Even if there was a statistically relevant deviation, it still doesn't mean the person is cheating intentionally. They may 'just' happen to have imbalanced dice.
Even if that person rolls 20s for the rest of their life (with varying dice) that is *not* impossible, merely improbable. Each roll has a 1/20 *chance*, independent of previous rolls.
Casinos take huge steps to even the odds, so that the statistics are in their favor, and still people can win big there.
Accusing someone to cheat is a pretty big call, and it's next to impossible to actually prove it. If you do, be prepared to show *convincing* evidence, or this will likely backfire. People may call you a sore loser.
If you don't enjoy this group anymore, I strongly suggest you tell them you need to move on and part as cordially as you can manage.
Blacklist the person you didn't get along with in your mind, and never let them join any of your games if necessary, but take the high road on your way out.
It will be beneficial for you, more than anyone else.
You are very much correct. Most people does actually agree with that even if they might not admit it. If not, you can always ask Kotath if he's still involved in that illegal toddler versus clown bare knuckle fighting business or if he's stopped smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station. Have you seen any evidence that he doesn't do those sorts of things any more?
Either of those would be crimes, subject to the criminal courts, where the standard is much stricter. Plus you are naming me specifically rather than a hypothetical 'That guy.'
Even if he was identifying someone, cheating on dice rolls in a friendly D&D game is not subject to criminal law. However accusing Vince of slander or liable would be potentially subjecting Vince to criminal law. Who is actually condemning whom here?
If you take the time to read my post you'll realize that I haven't said a word about criminal law. I was repying to HeironymusZot's very good point that "Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do." Nothing more, nothing less. But I take it from your answer that you want to us to *not* assume that you are smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station? That you would, in fact, prefer if we treated you as innocent to that outlandish claim unless there is something actual evidence to support it?
Anyway, vince is the only person who can be said to be condeming anyone. Not sure how that is relevant though but I answered your question.
No, you haven't said a word about criminal law.
So why do you bring up criminal law? It's completely irrelevant to anything in this thread.
Instead you have ignored my point
No I haven't.
and continue to ignore my point, continuing to conflate Vince's accusations with accusations of criminal acts (Such as smuggling animals to the ISS, which would, actually be a criminal act if someone did so).
Do you not read the messages you reply to? It was an example to illustrate HZ's point that even in everyday life the presumtion of innocence is the respectful thing to do. Even when it comes to the horrible act of Dachshund space smuggling.
So why do you bring up criminal law? It's completely irrelevant to anything in this thread.
Instead you have ignored my point
No I haven't.
and continue to ignore my point, continuing to conflate Vince's accusations with accusations of criminal acts (Such as smuggling animals to the ISS, which would, actually be a criminal act if someone did so).
Do you not read the messages you reply to? It was an example to illustrate HZ's point that even in everyday life the presumtion of innocence is the respectful thing to do. Even when it comes to the horrible act of Dachshund space smuggling.
The presumption of innocence is nowhere near as absolute as you claim.
I haven't claimed anything about the absolutism of the presumption of innocence. Do you mind terrible if I asked you to please stop lying all the time?
There is such a thing as reasonable distrust.
No-one has ever said there shouldn't be. That is a strawman.
I brought up criminal law because you two keep trying to apply the standards of a criminal trial to this situation, i.e. a requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
First of all, I am only one person. Please don't accuse me of things that other people may or may not have done. Second of all, would you please stop with the incessant lying? I have literally not brought up criminal law, you yourself even aknowledged that just a few posts ago. Proof beyond reasonable doubt has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence. Or are you seriously saying that you presume everyone guilty of galactic Dachshund smuggling until you see evidence that they aren't?
Furthermore, you continue to use accusation of criminal acts as justification for your position, all the while insisting that discussion over the difference between criminal, civil, and personal accusations is irrelevant.
Well, kind of. Because it is irrelevant.
