# Cheating cheaters



## Obryn (Sep 4, 2008)

Overall, I have a great group of folks.  I have one, though, who's cheated on and off...  It's been noticeable enough to me and the other players that we've talked about it before and after the game a few times.

I've called her on it - or tried to - a few times, and did last night, too.  When a 2 turns into a 20 and a 7 turns into a 17 on two die rolls in a row, it's just gotten to be too much.  Especially when the other players are all looking around incredulously at one another, like "I did not just see that."

Here's the problem, though.  She generally sits way across the table from me, and I don't have really good proof.  I don't think... 

"17!  Yay!"
"You sure?  Looked like a 7 from here."
"No, my dice are weird.  It was a 17."
"Ummm... okay...."

...serves to elevate the level of the game.

I've tried the gentle "No, it didn't look like it."  I've tried the "Cheating at D&D is pathetic and sad" speech, made to the table as a whole.

Obviously, I could kick her out.  That's not my top option, especially because both she and her best friend play, and I'd rather not lose two players to get rid of one.  Also, I think this is a manageable problem rather than an unmanageable one.


So, since it's bothering my players as much or more than it is me, I asked them to help me out.  Unless she sits next to me, I can't watch her die rolls.  Simply, I asked the few I talked with last night to ... well, cheer her on when she's rolling, and loudly announce the results.  Sneaky, I know.  But it gets more pairs of eyes on her dice.  "Come on, roll high!  Awwww, a two."

They seem game and genuinely interested in helping out.

I'll see how this works - but I'm looking for input from other DMs and players.  How have you handled cheaters in the past, if they were otherwise decent players and okay human beings?

-O


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 4, 2008)

I would suggest that you ask the players (all of them, so as to not single her out) to roll in a shoe box near the middle of the table, and then everyone can see the results.


----------



## Storminator (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Overall, I have a great group of folks.  I have one, though, who's cheated on and off...  It's been noticeable enough to me and the other players that we've talked about it before and after the game a few times.
> 
> -O




Next time she actually rolls a 20, wait until she picks up her dice and say "I didn't see that, please roll again where I can see the dice..."

PS


----------



## Crothian (Sep 4, 2008)

Ya, cheating is bad and all that but does it really impact the game or make it less fun for the other people?  It might not be worth it to worry about it.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> I've tried the "Cheating at D&D is pathetic and sad" speech, made to the table as a whole.



That probably didn't work because it's not true?

My attitude as both player and DM is if that's how someone enjoys playing D&D, who am I to say it's wrong (or pathetic, or sad)? I don't "cheat" as a player, and I don't think any of my players do either, but what's the big deal?

I see from your post that it bothers the other players, not just you, so it's obviously something that needs to be dealt with. Have you tried asking the other players why it bothers them so much? All D&D players have their quirks. Why can't this be hers?


----------



## Halivar (Sep 4, 2008)

I had a cheater in my group. Rolled secretly, rerolled when he thought no one was looking, used splat books no else had and got creative with the rules. It got so bad that twice I even made an ultimatum to the DM: me or him. He talked me down, and I regretted it within a week.

The edition wars have since split my group, and I no longer game with this individual. Never thought anything good could come from edition wars, but it has...


----------



## Obryn (Sep 4, 2008)

Crothian said:


> Ya, cheating is bad and all that but does it really impact the game or make it less fun for the other people?  It might not be worth it to worry about it.






Fifth Element said:


> That probably didn't work because it's not true?
> 
> My attitude as both player and DM is if that's how someone enjoys playing D&D, who am I to say it's wrong (or pathetic, or sad)? I don't "cheat" as a player, and I don't think any of my players do either, but what's the big deal?
> 
> I see from your post that it bothers the other players, not just you, so it's obviously something that needs to be dealt with. Have you tried asking the other players why it bothers them so much? All D&D players have their quirks. Why can't this be hers?




Talking to both of you at the same time...

For one thing, the dishonesty bothers me.  She _knows_ she's doing something sneaky - it's not like she's saying "I rolled a 7, but I'd like to re-roll because I don't feel fulfilled in my life if I miss this Magic Missile."

We have the numbers and pencils and dice and action points for a reason, and ignoring all the die rolls flies in the face of that.  Where's the risk if you always pull out that 'lucky' shot exactly when it's most convenient?  It's another form of spotlight-hogging.

It's pathetic and sad to me because I don't see the point in cheating in what is otherwise a theoretically cooperative endeavor.  So what if you miss with that at-will spell?  Life goes on.  Sometimes folks fail at what they do, and everyone deserves a chance to be a hero sometimes.  If our final goal is having fun as a _group_, what's wrong with doing it honestly?  My goal with board games is to have fun as a group, too, but I don't smile and look the other way when folks cheat there, either.

I can live with it, generally, and I have since she started gaming with us almost a year ago.  It definitely bothers several of my players, though, and it's gotten worse for some reason.  Her fun doesn't outweigh the rest of the table's fun.

-O


----------



## jmucchiello (Sep 4, 2008)

I always give the same advice about cheating featured by fifth element...



Obryn said:


> For one thing, the dishonesty bothers me.  She _knows_ she's doing something sneaky - it's not like she's saying "I rolled a 7, but I'd like to re-roll because I don't feel fulfilled in my life if I miss this Magic Missile."



And calling her out on it is designed to increase whose fun? Making her feel like crap is designed to make her feel bad. Who goes to D&D sessions to be ridiculed and made to feel bad. Deep down, I'm sure she already loathes cheating. So calling her out on it cannot help. The question is, why does she cheat? What does she hope to accomplish by cheating?

IME, the main reason someone cheats at an activity like D&D is there is something so dire outside the game which they can't control and cheating at D&D provides them with a level of control they seek IRL. Now, it's not your job to psychoanalyze your friends. But her motivation for cheating is unlikely to be "to annoy the other players when the see I'm cheating." Thus, she isn't doing it TO you. She's doing it FOR herself.



> We have the numbers and pencils and dice and action points for a reason, and ignoring all the die rolls flies in the face of that.  Where's the risk if you always pull out that 'lucky' shot exactly when it's most convenient?  It's another form of spotlight-hogging.



That's your definition of fun. Again, spotlight hogs are also folks who have some pressing need to be better than they are. This is probably rooted in deep psychological issues or recent stress out of their control. 



> It's pathetic and sad to me because I don't see the point in cheating in what is otherwise a theoretically cooperative endeavor.  So what if you miss with that at-will spell?  Life goes on.



In some people's psyches failure at anything feeds their darkness. And cheating at die rolls maybe their only way to fight against that darkness.



> I can live with it, generally, and I have since she started gaming with us almost a year ago.  It definitely bothers several of my players, though, and it's gotten worse for some reason.  Her fun doesn't outweigh the rest of the table's fun.



That is the real crux of the matter. You need to determine when her fun outweighs everyone else's. But until you reach that point, you need to ask yourself "does her cheating really affect you?"

Once you feel the cheating is bothering you, well, you're not a psychiatrist so it isn't your job to cure her. It's your job to have fun. Part ways as amicably as you can with as little reference to the cheating as possible.

Good Luck.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 4, 2008)

jmucchiello said:


> That is the real crux of the matter. You need to determine when her fun outweighs everyone else's. But until you reach that point, you need to ask yourself "does her cheating really affect you?"
> 
> Once you feel the cheating is bothering you, well, you're not a psychiatrist so it isn't your job to cure her. It's your job to have fun. Part ways as amicably as you can with as little reference to the cheating as possible.



I imagine that the reason that the OP has put this out to the gang at EnWorld is because it already DOES bother him/her and the group.

I understand that asking WHY it bothers someone is valid, but if it already is a problem and the OP is seeking a resolution and not really an analysis of why it bugs the group, then the why is not as important as finding a reasonable way to deal with it and not alienate the player(s).


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> For one thing, the dishonesty bothers me.  She _knows_ she's doing something sneaky



Or perhaps, she _knows_ she has to do it surreptitiously because she _knows_ you and the other players don't approve of her preferred playstyle.

So her choice is to either have her preferred playstyle, but do it secretly, or to not have her preferred playstyle at all. At which point she might not want to play.



Obryn said:


> Her fun doesn't outweigh the rest of the table's fun.



But that's rather my point. _Why_ does it hurt the other players' fun? You say her fun is not more important, which is true - just make sure you don't consider it _less_ important either.

By some interpretation, that's what you're doing. "Here is the right way to play D&D, and if that's not how you play, we have a problem with that."


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd (Sep 4, 2008)

IMO, cheaters are weak. I don't agree with all the above psycho-babble crap, but I do agree that cheaters are almost always trying to compensate for something.

A player in my current campaign once asked me when I ran a weekly campaign open to anyone at my FLGS why I allowed one particularly blatant cheater to continue playing.

The main reason I allowed him to stay and not call him out on his cheating was because it was extremely fun for me to watch him cheat and still fail miserably.

If she is a good friend all you can do is mention to her seriously, privately out of game, that you don't enjoy people cheating at the table. But in the big picture, it is just a game.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Or perhaps, she _knows_ she has to do it surreptitiously because she _knows_ you and the other players don't approve of her preferred playstyle.
> 
> So her choice is to either have her preferred playstyle, but do it secretly, or to not have her preferred playstyle at all. At which point she might not want to play.



I am curious, though.  When did being dishonest become categorized as a "preferred playstyle"?  Are we really becoming so squishy as a society and afraid of hurting people's feelings that we don't want to call cheating what it really is?  Rolling a 2 and knowingly telling people that you got a 20 is just plain dishonest.  Especially when the results are so wildly different.

Maybe you just take her aside, and say something like:

"Listen xxxx,  I really like you and like having you in the game.  But we know you are fudging your dice rolls.  Everyone has seen it multiple times.  We totally dig your part in our game and we want you to play, so can I count on you to take the time to be sure of your dice results before you call out a number?"


----------



## Obryn (Sep 4, 2008)

jmucchiello said:


> In some people's psyches failure at anything feeds their darkness. And cheating at die rolls maybe their only way to fight against that darkness.



...

You know, I'm more than a little shocked.

I don't consider running a game to be my opportunity to help my players' psychological fights against their inner demons.  They can get psychoanalyzed, go to counseling, or get put on medications at their own leisure.  During the game, it's time to throw some dice around and kill orcs.

I agree with catsclaw - since when is cheating just an acceptable playstyle?  It's not acceptable in Monopoly, it's not acceptable in Football, it's not acceptable in marriage, and no group I've ever been involved with has considered it acceptable in RPGs.

Am I just completely naive to think that "don't cheat" is part of an assumed social construct when playing games with rules?

I don't want to torment her, I don't want her to feel bad.  It's a behavior that's a problem at the table, and I'm looking for the simplest, least offensive way possible to correct that behavior.



> You feel the cheating is bothering you, well, you're not a psychiatrist so it isn't your job to cure her. It's your job to have fun. Part ways as amicably as you can with as little reference to the cheating as possible.



That's missing the point, though.  I'm looking to keep an otherwise good player, but solve a problem behavior without aggressively calling her out.  Asking her to leave the game without any reference to the problem is exactly the opposite of what I'm trying to accomplish - which is keep the player, solve the problem.

-O


----------



## fba827 (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> So, since it's bothering my players as much or more than it is me, I asked them to help me out.  Unless she sits next to me, I can't watch her die rolls.  Simply, I asked the few I talked with last night to ... well, cheer her on when she's rolling, and loudly announce the results.  Sneaky, I know.  But it gets more pairs of eyes on her dice.  "Come on, roll high!  Awwww, a two."
> 
> They seem game and genuinely interested in helping out.




That would have been my suggestion -- but you're already trying it.  How has that helped (if any) so far?  Do her miracle success seem to have leveled off a little with more eyes glued on her dice?


----------



## Obryn (Sep 4, 2008)

fba827 said:


> That would have been my suggestion -- but you're already trying it.  How has that helped (if any) so far?  Do her miracle success seem to have leveled off a little with more eyes glued on her dice?



I just pulled 'em aside last night for this, so time will tell...

-O


----------



## Engilbrand (Sep 4, 2008)

Cheating isn't a playstyle. If the ideas that some have mentioned were applied equally to everything... Hell on Earth?
Can you sit at a smaller table? Can she roll towards the center? I don't trust people who don't let you see their dice. I hate DM screens. I don't use them. I don't fudge. If I "cheat", it's in adding abilities to things. When it comes to the random stuff, though, I leave everything as random as it should be.
When I was a kid, I liked to cheat in computer games. If you typed "E=MC2" into Age of Empires, you'd get a unit with a super laser that would lay waste to everything. That was fun for a little bit. But there's a reason that I stopped doing that. There's a reason that I never had a Game Genie. It's because cheating takes the fun out of it. Cheating other players? That's crappy.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 4, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> When did being dishonest become categorized as a "preferred playstyle"?



Never, so far as I know, and certainly this was not the implication of my post. The playstyle in question is considering the random result of a die roll to be relatively unimportant. The dishonesty arises due to the rejection of said playstyle by the DM and other players.


----------



## jmucchiello (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> ...
> 
> You know, I'm more than a little shocked.
> 
> I don't consider running a game to be my opportunity to help my players' psychological fights against their inner demons.  They can get psychoanalyzed, go to counseling, or get put on medications at their own leisure.  During the game, it's time to throw some dice around and kill orcs.



Assuming they know they need counseling. No one who cheats thinks about why they do it. Not without outside help. I said you are not her psychiatrist so it isn't your job to help her solve her problems. You are however her friend I suppose and as a friend you should have some interest in her well-being, mental or otherwise. It is for this reason that calling her to task in front of others is a problem. If you want to continue playing with her at the table then you accept her for who she is or you don't play together. 



> I agree with catsclaw - since when is cheating just an acceptable playstyle?  It's not acceptable in Monopoly, it's not acceptable in Football, it's not acceptable in marriage, and no group I've ever been involved with has considered it acceptable in RPGs.



No one said cheating is an acceptable playstyle. But RPGs are non-competitive. Cheating is obviously a symptom of some other issue. Does your horror at witnessing the dishonorable cheating outweigh your friendship with this person or does it make you wonder why she does it? What is more important to you cheating at D&D or your friendship with her? I can't answer that for you. But how you answer should tell you how to deal with this problem.



> Am I just completely naive to think that "don't cheat" is part of an assumed social construct when playing games with rules?



No. If it wasn't we wouldn't be discussing it. But there is the social contract of gaming and there is the social contract of friendship here. The friendship contract should push you toward sympathy and inquiry. Without the friendship contract, yeah, don't play with cheaters.



> I don't want to torment her, I don't want her to feel bad.  It's a behavior that's a problem at the table, and I'm looking for the simplest, least offensive way possible to correct that behavior.



And yet you lectured the group about how cheating is bad. So you've already alerted her to your suspicion that she cheats; told her it you don't approve of it; and, put her on her guard.



> That's missing the point, though.  I'm looking to keep an otherwise good player, but solve a problem behavior without aggressively calling her out.  Asking her to leave the game without any reference to the problem is exactly the opposite of what I'm trying to accomplish - which is keep the player, solve the problem.



Most problems do not have a simple solution. Why someone cheats in front of her friends cannot have a simple solution. Tread lightly.

If you really want to solve the problem you are going to have to talk to her one-on-one and see if she knows why she cheats. But this can easily lead to disaster. Primarily because she may not know why she cheats initially. As I said before, while she may have a rationalization for why cheating is okay, I doubt she's thought about why she resorted to cheating in the first place.

You also have to realize that "solving the problem" may not be possible. Perhaps she'll be too embarrassed to continue playing with your group if you confront her, no matter how delicately or ham-fistedly you approach the subject. She might be in such denial that she'll vehemently deny it and if you press she'll never speak to you again. Perhaps she'll nod and agree not to cheat any more to your face and then continue doing so. Then what will you do?

This is why my first piece of advice was live and let live. Unless you accept the range of possible consequences for calling out a cheater, you are better off letting the cheating go. I'm not saying cheating is right. I'm just saying in the grand scheme of things, it isn't worth getting worked up about.


----------



## Arnwyn (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> So, since it's bothering my players as much or more than it is me, I asked them to help me out.  Unless she sits next to me, I can't watch her die rolls.  Simply, I asked the few I talked with last night to ... well, cheer her on when she's rolling, and loudly announce the results.  Sneaky, I know.  But it gets more pairs of eyes on her dice.  "Come on, roll high!  Awwww, a two."
> 
> They seem game and genuinely interested in helping out.



Just noting that this is an excellent _excellent_ method (especially so if it really is bothering your players more than you - the onus, and responsibility, is on _them_ to handle it... not you).

An early 'policy' to make is to ensure everyone rolls out in the open so multiple people can see it, and no snatching dice away. catsclaw227's shoebox advice is very good.

And while Fifth Element's and jmucchiello's take on things is... interesting..., you (probably!) aren't well-equipped to conduct some freaky pop-psychology as to "why" your player likes to cheat. It also isn't particularly relevant why the majority of your players don't like that kind of "play style" - they just don't, and there we go. And, since we all know some play styles don't mesh with others, it is perfectly legitimate to "have a problem" with and put a stop to said styles when they conflict with the majority of the group. Kind of self-evident, actually.

I think you're on the right track, Obryn.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 4, 2008)

Engilbrand said:


> When it comes to the random stuff, though, I leave everything as random as it should be.



Here's the playstyle issue right here. How random should it be? What if you think it should be less random than other people do? Why is there only one right amount of random?



Engilbrand said:


> When I was a kid, I liked to cheat in computer games. If you typed "E=MC2" into Age of Empires, you'd get a unit with a super laser that would lay waste to everything. That was fun for a little bit. But there's a reason that I stopped doing that. There's a reason that I never had a Game Genie. It's because cheating takes the fun out of it.



If WotC gave this advice, they would be assailed for telling people what's fun and what's not. Maybe _you_ don't find it fun for long, but why does that make it wrong for other people to find it fun?

It takes the fun out of it _for you_. Don't presume to judge what other people find fun.



Engilbrand said:


> Cheating other players? That's crappy.



If the other players feel cheated in this situation, you need to find out why. Are they not having fun? Would they have more fun if they got better die rolls? That's something that should be addressed.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Never, so far as I know, and certainly this was not the implication of my post. The playstyle in question is considering the random result of a die roll to be relatively unimportant. The dishonesty arises due to the rejection of said playstyle by the DM and other players.



OK, I understand, but we have no idea if her preferred playstyle is to remove the randomness of D&D.  And if it is, then why is she playing D&D?  It has always had and always will have a random element to it.

But, regardless, the issue is not about a preferred playstyle.  It is that she is dishonest with the group about her dice.


----------



## renau1g (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> ...
> 
> You know, I'm more than a little shocked.
> 
> ...




I agree with you Obryn . I had a similar experience with a player. This player had gone so far as to bring cheating dice to the table... . How I remedied the situation was a two-fold. I set-up the Character Sheets around the table where I wanted players to sit, asking the others to help out (one also DM's part-time with our group so he was aware). 

I also instituted a policy that all players must roll any attack rolls on the table in full view of everyone, and that any new dice brought to the table are subject to DM inspection. I think they still cheat as during Initiative, they've never rolled below 16 for over a month now... but hey, you can only do so much.


----------



## Delta (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> My attitude as both player and DM is if that's how someone enjoys playing D&D, who am I to say it's wrong (or pathetic, or sad)? I don't "cheat" as a player, and I don't think any of my players do either, but what's the big deal?... All D&D players have their quirks. Why can't this be hers?




<Jaw hits floor>


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 4, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> And while Fifth Element's and jmucchiello's take on things is... interesting..., you (probably!) aren't well-equipped to conduct some freaky pop-psychology as to "why" your player likes to cheat.



