Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9183320" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Does that mean that a single instance of, say, a player using a loaded die to guarantee a 20 is not cheating, because a single instance cannot be "constantly"?I find this requirement that it be a long, sustained, pervasive pattern unwarranted. Even a single instance of deception or misrepresentation can qualify as "cheating." And yes, it is a loaded term. That's kind of the point. It's highlighting how there is a shell game being played here, that things are being presented as though they were something that they aren't.But that's not what the random monster rolls do. The random monster rolls replace encounters that had to be built by hand. It isn't the GM choosing to insert monsters that weren't there; it is them correctly using the encounter design and creation tools. That's like saying that rolling damage is cheating; it cannot be, that is how non-fixed-damage things work.Inserting extra monsters that weren't there or rewriting the stats of monsters that are there, simply because you feel like they should be, not because you're using the rules, however, would not be using the rules as designed. Like...pretty much literally not that.Then they have, as I said, done the work to explain that this is possible. Have they also done the work to explain why these allegedly infinite monsters don't just destroy the players instantaneously? Because that's kind of the double-edged sword here. How can there ever be safety enough for even fifteen minutes' rest, let alone eight hours?But do you not see exactly why this isn't done? Beyond the above problem of "okay so...how is it that the opposition doesn't just win everything forever?" you get the problem of negated stakes. An enemy with infinite, always-accessible, always-refillable reserves cannot lose anything. Infinity minus one is still infinity. No amount of (finite) subtraction or division can turn the concept of infinity into any finite number, let alone zero. In using such a nuclear flyswatter, you have created a dramatically worse problem in its place.So a player secretly bringing loaded dice is not bad or good, it comes down to how those loaded dice are employed?</blockquote>

Verification