Furthermore, you ignore the fact that Vince is actually doing his best to collect evidence.
This is another lie. I haven't ignored vince's "evidence collecting", in fact, I have barely even touched upon his "evidence". I do howveer see that it's fairly obvious that it won't solve the situation so I haven't really bothered with it.
Your counter seems to be that he should not even be collecting evidence without proof of guilt. That he should not even be suspicious without proof of guilt.
Why do you keep on lying? I haven't said anything about whether or not he should be suspiscious, at all. Are you confusing me with someone else again? Like I mentioned, I don't think it will solve the situation so I see no reason for him doing so. If you would've bothered to read my posts in this thread you would see that my advice for vince is quite clear.
Exactly what right or standard of civility is being defended here? Some sort of right to keep die rolls secret even from the DM? If you were playing some board game, live and in person and one player was insisting on keeping their die rolls hidden, would you not question that?
What are you even talking about? :D No-one has ever claimed a "right to keep die rolls secret even from the DM". What kind of silly strawman is that? Are you saying that the "that guy" that vince loaths so much has argued that? And literally no-one has been arguing the last thing you mention.
You use examples of accusations of actual crimes as an example how a lack of presumption of innocence is bad, yet repeatedly insist that the difference between criminal law (and it's standard with respect to presumption of innocence) is irrelevant and that challenging your arguments on that basis is some sort of straw man.
You repeat that "in everyday life the presumtion of innocence is the respectful thing to do." Questioning that position is similarly not a straw man.
I see that you once again avoid the actual topic in lieu of actually adressing the issue. You can, of course, presume someone's innocence even in matters not concering criminal law. You haven't questioned the position, you have questioned your own strawman version of said position.
You use examples of accusations of actual crimes as an example how a lack of presumption of innocence is bad, yet repeatedly insist that the difference between criminal law (and it's standard with respect to presumption of innocence) is irrelevant and that challenging your arguments on that basis is some sort of straw man.
You repeat that "in everyday life the presumtion of innocence is the respectful thing to do." Questioning that position is similarly not a straw man.
I see that you once again avoid the actual topic in lieu of actually adressing the issue. You can, of course, presume someone's innocence even in matters not concering criminal law. You haven't questioned the position, you have questioned your own strawman version of said position.
You can, but you won't. If you blindly trust, you will be burnt. If you do not learn from being burnt, will be repeatedly burnt until you break or die.
Again with the ridiculous strawmen. No-one has said anything about "blindy trust". What's up with that nonsense.
With due respect, you are the one avoiding my question by trying to question me back. You claim that you do not blindly trust but you have yet to acknowledge any limits at all other than literal conclusive proof of guilt on that 'presumption of innocence.'
This is literally the first time you've mention blind trust. I can't answer a question you haven't asked yet. :)
Also not sure what that has to do with the actual topic of the thread. Maybe you can start your own thread about that completely different, totally irrelevant topic?
To restate, I presume no man a saint. I presume my fellow humans to be humans. Humans have been known to cheat. This is a documented fact. Therefore any given human may be a cheater and reasonable precautions against cheating should be taken.
Good for you. Now if you could just find anyone in this thread who disagress with you on that maybe you can direct your respones to them. :)
Whether 'That Guy' specifically is a cheater or not does not change that. Everyone at that table (other than the DM) who insists on hidden rolls is defending the option to cheat, even if they themselves are not cheating, since with the rolls hidden, anyone there could cheat with impunity. You seem to be insisting that said situation should not be changed.
Again, why do you feel the need to constantly lie? I haven't said anything about "defending the option to cheat", I have given a suggestion on how to handle the situation.
If you are not insisting that nothing should be changed (or that the only change that should be made is that Vince should leave the table), why are you arguing against me? If you agree with me on that, why not simply agree with me on that?