Please note, the pop psychology came from jmucchiello, and although I agree with him in principle I don't necessarily support how he makes the argument.



Arnwyn said:


> It also isn't particularly relevant why the majority of your players don't like that kind of "play style" - they just don't, and there we go.



Which is fine and good, but overcoming the deception by more deception (pretend to cheer her on, but really just check what she rolls) is pretty crappy.

But again, just because you wouldn't play in a certain way, doesn't necessarily mean that someone else playing that way actually hinders your fun. So again, why does this bother the other players? Maybe they can accept it and move on, so that everyone can have fun, rather than telling one player she's just wrong, period.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 4, 2008)

Delta said:


> <Jaw hits floor>



Well, that's a helpful comment. It certainly explains why players fudging their die rolls is inherently wrong.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 4, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> OK, I understand, but we have no idea if her preferred playstyle is to remove the randomness of D&D.



True, but it's certainly as valid as supposing she's out to cheat the other players or the DM.



catsclaw227 said:


> And if it is, then why is she playing D&D?  It has always had and always will have a random element to it.



Maybe she likes everything else about the game? I don't know. There are several things I don't like about D&D but I still play it. Maybe her friends only play D&D and she can't find another group? Who knows?



catsclaw227 said:


> But, regardless, the issue is not about a preferred playstyle.  It is that she is dishonest with the group about her dice.



Again, this might only be because the other players and DM are openly disdainful of how she chooses to play.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:
			
		

> If WotC gave this advice, they would be assailed for telling people what's fun and what's not. Maybe you don't find it fun for long, but why does that make it wrong for other people to find it fun?



If a group wants to sit around and decide, "Go ahead and fudge your rolls when you want to!" that's kinda their decision.  As a _group_.  Heck, many games give specific metagame mechanics for this, like pre-4e Action Points, Drama Points, Karma, etc.

There's a bigtime difference between a group decision to allow player dice-cheating and one player cheating all their dice rolls.  I can't see how they're remotely similar.  Regardless of jmucchiello's misinterpretation of "social contract", there's a general assumption, when people are sitting down to play games, that people will play fairly and use the rules instead of ignoring them.  Unless it's Euchre.

And I can't believe I'm sitting here explaining this.



Arnwyn said:


> And while Fifth Element's and jmucchiello's take on things is... interesting..., you (probably!) aren't well-equipped to conduct some freaky pop-psychology as to "why" your player likes to cheat.



Well, I have a BA in psych and the better part of a Master's degree, but my concentration was in cognitive/behavioral research, and not the touchy-feely counseling stuff. 



> I think you're on the right track, Obryn.



Thanks!

-O


----------



## Arnwyn (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> But again, just because you wouldn't play in a certain way, doesn't necessarily mean that someone else playing that way actually hinders your fun. So again, why does this bother the other players? Maybe they can accept it and move on, so that everyone can have fun, rather than telling one player she's just wrong, period.



Necessarily? Oh heavens, of course not.

But I think the OP has been more than clear about the current situation and tastes of his particular group.



			
				Obryn said:
			
		

> Well, I have a BA in psych and the better part of a Master's degree, but my concentration was in cognitive/behavioral research, and not the touchy-feely counseling stuff.



 And _that's_ why I'm glad I put in words like "probably"...!


----------



## renau1g (Sep 4, 2008)

Well if every attack/check is a success we should throw the dice out the window and sit around and have a group narrative then? 

That isn't how the game is played. Cheating isn't a playstyle.


----------



## hanasays (Sep 4, 2008)

In the group of people that I play in (not just the group I'm currently playing in, but the social "pool" of players that I tend to play with), there is a designated "rolling area".  This is often indicated by a piece of poster board or otherwise clearly delineated.  It's well-lit and visible to everyone in the group.

The rolling area is the ONLY area that a dice roll is considered valid in.  Any roll that lands outside of the area, even if the dice accidentally rolled beyond the marker, is considered invalid - whether it's 1 inch or 1 foot from the line.  No exceptions.  The dice CANNOT be touched picked up by the player until the DM has verified the roll, or else the roll is invalid and the player must reroll.  Again - no exceptions.  We developed this 'rule' in order to deal with a chronic cheater of our own.  

For rolls that are, by necessity, "private" (example: Player 1 is rolling a Bluff or Sleight of Hand or Move Silently check against Player 2) we have a bent posterboard 'screen' similar to the DM's screen that is set up (it fits around 2 edges of the designated rolling area) and the player makes the roll - the DM verifies the roll - the screen is pulled down and the game moves on. 

Everybody accepts and abides by this, and it works wonderfully because all of the players trust each other.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 4, 2008)

jmucchiello said:


> Most problems do not have a simple solution. Why someone cheats in front of her friends cannot have a simple solution. Tread lightly.
> 
> If you really want to solve the problem you are going to have to talk to her one-on-one and see if she knows why she cheats. But this can easily lead to disaster. Primarily because she may not know why she cheats initially. As I said before, while she may have a rationalization for why cheating is okay, I doubt she's thought about why she resorted to cheating in the first place.



In my experience, the main reason why people cheat is because they think they can get away with it.

The reasons why and the rationalizations why are the purview of someone more qualified, but there's nothing ham-fisted about just taking her aside and saying "hey gal-pal, the fudging of the die rolls is making me uncomfortable. Let's just make a table rule to roll out in front of everyone."  Pat her on the back and smile, then offer a beverage or ask her about whether she liked Iron Man.

This doesn't have to be a frakin' intervention.

In my case, If I want to set an example for my kids that cheating isn't something that is acceptable, I need to live by it. 

It's perfectly reasonable to talk about it with her in a way that shows you aren't a jerk and yet you aren't dancing around china dolls and egg shells.  Be direct, but be sure to be kind and compassionate with your honesty.



jmucchiello said:


> You also have to realize that "solving the problem" may not be possible. Perhaps she'll be too embarrassed to continue playing with your group if you confront her, no matter how delicately or ham-fistedly you approach the subject. She might be in such denial that she'll vehemently deny it and if you press she'll never speak to you again. Perhaps she'll nod and agree not to cheat any more to your face and then continue doing so. Then what will you do?



If she nods, agrees and then cheats again, then she has proven that either she has a clinical-grade problem or she doesn't respect you and your group.

At that point, the decision would be easy.  It might be a sad decision, but there isn't much to do at that point.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> But again, just because you wouldn't play in a certain way, doesn't necessarily mean that someone else playing that way actually hinders your fun. So again, why does this bother the other players? Maybe they can accept it and move on, so that everyone can have fun, rather than telling one player she's just wrong, period.



I have never met a group that found it acceptable for one of the players to regularly cheat on their dice.

But that's just me.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> But again, just because you wouldn't play in a certain way, doesn't necessarily mean that someone else playing that way actually hinders your fun. So again, why does this bother the other players? Maybe they can accept it and move on, so that everyone can have fun, rather than telling one player she's just wrong, period.



We're talking about a specific player in my specific group, which specifically exists.  In the world, not theory-land.

And, as I noted, it is, in fact, hindering my other players' fun.

I think it's more than a little crazy to suggest I should try and get the five or six other players at the table to just accept her cheating and move on, than to deal with the cheating itself.

-O


----------



## Crothian (Sep 4, 2008)

There are really only so many ways of handling it.  There is direct confrontation, having people watch her like a hawk, or passive agressively punish her when you think she's cheating.

If you want her to stop cheating but stay in the group talking to her is the best way.  Most other options will just lead to her getting mad.


----------



## Edgewood (Sep 4, 2008)

If I have a player who cheats I just cheat back. If they roll something and I know it wasn't the result they said they got, i just tell them something that they wouldn't want to hear.

"Well as you were swinging your sword, you tripped on an untied bootlace and fall flat on your face! Okay, who's next?"

basically you just negate the roll they made into something harmless.


----------



## renau1g (Sep 4, 2008)

ONly problem with the edgewood is that he will piss off the player, which the OP wants to avoid. I'd agree that talking or rolling into a designated area are two suggestions that might work in this case.


----------



## SteveC (Sep 4, 2008)

This is a really interesting discussion. Over the years I've played with many players who had the tendency to cheat, and for most of the time I did the whole "passive aggressive" thing of adjusting the opponents HP or attacks to compensate for it.

As I've gotten older, I find that I really loath the whole passive aggressive thing, and I've started to directly address issues like this with the person involved. I've found that it works so much better that it's on my time travel agenda to go back in time and tell myself this to save myself a lot of grief over the past.

If it's an issue for you and your group, you have to talk to her about it. I'd recommend something like saying: _you may think that a little fudge here and there isn't a big deal, but it *is* for a lot of the group, *so what's really going on*?_ That's direct, to the point and gives her the opportunity to tell you what the issue is. 

Odds are, there won't be an issue, at least one that she's able to express (it hasn't been with my players who have had this issue) so ultimately I just had to say "are you going to enjoy playing D&D if we just go by the rolls we make and don't fudge?" Most of the time the answer was yes. In the case where it wasn't, this player really enjoyed playing Spirit of the Century when I ran it later on. You just have to match the player to the right game.

--Steve


----------



## renau1g (Sep 4, 2008)

Steve... I love your Sig... I always order my coffees like that and the person behidn the counter always give me the sneer....


----------



## Edgewood (Sep 4, 2008)

renau1g said:


> ONly problem with the edgewood is that he will piss off the player, which the OP wants to avoid. I'd agree that talking or rolling into a designated area are two suggestions that might work in this case.




You're right about that. The player might be pissed off. But it I think it would bring the issue to the forefront. Basically if they want to cheat, fine, but don't expect me to turn a blind eye to it. Because if one player cheats another may cheat. There shouldn't be one set of rules for one player who cheats and a different set for one who doesn't. 

I had a cheater in my game once and I did what I suggested and it worked out fine. In fact the player said he realized why I was doing it, and admitted to cheating and said he'd stop, which he did (from what I could tell ). 

Of course the OP knows the personality of this player much better than we do, so who knows. Like you said. My idea may just piss off the player.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 4, 2008)

Edgewood said:


> Of course the OP knows the personality of this player much better than we do, so who knows. Like you said. My idea may just piss off the player.



Well, without any hard evidence to back me up, every approach I've made at it to date has ended with denial and a bit of defensiveness.  I mean, "That looked like a 7 to me," "No, my dice are funny," is about as far as that conversation can go without getting stupid.

I have no specific problem with airing my grievances to her in private, and it may help the issue, but it may also just put her on the spot and make things unharmonius.

I strive for harmony at my gaming table, so that isn't my first choice.

Hence, my idea for somewhat subtle social correction.  All I'm looking to do is solve the target behavior with a minimum of drama.

-O


----------



## baberg (Sep 4, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Well, that's a helpful comment. It certainly explains why players fudging their die rolls is inherently wrong.




I think if you ask most people, they will agree that consciously and repeatedly breaking the rules of a game is inherently wrong.  The burden of proof falls on the one making the outrageous claim, and in this case the claim to be proven is that "one person breaking the rules while all the others follow the rules is an acceptable way to play D&D".


----------



## ppaladin123 (Sep 4, 2008)

Two main problems with cheating that I see:

1. Glory-hogging. The player always hits, always crits, always succeeds on improbably difficult stunts. The other players, who are playing by a different set of rules, may feel overshadowed and useless. Some may have spent a great deal of time building their character, selecting feats and powers, questing for powerful weaponry, etc. in an effort to make their characters powerful, useful and heroic. All that effort on their part is invalidated if just anybody (the cheater) can effortlessly slay monsters. Maybe being a hero should be hard work.

2. Tension. Some players (myself included) enjoy the tension that comes with an epic battle, the possibility that they might actually lose this fight. That sense of danger pushes them to choose their actions carefully, to plan for contingencies. What am I going to do if my allies fall? Will player X come through for us? That tension is at least partly erased by a cheating player. Our hearts don't stop momentarily when the cheater rolls; of course they will succeed. The cheater is nigh-invincible; there is little chance they will fall. We are not going to have to initiate desperate plan X; battles become routine.

Now if nobody has a problem with this...that's fine. I think pure narrative games can be fun if everyone agrees to them. That's the problem though...the DM and other players have not agreed to this. The cheater strips others of their choice.


----------



## nerfherder (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Well, without any hard evidence to back me up, every approach I've made at it to date has ended with denial and a bit of defensiveness.  I mean, "That looked like a 7 to me," "No, my dice are funny," is about as far as that conversation can go without getting stupid.
> 
> I have no specific problem with airing my grievances to her in private, and it may help the issue, but it may also just put her on the spot and make things unharmonius.
> 
> ...



I think your idea sounds worth trying - by reducing her opportunity to cheat she may get used to playing normally and find she still enjoys it.

The one adult I know that used to cheat on dice rolls was a long-time friend of a few of us in the group, so we just shamed him into playing straight - probably not applicable in your situation.


----------



## El Mahdi (Sep 4, 2008)

Obryn said:


> . . . It's pathetic and sad to me because I don't see the point in cheating in what is otherwise a theoretically cooperative endeavor. So what if you miss with that at-will spell? Life goes on. Sometimes folks fail at what they do, and everyone deserves a chance to be a hero sometimes. If our final goal is having fun as a _group_, what's wrong with doing it honestly? My goal with board games is to have fun as a group, too, but I don't smile and look the other way when folks cheat there, either. . .




I agree with you completely.  I think you've already come up with the best course of action.  She is essentially violating the social contract of the group.  Having the group enforce that social contract with increased oversight (watching her rolls, especially with the _cheering_ aspect) could help.  It won't take away the reason why she does it (which nobody but _she_ knows - _if_ she even knows why), and probably won't make her not do it as soon as that oversight slips, but it probably will make the other players feel a little better about it.  As long as it's not called out into the open (unless it absolutely needs to), the offending player probably won't have a problem with it either.  Especially since she seems to be playing a bit of cat-and-mouse with it already (you know - catch me if you can mentality).


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 5, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Hence, my idea for somewhat subtle social correction.  All I'm looking to do is solve the target behavior with a minimum of drama.




I feel like the best way to solve the problem with a minimum of drama is to implement a new rule that everyone has to follow, like hanasays's rolling area, that makes cheating impossible, or at least very hard.  You're not calling out that player specifically, but by making an area in the middle of the table the designated "rolling area" and saying that all rolls outside the area must be rerolled should be enough to stop the behavior.  It's basically a subtle way to say, "I know you're cheating, and I don't like it, so stop."

If you implement a rule that prevents cheating you're probably going to get one of two reactions to the problem player, depending on their maturity level.  She could either throw some sort of tantrum and storm out (in which case she created the drama, not you, and it probably would've happened eventually), or she will probably just accept the new situation and stop cheating.  Like others have said before, she's likely cheating just because she can get away with it.  If you make it difficult for her she'll probably just stop with no fuss.

If she finds some way to continue to cheat after you've implemented this rule then it might be time to take her aside and have a heart-to-heart.  Either that or just accept her cheating and live with it, because at that point she's probably not going to stop unless you flat-out tell her to stop.


----------



## TarionzCousin (Sep 5, 2008)

...or, you could simply accept her as she is and go on with your game...



Spoiler



--but only if you're all confined to a mental institution. In reality, you and all of the other players should start cheating!


----------



## Nifft (Sep 5, 2008)

jmucchiello said:


> In some people's psyches failure at anything feeds their darkness. And cheating at die rolls maybe their only way to fight against that darkness.



 Wow. You've almost swayed me to the side of the darkness.

Seriously, though, anyone who views cheating as a self-esteem boost really needs to learn to deal with failure. RPGs are a great way to experiment with risk and failure in a "safe" environment. By forcing her to play by the rules, you may actually be helping her grow (as opposed to enabling her escapist reflexes to ruin yet another aspect of her life).

But even if you're not, and all you do is pimp-slap her crying inner child, that's still good for the health of your group's culture. I don't tolerate cheaters when I play or DM: the game is a game, and it has rules, and you succeed or fail by your choices within those rules.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## fissionessence (Sep 5, 2008)

If I were a player in a game where I knew one of the other players was regularly cheating, I would be pretty upset. I would be doubly upset if I knew the DM was aware of this cheating and didn't care or wasn't doing anything proactive about it.

When I have a _chance_ to succeed, and another player basically always succeeds, my character's usefulness, cool factor and power level lowers dramatically. In one campaign where I am a player, I've had fairly bad combat rolls for three sessions in a row, missing almost consistently. I already feel somewhat useless compared to the other characters because of this, but I go with the flow. However, if I knew that another player was doing considerably better than I was because of cheating, that would be really upsetting; why should my character suck for following the rules when another player can just break them and be godly?

Seriously, from a player point of view, I'm almost offended by those who suggested the cheating player's actions are in any way tolerable.

What I wrote above pertains to perpetual cheaters. If a player has an unlucky streak, and secretly cheats on a couple rolls to get back into the fight and start having fun again, this wouldn't bother me from a DM or player perspective. [sarcasm](Maybe I should even consider this for myself if my bad luck streak keeps up!)[/sarcasm]

Perhaps one way to confront the player is to feign an acceptance of her cheating as a play style, but explain that it does not mesh with the play style of the rest of the group because of the way it negatively impacts the relative potency of other players' characters. 

You might even suggest that no longer cheating could enhance her enjoyment of the game play experience because of the fun derived from the additional tension. Keep this comment in reserve, though; it certainly isn't something to base an argument on.

~ fissionessence


----------



## cnath.rm (Sep 5, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> It takes the fun out of it _for you_. Don't presume to judge what other people find fun.



If his players have complained, it seems that the majority of the players are united as to Not considering this situation to be fun.  I've been in groups before that had problems with char sheets/scores/abilities changing from game to game...  only the two who were cheating seemed to find it fun...  I'm not going to judge the fact that they found it to be fun...  I will however feel free to judge the fact that they were failing to live up to/follow the guidelines set down for the game and the trust that had been placed in them by the rest of the group.


----------



## WayneLigon (Sep 5, 2008)

I'm generally a very non-confrontational person but the only times I've ever thrown people out of my game have been for cheating. Consistant, blatant, casual cheating in everything from rolling dice to how XP is figured, treasure is divided, or (in point-based systems) how a PC was built.

It's not a playstyle choice, it's not a symptom of some 'darkness', it's damn _cheating_ and you shouldn't have to put up with it.  If cheating is what they find fun, then yeah, I'll judge 'em for it; I'll be judge, jury and executioner. Their fun is automatically everyone else's non-fun. They're cheaters and there's no two ways about it. They toss people out of school for it, politicians careers are destroyed because of it, they make athletes resign and pay back millions or go to jail, etc etc. Tolerating it cheapens and lessens the experience for everyone. Yes, it does 'hurt' everyone both by her breaking the rules of the game and getting away with it, and by their tolerance of it. To tolerate it is just as silly as saying 'hey, stealing from the bank is OK, everyone has insurance for it so no-one really gets hurt'. 

What does her best friend have to say about this? Is this person also aware of her cheating and what do they feel about it? Have you broached the subject of 'If I throw X out of the game for being a craven liar, what will you do?'

I hope the 'cheering her on' thing works and keeps people's eyes on her dice but if it doesn't then you need to sit her down and tell her straight to her face that you've noticed a problem and not to be a filthy cheater. If that doesn't work, boot her. I don't see what more you can do.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 5, 2008)

WayneLigon said:


> I hope the 'cheering her on' thing works and keeps people's eyes on her dice but if it doesn't then you need to sit her down and tell her straight to her face that you've noticed a problem and not to be a filthy cheater. If that doesn't work, boot her. I don't see what more you can do.



Yeah, I hope so too.  It's basically my last idea before direct confrontation. 

-O


----------



## Xath (Sep 5, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Here's the playstyle issue right here. How random should it be? What if you think it should be less random than other people do? Why is there only one right amount of random?




