually/always be more useful for getting data? The absolutism your recent polls seem to impose on the questions seems excessive...

 

[CleverNickName]

No.

I acknowledge that everyone at the table is there to have fun, and also that there are many, many ways to have fun in this game. So with all of that being equal, I'm motivated more by telling a compelling story than I am with gaining any kind of numerical advantage.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

As stated above: My goal was never to parade around and say "look, everyone agrees with me!" Because that's not only pointless preening, it's doubly pointless because a self-selected online poll where people are allowed to change their votes is a poll with near-zero merit.

I mean I like the idea of a few poll qustions... I enjoy seeing the answers

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I don't have much to add to this discussion, but I am reminded of a funny anecdote where a DM hit one of the player characters in our party with a curse that had all sorts of narrative consequences, but we just shrugged them off and used it to steamroll everything. It most definitely wasn't his intention, but I don't think we should have had to justify capitalizing on it.

I had a situation kinda-sorta like this, though the DM turned the tables on me later. In an "Exalted by way of Dogs in the Vineyard rules" game, my character developed antigravity boots through his burgeoning skills with occult engineering. This pissed off the lesser deity in charge of the Bureau of Weights and Measures in the celestial bureaucracy, so my character was cursed to be weighed down super heavy. This was, at first, an annoyance. However, it proved to be incredibly useful when a squad of Dragonblooded attacked our fair city of Chiaroscuro; I was able to leap into the water, sink straight to the bottom, and eliminate the water-affiliated Dragonblooded person who was sending waves to crash against the city walls.

Afterward, said deity realized that threatening my char was ineffective, so they started hurting the people under his care. That made him change his tune, and he burned the boots as a peace offering.

Sure, but wouldn’t a 5 point poll more along the lines of never/rarely/sometimes/usually/always be more useful for getting data? The absolutism your recent polls seem to impose on the questions seems excessive...

This is the first poll I have posted in quite some time, and the most recent poll I posted was in fact a five-point poll, and the one before that had 10 options, pick two. (And the previous had 6 options, the standard 5 spread + "your options cannot contain my answer!!") I assume you are conflating me with @el-remmen and their recent flurry of polls (though IIRC at least one other person has gotten in on the true/false poll thing.)

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I mean I like the idea of a few poll qustions... I enjoy seeing the answers

It provides entertainment, to be sure. That's why I did it. But in terms of proving points, a poll like this is a very small step up from "my dad works at Nintendo."

 

[Gradine]

I mean, not unless we're talking about Paranoia

 

[J.Quondam]

Egad, no.*

* Unless those players have a contractual fiduciary duty to their shareholders to maximize returns.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Hard to answer. I'd say...YES...BUT then I think of what someone may interpret that as...

For example, someone CHEATING on purpose, or twisting something so badly it basically IS cheating and then ignoring or arguing with the DM about it, and other items like that...

Also makes me want to put down a STRONG no as well.

If we excluded anything that was clearly cheating, such as falsifying rolls, intentionally "forgetting" gold spent, or intentionally giving yourself powers or features you shouldn't have (presumably in the hope that no one will notice), would that change your answer? It is difficult, of course, to be specific about your second concern, because the only thing that can oppose such "twisting" is a rational mind carefully considering context and principle, so if that alone would still lead you to say "no," that's a perfectly reasonable stance to take.

I'll add the "no outright, actual cheating" thing to the OP, for future voters, though no one should feel compelled to change their vote solely for that reason.

I would say no. If it’s within the rules (both the game rules and any house/table rules) then sure. Once you go outside of the rules, that crosses the line into potentially disruptive play, in my opinion.

The question I think, then, comes from whether the social contract is part of "the rules" or not. From our past interactions, I'm fairly sure you would say that (at least in this context) it is part of "the rules," but if I'm wrong about that I welcome correction.

Of course not. "Always" and "No matter what" make this an easy one.

So, even if the DM accidentally left open a major loophole, you would in fact pass up on using it? Just to be clear. 'Cause that sort of thing, doing something technically rules-legal despite knowing, for sure, that it would upset the DM if you did it, was part of why I posted this poll--someone said pretty much exactly that.

 

[Lanefan]

When you use charged words like 'no matter what', or 'always' it should skew towards no- I hope. You do take away the squishy middle ground of a lot of people choosing 'it depends' or 'sometimes' and make things all or nothing.

This.

I voted "yes" in that a player IMO is always justified in pursuing advantages*, but I'm well aware that those advantages can sometimes - often? - be bad for the game; and the corollary is that the DM should and IMO must be empowered to a) allow non-game-wrecking advantages to be exploited while b) shut down game-breaking advantages on the spot if-when they arise.

* - edit to add: within the rules. Cheating is a complete non-starter.

 

[James Gasik]

If we excluded anything that was clearly cheating, such as falsifying rolls, intentionally "forgetting" gold spent, or intentionally giving yourself powers or features you shouldn't have (presumably in the hope that no one will notice), would that change your answer? It is difficult, of course, to be specific about your second concern, because the only thing that can oppose such "twisting" is a rational mind carefully considering context and principle, so if that alone would still lead you to say "no," that's a perfectly reasonable stance to take.

I'll add the "no outright, actual cheating" thing to the OP, for future voters, though no one should feel compelled to change their vote solely for that reason.


The question I think, then, comes from whether the social contract is part of "the rules" or not. From our past interactions, I'm fairly sure you would say that (at least in this context) it is part of "the rules," but if I'm wrong about that I welcome correction.


So, even if the DM accidentally left open a major loophole, you would in fact pass up on using it? Just to be clear. 'Cause that sort of thing, doing something technically rules-legal despite knowing, for sure, that it would upset the DM if you did it, was part of why I posted this poll--someone said pretty much exactly that.

Generally all that happens if you exploit a rule is the GM is going to immediately rule "lol, no", or try to implement a house rule patch anyways. Most GM's abide by "da rulez", I've noticed, but not a damn one is going to put up with a broken exploit for very long.

That's why I try to point them out as early as I'm able to, because we can hopefully get back to the game at hand. I have a tendency to stumble across them by accident, like Friday when I almost destroyed my friend's Changeling the Dreaming game by simply attempting to use one of my abilities. But I really shouldn't be surprised, Storyteller games are infamous for rules so riddled with holes you could replace the pages of the rulebook with slices of swiss cheese and I doubt anyone would notice.