Wow, this is like what, your fourth strawman and just as many lies in just this replY? Impressive. I've never once said that "nothing should be changed" (this is both a lie and a strawman). My suggestion on how to handle the situation is in my very first reply in this thread.
the reason I'm "arguing" against you is because you keep on posting lies and strawmen arguments. It's not really arguing as pointing out the fact that you lie and build strawmen. And of course I don't agree with your lies. Agreeing with someone's lies is kind of like condoning cheating as far as I'm concerned. Now, do you have anything that is actually relevant to the topic or something that I have said that isn't just another lie or strawman?
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Let's take that up once I have those numbers.
I tend to be solution-oriented (occupational hazard). The thing is, I don't see you really coming to a good solution either way like this. But I'm pretty sure I'm not going to dissuade you, so do your thing. I would suggest at least thinking about what you're going to do once you have your data points though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Let's take that up once I have those numbers.
I tend to be solution-oriented (occupational hazard). The thing is, I don't see you really coming to a good solution either way like this. But I'm pretty sure I'm not going to dissuade you, so do your thing. I would suggest at least thinking about what you're going to do once you have your data points though.
Oh, I know there is no happy ending, where we all gather for group hugs. Best case scenario, THAT GUY suddenly starts rolling with expected values, and I say "oh well, folks, looks like he was just on a ridiculous hot streak that Vegas pit bosses would have been alerted to", (and yeah, you can be banned from Vegas casinos for being "too lucky", with no proof of cheating).
But, what I expect to happen, is I collect more data, the trend does not change, and the evidence become overwhelming. Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
I have detailed in one of the previous posts how I am enjoying the game otherwise. But I simply can't stand cheating. Others have stated that "it does not hurt you", and I have stated the obvious reasons how it does. But for me, cheating in general enrages me, because of the disrespect the cheater is displaying of the other players and the game itself, whatever the game.
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Let's take that up once I have those numbers.
I tend to be solution-oriented (occupational hazard). The thing is, I don't see you really coming to a good solution either way like this. But I'm pretty sure I'm not going to dissuade you, so do your thing. I would suggest at least thinking about what you're going to do once you have your data points though.
Oh, I know there is no happy ending, where we all gather for group hugs. Best case scenario, THAT GUY suddenly starts rolling with expected values, and I say "oh well, folks, looks like he was just on a ridiculous hot streak that Vegas pit bosses would have been alerted to", (and yeah, you can be banned from Vegas casinos for being "too lucky", with no proof of cheating).
But, what is what I expect to happen, is I collect more data, the trend does not change, and the evidence become overwhelming. Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
I have detailed in one of the previous posts how I am enjoying the game otherwise. But I simply can't stand cheating. Others have stated that "it does not hurt you", and I have stated the obvious reasons how it does. But for me, cheating in general enrages me, because of the disrespect the cheater is displaying of the other players and the game itself, whatever the game.
One could say that complaining on how other people have fun (in this case, the rule of cool) to the point where you want them kicked out of the game is also a bit disrespectful but hey, to each their own. I still say you'd save a lot of time and energy just leaving the game.
Honest question, since you yourself admit that you don't want a happy ending, what do you think you'll get out of this in the case you present the DM with "overwhelming" "evidence" or that the "that guy" suddenly starts rolling with expected values? What then? Will that be enough for you? Will you be able to enjoy the game even though it seems that at least some of the other players have fun differently from you? What if the DM just goes "yeah, don't care" and everything just goes on as before?
Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
As DM, your huge ask wouldn't be my main takeaway (in fact, I might just say, nope, not gonna do that). My main takeaway would be I'm getting this hot potato dropped in my lap that seems to have been spinning out of control for a few weeks already before I'm hearing any of it. You know your DM, I don't, but if it was me and you'd be dumping this on me (which, let's be fair, you are) I'd much rather have been apprised sooner rather than later.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
As DM, your huge ask wouldn't be my main takeaway (in fact, I might just say, nope, not gonna do that). My main takeaway would be I'm getting this hot potato dropped in my lap that seems to have been spinning out of control for a few weeks already before I'm hearing any of it. You know your DM, I don't, but if it was me and you'd be dumping this on me (which, let's be fair, you are) I'd much rather have been apprised sooner rather than later.