There isn't just one right amount of random.  That's why there are multiple systems.  The amount of random is determined by the rules of the system you play.  This woman has agreed to play in a game that has her roll a die and add a number.  If she decides to cheat at this by lying about the number rolled on the die, this is cheating.  If the woman has a fundemental disagreement about the idea of rolling a die and adding a number, she should probably play a different system.  However, I doubt this is the case.  More than likely, she hates rolling low, so she cheats and says she rolled higher than she did.  While this may make the game more fun for her, it's pretty clear from Obryn's posts that it detracts from the enjoyment of the other players.  If noone in the group cared, her behavior may be tolerable if not acceptable.  However, her negative actions are detracting from the game, which is clearly unacceptable.  




Fifth Element said:


> If the other players feel cheated in this situation, you need to find out why.




I would guess that they feel cheated because the other player is cheating...


----------



## jdrakeh (Sep 5, 2008)

Cheating has nothing to with playstyles or rules preferences but rather, a deliberate decision to engage in dishonesty. What I would recommend is that you talk to the problem player about her decision to be dishonest and tell her that it's causing issues with the other players who have chosen to not be dishonest. Explain that she basically has two option: 

1. Start being honest. 
2. Start playing in a different group. 

That said, if the issue is only bothering _you_ and none of the other players have _specifically spoken to you_ about the dishonesty of this person, then you may be projecting your own feelings about the matter onto the other members of the group (i.e., assuming that the behavior in question is a big deal to everybody, when it isn't). 

Ask your other players about it, _specifically_. If your other players are bothered by the situation, _then_ confront the problem player. If it's now sweat off their backs, then you probably shouldn't sweat it, either, lest you come off looking like an obsessive control freak to the rest of the group


----------



## Obryn (Sep 5, 2008)

jdrakeh said:


> Ask your other players about it, _specifically_. If your other players are bothered by the situation, _then_ confront the problem player. If it's now sweat off their backs, then you probably shouldn't sweat it, either, lest you come off looking like an obsessive control freak to the rest of the group



Oh, no - like I said, I already got their buy-in on the plan.

They were also the ones who alerted me to the issue, actually.  I kinda figured something was up, since she was doing elementary cheater stuff - rerolls when I'm not looking, picking up her dice and staring at the number rather than leaving them on the table, hesitating before reading off numbers...  They filled me in after the game one night.

It bothers them more than it does me.

-O


----------



## rgard (Sep 5, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Well, that's a helpful comment. It certainly explains why players fudging their die rolls is inherently wrong.




I understood his intent and agree with Delta.  

The 'why' isn't important.  I don't care why people cheat at the table.  It's not my job as DM or player to figure out why.  Cheating doesn't fly in any of my games.  When I DM, the cheater is booted if caught.  As a player I will leave the game if the DM doesn't stop the cheating.

Thanks,
Rich


----------



## RFisher (Sep 5, 2008)

While I may not be on-board with “valid playstyle” or the pysch angle, I do think they’re only damaging themself. They know what they’re doing and probably aren’t proud of it. They probably know the suspicion they’re engendering and aren’t proud of that either. Even if they don’t know, they _are_ losing the respect of you and the others. And while it may bother the rest of you, this is a coöperative game (some would even say it doesn’t qualify as a “game”) so it’s not quite the same as cheating in a competitive game.

I think you have a simple choice:

1. Institute some of the suggestions for trying to minimize the cheating and you and the others try to remember that this person is hurting themself more than you.

2. Stop inviting them to the sessions.



Obryn said:


> Well, without any hard evidence to back me up, every approach I've made at it to date has ended with denial and a bit of defensiveness.




And here’s the real problem.

1. The lack of hard evidence means it is very unlikely they’ll own up to it and change.

2. If you have no hard evidence, you may be wrong.


----------



## Aluvial (Sep 5, 2008)

Interesting discussion. Cheating is an ethical issue. Cheating is lying. Lying is an ethical issue. 

Anyhow, there are numerous ways to fix cheating players. 

1) Stomp them harder, every time. DM's cheat. DM's therefore lie. Fortunately the rules say that we can... still, an ethical issue, one where the DM finds himself on the "dark" side of the line. Too bad cheating player. You cheat, I cheat worse. Childish, but mildly effective. 

2) Curse them. Negatives on all rolls will do wonders for cheaters... first expect the backlash of even greater cheating, then as things escalate, cheating becomes unavoidable issue. 

3) Send them an email daily with this thread.

OR, do what I did...

4) Make them use these... 
http://www.gmdice.com/proddetail.php?prod=OD-16451
also comes in BLUE....

Really, #4. GIANT DICE!  This sends a pretty clear message that the roller will pick up on. 

Aluvial


----------



## Obryn (Sep 5, 2008)

RFisher said:


> 2. If you have no hard evidence, you may be wrong.



I understand your point, but my eyes, my players' eyes, and her die-rolling behavior is plenty.

-O


----------



## jdrakeh (Sep 5, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Oh, no - like I said, I already got their buy-in on the plan.




You know, I was so distracted by some of the other responses that I _totally_ missed that!


----------



## Mephistopheles (Sep 5, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Well, without any hard evidence to back me up, every approach I've made at it to date has ended with denial and a bit of defensiveness.  I mean, "That looked like a 7 to me," "No, my dice are funny," is about as far as that conversation can go without getting stupid.
> 
> ...
> 
> Hence, my idea for somewhat subtle social correction.  All I'm looking to do is solve the target behavior with a minimum of drama.




When you're calling her on it in front of the group it's not surprising she would be defensive, her only alternative may be to say "Yes, I'm cheating, it was a 7" (assuming she is cheating).

My prediction is that if people start to call her dice before she can fudge them she'll just retreat and roll her dice where nobody can see them. If you've established that it's a problem for your group, and I think the majority of groups would feel that way, I'd suggest talking to her about it in private with a good dose of tact as others have outlined already.


----------



## Logos7 (Sep 5, 2008)

you wanna know why people cheat, theirs a reward for success and its an imaginary game. its not too hard to go from imaginary failure, to imaginary success. 

What should you do about it? Well the problem has gone from a little cheating to enough to annoy other players, I would suggest a dice dish rolling area (you can get some nice wood ones with felt and shizzle looks nice rolls nice, maybe a dice tower), and maybe all this drama (yeah its offically drama, when you have people talking behind other peoples back about what those people do that they dont approve of and want those other people to affect change on the original person that those people are too afraid of confronting themselves, you got drama )will go away and you can focus you know on having fun with your friends. 

If it doesn't get prepared to ask yourself if your gonna be prepared to kick the gal out of the group and quite possibly your monkeysphere. If yes, go all ape  on here, sounds like you already have for the most part,  polite ape , but ape . If no shut your mouth and smile and continue on. 

As for all these people who seem to think that Thou shalt not cheat at RPG's was the 11th commandment , honestly I think your hypocrits. What I have learned about people and games is that everyone cheats, I do, Others Do, My Grandmother Did, and you know what we survived, games were still games, smiles where had, bastardry is okay every now and then, its just a game for  sakes. All you people who are like, if everyone cheats all the time what kind of thing would that be , it would not be a game at all. Your looking at a corner case, No one is ever gonna cheat all the time (You would need some kind of cheating machine) honestly lots and lots of games get by just fine with cheaters (Just look at a major league baseball ).  And I know some smart ass is gonna come on and say that I can't say this , and I don't have sufficient sample, and maybe that's how things roll where I come from but there is a bigger and better way where they come from, but the moral of the story is , Which do you find easier to believe in, that everyone (or close enough) cheats(Eveer) or that most do  not , I'm putting my money on the cheaters. 

L


----------



## Aluvial (Sep 5, 2008)

Logos7 said:


> As for all these people who seem to think that Thou shalt not cheat at RPG's was the 11th commandment , honestly I think your hypocrits. What I have learned about people and games is that everyone cheats, I do, Others Do, My Grandmother Did, and you know what we survived, games were still games, smiles where had, bastardry is okay every now and then, its just a game for  sakes.



CHEATER!!! You've admitted it. GIANT DICE FOR YOU!



			
				Logos7 said:
			
		

> All you people who are like, if everyone cheats all the time what kind of thing would that be , it would not be a game at all. Your looking at a corner case, No one is ever gonna cheat all the time (You would need some kind of cheating machine) honestly lots and lots of games get by just fine with cheaters (Just look at a major league baseball ). And I know some smart ass is gonna come on and say that I can't say this , and I don't have sufficient sample, and maybe that's how things roll where I come from but there is a bigger and better way where they come from, but the moral of the story is , Which do you find easier to believe in, that everyone (or close enough) cheats(Eveer) or that most do not , I'm putting my money on the cheaters.
> 
> L



I believe that most people cheat (therefore lie). Doesn't make it right.  Besides, cheaters never win (in the end; although in the short term, they sure do if they get away with it!)

Aluvial


----------



## resistor (Sep 5, 2008)

I'm going to take a completely different approach to the "different playstyle" angle...

It might be an indication that she's more interested in a narrative rather than gamist or simulationist playstyle.  A lot of very narrative-oriented games allow players a lot more direct control over their character's success.  The most abstract narrative system often using bidding of some form, in which a declared action always succeeds unless someone "outbids" the declarer.

To use myself as an example:  I cheat in (single player) computer games.  Yes, I know it's cheap, but I don't care.  I don't play them for the challenge, I don't play them for any simulation.  I play them to find out what happens.  I'm motivated to create the next step of the story, to create the super-awesome army that's fun to pound the computer into the ground with, even if it's totally a false victory 'cause I have all the cheats on.  And you know what?  I enjoy it.

Maybe she's similar.

In terms of concrete advice, I don't have much to offer you.  Perhaps D&D with a fairly gamist/simulationist group just isn't the game for her.


----------



## nerfherder (Sep 5, 2008)

Logos7 said:


> As for all these people who seem to think that Thou shalt not cheat at RPG's was the 11th commandment , honestly I think your hypocrits. What I have learned about people and games is that everyone cheats, I do, Others Do, My Grandmother Did, and you know what we survived, games were still games, smiles where had, bastardry is okay every now and then, its just a game for  sakes. All you people who are like, if everyone cheats all the time what kind of thing would that be , it would not be a game at all. Your looking at a corner case, No one is ever gonna cheat all the time (You would need some kind of cheating machine) honestly lots and lots of games get by just fine with cheaters (Just look at a major league baseball ).  And I know some smart ass is gonna come on and say that I can't say this , and I don't have sufficient sample, and maybe that's how things roll where I come from but there is a bigger and better way where they come from, but the moral of the story is , Which do you find easier to believe in, that everyone (or close enough) cheats(Eveer) or that most do  not , I'm putting my money on the cheaters.



Just because you're happy to lie and cheat, don't go assuming everyone else is.


----------



## Hypersmurf (Sep 5, 2008)

Logos7 - do be a little more circumspect with your choice of language, please.  The profanity filter is there to pick up the odd slip, but we prefer it when it has nothing to do...

-Hyp.
(Moderator)


----------



## Kaisoku (Sep 5, 2008)

Honestly... with the how often one of my friend's rolls can get (and it doesn't matter who's dice he uses), I'd almost wish he'd cheat.

I'm not even joking... if he literally cheated on every 3rd roll or so, he *might* amount to the average gamer's luck.

We've started advising him on his character options, basing his choices around things where he doesn't have to roll to affect the outcome.


Ugh...


----------



## Ginnel (Sep 5, 2008)

Logos7 said:


> you wanna know why people cheat, theirs a reward for success and its an imaginary game. its not too hard to go from imaginary failure, to imaginary success.
> 
> What should you do about it? Well the problem has gone from a little cheating to enough to annoy other players, I would suggest a dice dish rolling area (you can get some nice wood ones with felt and shizzle looks nice rolls nice, maybe a dice tower), and maybe all this drama (yeah its offically drama, when you have people talking behind other peoples back about what those people do that they dont approve of and want those other people to affect change on the original person that those people are too afraid of confronting themselves, you got drama )will go away and you can focus you know on having fun with your friends.
> 
> ...




With Gaming when you agree to play D&D you've agreed to play a game which has a random factor involved in it (unless the DM says otherwise) your levels your skills your attacks are all about taking that randomness away and making it go towards a result you want it to. 

If you allow cheating you might as well go well do you want 5 extra levels and a bag full of magic items? because by saying someone can cheat you are effectively doing this, rerolls extra pluses on rolls are some heavy weight rewards in the game and the cheater is getting this for free.
I'm going to doubt that you would allow a player to have those 5 extra levels and a bag full of magic items just to make him/her happy.

I will state for a fact that all people don't cheat, people who do cheat however like to convince themselves that everyone does because then it becomes acceptable as "everyone" is doing it.

Off topic rant:
In all honesty I think cheating is a major issue I'm having to pay more taxes because people cheat the benefit system a classic example was a single mother at my work had a job on the side which she didn't declare so she could still get benefits then she went on and on about how she was going on holiday abroad somewhere on this £1000 holiday, me being in a certain amount of debt and not having gone on holiday in god knows how long found this to be a little grating, who knows if I'll actually have the guts to report the next person who steals from the state (and therefore myself) like this.


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Sep 5, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> I am curious, though.  When did being dishonest become categorized as a "preferred playstyle"?  Are we really becoming so squishy as a society and afraid of hurting people's feelings that we don't want to call cheating what it really is?  Rolling a 2 and knowingly telling people that you got a 20 is just plain dishonest.  Especially when the results are so wildly different.




This. 

Seriously. Cheating is cheating and it really says something about a persons character. The OP is functioning as a DM not a therapist. If the cheating bothers him and other people at the table then it needs to be addressed. 

If you needed a 20 and you rolled a 2 suck it up. If youre afraid of being screwed by a random element (in this case dice) youre playing the wrong game.


----------



## evileeyore (Sep 5, 2008)

jmucchiello said:


> And calling her out on it is designed to increase whose fun?



Everyone's.

Her's included.

Learning that cheating is bad, you'll likely get caught, and it won't be accepted means she'll have less problems later in life.  Which increases her potential fun, thus increasing the fun all around.

Sometimes you need to be "not nice" now to make things nice later.



Fifth Element said:


> So again, why does this bother the other players?



Likely it's the lying to her friends that is hurting them.



Obryn said:


> Well, without any hard evidence to back me up, every approach I've made at it to date has ended with denial and a bit of defensiveness.  I mean, "That looked like a 7 to me," "No, my dice are funny," is about as far as that conversation can go without getting stupid.



You really need to confront her about it, on her own and gently.

Then implement Plan "Everyone roll in the center" anyway.


Otherwise, when everyone else is eyeballing her rolls, all the time, she'll catch on that she was caught and be even more embarrassed.  Or maybe she'll just "up the cheating ante".

:shrug:   Who knows.




> I strive for harmony at my gaming table, so that isn't my first choice.



I recommend playing Amber.  No dice, no randomness, very hard to cheat at.  



Kaisoku said:


> Honestly... with the how often one of my friend's rolls can get (and it doesn't matter who's dice he uses), I'd almost wish he'd cheat.



I'm the same way.

I hate dice.


----------



## billd91 (Sep 5, 2008)

Kaisoku said:


> Honestly... with the how often one of my friend's rolls can get (and it doesn't matter who's dice he uses), I'd almost wish he'd cheat.
> 
> I'm not even joking... if he literally cheated on every 3rd roll or so, he *might* amount to the average gamer's luck.
> 
> ...




We had a case of this once. Player couldn't roll a character with a decent stat. So we decided to take his 3d6 roll and subtract it from 21. Got a good character that way.

If his D20s always come out low, subtract them from 21. Random distribution is the same. See if he starts doing better.


----------



## El Mahdi (Sep 6, 2008)

Aluvial said:


> . . . I believe that most people cheat (therefore lie). . .





I think you're wrong.  According to _House_, *everyone* lies!


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 6, 2008)

Logos7 said:


> As for all these people who seem to think that Thou shalt not cheat at RPG's was the 11th commandment , honestly I think your hypocrits. What I have learned about people and games is that everyone cheats, I do, Others Do, My Grandmother Did, and you know what we survived, games were still games, smiles where had, bastardry is okay every now and then, its just a game for  sakes. All you people who are like, if everyone cheats all the time what kind of thing would that be , it would not be a game at all. Your looking at a corner case, No one is ever gonna cheat all the time (You would need some kind of cheating machine) honestly lots and lots of games get by just fine with cheaters (Just look at a major league baseball ).  And I know some smart ass is gonna come on and say that I can't say this , and I don't have sufficient sample, and maybe that's how things roll where I come from but there is a bigger and better way where they come from, but the moral of the story is , Which do you find easier to believe in, that everyone (or close enough) cheats(Eveer) or that most do  not , I'm putting my money on the cheaters.



We must game and socialize with different types of people then. I would be surprised if someone cheated in our group, not the other way around.

Seriously, I haven't seen any cheating at my table in a very long time, and it's a reflection of the type of people I choose to surround myself with.

I prefer to have friends and game-pals that are honest with each other and can be open about discussing these kinds of things.  We aren't saints, for sure, but we are honest.


----------



## Wyrmshadows (Sep 6, 2008)

You cheat, you get called on it. 

I would warn once privately that if I catch her cheating again she's no longer welcome at my table. She can take her 'playstyle'  somewhere else. I am not going to bend over backwards to accomodate someone who has a problem with following a simple instruction....don't cheat. I'm also not going to create an elaborate in game situation to prove to her that cheating is wrong. If she cannot grasp the basics of social/game etiquette she needs to find another hobby or play with gamers as dysfunctional as she is.

What is she, 9 years old? Did her mommy and daddy not model proper social contracts/etiquette? Is she harboring low self esteem? Is it really right to call cheating wrong? Maybe lying to you and everyone else at the table is just another playstyle and we don't want to be intolerant and call anything wrongbadfun....heavens no. 

I call BS on all that psychobabble/politically correct/relativistic nonsense. We all know that cheating is wrong. Even when we do it, if it in any way impacts others adversly, it is wrong. Lying in a game when everyone else is honest is negative impact by betraying the social contract of the hobby. 

I work as a counselor and I find that the worst thing you can do is coddle someone's misbehavior. When I work with someone (in a mental health facility) the first thing that needs to be established is what is and what is not appropriate behavior and then clearly note the consequences for inappropriate behavior. After 8yrs of doing this work, I have found that without the threat of serious consequences there is unlikely to be any change of non-pathological (ie. non mental illness related) behavior.

I haven't had someone cheat at my table since me and my players were kids, when some of us actually believed that you could win a RPing game. What benefit is there to actually lying to everyone at the table when they are all taking the same risks and respecting the game, the DM, and each other by playing by the rules?

If I cheat on an single player PC or XBOX 360 game it is only because I want to win. I want to complete the game and I don't want to be unable to get past a given level. I would cheat because the satisfaction of seeing it out to the end in order to see how the story plays out and I may have paid $50 for the game. Honestly, I just want to get through it and once I do I'll trade it in or sell it on ebay. However, it is a really crappy move to cheat on a multiplayer game because others are involved and there is an unspoken understanding amongst individuals older than 12yrs old (at the latest) that cheating is a no-no. 

IMO if you allow cheating, just close the books, put away the dice and everyone sit in a circle and just tell each other stories about how cool each others imaginary personas are. Ultimately, without dice, rules, and the random element RPing games are just *Grown Up Story Time*.

_*I apologize if some of this post sounds snarky. I just have a pet peeve about RPing game cheaters as well as any excuse making for them.*_



Wyrmshadows


----------



## Delta (Sep 6, 2008)

El Mahdi said:


> I think you're wrong. According to _House_, *everyone* lies!




