tyler
Journeyman Douchebag
Posts: 226
|
Post by tyler on May 12, 2017 9:17:08 GMT -8
My favorite thing about this thread is that the "cheaters" are all saying "Me and my players enjoy the game this way, and you and yours enjoy the way you play, everyone is different, let's all have fun." Then, all the "anti-cheaters" are all "NO, YOU'RE WRONG! RAWR!"
What's the point in trying to discuss something if you're not willing to even entertain other ideas? If you're so steadfast that changing a dice roll is wrong, and nothing is going to ever make you change your mind about it, why bother discussing it?
I think it says a lot about people.
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on May 12, 2017 9:25:12 GMT -8
We the listeners miss you Tyler...
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on May 12, 2017 9:38:15 GMT -8
I hear the word subjective many times and that in the end is it. RPGs are subjective, nuanced they will always be great bastions of shades of grey. Lawful Good GMs may think they exist but in the end judgement calls abound. No GM is eternally truthful, rules abiding, and non-fudging. It's not a board game. Where we go we don't need boards. (To paraphrase Doc Brown) Is it me or do these forums reduce all of our discussions to a pedantic, combative tone ? It can sometimes feel very unwelcoming to someone just dropping in for the first time or a long time away. But most likely can't be helped. Gamers and their defensiveness and the evils of the written word I guess... That's why I am so grateful for the opportunity to have been able to game with many of you. Probie Tim I hope you get the opportunity to play in one of savagedaddy's games THEY ARE AMAZING! You will never find a more welcoming and helpful GM to learn the Savage World's ropes and his online games are incredibly well designed. He really puts Roll20 and online gaming in general in a bright and shiny light. Zombie Smurfs....'nuff said.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 21:36:27 GMT -8
My favorite thing about this thread is that the "cheaters" are all saying "Me and my players enjoy the game this way, and you and yours enjoy the way you play, everyone is different, let's all have fun." Then, all the "anti-cheaters" are all "NO, YOU'RE WRONG! RAWR!" What's the point in trying to discuss something if you're not willing to even entertain other ideas? If you're so steadfast that changing a dice roll is wrong, and nothing is going to ever make you change your mind about it, why bother discussing it? I think it says a lot about people. Except that isn't what is happening. Do you know how many times it has been suggested that there is something wrong with me personally because I'm not okay with that style of play? Seriously, I've had people call me a sad person because I prefer to play differently. I should just learn to play their way, clearly. I want to make an amendment to my earlier position. I'm cool with cheating. Full stop. Cheat your heart out. Just do it in the open. I think I heard it first from Chad on Fear the Boot, but just reach out and turn the die. Do it in front of everyone. I agree with Probie Tim that it often sucks to die in the first or second session because of pure bad luck. I think everyone else would too. If they don't, they can say something, because I'm going to cheat in the open where everyone has a chance to see and comment. I'd be cool with a player doing it too. Everyone has the chance to know it is happening and agree or call BS. If we all agree, then dice be damned. What I think is not cool, from anyone, is hiding rolls. In the games I play in and run, I want as much equality as possible. I've spent enough years kneeling before the self proclaimed god of GM. I don't take that shit at work, where I get paid to be there. No way in hell I'm taking it at the game table. I can take my ball and go home too. I have other shit I can do instead.
|
|
|
Post by uncommonman on May 13, 2017 1:47:29 GMT -8
I won't change my opinion that cheating is cheating but as Steven said keep playing they way you want to.
But "you people" won't listen to my opinion that cheating is hurting the story you are making.