I would prefer going to the DM with overwhelming evidence, as opposed to saying "these numbers sure seem out of whack".
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Let's take that up once I have those numbers.
I tend to be solution-oriented (occupational hazard). The thing is, I don't see you really coming to a good solution either way like this. But I'm pretty sure I'm not going to dissuade you, so do your thing. I would suggest at least thinking about what you're going to do once you have your data points though.
Oh, I know there is no happy ending, where we all gather for group hugs. Best case scenario, THAT GUY suddenly starts rolling with expected values, and I say "oh well, folks, looks like he was just on a ridiculous hot streak that Vegas pit bosses would have been alerted to", (and yeah, you can be banned from Vegas casinos for being "too lucky", with no proof of cheating).
But, what is what I expect to happen, is I collect more data, the trend does not change, and the evidence become overwhelming. Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
I have detailed in one of the previous posts how I am enjoying the game otherwise. But I simply can't stand cheating. Others have stated that "it does not hurt you", and I have stated the obvious reasons how it does. But for me, cheating in general enrages me, because of the disrespect the cheater is displaying of the other players and the game itself, whatever the game.
One could say that complaining on how other people have fun (in this case, the rule of cool) to the point where you want them kicked out of the game is also a bit disrespectful but hey, to each their own. I still say you'd save a lot of time and energy just leaving the game.
Honest question, since you yourself admit that you don't want a happy ending, what do you think you'll get out of this in the case you present the DM with "overwhelming" "evidence" or that the "that guy" suddenly starts rolling with expected values? What then? Will that be enough for you? Will you be able to enjoy the game even though it seems that at least some of the other players have fun differently from you? What if the DM just goes "yeah, don't care" and everything just goes on as before?
Will that guy get kicked? Not a chance.
Will I get kicked? That is a non-zero probability.
Will I quit if the DM says "yeah, I don't care "? Depending on how the DM qualifies that answer, yeah.
But that is a lot of what if's. Not there yet.
And please, stop suggesting that cheating is "just different fun". It is not, and is not across any game you wish to mention.
I would prefer going to the DM with overwhelming evidence, as opposed to saying "these numbers sure seem out of whack".
You may have said this somewhere else, but I've got to ask. Why can't you just suggest to the DM and/or the other players the option of using a dice-rolling bot in Discord?
I would prefer going to the DM with overwhelming evidence, as opposed to saying "these numbers sure seem out of whack".
You may have said this somewhere else, but I've got to ask. Why can't you just suggest to the DM and/or the other players the option of using a dice-rolling bot in Discord?
Because the bulk of the players are old school, and "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". If I was the DM, and did not know there was a problem, (and I doubt many DM's would pick up on this given how much is on a DM's plate during a session), my first thought would be "Why do you want this?". I am not prepared to answer that question without more data.
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Let's take that up once I have those numbers.
I tend to be solution-oriented (occupational hazard). The thing is, I don't see you really coming to a good solution either way like this. But I'm pretty sure I'm not going to dissuade you, so do your thing. I would suggest at least thinking about what you're going to do once you have your data points though.
Oh, I know there is no happy ending, where we all gather for group hugs. Best case scenario, THAT GUY suddenly starts rolling with expected values, and I say "oh well, folks, looks like he was just on a ridiculous hot streak that Vegas pit bosses would have been alerted to", (and yeah, you can be banned from Vegas casinos for being "too lucky", with no proof of cheating).
But, what is what I expect to happen, is I collect more data, the trend does not change, and the evidence become overwhelming. Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
I have detailed in one of the previous posts how I am enjoying the game otherwise. But I simply can't stand cheating. Others have stated that "it does not hurt you", and I have stated the obvious reasons how it does. But for me, cheating in general enrages me, because of the disrespect the cheater is displaying of the other players and the game itself, whatever the game.