And that's why House is Chaotic Evil.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=166771


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 6, 2008)

Wyrmshadows said:


> _*I apologize if some of this post sounds snarky. I just have a pet peeve about RPing game cheaters as well as any excuse making for them.*_



Snarky? Not really. Condescending and judgmental? Yep.

This is a game, people. Any comments about "if she cheats at D&D, she'll never learn about life" are as much "psychobabble" as jmucchiello's comments. There are no real "risks" here. It's a game. Imaginary success and imaginary failure. That's it. What's the big deal?

Have your own fun. Don't tell others how to have theirs.


----------



## Xath (Sep 6, 2008)

Fifth Element,

Please maintain a degree of civility, and do not attack the postings of other players.


----------



## Arashi Ravenblade (Sep 6, 2008)

Ive had to cheat cheaters. Sounds like a good idea having your buddies watch out for her.
Also I would recommend making the monsters tougher for the party, or so it would seem. Really whenever she cheats on a dice roll and you know it didnt hit, just dont apply damage. She'll never know.


----------



## Wyrmshadows (Sep 6, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Snarky? Not really. Condescending and judgmental? Yep.




That's what having a strong opinion is these days. Just like cheating is an acceptable playstyle. Because we all know that all points of view are equally valid. We could get into the endless loop of:

_"Well you can't say that a cheater's playstyle is invalid because all points of view are equally valid. If you say otherwise you are being judgmental"_

_"If all points of view are equally valid then my point of view that cheaters should be bounced from the game is valid. If you say otherwise you are being judgmental"_

*GAME OVER*

Another's point of view only ever has as much credibility as you subjectively grant it. We are always making judgments. So the mantra of 'don't be judgmental' is really saying 'don't be discerning, don't filter, allow every point of view equal weight.' This is a recipe for madness.



> This is a game, people. Any comments about "if she cheats at D&D, she'll never learn about life" are as much "psychobabble" as jmucchiello's comments. There are no real "risks" here. It's a game.




Don't create a straw man and then knock it down. I said no such thing. The fact is that most people's behaviors only change when there is a consequence for misbahavior. 

I'd like to see folks who play poker act as if "its just a game, let her cheat if she is having fun." That attitude doesn't even exist among friends who get together to play Trivial Pursuit or Monopoly unless they've all gotten so drunk that they no longer care about the rules (which I have seen happen). No one enjoys playing with cheaters and most people (adults anyway) would be incredulous that someone is going to cheat regularly at any social game. 



> Imaginary success and imaginary failure. That's it. What's the big deal?




That's a weak argument. I can ask the same thing from a different angle. "If it is only a game and it doesn't matter, with no real risk, rewards or consequences then why go out of your way to cheat?" 

The answer is that of course there are rewards to RPing games. The rewards are psychological and as real for those involved as for those involved in any activity where there is an element of risk (randomness, loss of a valued character, in-game consequences for action or inaction, etc.) Sports, board games, anything we do socially that doesn't involve actual risk to life and limb as part of the activity and whose payoff is ultimately psychological matters to those involved. If it didn't, they wouldn't be involved in the activity.



> Have your own fun. Don't tell others how to have theirs.




Telling the poste of the OP not to tolerate cheating is not telling someone how to have fun. The OP wanted to know how to deal with a cheater and I told him how I would handle it and pointed out the fact that behavior doesn't change without the threat of consequences ie. you cheat, you don't play.

Just the way it is.


Wyrmshadows


----------



## Aluvial (Sep 7, 2008)

From Kevin Cook's Dice thread....

http://www.dicecollector.com/D20_OPAQUE_ROUNDED_SOLID_HUGE_3.jpg

BIG DICE = NO CHEATING  


Aluvial


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 7, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> My attitude as both player and DM is if that's how someone enjoys playing D&D, who am I to say it's wrong (or pathetic, or sad)? I don't "cheat" as a player, and I don't think any of my players do either, but what's the big deal?




OK, let me ask this: what if someone in your group _was_ cheating, perhaps blatantly so? What if I sat at your table and no matter what was rolled on a d20, obviously and out in the open, I called it a 20 (or simply any number that meant success)? No doubts, no equivocation, just flat-out cheating. Let's also assume I was a pleasant enough guy, brought snacks, cleaned up afterward, was polite, bathed, and otherwise helpful. But still, I would tell you and the others a bald-faced lie every single time I rolled a die. What then? Let's even say I didn't do it every single time, maybe once a session or so. How do you handle it? I'm not arguing, really, I'm genuinely curious.


----------



## ColonelHardisson (Sep 7, 2008)

resistor said:


> I'm going to take a completely different approach to the "different playstyle" angle...
> 
> It might be an indication that she's more interested in a narrative rather than gamist or simulationist playstyle.  A lot of very narrative-oriented games allow players a lot more direct control over their character's success.  The most abstract narrative system often using bidding of some form, in which a declared action always succeeds unless someone "outbids" the declarer.




That's an interesting suggestion (though I'm sure you'd agree it doesn't necessarily remedy whatever motivated cheating). It's too bad the Amber Diceless RPG (whic I get the feeling you might have had in mind) isn't currently in print, or I'd suggest it as the perfect type of game for the player in question.


----------



## Wyrmshadows (Sep 7, 2008)

ColonelHardisson said:


> That's an interesting suggestion (though I'm sure you'd agree it doesn't necessarily remedy whatever motivated cheating). It's too bad the Amber Diceless RPG (whic I get the feeling you might have had in mind) isn't currently in print, or I'd suggest it as the perfect type of game for the player in question.




IME cheaters cheat. They cheat to win and will find any means to do so. I don't think the cheater is more a narrativist than a gamist or a simulationist....she's a lying cheaterist. 

Her real problem is that her perspective is one of winning vs. losing in a RPing game. There is also the element of competition (player vs. player/player vs. DM) that I see in players that cheat. They either want to stand out via their cheating (ooh, look what my PC did!) or they want to 'beat' the adversary who is ultimately the DM.



Wyrmshadows


----------



## JeffB (Sep 7, 2008)

OMG, some of the comments in this thread are absolutely ridiculous 


My opinion- Call the cheater out...hard. If she doesn't shape up, kick her out of the group. Losing a good player sucks. Tolerating cheating as a "preferred playstyle" sucks more.


----------



## WayneLigon (Sep 7, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> There are no real "risks" here. It's a game. Imaginary success and imaginary failure. That's it. What's the big deal?
> 
> Have your own fun. Don't tell others how to have theirs.




The point is that the cheater's idea of having fun directly and negatively impacts my fun and the fun of everyone else at that table.

How is it that this is unclear?


----------



## That One Guy (Sep 7, 2008)

Wow, that's a long thread.

To the OP, yup. Good plan. I'd suggest two more subtle methods if you cannot see her dice easily. Make her sit closer, or have a few people near her watch. If she rolls junk, have them tell you so you know for certain. Then try the cheering method, big dice method, or being a friend and saying 'hey, this isn't good.' You know her better than we do.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Sep 7, 2008)

Fifth Element said:
			
		

> Here's the playstyle issue right here. How random should it be? What if you think it should be less random than other people do? Why is there only one right amount of random?





Xath said:


> The amount of random is determined by the rules of the system you play. This woman has agreed to play in a game that has her roll a die and add a number. If she decides to cheat at this by lying about the number rolled on the die, this is cheating. If the woman has a fundemental disagreement about the idea of rolling a die and adding a number, she should probably play a different system.



What Xath said.

People can prefer different levels of randomness in their games, and there is nothing wrong with that.  But it is socially _unacceptable_ to agree (explicitly or implicitly) to a set of rules, and then surreptitiously violate those rules.  We call such behavior "cheating," and you can count me among those posters who are frankly _astonished_ that we even have to explain this.

If you don't want to play by the rules, don't _agree_ to play by the rules.  Say it up front: "By the way, I'm not going to play by the rules, you know."

When you put it like that, it sounds ridiculous...doesn't it?


----------



## Crothian (Sep 7, 2008)

JeffB said:


> Losing a good player sucks.




Yes it does, but a cheater is not a good player.


----------



## Set (Sep 8, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> I am curious, though. When did being dishonest become categorized as a "preferred playstyle"? Are we really becoming so squishy as a society and afraid of hurting people's feelings that we don't want to call cheating what it really is? Rolling a 2 and knowingly telling people that you got a 20 is just plain dishonest. Especially when the results are so wildly different.




Total agreement. I loathe the news these days, because they'll show some politician saying one thing one day, and the exact opposite the next day and describe it as 'confused' or 'mistaken' or 'misquoted' instead of just flat out saying that the creep got caught LYING, again.

As for the cheating thing, we use the box top method occasionally, mainly because we *hate* chasing dice off the table. (Haven't had a cheating issue since college.)

The calling out rolls feature sounds like a decent option as well, but make sure to actually reward her with praise when she *does* make a close roll (not just a 20), so that she gets the clue that maybe the rolls that she's *earned* are the valuable ones that get the praise, and not the ones that she's 'stolen' by cheating.  There's no real need to single her out either.  Praise the hell out of someone else who rolls an actual 20 or makes a difficult saving throw or attack roll or disable device roll.  Encourage the others to look disappointed *and openly remark on it* when they fail an important roll.  Seeing the players openly admitting to a failed roll and encouraging each other because of it, might help her to get the idea that D&D isn't a game about 'beating the other players' and 'always getting the best rolls' but about working together and covering for the rest when things *don't* work out.  Everybody is supposed to win, in the end, not just the special person who never misses a roll and is better than everyone else.

You're not her parents, so it's not your job to try and teach her that theft and fraud and deceit are bad, and ultimately self-destructive, in real-life, but you can at least encourage her not to pull that crap at the game table.


----------



## JeffB (Sep 8, 2008)

Crothian said:


> Yes it does, but a cheater is not a good player.





Agreed. I was referring to the other player the OP thought they may lose if the cheater was booted


----------



## Nifft (Sep 8, 2008)

WayneLigon said:


> The point is that the cheater's idea of having fun directly and negatively impacts my fun and the fun of everyone else at that table.



 Exactly. A cheater is just like any other disruptive player -- she negatively impacts the game.

We don't try to empathize with the misbehavior of disruptive players. We try to correct it.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Obryn (Sep 8, 2008)

Nifft said:


> We don't try to empathize with the misbehavior of disruptive players. We try to correct it.



Bingo.

And I'd rather turn a bad player into a good player than toss her out before giving it a try.

-O


----------



## jodyjohnson (Sep 8, 2008)

Aluvial said:


> From Kevin Cook's Dice thread....
> 
> http://www.dicecollector.com/D20_OPAQUE_ROUNDED_SOLID_HUGE_3.jpg
> 
> ...




I have a pair of those and the ironic thing is they are spin-down with all the high numbers on one half of the dice.

Oddly enough the first set of DDM dice were also spin-down and later banned from organized play.


----------



## Aluvial (Sep 8, 2008)

jodyjohnson said:


> I have a pair of those and the ironic thing is they are spin-down with all the high numbers on one half of the dice.
> 
> Oddly enough the first set of DDM dice were also spin-down and later banned from organized play.



 I'm not sure what "spin-down" means?  Can you explain?

Aluvial


----------



## nerfherder (Sep 8, 2008)

Aluvial said:


> I'm not sure what "spin-down" means?  Can you explain?
> 
> Aluvial




They have all the high numbers on one half of the dice, making it easier to roll a number in that physical grouping.


----------



## Fenes (Sep 8, 2008)

I'd ask myself if she cheats to win, or to avoid losing - losing face, losing a favorite character, etc.

People do not always cheat to win, sometimes they cheat just to keep up with the rest. If you have a highly competitive group where some people make very effective characters, it can create serious pressure to avoid becoming "dead weight".

It might be that all she needs to stop cheating is some assurance that it's not needed - maybe have a safety net for characters, so dice do not result in character loss. Or check if the game atmosphere is too competitive, and if "low performers" are pressured in any way to shape up.


----------



## mykelsss (Sep 8, 2008)

I just had to post and say how abhorently misguided the entire first page is. Saying that it's okay for players to *cheat* in D&D? Absolute balls. It's disrespectful to the DM, but even moreso on the players. To cheat on rolls right in front of your friends, in plain sight, doesn't have an excuse.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 8, 2008)

Fenes said:


> I'd ask myself if she cheats to win, or to avoid losing - losing face, losing a favorite character, etc.
> 
> People do not always cheat to win, sometimes they cheat just to keep up with the rest. If you have a highly competitive group where some people make very effective characters, it can create serious pressure to avoid becoming "dead weight".
> 
> It might be that all she needs to stop cheating is some assurance that it's not needed - maybe have a safety net for characters, so dice do not result in character loss. Or check if the game atmosphere is too competitive, and if "low performers" are pressured in any way to shape up.



Well, everyone (except her) performs pretty equally, and nobody has a munchkined-out character.  People don't tend to be overly competitive at the table, either.

I also run things pretty easily, and although 2 PCs have died so far in the campaign, there's been chances to save them.

Really, the only explanation I can see is that she wants to shine brighter than the other PCs.

-O


----------



## Storm Raven (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Maybe she likes everything else about the game? I don't know. There are several things I don't like about D&D but I still play it. Maybe her friends only play D&D and she can't find another group? Who knows?




And if she chooses to play D&D, then the accepted way to play is to, you know, use the rules that everyone else at the table is using.



> _Again, this might only be because the other players and DM are openly disdainful of how she chooses to play._




Using your own logic, she is not only disdainful of the way the group she is in chooses to play, she is actively contemptuous of it, because she refuses to abide by the constraints of the system she agreed to sit down and play.

In my group she'd be shown the door and told not to come back unless she could play by the rules of the game being played at the time. D&D is not a self-help group, and playing by the same rules as everyone else at the table is not an optional element.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

Storm Raven said:


> Using your own logic, she is not only disdainful of the way the group she is in chooses to play, she is actively contemptuous of it, because she refuses to abide by the constraints of the system she agreed to sit down and play.



I'm not using logic, I'm offering hypotheses for unknowns. I have no idea why she's doing it. (Apparently the DM doesn't either, judging by the last post. I suggest he/she find out.)

I would also point out the other players are actively contemptuous of how she chooses to play. Since they're in the majority at the table, I guess that's alright.


----------



## Janx (Sep 8, 2008)

a whole bunch of good points have been brought up.

Here's a few more points (good or bad):
she may be cheating because:
-she rolls bad most of the time
-she wants to outshine everyone else
-she doesn't want to lose or let down the group
-she sees it as a competition

It's been observed that folks embezzle because they have opportunity with no safeguards to stop them (NPR had a great interview with a recently released embezzler).  Cheating is the same thing. Folks do it, becuase they see an opportunity.  And they get caught because they keep doing it.

If you were a family or community leader (priest) running a game of candy land with 5 year olds, and 1 child was cheating, do you not have an obligation to correct the behavior (to teach proper values)?

A Texas A&M student (Aggie) is pretty much required to take an oath stating "I will not lie, cheat or steal, nor tolerate anyone that does."  At the minimum, this would imply excusing oneself from the company of such an individual.  This oath is very similar to what military officers take in school (the A&M has a military background, so adoption of this oath makes sense).


There's good points that the player may have issues, and that fixing the issue may cause more problems.  There's also valid points that the group does not have to put up with bad behavior.

When somebody does something bad, the group may forgive them for it.  When somebody repeatedly does it, they are disrespecting that forgiveness.  

An extreme example: It would be like a family forgiving a drunk driver for killing their child, and then to have the driver get drunk again and kill another member.

If you make a poor judgement, and the community forgives that, you must not repeat the mistake, or you deserve casting out from the community.

Cheaters do win. The do so at the expense of others.  

Having a common rolling area and only approving dice rolls you see is a good safeguard.  It won't stop cheating on character sheets (more money, better stats).  It's simply reducing opportunity, which helps stop cheating.

the key questions are: would you accept a cheater in your group?  Would you accept someone who steals 1 die during each game session.  Would you accept someone who breaks something at your house during each session? Would you accept someone who barfs on your floor each session?  Would you accept someone who swears at your family during each session?

My problem person resolution system is as follows: Correct, Deflect, Eject.  Try to correct the behavior.  Try to avoid putting the person in a situation where the behavior will occur.  Lastly, if those 2 don't work, get rid of the person.

I think there's situations where Deflect should be tried first, and where Correct should be first.  It depends on the behavior.  However, Eject is always the last thing you should use, and you have to be willing to use it, when other methods fail.

The community sets the standard of acceptable behavior.  Ultimately those who behave unacceptably, by definition are not accepted and must be removed.


----------



## Nifft (Sep 8, 2008)

Janx said:


> If you were a family or community leader (priest) running a game of candy land with 5 year olds



 Must ... not ... make ... joke ...

_Gngrh!_, -- N


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

Janx said:


> If you were a family or community leader (priest) running a game of candy land with 5 year olds, and 1 child was cheating, do you not have an obligation to correct the behavior (to teach proper values)?



Yes, probably.

A gamer running a game for other gamers? Rather different situation. They're peers, not master-and-students. A DM "correcting" a player on the basis of teaching "proper values" is a very presumptuous DM. Note that there are many possible reasons, it's just this one is a very bad one amongst peers.


----------



## Janx (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Yes, probably.
> 
> A gamer running a game for other gamers? Rather different situation. They're peers, not master-and-students. A DM "correcting" a player on the basis of teaching "proper values" is a very presumptuous DM. Note that there are many possible reasons, it's just this one is a very bad one amongst peers.




You're getting to the point of that question.  A leader must teach and model good behavior.  

However, the core point is, cheating is a bad behavior that was supposed to be corrected before they got to my peer level game.  As such, I should not be expected to tolerate it.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Yes, probably.
> 
> A gamer running a game for other gamers? Rather different situation. They're peers, not master-and-students. A DM "correcting" a player on the basis of teaching "proper values" is a very presumptuous DM. Note that there are many possible reasons, it's just this one is a very bad one amongst peers.



You're really, really, really over-reaching here.  And getting funnier to read with every post.

To expand:  I don't see a pressing need to remain value-neutral on the subject of cheating.  The fact that you do makes me sad.

-O


----------



## Set (Sep 8, 2008)

Important note;

If she botches a roll after you guys begin watching her like a hawk, and her character dies, and she gets up and cries, "NO!  NOT BLACK LEAF!" make sure to lawyer up.


----------



## jmucchiello (Sep 8, 2008)

I had a clarification post eaten by ENWorld so I'll try again here.

My name is being thrown around and not including the full meaning of my point of view. To whit....



Janx said:


> However, the core point is, cheating is a bad behavior that was supposed to be corrected before they got to my peer level game.  As such, I should not be expected to tolerate it.



Part of the current equation is also friendship. No, I don't tolerate cheating in a convention setting. But I don't lay the smackdown on my friends either. If my friend is cheating, I don't take a hard stance against. At that point the so-called psycho-babble/pop-psychology is important.

My impression was that the OP was friends with the cheater. And as such, my advice prioritized the friendship over the game. If that is not true, well, there's plenty of advice here for what to do.

I come to this from experience. My friend cheated during our D&D sessions. And I convinced everyone else who wanted to go passive aggressive on him to just let it go. If he needed to cheat to have fun, it wasn't my problem. Eventually, he stopped cheating. Later we found out about stress he was having outside game. So he worked through it. For a few months he was basically a spotlight hog. No worries.

I guess my point of view is colored by the fact that I don't game with strangers. I game with people I'm friends with first. So any aberrant behavior at the gaming table makes me wonder what's up IRL first and foremost.


----------



## OchreJelly (Sep 8, 2008)

I had to add to this.  I have had a player who cheated in the past on occasion.  I never even had to intervene, because the players were all over him like flies on stink when he was caught.  He has turned it around.  All our rolling is more in the open and everyone is watchful.  Everyone is having more fun now, including the cheater.  Not to derail this, but it seems like the cheater feels less need to do so in 4E.  In 3E I could sense this particular player’s frustration at contributing next to the powergamer wizard player, and that’s where the dice fudging began.   