You keep saying that "it's to make the story better" but you can't know that not letting the characters die the first few sessions might lead to something more interesting later.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on May 13, 2017 2:41:11 GMT -8
I won't change my opinion that cheating is cheating but as Steven said keep playing they way you want to. But "you people" won't listen to my opinion that cheating is hurting the story you are making. You keep saying that "it's to make the story better" but you can't know that not letting the characters die the first few sessions might lead to something more interesting later. Seriously, dude? Asked and Answered. You can't know for certain how any decision is going to pan out. You make your best judgement in the moment, and get on with your life. That's why your point is meaningless. You are right. We can't know if letting them fail/die will make for a better story. But equally, you can't know that it won't.
|
|
|
Post by uncommonman on May 13, 2017 3:33:38 GMT -8
I won't change my opinion that cheating is cheating but as Steven said keep playing they way you want to. But "you people" won't listen to my opinion that cheating is hurting the story you are making. You keep saying that "it's to make the story better" but you can't know that not letting the characters die the first few sessions might lead to something more interesting later. Seriously, dude? Asked and Answered. You can't know for certain how any decision is going to pan out. You make your best judgement in the moment, and get on with your life. That's why your point is meaningless. You are right. We can't know if letting them fail/die will make for a better story. But equally, you can't know that it won't. Then why do you change the story?
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on May 13, 2017 3:36:09 GMT -8
I think the topic is too broad re: 'cheating' - eg: the 'quantum ogre' is a different thing from 'fudging a die roll'. From one perspective both are 'cheating' but it is their difference that is making this conversation go in circles ie: the debate is too polarised and won't allow any middle ground or consensus eg: adjusting an encounter on the fly is ok, fudging dice isn't*. It would help to break down the topic into several aspects: Quantum Ogres - adjusting encounters on the fly (including adjusting numbers or tactics) Fudging Dice - changing die rolls (in the open or behind the screen) Retconning - changing the story/plot (either retroactively or 'on the fly' eg: moving a planned encounter) Aaron *not my personal decision/opinion, just an illustrative example ... though it *could* be, basically I'm not going to commit to saying because I'm sure there is a middle ground in this argument where we can all agree or agree to disagree. Either way it'll never change what actually happens at each individuals table ... it's all just hypotheticals
|
|
|
Post by uncommonman on May 13, 2017 3:42:04 GMT -8
I think the topic is too broad re: 'cheating' - eg: the 'quantum ogre' is a different thing from 'fudging a die roll'. From one perspective both are 'cheating' but it is their difference that is making this conversation go in circles ie: the debate is too polarised and won't allow any middle ground or consensus eg: adjusting an encounter on the fly is ok, fudging dice isn't. It would help to break down the topic into several aspects: Quantum Ogres - adjusting encounters on the fly (including adjusting numbers or tactics) Fudging Dice - changing die rolls (in the open or behind the screen) Retconning - changing the story/plot (either retroactively or 'on the fly' eg: moving a planned encounter) Aaron That's why we need the hosts to bring up this topic
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2017 4:31:14 GMT -8
I think the topic is too broad re: 'cheating' - eg: the 'quantum ogre' is a different thing from 'fudging a die roll'. From one perspective both are 'cheating' but it is their difference that is making this conversation go in circles ie: the debate is too polarised and won't allow any middle ground or consensus eg: adjusting an encounter on the fly is ok, fudging dice isn't*. It would help to break down the topic into several aspects: Quantum Ogres - adjusting encounters on the fly (including adjusting numbers or tactics) Fudging Dice - changing die rolls (in the open or behind the screen) Retconning - changing the story/plot (either retroactively or 'on the fly' eg: moving a planned encounter) Aaron *not my personal decision/opinion, just an illustrative example ... though it *could* be, basically I'm not going to commit to saying because I'm sure there is a middle ground in this argument where we can all agree or agree to disagree. Either way it'll never change what actually happens at each individuals table ... it's all just hypotheticals The first part of the definition of cheating is, "To act dishonorably or unfairly..." The issue with the quantum ogre is one of motives. It would be unfair to change the position of the ogre because you wanted the group to fight it and they outwitted you. It would not be dishonorable or unfair to move it based on some in game reason. Perhaps the party camped and lit a fire. The ogre saw the smoke and so left his cave to go investigate, ending