Cheating is up there with any other behavior children should have learned about in Kindergarten or earlier: Not acceptable.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

Obryn said:


> You're really, really, really over-reaching here.  And getting funnier to read with every post.



Helpful.



Obryn said:


> To expand:  I don't see a pressing need to remain value-neutral on the subject of cheating.



But "cheating" is a very broad term. If you're talking about cheating on your taxes, I agree with you. Cheating in a game that ultimately doesn't really matter in any important sense? Not the same thing.



Obryn said:


> The fact that you do makes me sad.



Why?


Listen, my point is this. In my view, cheating *in this context* isn't a big deal. It doesn't cause any objective pain to anyone. If I found one of my players was cheating, I'd say "whatever floats your boat". If the other players were bothered by it, I would not only ask the cheater "why do you cheat?", I would also ask the others "why does it bother you?" If it's something you can easily get over, we'd all be better off if you got over it. On either side.

In this case, the other players do mind, so the issue needs to be addressed, as I said before. But the assertions that there is something inherently wrong with this player, and that she should be cast out of the group, are off-base. There's more to conflict resolution than "my way or the highway."


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

jmucchiello said:


> I come to this from experience. My friend cheated during our D&D sessions. And I convinced everyone else who wanted to go passive aggressive on him to just let it go. If he needed to cheat to have fun, it wasn't my problem. Eventually, he stopped cheating. Later we found out about stress he was having outside game. So he worked through it. For a few months he was basically a spotlight hog. No worries.



This is essentially my point as well.

I also game only with friends, so suggestions that a player be booted for something so minor are not in play, so to speak.


----------



## OchreJelly (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Listen, my point is this. In my view, cheating *in this context* isn't a big deal. It doesn't cause any objective pain to anyone. If I found one of my players was cheating, I'd say "whatever floats your boat". If the other players were bothered by it, I would not only ask the cheater "why do you cheat?", I would also ask the others "why does it bother you?" If it's something you can easily get over, we'd all be better off if you got over it. On either side.




Really?  Look, if it’s a single player doing this and everyone at the table knows it, then it’s the same as you announcing: “Hey this player can make up any roll he wants, but the rest of you can’t”.  I don’t see how that’s fun for everyone.  It’s basically playing favorites which has a negative impact on the game, whether or not your players choose to vocalize it.  

If the same situation existed at your table and everyone just shrugged their shoulders and said “whatever” (a situation I can’t fathom either but I’ll go with it) then how is the game fun?  People just make up their results is like playing Candyland or something where “everyone wins”.  Winning a game is meaningless without challenge.  I’m not trying to belittle your thoughts on this, but I really can’t put my head around how this can maintain the fun for everyone at the table (DM included) over a period of time.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

OchreJelly said:


> Really?  Look, if it’s a single player doing this and everyone at the table knows it, then it’s the same as you announcing: “Hey this player can make up any roll he wants, but the rest of you can’t”.  I don’t see how that’s fun for everyone.  It’s basically playing favorites which has a negative impact on the game, whether or not your players choose to vocalize it.



Say what? Where did I say only this one player can cheat?



OchreJelly said:


> Winning a game is meaningless without challenge.



I guess that's the difference. I don't play D&D to win. My players don't either.


----------



## OchreJelly (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Say what? Where did I say only this one player can cheat?




Your example showed that you and your players know that cheating was going on and you challenged everyone on what the big deal is.  My point was by doing so you are either green-lighting everyone to use that behavior since it’s “not a big deal”, or telling them to ignore the behavior of said player and let him continue on his merry cheating way.  IME ignoring the problem is bad.  I will grant you that your second paragraph showed that if players did have a problem with it you would probably work something out, no?




Fifth Element said:


> I guess that's the difference. I don't play D&D to win. My players don't either.




Regarding winning, let me rephrase it.  I should have seen that coming.  People do win at DND all the time, in small increments:  Encounters.  Losing can be fun too in small doses (horror games come to mind), but really a good game is always full of constant little reward mechanisms.  That’s what I meant.  It’s when the challenge of getting the reward is removed, either by cheating or broken rules etc., that the reward itself becomes worthless.  IME worthless reward = unfun game.

Look my group is pretty carefree too.  We play DND to blow off steam, have fun etc. but we are all serious enough about the rules  to not tolerate cheating.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

OchreJelly said:


> My point was by doing so you are either green-lighting everyone to use that behavior since it’s “not a big deal”, or telling them to ignore the behavior of said player and let him continue on his merry cheating way.




Yes. Since "cheating" in this way is not a big deal, why would I mind if everyone did it? And if the other players don't mind the one's actions, that's fine too.




OchreJelly said:


> IME ignoring the problem is bad.  I will grant you that your second paragraph showed that if players did have a problem with it you would probably work something out, no?




Yes, I've mentioned that several times I believe. Everyone needs to have fun, or there's no point in playing.




OchreJelly said:


> People do win at DND all the time, in small increments:  Encounters.  Losing can be fun too in small doses (horror games come to mind), but really a good game is always full of constant little reward mechanisms.  That’s what I meant.  It’s when the challenge of getting the reward is removed, either by cheating or broken rules etc., that the reward itself becomes worthless.  IME worthless reward = unfun game.




But that's just a matter of degree. We all know that by default, D&D encounters are designed such that the PCs have a very good chance of defeating them. So in this case the chance would just go up a bit. That's not a sea change in the reward structure. It's a matter of degree.


----------



## OchreJelly (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> But that's just a matter of degree. We all know that by default, D&D encounters are designed such that the PCs have a very good chance of defeating them. So in this case the chance would just go up a bit. That's not a sea change in the reward structure. It's a matter of degree.




Agreed on the encounter design weighted for players.  That’s part of the social contract of DND that the DM will present fair challenges just as much as everyone is expected to play fairly.  Those small degrees add up over time.  It may not be one encounter or the next, but if said player tips the scales in encounters enough I personally would find that less fun to play in.  I don’t want you to think I’m coming at this as “don’t play that way”.  Every group should do what works for them.  I just have never encountered a group that would tolerate it.  YMMV.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

OchreJelly said:


> Agreed on the encounter design weighted for players.  That’s part of the social contract of DND that the DM will present fair challenges just as much as everyone is expected to play fairly.  Those small degrees add up over time.  It may not be one encounter or the next, but if said player tips the scales in encounters enough I personally would find that less fun to play in.  I don’t want you to think I’m coming at this as “don’t play that way”.  Every group should do what works for them.  I just have never encountered a group that would tolerate it.  YMMV.



Fair enough, just remember that different people enjoy different amounts of challenge. Some people enjoy having powerful characters who rarely fail. Others enjoy having to fight for every inch. There's no answer to the question "how much challenge is enough?"


----------



## Janx (Sep 8, 2008)

> Part of the current equation is also friendship. No, I don't tolerate cheating in a convention setting. But I don't lay the smackdown on my friends either. If my friend is cheating, I don't take a hard stance against. At that point the so-called psycho-babble/pop-psychology is important.




I think the key here is anytime your friend does something that you find offensive, you have to weigh challenging the issue versus keeping the friend.  

I feel that at some point, the offenses add up and that friend is not worth keeping.  And I am not at fault for what happens next, if I didn't create the offenses, particularly ones that are considered commonly accepted social wrongs (hurting people, lying and stealing).

The point then is, be aware that any action you take may sacrifice a friendship.  However, the OP has every right to take action, and that's what he seems to be asking (methods to correct the player's  behavior).

The OP's problem is "need methods to correct cheating player", and one of the requirements is "cheating must stop".  Accepting it is not viable.  Now, solve for that.

The cheater's background may be relevant to a solution.  Allowing it for a while longer may also be acceptable if it leads to cessation.  Allowing cheating should not be acceptable as the final solution to stop cheating.


----------



## WetWombat (Sep 8, 2008)

Re: Nifft:  *snicker*

Obryn:

How about this?  Aside from previously suggested options of placing Ms. Cheaty McCheatypants nearby and/or observing her rolls like the proverbial hawk, and gently suggesting that her interperetation of the results should be reexamined should her declaration not agree with the hard facts, why not attempt positive reinforcement?

To Wit:  Karma Points
Balance must be maintained.  When the Fates frown on a character's actions, causing catastrophic failure, they are obligated to smile unconditionally at some later date.  Mechanically, this simply means a failure (especially those with dire consequences, such as favorite items being lost or destroyed.), when accepted (no cheating!), generates a point that can be used in another encounter, to turn a similarly failed attempt into a success instead. (Similar to action points, only this is a mechanic to allow a single unconditional success.)

Sure, this would involve bookkeeping, but the rewards in terms of reduction of cheating might, hopefully, make it worthwhile.

JUST a thought from The Wombat(wet).


----------



## Janx (Sep 8, 2008)

wetwombat's got a pretty good idea.  It seems like it would help folks who always roll bad, by giving them a "critical success" just when they really need it.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

WetWombat said:


> To Wit:  Karma Points
> Balance must be maintained.  When the Fates frown on a character's actions, causing catastrophic failure, they are obligated to smile unconditionally at some later date.  Mechanically, this simply means a failure (especially those with dire consequences, such as favorite items being lost or destroyed.), when accepted (no cheating!), generates a point that can be used in another encounter, to turn a similarly failed attempt into a success instead. (Similar to action points, only this is a mechanic to allow a single unconditional success.)



Nice idea. It's kind of like action points, but has the additional benefit of balancing out bad die rolls, which bother some players.


----------



## Storm Raven (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> I would also point out the other players are actively contemptuous of how she chooses to play. Since they're in the majority at the table, I guess that's alright.




No, since they are abiding by the rules of the game the group agreed to play, they are in the right.

Seriously, I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to figure out. Playing a diceless game is cool, if you are playing a diceless game. Agreeing to play a game with dice and treating it as if it was a diceless game while everyone else follows the actual rules is not cool. It is a one-way ticket to "outta here".

This is so basic that no one should need to explain it to you.

In addition to the fact that cheating is a sign of hogging the spotlight and otherwise acting unfairly to the other players at the table, someone who believes that it is worth cheating at a pastime like D&D to make themselves feel better, or to have the most powerful character around, or whatever is simply too sad and pathetic to continue to associate with.


----------



## Nifft (Sep 8, 2008)

Storm Raven said:


> No, since they are abiding by the rules of the game the group agreed to play, they are in the right.



 Yeah. Social contracts exist, even if they're not usually formalized. Violation of an implicit social contract will be disruptive to the group.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## the Jester (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Fair enough, just remember that different people enjoy different amounts of challenge. Some people enjoy having powerful characters who rarely fail. Others enjoy having to fight for every inch. There's no answer to the question "how much challenge is enough?"




That's why there are different gaming groups.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> I would also point out the other players are actively contemptuous of how she chooses to play. Since they're in the majority at the table, I guess that's alright.



And here's the main difference between my opinion and your opinion.

Cheating is not how someone "chooses to play".  In her case, cheating is how she falsifies results. It is NOT a chosen play style.

If someone's kid is going around on his bicycle, keying cars on the street, I sure as hell don't want his family to rationalize it by saying it's how he chooses to ride his bike.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 8, 2008)

Storm Raven said:


> No, since they are abiding by the rules of the game the group agreed to play, they are in the right.
> 
> Seriously, I'm not sure why this is so hard for you to figure out.



I've been wondering the same thing for five pages.

-O


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

the Jester said:


> That's why there are different gaming groups.



That's easy enough to say. But in reality, the tastes of different players will not match up 100%. And what if you can't find a group that shares the majority of your tastes? Or what if there's only one group in your area? Do you accept that you just don't get to play, or do you try to play anyway, with a group that doesn't share your preferences?

Reality and message-board comments often do not mesh.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 8, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> Cheating is not how someone "chooses to play".  In her case, cheating is how she falsifies results. It is NOT a chosen play style.



I admit, I'm not using the term "play style" in the typical fashion. I could probably find a better term. But it's really just semantics. Some people consider powergaming to be essentially cheating. If someone designs a really powerful character so that his die rolls don't really matter (he'll succeed regardless), that's basically the same situation.



catsclaw227 said:


> If someone's kid is going around on his bicycle, keying cars on the street, I sure as hell don't want his family to rationalize it by saying it's how he chooses to ride his bike.



That's a terrible comparison. We're not talking about objective damage. If this girl were LARPing and going around smashing people's mailboxes with her "sword", that would be a good comparison. But there is no objective damage here. The result is that certain things are imagined in a slightly different way than they would have otherwise been imagined. How does that compare to keying cars?


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> I admit, I'm not using the term "play style" in the typical fashion. I could probably find a better term. But it's really just semantics. Some people consider powergaming to be essentially cheating. If someone designs a really powerful character so that his die rolls don't really matter (he'll succeed regardless), that's basically the same situation.



If the table's social contract (and rules) allow for the inclusion of books used in said powergaming, then it isn't cheating.  Rolling a 2 and saying it is a 20 is cheating.  They are not even close to semantically the same thing.



Fifth Element said:


> That's a terrible comparison. We're not talking about objective damage. If this girl were LARPing and going around smashing people's mailboxes with her "sword", that would be a good comparison. But there is no objective damage here. The result is that certain things are imagined in a slightly different way than they would have otherwise been imagined. How does that compare to keying cars?



I should have been clearer.  I am not trying to compare the damage done between the two examples. I am stating that an action taken (cheating on dice/keying cars) while performing another action (playing D&D/riding bike) should not be considered "linked" as as simply different variants of the second action.

i.e. cheating on dice while playing D&D isn't a variant play style of D&D any more than keying a car while riding a bike is a variant riding style of cycling.

And it could be argued that objective damage has been done, since the other players have stated that it has affected their game negatively.  But... that may be a stretch.


----------



## cougent (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Listen, my point is this. In my view, cheating *in this context* isn't a big deal. It doesn't cause any objective pain to anyone. If I found one of my players was cheating, I'd say "whatever floats your boat". If the other players were bothered by it, I would not only ask the cheater "why do you cheat?", I would also ask the others "why does it bother you?" If it's something you can easily get over, we'd all be better off if you got over it. On either side.



Although I completely disagree with your assessment up until this point it seemed to at least be consistent.  "Why make a big deal over something one player does that bothers almost no one" (my paraphrase of all your posts).  But now you _seem_ to be crossing your own boundaries and going out of your way to accommodate the cheater with the statement "I would also ask the others "why does it bother you?" If it's something you can easily get over, we'd all be better off if you got over it. On either side."  I would personally be extremely offended if a DM asked me to just "go along" with another player cheating and being curious as to "why it bothered me".

It is one thing to hold a belief that it is "no big deal" for yourself, and be OK with the single player cheating you as DM.  However to then even suggest to the group (2 or more) that they also should consider it no big deal either seems to be pushing an agenda... a bad agenda IMO on top of that!

Bottom line, in trying to (over) accommodate the cheating player, you would loose a different player instead who believes cheating is just plain WRONG (not a play style).  Depending on your group status quo, you could easily loose even more by trying to appease the cheater rather than possibly loosing the cheater by confronting them.  In terms of group stability and "fun" that seems counter intuitive to me.



From my perspective as a DM, it would bother me because I host games in my home.  If this person will cheat (lie) about something as trivial as a game, what else might they do?   Will they smoke in my bathrooms instead of going outside (I am a non-smoker and very sensitive to smoke)?  Will they toss in $4 for pizza and claim they put in $10 like all the rest and have us make up the difference?  Will a miniature that they really like disappear from my collection one night?  Where did that new $40 WotC book go that I just bought?  I believe tolerating it is just asking it to escalate, human nature is to continue to push the envelope further and further; not to reach a certain level and be content.  I would have to speak directly (and privately) to the player and have it cease or them leave.


----------



## Wyrmshadows (Sep 8, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> I admit, I'm not using the term "play style" in the typical fashion. I could probably find a better term. But it's really just semantics. Some people consider powergaming to be essentially cheating. If someone designs a really powerful character so that his die rolls don't really matter (he'll succeed regardless), that's basically the same situation.




Brother you are reeeaaacching.

Though I offer the smackdown to munchkinism at my table, if something is in the rules it is by default not cheating to use it. Even using the letter of the rule as opposed to the spirit of the rule isn't cheating as such behavior is often exploiting a loophole. Correcting this kind of thing is the DMs job because designers cannot fix every loophole and many DMs don't want them to. That such loopholes are abused in the game is the fault of weak DMs as much as it is te fault of the munchkins.

Cheating is a direct and deceitful breaking of agreed upon rules....period. Saying "I rolled a 18" when you rolled a 6 is cheating...period.
A player lying about any roll is cheating...period...no matter what the cheater's motivation or psychological state.

Allowing one person to cheat is the most egregious form of favoritism. If the DM allows one player to make up rolls as she goes then why shouldn't every player be allowed to decide their own rolls? If that is the case, then why not have everyone just sit around telling each other stories and drop the pretense of rolling dice?

Too add, I do not care if cheating causes "objective" damage or not. The whole objective versuse subjective damage thing is a red herring. Cheating damages the subjective enjoyment of the game on the part of the DM as well as that of the players willing to play by the rules. That's it. Cheating doesn't have to lead to kicking someone's dog, keying their car, arson, or eating your sister's baby to be wrong. Cheating is wrong. We know it is wrong even when we can't articulate social contract theories in order to intuit the reality that a player cheating at D&D while everyone else at the table is playing by the rules is wrong.



Wyrmshadows


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 8, 2008)

cougent said:


> From my perspective as a DM, it would bother me because I host games in my home.  If this person will cheat (lie) about something as trivial as a game, what else might they do?   Will they smoke in my bathrooms instead of going outside (I am a non-smoker and very sensitive to smoke)?  Will they toss in $4 for pizza and claim they put in $10 like all the rest and have us make up the difference?  Will a miniature that they really like disappear from my collection one night?  Where did that new $40 WotC book go that I just bought?  I believe tolerating it is just asking it to escalate, human nature is to continue to push the envelope further and further; not to reach a certain level and be content.  I would have to speak directly (and privately) to the player and have it cease or them leave.



This is an excellent point, BTW.  One that I hadn't considered, yet it seems so obvious now.


----------



## Elrohir_of_Kellemar (Sep 9, 2008)

We had a player sneak into the desk of our DM to find out where treasure and traps were as well as what door to enter and such. He was simply amazing in his ability to make wonderous suggestions and find such powerful magic items. Gee, he even showed extreme intelligence in solving puzzles. 

It all ended when the DM changed placement of items and rooms before one of our sessions. The player stopped playing with us. Not all cheating is equal.

Players lose respect for someone who cheats (and for DMs who allow it). They don't just lose respect for that player in game, but as a person outside the game as well. You are doing the player a service if you can correct their behavior before they lose the respect and friendship of the other players. This is especially true if you are all good friends.

Obryn - I think you have things pretty well handled in your mind and some of the comments have probably made that more so in their own way. Good luck - DMing sure requires a lot of skills, and 4ED doesn't affect some of them.


----------



## MadMaxim (Sep 9, 2008)

To answer Obryn's question: Try your "cheering players" idea for a little while and if it doesn't produce any positive results, I'd take a face-to-face chat with her about the problem. She needs to know that it isn't okay to cheat and if she can't accept that, she'll have to find some other people to play with, because you prefer players you can trust.

And concerning the whole cheating issue in general: Stating facts as something else is just plain wrong. If you can't stick to the facts (the number you rolled on the die), you need to find another type of game to suit your needs.


----------



## the Jester (Sep 9, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> That's easy enough to say. But in reality, the tastes of different players will not match up 100%. And what if you can't find a group that shares the majority of your tastes? Or what if there's only one group in your area? Do you accept that you just don't get to play, or do you try to play anyway, with a group that doesn't share your preferences?




Let's put it this way: if you want to cheat in my game, you are OUT OF MY GAME.

If you can't find a group that accepts your "preferred playstyle" because it's cheating, maybe it's time to accept that cheating isn't a playstyle at all. "Cheating" means that, instead of playing the same game as everyone else, you are lying to them- claiming that you are playing the same game as them- but making up rules that only apply to yourself.

Seriously- is your position that, if you want to cheat at dnd and the rest of the group won't accept that, you have the right to impose your cheating on their game anyway?

Seriously, do you let people cheat when you play them at chess?


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 9, 2008)

the Jester said:


> Seriously- is your position that, if you want to cheat at dnd and the rest of the group won't accept that, you have the right to impose your cheating on their game anyway?



No, as I have stated several times, my point is that the solution to the problem is not automatically to boot the player or trick her into not cheating. If it's easier (on the whole) to just ignore it, then that's probably easier for everyone involved, because it's really not a big deal to imagine things in a slightly different way than they would have otherwise been imagined.



the Jester said:


> Seriously, do you let people cheat when you play them at chess?



If chess were a cooperative game played solely in the imaginations of the players, maybe.


----------



## jmucchiello (Sep 9, 2008)

the Jester said:


> That's why there are different gaming groups.



Doesn't that cut both ways?



cougent said:


> Although I completely disagree with your assessment up until this point it seemed to at least be consistent.  "Why make a big deal over something one player does that bothers almost no one" (my paraphrase of all your posts).  But now you _seem_ to be crossing your own boundaries and going out of your way to accommodate the cheater with the statement "I would also ask the others "why does it bother you?" If it's something you can easily get over, we'd all be better off if you got over it. On either side."  I would personally be extremely offended if a DM asked me to just "go along" with another player cheating and being curious as to "why it bothered me".



And yet, anecdotally, I already said I did exactly that with my group when we caught a player cheating. We (the other players and I) had an out of game powwow about "what to do about it". And I asked everyone standing there, "If that's how so-and-so needs to play to have fun, is it really a deal breaker?" Do you pitch your 15+ year relationship with him over cheating at a silly game? Yes, at first they reacted "But he's cheating." But at the point of kick your friend when he's down or learn to live with it, they all were willing to live with it.

I suppose the difference is I didn't put on my DM hat and say "we will do nothing." So it isn't exactly as you described. My only concern about it was that we would hang our friend out to dry as it were.

Again, I don't want you to think I'm a Kumbaya-singing** fool. There's friendship and there's things that cross the line. Another player was driving to game drunk and stepping our for a cig (and a drink) during game. Him we asked to get help and asked not to return until he got it.

** Firefox's spellchecker doesn't recognize Kumbaya. Suggestions: Lumbago or Scumbag.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 9, 2008)

cougent said:


> But now you _seem_ to be crossing your own boundaries and going out of your way to accommodate the cheater with the statement "I would also ask the others "why does it bother you?" If it's something you can easily get over, we'd all be better off if you got over it. On either side."  I would personally be extremely offended if a DM asked me to just "go along" with another player cheating and being curious as to "why it bothered me".



You're reading into my post something that isn't there. I'm not suggesting favouring the one player. I'm saying that if the other players really don't mind very much, it might be easier to just ignore it. What's the harm in asking?

If the other players have serious problems with it, then obviously that doesn't work. I'm just saying that "CHEATER BE GONE!!!" is hardly the only option in such a situation.



cougent said:


> Bottom line, in trying to (over) accommodate the cheating player, you would loose a different player instead who believes cheating is just plain WRONG (not a play style).



If such a player is in the group, maybe. I'm not saying that the cheater must be accommodated. All I'm saying is that you should consider accommodating. As a counter-point to all the "boot her from the table!" comments.


----------



## cougent (Sep 9, 2008)

jmucchiello and Fifth Element, you guys _may_ just be better people than I am, but for a whole long laundry list of RL events (aka getting screwed over) I have ZERO tolerance for liars, and at the root that is what cheaters are is liars.  I have seen the escalation happen far too many times to naively think it will stop at simple dice rolls once in a while.  It may start as 2 per game, then it will be 5, then it will be a natural 20 on every single roll.  So yes my 45 year old life and 27 year DM philosophy is to nip it in the bud and cut my losses.

Now having said that, all of my close friends know this of me and new friends learn it quickly.  I do consider all of my gamers as friends and this particular situation has never come up in a game.  If it did though, I would have to question the true level of friendship from such a person who would find it necessary to do that.  I understand your points of "If I am a good friend I will ignore it" (again my paraphrase); but I would reverse it back to you that "If they were truly my friend, they would not do that in the first place."

EDIT:  I forgot, on reference to the boot them from the table, that would be a last resort after a couple of private and polite conversations to try and avoid that, but yes if it cannot be resolved by any other means other than accepting the cheating then ultimately I would resort to that.


----------



## Parlan (Sep 9, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> But "cheating" is a very broad term. If you're talking about cheating on your taxes, I agree with you. Cheating in a game that ultimately doesn't really matter in any important sense? Not the same thing.




Funnily enough, I think the opposite.  Cheating on taxes is illegal, but I wouldn't think less of a friend who did it. 

Cheating at D&D tho is like welching on a bet.  I just can't forgive it.


----------



## Moggthegob (Sep 9, 2008)

I have only cheated in one game I ever played in ever. And that was because the group was large and the playstyle made me nervous.

I am mostly an rper and I was playing in a group where everyone's aim was to power-game. I still liked the game, and I liked my characters ,but always always it felt like  I was an insignifiant member of the party. 

It seemed like the only way to stand out or even get to be part of the story was to fudge rolls. The DM only ever actively ivolved the party leader in the plot. Everyone else gotto nothing, and as someone who doesnt often to play humans, I suffered more due to the DM's sensibilities on "how things work"( and don't get me started on magic, if you werent a sorceror, you didn't get spells....EVER). 

Once again, I didn;t want to leave the group but I didnt want to change my playstyle. SO I contnued to fudge rolls and I got to stand out and I got to be part of the story. ANd I stopped dying( death occured often in this game)

So really as a result of pressure and a want to be involved in the game beyond rolling dice at the margins of the game, I felt like I HAD to cheat to actually get any enjoyment out ofthe game. Ironically, everyone was so wrapped up in their own stuf, they didnt even realize I was cheating until a new player joined and pointed it out.

This group has since split due to edition wars and I only game with one of them now.


----------



## Crosswind (Sep 9, 2008)

Obryn, Fifth, etc:

I think there's a fairly simple solution.  It involves a conversation like this:

"Hey, X.  We've noticed that you keep stating that the numbers on your dice are higher than they are.  You're our friend, and if it's that important to succeed, we're willing to support you - just let us know, and you can re-roll any dice you want, or just state the number you get.  However, if it's not that important, we'd prefer that you stick to saying the number that actually comes up on your dice."

That way, FifthElement is happy - if they really just want to get really high numbers, they'll take the option.

And, everybody else is happy, 'cause it's no longer cheating. =)

-Cross (This is really just a way of pointing out that there's a difference between a player goal of "I want to roll really high and have my character succeed!", and "I want to be dishonest to my friends.")


----------



## Arnwyn (Sep 9, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> That's easy enough to say. But in reality, the tastes of different players will not match up 100%.



Who said anything about "100%"?




> And what if you can't find a group that shares the majority of your tastes? Or what if there's only one group in your area? Do you accept that you just don't get to play, or do you try to play anyway, with a group that doesn't share your preferences?



A possibility one might have to live with, if one has fringe tastes.


----------



## Rel (Sep 9, 2008)

With due respect to Fifth Element and jmucchiello, I think there is a bit of a false dichotomy being set up regarding accepting this behavior or losing a friend.  Not accepting the cheating at the game table does not have to equate with losing the friend.  It might result in that but, if it did, I don't think that the onus is on the non-cheater.

If I were to learn that one of my players had a habit of cheating then I'd talk with them about it and ask that it stop.  If it did not stop then I would simply tell them that I wasn't willing to game with them anymore.  I wouldn't stop inviting them to cookouts or birthday parties.  I wouldn't ask that they be excluded from the annual Christmas drawing.  I wouldn't refuse to help them move furniture.  We could still be friends.  I just wouldn't game with them unless and until they agreed not to engage in the cheating anymore.

Now, it's possible that by me refusing to game with them that THEY would choose not to continue the friendship.  And that would be very sad.  But that is on their shoulders, not mine.  It is them who is choosing to not be friends over "something as silly as a game".

A big part of my philosophy regarding friends is that we are here to support each other.  But that doesn't mean "right or wrong".  It means we pat each other on the back for doing right and we call each other out for doing wrong.  A stranger isn't going to do you the courtesy of telling you that you're acting out of selfishness, greed or malice.  The times that my friends told me that I was doing something that was beneath me, those were the times that I knew I had good friends.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 9, 2008)

Rel said:


> I think there is a bit of a false dichotomy being set up regarding accepting this behavior or losing a friend.  Not accepting the cheating at the game table does not have to equate with losing the friend.  It might result in that but, if it did, I don't think that the onus is on the non-cheater.
> 
> <snipped for length, but assumed to be part of quote>
> 
> A big part of my philosophy regarding friends is that we are here to support each other.  But that doesn't mean "right or wrong".  It means we pat each other on the back for doing right and we call each other out for doing wrong.  A stranger isn't going to do you the courtesy of telling you that you're acting out of selfishness, greed or malice.  The times that my friends told me that I was doing something that was beneath me, those were the times that I knew I had good friends.



This.  

In other threads, I agree with Fifth Element almost all of the time, but in this one I disagree.  I have been having a hard time with the connection between asking a player not to cheat and losing friends.  One doesn't begat the other.

I would say that, as friends (especially close friends), that we have right, and possibly a responsibility, to call out cheating when it occurs.  Unchecked cheating could develop into real world problems that can have a profound effect on jobs, marriages, life.

I haven't suggested going right to exiling the player from the table, but if they continue after have an honest, kind but frank talk about it, the cheater has made a conscious decision about gaming with the rest of the group, if not the friendship in general.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 9, 2008)

Crosswind said:


> "Hey, X.  We've noticed that you keep stating that the numbers on your dice are higher than they are.  You're our friend, and if it's that important to succeed, we're willing to support you - just let us know, and you can re-roll any dice you want, or just state the number you get.  However, if it's not that important, we'd prefer that you stick to saying the number that actually comes up on your dice."
> 
> That way, FifthElement is happy - if they really just want to get really high numbers, they'll take the option.



I would be happy with that. I've probably not been clear enough with my point, which is that "boot the cheater!" is rarely the best reaction to the situation. Talking to everyone involved to see if something can be worked out is far superior.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 9, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> In other threads, I agree with Fifth Element almost all of the time, but in this one I disagree.  I have been having a hard time with the connection between asking a player not to cheat and losing friends.  One doesn't begat the other.
> 
> I would say that, as friends (especially close friends), that we have right, and possibly a responsibility, to call out cheating when it occurs.  Unchecked cheating could develop into real world problems that can have a profound effect on jobs, marriages, life.



I believe that the 'losing friends' argument was jmucchiello's. Though I don't subscribe to the idea that if someone cheats at something as trivial as a game, what else will they cheat at? In my view, someone is more likely to cheat at something that doesn't really matter, such as a game, than something more important.

My point here actually applies best when you are gaming with friends: since you're friends, you can openly discuss what's going on, rather than just "boot the cheater!" or "trick her into not cheating!"


----------



## Oryan77 (Sep 9, 2008)

Cheating is a playstyle now? 

As much as some people are defending cheaters, why do I not believe them? If you guys are looking for a new player and you meet a guy that seems like a good player, but he tells you, "BTW, I cheat when I roll my dice....I cheat a LOT and I will probably cheat every time you ask me to roll a save.", you will allow him into your game? 

I don't believe this "cheating is ok" opinion a bit. It seems more like someone trying to get attention on the internet by being radical. I don't even think a cheater would enjoy DMing someone who is cheating in their campaign


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 9, 2008)

Oryan77 said:


> Cheating is a playstyle now?
> 
> As much as some people are defending cheaters, why do I not believe them? If you guys are looking for a new player and you meet a guy that seems like a good player, but he tells you, "BTW, I cheat when I roll my dice....I cheat a LOT and I will probably cheat every time you ask me to roll a save.", you will allow him into your game?



Please read the two posts immediately before yours for a succinct summary of my position. It appears you're a way back in the thread and haven't caught up with the discussion.


----------



## Janx (Sep 9, 2008)

Rel said:


> With due respect to Fifth Element and jmucchiello, I think there is a bit of a false dichotomy being set up regarding accepting this behavior or losing a friend.  Not accepting the cheating at the game table does not have to equate with losing the friend.  It might result in that but, if it did, I don't think that the onus is on the non-cheater.
> 
> If I were to learn that one of my players had a habit of cheating then I'd talk with them about it and ask that it stop.  If it did not stop then I would simply tell them that I wasn't willing to game with them anymore.  I wouldn't stop inviting them to cookouts or birthday parties.  I wouldn't ask that they be excluded from the annual Christmas drawing.  I wouldn't refuse to help them move furniture.  We could still be friends.  I just wouldn't game with them unless and until they agreed not to engage in the cheating anymore.
> 
> ...




This pretty much says what I've been trying to say.  Well said!

I have a responsibility to handle the situation tactfully.
I have a right to not accept bad behavior.

It's really that simple.


----------



## Nifft (Sep 9, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Please read the two posts immediately before yours for a succinct summary of my position. It appears you're a way back in the thread and haven't caught up with the discussion.



 Skipping to the bottom of the thread might just be his posting style.

How dare you trouble his inner child for trying to express itself.

, -- N


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 9, 2008)

Nifft said:


> Skipping to the bottom of the thread might just be his posting style.
> 
> How dare you trouble his inner child for trying to express itself.



Hey, I could have said "Boot him from the thread!" or "I don't tolerate people who don't read every post!"

But that's not my style.


----------



## Fifth Element (Sep 9, 2008)

Janx said:


> I have a responsibility to handle the situation tactfully.
> I have a right to not accept bad behavior.
> 
> It's really that simple.



The first point is what I've been trying to say. "Boot her from the table" is not tactful.

The second part seems simple enough. Just don't get hung up on something being "bad" if it really doesn't matter.

I consider smoking to be "bad behaviour". One of my players smokes. I don't chastise him for it. The smell of smoke (smokers always smell of smoke) bothers a couple of the other players a bit, but it's not really a big deal. So it's not an issue for us.


----------



## Voadam (Sep 9, 2008)

Obryn said:


> I'll see how this works - but I'm looking for input from other DMs and players.  How have you handled cheaters in the past, if they were otherwise decent players and okay human beings?
> 
> -O



I used to have a friend in our game who was a habitual liar. He would lie to make himself seem better. He would make stuff up on the spot to try to pass off that he was an expert about something he knew nothing about. He would exaggerate things he had done when retelling them to make himself sound cooler.

In games he would lie about die rolls. His character sheet would change between sessions with higher attributes, hp, xp, and better equipment. He would buy the module the DM was running to find out where treasure was hidden and to know what monsters he would face and what NPCs he could push around with impunity.

We didn't want to boot him from the group or get into arguments all the time but it did bug us and it bugged me.

I disliked the changing of his characters. I disliked feeling that everybody else risked bad things happening to their characters but feeling that he would likely cheat his way out of them if he could (particularly when I was a player facing having bad things happening to my character). I disliked being lied to.

In reaction to this I changed the way I ran games to reduce the opportunities for cheating and lieing.

I requested die rolls from everybody in front of me so I could see them. 

I would occasionally ask for a die roll by die size but not say what it was for (earlier D&D editions had some checks with high rolls for success and some requiring low rolls for success).

I would keep PC character sheets between sessions.

I would change things from the default in the modules.

I was quite happy with point buy options for character generation and when we switched to a flat amount of hp increase per level instead of rolling.

Minimizing the opportunities for cheating reduced the cheating and lieing.

I was happier for it.


----------



## Storm Raven (Sep 9, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> My point here actually applies best when you are gaming with friends: since you're friends, you can openly discuss what's going on, rather than just "boot the cheater!" or "trick her into not cheating!"




Someone who is willing to cheat over something as trivial as a game is not someone who I would want to be friends with. And if I have to come with ways to be a hall monitor and watch over them to keep them from cheating, I don't see why I would want to spend my leisure time with them either.

Boot them. Forthwith. There isn't enough gaming time available to spend it teaching people lessons they should have learned in grade school.


----------



## Kishin (Sep 9, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Please note, the pop psychology came from jmucchiello, and although I agree with him in principle I don't necessarily support how he makes the argument.
> 
> 
> Which is fine and good, but overcoming the deception by more deception (pretend to cheer her on, but really just check what she rolls) is pretty crappy.
> ...




If there's no chance of failure, what's the point? Might as just let everyone pick their dice roll and have no repercussions whatsoever for just naming '20' every time.

Obviously the randomness is an important element to the game as a whole, and to the OP's party. That's why it bothers them. They have every right to correct it, even if hashes the one player's mellow. They shouldn't have to accept her violating a precept of the game, one they mutually ascribe importance to.

This 'give the baby its bottle'  treatment is a little disgusting to me, in all honesty.


----------



## El Mahdi (Sep 9, 2008)

Storm Raven said:


> Someone who is willing to cheat over something as trivial as a game is not someone who I would want to be friends with. And if I have to come with ways to be a hall monitor and watch over them to keep them from cheating, I don't see why I would want to spend my leisure time with them either.
> 
> Boot them. Forthwith. There isn't enough gaming time available to spend it teaching people lessons they should have learned in grade school.




I gave my opinion earlier in the thread with my preference of the group oversight/cheering option.  However, I have to say, I'm normally not a judgemental person, but if this was my group, and they weren't a friend, and they wouldn't stop, it would be absolutely _"Asta la Vista"_, without a doubt.  If it were a friend, I'd probably want to know why they were doing this, in case there was something bigger going on.  And, if they were a _close_ friend, I wouldn't be afraid of losing a friendship over speaking up about it (if the friendship ended because of this, I don't think they were that good a friend in the first place).  If I already knew that there was something bigger going on, and there was nothing to be done about it, the only option I see is live with it, and maybe use the group oversight/cheering option.  But besides all of this, I know I would _want_ to say "what the hell are you doing", and toss them out on their .  Hopefully, I've matured beyond this, but I'd be tempted.


----------



## Oryan77 (Sep 9, 2008)

Nifft said:


> Skipping to the bottom of the thread might just be his posting style.
> 
> How dare you trouble his inner child for trying to express itself.




Actually, I like to read every post in a thread. But after visiting Enworld for several years and realizing how long winded we all are and how we repeat ourselves post after post, my new posting/reading style has been to read the first couple of pages, skip the middle pages, and finish off with the last page 

So I did read his last 2 posts before I posted 

His first 20 or so posts were about how he doesn't have a problem with cheaters and the OP should just deal with the cheating cause it's not that big a deal. Then his last 2 posts were about how he was _really_ only talking about friends that cheat & how you should talk to them. By the end of the thread, I was still convinced that they are only claiming to be pro-cheating for the forum shock value. I didn't think that they really tolerated cheating players as if it was just a gaming style.

I'm sure, even if their _"friend"_ who wants to join their group, had a _"conversation"_ about how he will be constantly cheating if he's allowed into their group, these guys aren't going to just say, "Oh yer gonna cheat if you join our game? We're good friends so it sounds fine to me!"