up on the other path. One is a dick move, the other is just the game world taking its course. Fudging dice, which almost always includes rolling secretly, is unfair. It is unfair because everyone else rolls in public and the GM is taking special privilege that others cannot have. Because it is done in secret, no one can oppose its occurance. Hence why I think it is fair and permissible if done in public. Once it is out in public anyone can call the action to account. "Hey man, stop playing favorites. Its ten sessions in, if he dies he dies." This is something that can't happen when that 'fudging' occurs behind a screen. Retconning isn't really cheating unless your the dick who insists that it was always this way (I love video taped games, because the video has the proof and it stops this shit cold). Some times things get out of hand and at retcon is needed. Most players are understanding if you are honest with them about it. Again, it is the deception which is the cheating, not the retcon itself. The second part of the definition is, "in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination." Any time you change your plans based on something the players do without in character knowledge or motivation you are taking an advantage. I've heard the Fear the Boot guys talk about battered groups and abusive GM's. A common theme seems to be hiding their plans from their GM so that they can't take advantage, which goes back to the wrong reason for moving the quantum ogre. In addition, fudging a monsters stats mid fight would be taking an advantage unfairly or dishonorably. A player can't decide to increase their stats because they are rolling poorly or getting beaten, so neither should the GM. This is different than making a mistake. If you screwed up, own up to it and change it. What isn't screwing up is bad luck. You should never adjust a fight because your players are rolling hot, for example. Its a dick move and by definition, cheating. I for one don't want an artificial struggle perpetuated by secrets and lies. The GM may be hoping to roll meaninglessly, in secret, to induce a state of tension, but what they are really doing for someone like me is activating the nocebo effect. They aren't even making an actual roll, but I'm getting the side effect of feeling screwed over. And when I report said side effect I get told I have the problem. What nerve. He's the guy who keeps giving me pills to take, and every time I have to wonder if I'm getting the real roll or a Mickey. Is this time the sugar pill? Or am I getting roofied and I don't even know it? Is that why it took you a little longer to tell me if I succeeded, because you were deciding to screw me or not? How would you feel if you went to the doctor for a problem and you found out the prescription he gave you was really a placebo? Maybe you wouldn't trust his prescriptions in the future without looking at them yourself. "But I only had your best interests at heart", is not going to restore my faith. You tricked me once, shame on you. I'm not letting it happen twice or three times.
|
|
sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on May 13, 2017 5:42:20 GMT -8
re: quantum ogre-ing and dice fudging. How different from this is relocating clues that your party needs to find, but for whatever reason hasn't discovered yet? Or what if, thanks to a spate of stork -erific dice rolls, every Investigate attempt has failed? Do you just let your players stand around with their thumbs up their asses, wondering whether it really was the butler that did it? Or do you jostle the target number a little and give them a hint? Do you move the stray matchbook cover from Sam's Bar to Jim's Apartment, because they never found the thread leading them to Sam's Bar?
|
|
|
Post by uncommonman on May 13, 2017 6:26:22 GMT -8
re: quantum ogre-ing and dice fudging. How different from this is relocating clues that your party needs to find, but for whatever reason hasn't discovered yet? Or what if, thanks to a spate of stork -erific dice rolls, every Investigate attempt has failed? Do you just let your players stand around with their thumbs up their asses, wondering whether it really was the butler that did it? Or do you jostle the target number a little and give them a hint? Do you move the stray matchbook cover from Sam's Bar to Jim's Apartment, because they never found the thread leading them to Sam's Bar? I would just give them clues that are necessary for progress. If they don't find all clues then it's thier problem to solve. "create problems, not solutions". And if they accuse the wrong suspect thats just a great future hook/complication.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on May 13, 2017 6:45:02 GMT -8
Seriously, dude? Asked and Answered. You can't know for certain how any decision is going to pan out. You make your best judgement in the moment, and get on with your life. That's why your point is meaningless. You are right. We can't know if letting them fail/die will make for a better story. But equally, you can't know that it won't. Then why do you change the story? Again.... Asked and Answered. Because, in the moment, I do think that it would be better. When I think that changing things would make for a better game, I do so, if I don't, I leave it alone.