----------



## Delta (Sep 9, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> The first point is what I've been trying to say. "Boot her from the table" is not tactful...
> 
> I consider smoking to be "bad behaviour". One of my players smokes. I don't chastise him for it. The smell of smoke (smokers always smell of smoke) bothers a couple of the other players a bit, but it's not really a big deal. So it's not an issue for us.




Totally disgree with the first point. Tactful booting: "It looks like you're not having fun, and I don't think this group is a good fit for you. I think it would be best if you not come anymore, but I hope you can find another group to play with. Maybe we could catch a movie sometime?" Un-tactful booting: "You stupid @#%#$%^ #$^%#$%. You're ugly and you're #$%#$ #@$%#$%."

It's exactly like your smoking issue. Tactful: "Oh, I'm afraid I don't allow smoking in this house. You'll have to step outside for that." Un-tactful: "You filthy smoker! You @#%#@$% stink! How 'bout I give you $%#$ cancer!" 

Over the past few years, I've had to fire a number of people from my punk band (for, say, skipping rehearsal half the time). So I get a whole lot of practice at this. And I've learned it's always the sooner, the more open/honest/direct, the better, and the easier. I'm still friends and do stuff with all the people I've tactfully fired like this.


----------



## SkidAce (Sep 10, 2008)

Will there be an update on the situation?

Just curious as to how well the "chosen" action workds/doen't work.

Not that it would be indicative of all situations, with so many variables in gaming groups.

Still....curious.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 10, 2008)

SkidAce said:


> Will there be an update on the situation?
> 
> Just curious as to how well the "chosen" action workds/doen't work.
> 
> ...



Gaming's tomorrow, and I'll let you folks know.

-O


----------



## Janx (Sep 10, 2008)

Delta said:


> Totally disgree with the first point. Tactful booting: "It looks like you're not having fun, and I don't think this group is a good fit for you. I think it would be best if you not come anymore, but I hope you can find another group to play with. Maybe we could catch a movie sometime?" Un-tactful booting: "You stupid @#%#$%^ #$^%#$%. You're ugly and you're #$%#$ #@$%#$%."
> 
> It's exactly like your smoking issue. Tactful: "Oh, I'm afraid I don't allow smoking in this house. You'll have to step outside for that." Un-tactful: "You filthy smoker! You @#%#@$% stink! How 'bout I give you $%#$ cancer!"
> 
> Over the past few years, I've had to fire a number of people from my punk band (for, say, skipping rehearsal half the time). So I get a whole lot of practice at this. And I've learned it's always the sooner, the more open/honest/direct, the better, and the easier. I'm still friends and do stuff with all the people I've tactfully fired like this.





though this thread finally died...Delta makes an excellent observation.  Gaming is NOT the only activity that suffers from "problem people."  I'm active on a musician forum, and like Delta says bands are FULL of flaky people, for often the exact same behaviors.

Dealing with these people is a skill.  Try to correc the problem.  Try to deflect the person from the problem area (Voadam seems to be doing this).  Lastly, eject the problem person.  They just aren't going to work.


----------



## Rel (Sep 10, 2008)

Oryan77 said:


> Actually, I like to read every post in a thread. But after visiting Enworld for several years and realizing how long winded we all are and how we repeat ourselves post after post, my new posting/reading style has been to read the first couple of pages, skip the middle pages, and finish off with the last page
> 
> So I did read his last 2 posts before I posted
> 
> ...




Oryan, I find it difficult to imagine agreeing up front to accept someone (even a close friend) into my gaming group when they openly claim cheating as their playstyle.  However there is nothing to be gained by claiming that Fifth Element doesn't believe what he is saying and, moreover, it is against the rules of the forum.  So drop this line of reasoning.


----------



## vagabundo (Sep 10, 2008)

I have a unrepentant cheater in my group, he is a good friend and generally contributes very constructively to the game. However he does change dice rolls if he can and his character sheet is in dire need of an Audit.

First off: it does not bother me all that much or my players at all. He is like this in real life and you either love him for it or hate him – and  he rubs quite a number of people up the wrong way. I’ve incorporated it into my game and make jokes about “Auditing his character sheets” and about the “roll and move technique from RPGcheaters.com”.

I’ve caught him a number of times doing the “roll and move” and it is an auto failure and usually some other penalties I think up on the spot. Funnily enough, sometimes he would have hit or passed a skill check on the original roll.

I’ve told him he has to declare his rolls and I watch him roll the dice. I don’t get into the swamp that is his character sheet too much, if it bothered me I would Audit it periodically.

Saying that, it is part of my game now and it doesn’t take away from the enjoyment of the other players – it is like a game within the game. It sounds like you should take more direct measures as your other players do not like it. The key word here is direct.


----------



## Arnwyn (Sep 10, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> The first point is what I've been trying to say. "Boot her from the table" is not tactful.



Number of posts in this thread out of 163 in which "booting" has been the only suggestion: 6/163 = 3.7% of the posts in this thread - and almost all of them by the same person. All others, if booting was even brought up, noted such an action as being a last resort.



> The second part seems simple enough. Just don't get hung up on something being "bad" if it really doesn't matter.



It has long since been noted that Obryn's OP, as well as his/her subsequent posts, were more than clear on this particular issue.

I have absolutely no idea why you are bringing up the "points" you are in this thread.


----------



## Oryan77 (Sep 10, 2008)

Rel said:


> Oryan, I find it difficult to imagine agreeing up front to accept someone (even a close friend) into my gaming group when they openly claim cheating as their playstyle.  However there is nothing to be gained by claiming that Fifth Element doesn't believe what he is saying and, moreover, it is against the rules of the forum.  So drop this line of reasoning.




It's now against the rules to say "I don't believe what someone is posting is true"? Rather than constantly telling us what we can't post here on Enworld, why don't you guys just tell us what we can post? That should make the Enworld crews job easier and you don't have to do things like post sticky threads telling us what not to talk about.  I swear, you guys make your job way harder than it needs to be.

Not a single swear word in my post, not a single attack against a persons character, I never mentioned anyones name, I never called anyone any names, and I wasn't even trolling...yet I'm being warned by a moderator about my posting behavior? 

Why don't you guys just make Enworld a private "friends-circle" only forum so the rest of us don't bother you with our differing personalities? I mean this is really childish and getting out of hand. I really am offended that I'm being warned for simply stating that I don't believe what a poster is saying is true. You're making it seem like I'm a troll or something for giving my opinion. What in the world is a forum for then if we are only able to say what other people want to here? Why bother running a _public_ forum if you can't be grown ups and let people have adult conversations? 

I don't like dealing with trolls and flames like the rest, which is why I don't visit WotC RPG forums, but it doesn't make a forum any better if people are overly-sensitive and intolerant. It makes you just as bad as the WotC forums, only on the opposite side of the spectrum. Enworld used to be a middle ground which is why I liked visiting. This is incredible and I'm not the only poster I've seen this happen to in recent months.

I apologize to those that are bothered by this post and might find me annoying. But getting warned like this surprises me and frankly, I'm tired of seeing posters here being told that everything they say is against the rules now.  No wonder it's so hard to make friends on these kind of forums when you're not part of the veteran posters circle. I'm sure I'm breaking some kind of rule here, so if this is cause for a ban, I apologize for speaking my mind & defending myself in this thread, and I will go back into my hole and deal with the repercussions. I don't mean to derail the thread.


----------



## Storm Raven (Sep 10, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> Number of posts in this thread out of 163 in which "booting" has been the only suggestion: 6/163 = 3.7% of the posts in this thread - and almost all of them by the same person. All others, if booting was even brought up, noted such an action as being a last resort.




Yep, that'd be me.

Here's the thing, a lot of people say things like "he's a great player and great to have around, except that he cheats". To me, that's not a great player, or even an acceptable player. To me, that's like saying "he's a great guy to hang out with, except that he pees on the floor". Or "he's a great player, except that he likes to talk about his graphic rape fantasies". Cheating, like peeing on the floor, is just a non-starter for me. Once you start doing that, then you just aren't worth bothering with any more.


----------



## Old Gumphrey (Sep 10, 2008)

Yeah...I honestly can't believe that people are actually defending cheating. You can rationalize it however you like, but cheating is cheating, and cheating isn't acceptable. Playstyle? Seriously, I laughed out loud in a quiet computer lab.

Maybe I'll sleep until 12:30 and show up at my 9 to 5 at 1:15 in jeans and a t-shirt and tell the boss to shove off, because this is my work style, and who is he to tell me no? Better yet, I think I'll go buy a hooker and bring her home, then tell my wife that it's my marriage style, and she should just look the other way. I'm sure that'll work out.



Oryan77 said:


> Why don't you guys just make Enworld a private "friends-circle" only forum so the rest of us don't bother you with our differing personalities? I mean this is really childish and getting out of hand. I really am offended that I'm being warned for simply stating that I don't believe what a poster is saying is true. You're making it seem like I'm a troll or something for giving my opinion. What in the world is a forum for then if we are only able to say what other people want to here? Why bother running a _public_ forum if you can't be grown ups and let people have adult conversations?
> 
> I don't like dealing with trolls and flames like the rest, which is why I don't visit WotC RPG forums, but it doesn't make a forum any better if people are overly-sensitive and intolerant. It makes you just as bad as the WotC forums, only on the opposite side of the spectrum. Enworld used to be a middle ground which is why I liked visiting. This is incredible and I'm not the only poster I've seen this happen to in recent months.




I'm very sad to say I have noticed and experienced this as well, when I was told (not asked) _what to think_ by a moderator, claiming that it was "against forum policy" to think otherwise. It really is incredible, and it really is getting out of hand. When rpg.net starts to look friendly, EnWorld has failed.


----------



## Rel (Sep 10, 2008)

Oryan77 said:


> It's now against the rules to say "I don't believe what someone is posting is true"? Rather than constantly telling us what we can't post here on Enworld, why don't you guys just tell us what we can post? That should make the Enworld crews job easier and you don't have to do things like post sticky threads telling us what not to talk about.  I swear, you guys make your job way harder than it needs to be.
> 
> Not a single swear word in my post, not a single attack against a persons character, I never mentioned anyones name, I never called anyone any names, and I wasn't even trolling...yet I'm being warned by a moderator about my posting behavior?
> 
> ...




Well now you've broken a very well known rule and so I've banned you for 3 days.  I really wish I hadn't had to do that.

In answer to what it is you did wrong before, we do not permit ascribing motives to other people's posts.  Why?  Because if we allow that to happen then discussion frequently devolves into nothing but bickering about "I don't think you believe what you're suggesting.  I think you're just playing devil's advocate."  Right after that we tend to see a long string of "AM NOT!" and "ARE TOO!"

I'm sorry you felt so put upon.  You might note that I didn't ban you for the earlier infraction.  I didn't ban you from this thread.  I didn't even use the "angry red text".  I simply asked that you not follow that line of reasoning.  I think we've seen it amply demonstrated that there are plenty of ways to disagree with Fifth Element's position without calling into question what motives he has for making his posts.

In terms of it not being a personal attack, I'll admit that it wasn't loud or vociferous.  But you were basically saying that Fifth Element is a disingenous liar and whoring for attention.  Who knows?  Maybe he is.  And you're welcome to think so.  I'm not telling you what to think.  I'm telling you what you're not allowed to post.

If you don't care for that restriction or aren't willing to acknowledge that it makes ENWorld a more productive place, then I guess you might want to find another forum to post at.  Circvs Maximvs might be a good option for you.  There you can tell people that they don't really believe what they are saying all you like.  I don't think that it will earn you a lot of respect.  But, at the very least, you can go there and post all manner of nasty things about me.

Might be worth considering.

Old Gumphrey, I'm not going to ban you for quoting that bit and complaining about the moderation in a thread (btw, folks are always welcome to complain about moderation via e-mail, just not in a thread).  But I'd recommend you cut that out right now.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 10, 2008)

Hey, guys - please don't hose up my thread about cheating with moderation complaints.

I'd rather not see it locked, so please find a new location for your Hidden Rebel Base.  (I hear Hoth is nice this time of year.)

-O

edit: And Rel ninja'd me.  Stinking, rotten moderators!


----------



## MadMaxim (Sep 10, 2008)

Well, this thread seems to have devolved into the very thing that Rel has been saying. Some people believe there's a deeper reason behind Obryn's player's cheating. Others are basically calling her on it and want to tell her to stop it or boot her as a last resort. I think that's really what you can boil this six-page thread down to at the moment.


----------



## cougent (Sep 10, 2008)

In a more direct response to the OP, I have had players who for whatever reasons decided to do exactly what the OP is proposing.  To my knowledge there was no cheating going on, but I just have nosy players who want to see and blab every detail they can get.  In a cross thread moment here, there is another thread about revealing DC or AC numbers, which I tend not to do.  However my players will work it out for themselves and gleefully announce it to the rest of the group...

"You need a 22 to hit, and your bonus is +8 right? so you just need a 14... oh man a 12, damn!"

This sort of cross chatter is very common for my group, so I don't see any problem with a contrived version of same for the OP if it works out for him.  I also don't see it as belittling or demeaning the player in question either.  In fact (putting on pop psychology hat) I see it as a positive reinforcement to do the right thing even if it results in bad consequences.  If the player sees that rolling bad does not cause the world to end, and if they are forced to reveal the true rolls, then maybe they will get used to it by shear repetition and unconsciously decide to do it on their own when the chance arises in the future? (taking hat off)


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 10, 2008)

cougent said:


> This sort of cross chatter is very common for my group, so I don't see any problem with a contrived version of same for the OP if it works out for him.  I also don't see it as belittling or demeaning the player in question either.  In fact (putting on pop psychology hat) I see it as a positive reinforcement to do the right thing even if it results in bad consequences.




My complaint about that option is that, depending on how the group is doing it, it may become very obvious that the cheating player is getting all of the attention when she rolls, which may end up being seen by her as a not-so-subtle way to punish her for cheating.  She'll probably realize very quickly that everybody knows she's cheating and that you've talked about it behind her back to come up with this "yell out her rolls" plan - and nobody likes finding out that they've been talked about behind their backs.  (Now, I'm not saying this is definitely how it'll play out, just that it's very possible.)

If you're trying to eliminate drama the best (IMO) way to do it is to implement a rule or behavior that affects everyone, not just the cheating player.  If you're going to have people calling out rolls for the cheater, encourage them to call out the rolls for other players as well.  Doing things that affect everyone will make the cheater feel less like she's being singled out and talked about behind her back.


----------



## Rel (Sep 10, 2008)

I don't recall if it's been suggested or not but you could just buy her some really big dice.

Rel "not compensating for something" Ooi


----------



## El Mahdi (Sep 11, 2008)

Rel said:


> I don't recall if it's been suggested or not but you could just buy her some really big dice.
> 
> Rel "not compensating for something" Ooi




Methinks the Rel doth protest too much!


----------



## roguerouge (Sep 11, 2008)

I find that my opinion is that it cheats the other players in the group from one chance to be heroes. One common way to be a hero is when the unlikely or plucky PC steps up when all seems lost. The PCs who cheat are making it less likely for genuine player heroics and less necessary for there to be creative risky thinking when the usual strategies don't work. Heroics requires accepting great risks. These players don't accept their characters running big risks to their characters.

Is this cheater fudging roles that another party member could be making? If so, that doubly stinks as that player is deliberately stealing the limelight from another player.

But let me be blunt: if a player cheats, repeatedly, and the players and the DM can't or won't stop it... _the social contract just changed to a state of nature._ When one person's fun counts more than any other person's good fun, there's absolutely no reason to cooperate with that selfish twit any more. It's every person looking out for their own fun.  

I'd get mad and then I'd get even. I'd stop supporting that person's character in combat because, after all, if they always succeed at what they do THEY'RE NOT IN REAL DANGER. I would do everything in my power to get that character killed. "Oops! You're in the fireball radius? I'm sorry. I am sure you can make your save!" Always within the rules.  

If repeated warnings and heart-felt conversations don't work, and people won't grow a spine, don't be surprised if one of your players pull out the long knives and administer some frontier justice.


----------



## roguerouge (Sep 11, 2008)

"If you're talking about cheating on your taxes, I agree with you. Cheating in a game that ultimately doesn't really matter in any important sense? Not the same thing."

Let me get this straight: A behavior that annoys many other people, causing them stress. It requires much agonizing on their part on how to handle it, causing more stress. Several people several times perform the intellectual and emotional labor to brainstorm to be polite and change Ms. Cheaty McCheatypants' behavior, thus taking time away from game prep, social time, and (possibly) work... And you say that there's no harm? None?

She's caused stress and reduced people's fun. And once she did it again after a first warning, she did it deliberately.


----------



## roguerouge (Sep 11, 2008)

Delta said:


> Totally disgree with the first point. Tactful booting: "It looks like you're not having fun, and I don't think this group is a good fit for you. I think it would be best if you not come anymore, but I hope you can find another group to play with. Maybe we could catch a movie sometime?" Un-tactful booting: "You stupid @#%#$%^ #$^%#$%. You're ugly and you're #$%#$ #@$%#$%."
> 
> It's exactly like your smoking issue. Tactful: "Oh, I'm afraid I don't allow smoking in this house. You'll have to step outside for that." Un-tactful: "You filthy smoker! You @#%#@$% stink! How 'bout I give you $%#$ cancer!"




For the win. The funniest thing that I've read at EnWorld in months.


----------



## cougent (Sep 11, 2008)

Merkuri said:


> My complaint about that option is that, depending on how the group is doing it, it may become very obvious that the cheating player is getting all of the attention when she rolls, which may end up being seen by her as a not-so-subtle way to punish her for cheating.  She'll probably realize very quickly that everybody knows she's cheating and that you've talked about it behind her back to come up with this "yell out her rolls" plan - and nobody likes finding out that they've been talked about behind their backs.  (Now, I'm not saying this is definitely how it'll play out, just that it's very possible.)
> 
> If you're trying to eliminate drama the best (IMO) way to do it is to implement a rule or behavior that affects everyone, not just the cheating player.  If you're going to have people calling out rolls for the cheater, encourage them to call out the rolls for other players as well.  Doing things that affect everyone will make the cheater feel less like she's being singled out and talked about behind her back.



I quite agree, and this is not the preferred method I would use either, I was just trying to demonstrate that the OP's idea could work.  In essence my group makes it work on their own without even trying.

I think there needs to be some detailed tweaking.  For instance the "caller" does not really need to announce every roll... a natural 20 is fine to stand on its own.  It might only be limited to the single digits (I believe the OP mentioned 7 becoming 17?).  A carefully placed "Oh crap that really sucks!" without even revealing the number rolled for sa y a 1 -5 might suffice.  The "caller" could also employ these tactics on his / her own rolls and occasionally on other players to keep the cheater from being isolated as well.


----------



## Delta (Sep 11, 2008)

roguerouge said:


> For the win. The funniest thing that I've read at EnWorld in months.




Ha!


----------



## Parlan (Sep 11, 2008)

Merkuri said:


> My complaint about that option is that, depending on how the group is doing it, it may become very obvious that the cheating player is getting all of the attention when she rolls, which may end up being seen by her as a not-so-subtle way to punish her for cheating.  She'll probably realize very quickly that everybody knows she's cheating and that you've talked about it behind her back to come up with this "yell out her rolls" plan - and nobody likes finding out that they've been talked about behind their backs.  (Now, I'm not saying this is definitely how it'll play out, just that it's very possible.)
> 
> If you're trying to eliminate drama the best (IMO) way to do it is to implement a rule or behavior that affects everyone, not just the cheating player.  If you're going to have people calling out rolls for the cheater, encourage them to call out the rolls for other players as well.  Doing things that affect everyone will make the cheater feel less like she's being singled out and talked about behind her back.




I see what you're saying, but doesn't that run the same risk?  If you're instituting a new table rule shortly after she's been caught cheating, isn't she likewise going to put two and two together?  

I think if I were the cheater, I'd put 2 and 2 together in either case, but be greatful that we didn't have a whole awkward conversation about it.  At least I would be after calm reflection.  

If the OP really thinks this player would get embarassed etc., a more devious method would be to have a plant.  Ask *another* player to start doing something underhand, like picking up dice waaaay too quickly.  After that happens once or twice, use that as the excuse to implement a "DM must see it" rule.  That way the rule is still implemented for all players, but it's not immediately obvious that the cheater was the cause.


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Sep 11, 2008)

I've only skimmed the thread, reading maybe a quarter of the posts, but has the OP mentioned the age of the player?  If she's young, maybe it's just a matter of waiting.

When I first began playing D&D, I cheated.  Not so much at the table, but (even worse) away from the table.  I'd up my PCs' ability scores, invent effects of supposed _wishes_, claim more wealth than I'd earned, and so on.

I grew out of it within a year or so.  Maybe the OP's player will, also.

I have a player who "cheats" simply due to a combination of wishful thinking and a failure to write things down as they're used.  (For example, he never seems to run out of action points.  Ever.)  Occasionally, I just tell him that since he's not keeping track, I'm guessing at what resources he has left, and then I guess deliberately low.  I figure eventually he'll figure out to track stuff, since I know he's not deliberately cheating.

FWIW, I'm with the "cheating isn't a valid playstyle" camp.  The social contract we have at the table is that we play by the rules, unless there is an explicit exception made (or if I fudge as DM, which I almost never do).  I also agree that the OP's solution is a pretty smart one, though (as a very direct person), I'd probably explain to the player why she's being baby-sat.


----------



## roguerouge (Sep 11, 2008)

Jeff Wilder said:


> I have a player who "cheats" simply due to a combination of wishful thinking and a failure to write things down as they're used.  (For example, he never seems to run out of action points.  Ever.)  Occasionally, I just tell him that since he's not keeping track, I'm guessing at what resources he has left, and then I guess deliberately low.  I figure eventually he'll figure out to track stuff, since I know he's not deliberately cheating.




How do your other players feel about this? Have they started growing action points and potion bottles too?


----------



## Jeff Wilder (Sep 11, 2008)

roguerouge said:


> How do your other players feel about this? Have they started growing action points and potion bottles too?



Nah.  We had a genuine cheater up until a few months ago, but due to personality conflicts (of which the cheating was a symptom) he's gone.  Far as I can tell, all the players in all three games in which I participate are basically honest (including the "accidental cheater" I mentioned).  A couple (including me) are scrupulous to the point of anal-retentiveness.  (I have one player who actually keeps a spreadsheet of every GP or XP earned and spent.)

Funny you mention potions ... now that you mention it, I do remember wondering how the cheating player always -- and I mean always -- had a spare _potion of cure serious wounds_ or two.  The rest of us use potions so rarely (they just never seem worth the cost of an action in combat) that I doubt any of us would bother with them, even if we were inclined to cheat.


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 11, 2008)

Parlan said:


> I see what you're saying, but doesn't that run the same risk?  If you're instituting a new table rule shortly after she's been caught cheating, isn't she likewise going to put two and two together?




With a new table rule (like "everyone roll in this shoebox lid") she will probably realize that the rule was made for her benefit, but a rule like that will not necessarily mean that EVERYONE at the table knows she was cheating, just the DM.  It's a way of trying to correct the behavior without singling out the cheater - somebody who was previously unaware of the cheating would probably suspect that somebody was cheating, but not who or how often.

Nothing you do will keep the cheater in the dark (at least not for long).  She'll know that people know she cheated in any case, the trick is to try and keep the perception that not many people know so you can reduce her embarrassment.

There's a big difference between, "Crap, the DM knows I've been cheating and made this rule to stop me," and, "Crap, they've been talking about me behind my back and are making fun of me by shouting out my rolls."  In both ways the cheater knows she's caught, but in one way she probably feels much worse.


----------



## Janx (Sep 11, 2008)

Merkuri said:


> There's a big difference between, "Crap, the DM knows I've been cheating and made this rule to stop me," and, "Crap, they've been talking about me behind my back and are making fun of me by shouting out my rolls."  In both ways the cheater knows she's caught, but in one way she probably feels much worse.




And what's wrong the cheater feeling bad?

I think it's wrong to humiliate her, as in me taking actions to make her feel bad.  I think it is right for her to feel humiliated and embarrased.  It's called shame.  A correctly wired human feels it when they know they did wrong, even if nobody catches them or calls them on it.

Someone who does wrong should feel bad.  I should do what I can to help them get through it and not make it worse.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 11, 2008)

I have no idea why, but I only had 4 players last night and she was on her best behavior.

The cheerleaders didn't even start cheerleading.

I'm perplexed.  Extremely happy, and perplexed.

-O


----------



## Rel (Sep 11, 2008)

Obryn said:


> I have no idea why, but I only had 4 players last night and she was on her best behavior.
> 
> The cheerleaders didn't even start cheerleading.
> 
> ...




She probably put a slow acting poison in your Mountain Dew.


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 11, 2008)

Janx said:


> And what's wrong the cheater feeling bad?




The OP said they wanted to minimize drama.  Minimizing bad feelings will minimize the drama.  If you start "punishing" the cheater (or make her feel like she's being punished) and singling her out then that could start a series of events where the cheater tries to get back at the punishers in some way, who retaliate on their own, etc.  These might not be major things, but it will certainly increase the drama and tension in the group.

Less bad feelings all around = less drama = happier group as a whole.


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 11, 2008)

Obryn said:


> I have no idea why, but I only had 4 players last night and she was on her best behavior.




Maybe she reads EN World?


----------



## Nifft (Sep 11, 2008)

Merkuri said:


> Maybe she reads EN World?



 Meta-gaming of the most heinous variety!

Why, it's almost *meta-cheating*!!!

, -- N


----------



## Rel (Sep 11, 2008)

Merkuri said:


> Maybe she reads EN World?




Merkuri Mentions a Major Melkor!


----------



## Obryn (Sep 11, 2008)

Nifft said:


> Meta-gaming of the most heinous variety!
> 
> Why, it's almost *meta-cheating*!!!
> 
> , -- N



hah!

Well, her friend might and her friend might have said something.  I have no idea. 

-O


----------



## Janx (Sep 11, 2008)

Merkuri said:


> The OP said they wanted to minimize drama.  Minimizing bad feelings will minimize the drama.  If you start "punishing" the cheater (or make her feel like she's being punished) and singling her out then that could start a series of events where the cheater tries to get back at the punishers in some way, who retaliate on their own, etc.  These might not be major things, but it will certainly increase the drama and tension in the group.
> 
> Less bad feelings all around = less drama = happier group as a whole.




The rest of my post where you found fault addresses this.  I don't advocate punishing her.  I advocate that she should feel bad on her own, because she was bad.  If she doesn't, she's a sociopath who doesn't think she's doing wrong.


----------



## Arnwyn (Sep 11, 2008)

Janx said:


> It's called shame.  A correctly wired human feels it when they know they did wrong, even if nobody catches them or calls them on it.
> 
> Someone who does wrong should feel bad.



I'm surprised that this even needs to be said!


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 11, 2008)

Janx said:


> I don't advocate punishing her.  I advocate that she should feel bad on her own, because she was bad.




I don't want to argue much further about this because it's going a bit off topic, and I suspect our arguments will be mostly about semantics, but I'll say this last bit...

Yes, she should feel bad because she's cheating.  But if you increase her bad feelings by doing something she may see as punishment (not saying that's your intent, just that it might be how she sees it) it's not doing anyone any good.  

She already knows cheating is bad.  She knows she shouldn't do it, but it's probably too tempting for her because it's easy.  If the choice is between two methods that make it harder for her to cheat but one really makes her feel a lot worse about herself and the other only makes her feel a little worse about herself in my opinion the one that makes her feel less bad is the preferrable one if your goal is to correct the behavior with the minumum of drama.  

Less bad feelings = less drama.  That's all I was trying to say.  Whether she feels bad on her own isn't really relevant to my point, and I agree that she probably is already feeling guilty about cheating, and that's a good thing.


----------



## Nifft (Sep 11, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Well, her friend might and her friend might have said something.  I have no idea.



 Whatever the specifics are, if it were me, I'd be happy enough if it just never happened again. 

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Old Gumphrey (Sep 11, 2008)

Arnwyn said:


> I'm surprised that this even needs to be said!




I'm surprised 75% of the things said in this thread need to be said. Cheating isn't a play style.


----------



## Rel (Sep 11, 2008)

I feel incredibly bad for not having had the presence of mind to ask this before and I'm also rather disappointed in the rest of the folks participating in this thread for not bringing it up either.  So let me make sure that we go not an instant longer without this bit of crucial information:

Is she hot?


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 11, 2008)

Rel said:


> So let me make sure that we go not an instant longer without this bit of crucial information:
> 
> Is she hot?




*sigh* Where are the moderators when you need them?

Oh... wait... oops..


----------



## cougent (Sep 11, 2008)

Rel said:


> I feel incredibly bad for not having had the presence of mind to ask this before and I'm also rather disappointed in the rest of the folks participating in this thread for not bringing it up either.  So let me make sure that we go not an instant longer without this bit of crucial information:
> 
> Is she hot?




Rel is my hero!


----------



## Rel (Sep 11, 2008)

cougent said:


> Rel is my hero!




I'm afraid this may not speak well of you.

Rel "not a role model" Ooi


----------



## Wyrmshadows (Sep 11, 2008)

Rel said:


> Is she hot?




I cannot believe that I didn't consider that. 

Well if she is, I still wouldn't allow her to cheat in my main game, but I would arrange for her to play in a specially crafted campaign made for solo play....just her and the DM...me. I've heard that gestalt characters in 3.5e can be useful for such solo efforts.

Usually I wouldn't go out of my way like that, but, sometimes people deserve a second chance. 



Wyrmshadows


----------



## Ginnel (Sep 11, 2008)

Rel said:


> I feel incredibly bad for not having had the presence of mind to ask this before and I'm also rather disappointed in the rest of the folks participating in this thread for not bringing it up either. So let me make sure that we go not an instant longer without this bit of crucial information:
> 
> Is she hot?



Hmm well are you hot? 

I'm not one of these Politically Correct people but is it an entirely appropriate comment? 

Hmm maybe we should have a hottest ENworld poster poll with proper real life pictures  A seperate male and a seperate female one and if this troubling cheaty player wants her physicality to be discussed she can offer it up on the Poll after Obryn tells her


----------



## Rel (Sep 11, 2008)

Ginnel said:


> I'm not one of these Politically Correct people but is it an entirely appropriate comment?




It probably isn't.  But it's probably also not entirely inappropriate either.

In any case, in answer to your question, yes I am hot.


----------



## doppelganger (Sep 12, 2008)

One thing to watch out for if you do go with the shoe box lid method is loaded/trick dice. I have seen d20s with 2 20s and no 1s. If the cheater knows that they must roll in plain view - and cheating is that important to them - such dice are just what the (evil) doctor ordered.


----------



## the Jester (Sep 12, 2008)

Rel said:


> I feel incredibly bad for not having had the presence of mind to ask this before and I'm also rather disappointed in the rest of the folks participating in this thread for not bringing it up either.  So let me make sure that we go not an instant longer without this bit of crucial information:
> 
> Is she hot?




+rep

Damn, wrong board.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 12, 2008)

Ginnel said:


> I'm not one of these Politically Correct people but is it an entirely appropriate comment?



As sad as it may seem, while a possibly politically incorrect (or just crude) thing to say, I would venture to guess it is a factor.

An unfortunate state of male behavior (and geek-male behavior more so) is that a "hot chick" would get an increased benefit of the doubt by virtue of her "hotness".  It's a pseudo-measurable attribute that factors into male decision making.

Oh, I am sure that many men would/will deny it, but deep in their gut.....  it's sadly true. 

I am happily married, so obviously I am immune to the hotness factor that the female species brings to bear upon my poor nerdly psyche. 

</dorky_comment>


----------



## Obryn (Sep 12, 2008)

Rel said:


> I feel incredibly bad for not having had the presence of mind to ask this before and I'm also rather disappointed in the rest of the folks participating in this thread for not bringing it up either.  So let me make sure that we go not an instant longer without this bit of crucial information:
> 
> Is she hot?



Actually, yeah, she's very attractive.  21, and up until recently, modeled.  No, I am not making that up.

She's still a cheater, though. 

-O


----------



## CleverNickName (Sep 12, 2008)

Old Gumphrey said:


> Cheating isn't a play style.



This.  Seriously.


----------



## Rel (Sep 12, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Actually, yeah, she's very attractive.  21, and up until recently, modeled.  No, I am not making that up.
> 
> She's still a cheater, though.
> 
> -O




Well this changes EVERYTHING! 

Actually it changes nothing about the cheating itself.  But it makes me wonder if she has a history of "getting her way" because of her looks.  Some people think that just because they are attractive and charming that they can do whatever they want.

I know I do.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 12, 2008)

Rel said:


> Well this changes EVERYTHING!
> 
> Actually it changes nothing about the cheating itself.  But it makes me wonder if she has a history of "getting her way" because of her looks.  Some people think that just because they are attractive and charming that they can do whatever they want.



Yeah, I really have no idea what deep psychological issues are causing it, but I'm pretty sure it's not entitlement as much as it is attention.

When she first joined, I had a problem with her and her friend attention-wh...um... disturbing the game.   I mean, you will just have to take my word for it, but having the two of them grabbing each others' chests and making innuendoes was awesome for maybe 15 minutes, but then got progressively more annoying.  Fortunately, both of them have improved greatly and are now much better players.  

So yeah, I think that attention may be what's behind the cheating.  I don't much care, though, since - as I mentioned - it's just a behavior I want to stop.



> I know I do.



So _that's_ what you have to do to become a moderator...

-O


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 12, 2008)

Obryn said:


> I mean, you will just have to take my word for it, but having the two of them grabbing each others' chests and making innuendoes was awesome for maybe 15 minutes, but then got progressively more annoying.



Wow... Just. OK. wow.

<insert stupid male joke>

I am glad the guys at my table aren't doing this anymore too.


----------



## Obryn (Sep 12, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:


> Wow... Just. OK. wow.
> 
> <insert stupid male joke>
> 
> I am glad the guys at my table aren't doing this anymore too.



HA! 

And like I said, if you're weren't there, you might think, "Sweet!  What's the problem?!"

But when you have 3 hours or so per week to game, and you're married, and there's not a lot of beer involved, and you really just want to get some orc-slaying time in....

It gets boring much more quickly than you'd expect. 

-O


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 12, 2008)

Obryn said:


> And like I said, if you're weren't there, you might think, "Sweet!  What's the problem?!"
> 
> But when you have 3 hours or so per week to game, and you're married, and there's not a lot of beer involved, and you really just want to get some orc-slaying time in....
> 
> It gets boring much more quickly than you'd expect.



Believe me, I understand.  Our whole group is made up of married dudes, except for one who's living with his SO, and we do one good session every other weekend (our only game), so we like to eliminate distractions too.

If we wanted that, we'd sit around and watch a porno instead of gaming.

...ewww.  terrible image burned into my brain...  Five married men hovering around a 65" big screen....  can't.... get... rid.... of.... it.....


----------



## Wyrmshadows (Sep 12, 2008)

Obryn said:


> HA!
> 
> And like I said, if you're weren't there, you might think, "Sweet! What's the problem?!"
> 
> ...




I completely understand.

I'm 37yrs old now so I have some modicum of control over my testosterone based reactions. When I was a teenager I could probably put up with just about anything as long as it had a pair of breasts attached to it.

Nowadays I have a 10yr old son and my gaming time is quite limited. I don't game because I can't get laid, or because I want to play out odd fantasies, I game because I love DMing. I love the creative expression of it.

I think too often gamers are pigeonholed into being total social outcasts. Social non-conformists....that is often true...but losers, not in my experience. In my experience, most gamers play because they love the game, not because they couldn't be doing something else.

No matter how cute someone is, if they are taking away from an activity that's already time compressed, get rid of her.


Wyrmshadows


----------



## Obryn (Sep 12, 2008)

catsclaw227 said:
			
		

> If we wanted that, we'd sit around and watch a porno instead of gaming.



Again with the horrible imagery!



Wyrmshadows said:


> No matter how cute someone is, if they are taking away from an activity that's already time compressed, get rid of her.



Yeah, it's amazing the difference that age, maturity, a family, and a real job makes, isn't it? 

-O


----------



## Rel (Sep 12, 2008)

You know you're old* when a pair of twenty-something models groping each other at the game table is an annoyance rather than something to be marvelled at.  




*Maybe a better word would be "mature" or simply "more mature than Rel".


----------



## The Little Raven (Sep 12, 2008)

Rel said:


> You know you're old* when a pair of twenty-something models groping each other at the game table is an annoyance rather than something to be marvelled at.
> 
> *Maybe a better word would be "mature" or simply "more mature than Rel".




May we never grow old*, good sir!

* Or "mature."

But seriously, there's a time and a place for that kind of thing, and it ain't at my gaming table... there are other places for that kind of "roleplaying."


----------



## Obryn (Sep 12, 2008)

Rel said:


> You know you're old* when a pair of twenty-something models groping each other at the game table is an annoyance rather than something to be marvelled at.
> 
> *Maybe a better word would be "mature" or simply "more mature than Rel".



Hah!  Well, this conversation is heading towards CM territory at this point.  And, sadly/fortunately, CM is blocked from work.  (It's blocked as "cartoon violence."  wtf?)

So yeah.  Cheating.

-O


----------



## Rel (Sep 12, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Hah!  Well, this conversation is heading towards CM territory at this point.  And, sadly/fortunately, CM is blocked from work.  (It's blocked as "cartoon violence."  wtf?)
> 
> So yeah.  Cheating.
> 
> -O




Fair enough.  Pardon my derailing the thread.


----------



## Mort (Sep 12, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Never, so far as I know, and certainly this was not the implication of my post. The playstyle in question is considering the random result of a die roll to be relatively unimportant. The dishonesty arises due to the rejection of said playstyle by the DM and other players.




Quite late to the party - considering where the thread is going - but just wanted to chime in on this early comment. 

If this was actually the case, the player would just as often voluntarily lower the number she actually rolled depending how she felt the story should go. Bet that hasn't happened even once.


----------



## roguerouge (Sep 13, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Actually, yeah, she's very attractive.  21, and up until recently, modeled.  No, I am not making that up.




I retract all prior statements. You should let the wookie—I mean _hot chick_—win.


----------



## roguerouge (Sep 13, 2008)

Rel said:


> You know you're old* when a pair of twenty-something models groping each other at the game table is an annoyance rather than something to be marvelled at.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I believe you may mean "senile" or perhaps "blind."


----------



## Obryn (Sep 13, 2008)

Rel said:


> Fair enough.  Pardon my derailing the thread.



Naah, it's all good!

Expect a PM on CM before the night is up. 

-O


----------



## Old Gumphrey (Sep 13, 2008)

I love how the posting rate triples when there's mention of girl on girl fondling.


----------



## cougent (Sep 13, 2008)

Old Gumphrey said:


> I love how the posting rate triples when there's mention of girl on girl fondling.




HUH?

I missed something somewhere... back to page 1 and start all over again.


----------



## catsclaw227 (Sep 13, 2008)

Obryn said:


> Naah, it's all good!
> 
> Expect a PM on CM before the night is up.



That sounds mysterious.   Are we sending photos of your gaming group acting out said disruptive behavior?  

(I need to visit CM more often....)


----------