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on May 13, 2017 6:47:11 GMT -8
Ugh. I had promised myself I wasn't going to get pulled back into this. But here I am. Gads. Seriously, I've had people call me a sad person because I prefer to play differently. For what it's worth, I didn't say that you were a sad person, I said that it was said that you didn't have trust enough in your GM to let him or her do what I consider to be the GMs job. At least, that was my intention, I apologize if it came out differently. Anyway, there's a... difference there. Totally unrelated to that... Generally speaking I do think "cheating" - specifically dice fudging - is wrong. I don't think it's generally OK to roll a 9 on a d20 and read it as a hit when you needed a 13. I don't think it's generally OK to roll 18 points of damage but drop it to 9 because it will be better for the story. Except in very, very few, specific situations. The frustrating part is that rather than ask for details on those specific situations, people just pointed their fingers at me and screamed "CHEATER!". So I'm going to take the time to explain when I fudged the dice, and why I would do it again: A long time ago, I decided to run a 2E AD&D game. It was going to be a long-reaching, from zero to hero, epic game. Well before "story games" were a thing, long before Fate had joint character and city creation, me and my players sat down and developed the setting together, weaving their characters backstory into the lore of the world. How one of their great uncles founded the town in which they live, how another one was a direct descendant of the necromancer who used to live in that tower over there. Blah, blah, blah, on and on and on we went for weeks before we sat down to put dice to character sheet. by the time the players sat down to spend that "fifteen minutes" in actual game-mechanic character creation, they were already heavily invested in their characters, with weeks of documented familial history and backstory. I started them at 2nd level, just as a little bump so they wouldn't be completely green and so that they would have just a little reputation in the town where they lived: "Oh, those guys? Yeah, they took care of a gang of goblin bandits that were harassing us last year..." The first session focused around them taking a trip from their town into the big city a few days away. They were coming as representatives from their town to discuss an (at that point) unidentified threat against the region. They arrived, and on a whim asked if they could find a seedy tavern with cage fighting "just to give the dice a quick spin; nothing too serious, we just want to see how the characters will work, just because they're new and we haven't had the chance to do much outside of character creation." I remember saying that to me almost verbatim. Well before "yes and" was a thing in RPGs, I totally "yes and"ed them. There totally was a seedy tavern on the other side of the city, it did have cage fighting, and shit, they were having matches TONIGHT. To make a long story short, on the second character's match against a lower-powered opponent, I critted and rolled max damage. It brought the PC to -2 HP; dead, in 2e AD&D. I rolled in the open, everyone saw the results. I could see it on their faces, they were crushed. A silence settled on the table as I stared at the dice. After a moment I said, "Oh, man, your opponent was looking at you with rage in his eyes as he pulled back to swing at you but just before he made contact with the side of your head, something outside the cage caught his eye and he faltered just a bit. You're at 1 HP now." The players breathed a collective sigh of relief, and the game went on. Am I making this up? No. That's what happened. Was it "cheating"? By the strictest definition of the word, yes, although I challenge you to find any dishonest or unfair intention in that exchange. Was it in the best interest of the game? In every way. Could I have done things differently? Oh, I totally could have, but I didn't. Do I think it was justifiable? In every way. Would I do it again? In a situation like that, I most certainly would. If we were playing, I dunno, Savage Worlds, and the player spent fifteen minutes making a character only to chase down an ogre in the first session, and my damage dice exploded all to hell, and he rolled death on the incapacitation table, and had spent all his bennies trying to soak my exploded-all-to-hell damage, then he would be dead. But those two situations are drastically different and require different handling: to replace the Savage World character would take... fifteen minutes. To replace that AD&D character, with all the backstory and world-building integration that happened would take weeks. For what it's worth? A few sessions later the character died a glorious death fighting off skaven that had been slowly but surely building up their forces to assault the city above (which was the aforementioned "unidentified threat").
|
|
sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on May 13, 2017 6:53:29 GMT -8
Im not saying they accuse the wrong person, Im saying they have bupkis for clues. And you'd just give them the clues? Isnt that what Investigation skills are for? If youre just going to assume they succeed, ie just hand them the clues without a roll, that seems to be ignoring the possibilities of dice rolls to me.
|
|