One could say that complaining on how other people have fun (in this case, the rule of cool) to the point where you want them kicked out of the game is also a bit disrespectful but hey, to each their own. I still say you'd save a lot of time and energy just leaving the game.
Honest question, since you yourself admit that you don't want a happy ending, what do you think you'll get out of this in the case you present the DM with "overwhelming" "evidence" or that the "that guy" suddenly starts rolling with expected values? What then? Will that be enough for you? Will you be able to enjoy the game even though it seems that at least some of the other players have fun differently from you? What if the DM just goes "yeah, don't care" and everything just goes on as before?
Will that guy get kicked? Not a chance.
Will I get kicked? That is a non-zero probability.
Will I quit if the DM says "yeah, I don't care "? Depending on how the DM qualifies that answer, yeah.
But that is a lot of what if's. Not there yet.
Sure, but what it is that you actually hope to achieve?
And please, stop suggesting that cheating is "just different fun". It is not, and is not across any game you wish to mention.
If I ever had suggesting anything of the sort I might consider it. But since it's a blatant lie to say that I am "suggesting that cheating is "just different fun"" I see no reason to validate your lies by doing that. I'm sure a reasonable person would understand that. :)
Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
As DM, your huge ask wouldn't be my main takeaway (in fact, I might just say, nope, not gonna do that). My main takeaway would be I'm getting this hot potato dropped in my lap that seems to have been spinning out of control for a few weeks already before I'm hearing any of it. You know your DM, I don't, but if it was me and you'd be dumping this on me (which, let's be fair, you are) I'd much rather have been apprised sooner rather than later.
I would prefer going to the DM with overwhelming evidence, as opposed to saying "these numbers sure seem out of whack".
I would prefer not making this the DM's problem to solve. It's a player problem, not a game problem. The DM is not the group's babysitter, they're the game master. Player problems are for the group to deal with, not for the DM to sit in sole judgement over. At worst you're putting all the responsibility with the DM, at best you're strategically positioning. Obviously if it's between going to the DM with an airtight case and going to the DM with a circumstantial one the former is to be preferred, but there's a lot more nuance to your options than just those two choices. What you're doing right now is making your DM's position more difficult. Depending on your end goal that might pragmatically serve your interests best, but it sucks for them. Again, you know your DM and I don't, but if I were that DM my best solution when you came to me would be to turn it over to the group right away - and in that case, it'd have been better if that had been done two-three weeks earlier and without you taking your grievance to me in private first.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
As DM, your huge ask wouldn't be my main takeaway (in fact, I might just say, nope, not gonna do that). My main takeaway would be I'm getting this hot potato dropped in my lap that seems to have been spinning out of control for a few weeks already before I'm hearing any of it. You know your DM, I don't, but if it was me and you'd be dumping this on me (which, let's be fair, you are) I'd much rather have been apprised sooner rather than later.
I would prefer going to the DM with overwhelming evidence, as opposed to saying "these numbers sure seem out of whack".
I would prefer not making this the DM's problem to solve. It's a player problem, not a game problem. The DM is not the group's babysitter, they're the game master. Player problems are for the group to deal with, not for the DM to sit in sole judgement over. At worst you're putting all the responsibility with the DM, at best you're strategically positioning. Obviously if it's between going to the DM with an airtight case and going to the DM with a circumstantial one the former is to be preferred, but there's a lot more nuance to your options than just those two choices. What you're doing right now is making your DM's position more difficult. Depending on your end goal that might pragmatically serve your interests best, but it sucks for them. Again, you know your DM and I don't, but if I were that DM my best solution when you came to me would be to turn it over to the group right away - and in that case, it'd have been better if that had been done two-three weeks earlier and without you taking your grievance to me in private first.
My best gauge of the situation is for me to gather more evidence that is totally damning. The DM, while not educated in statistics, certainly grasps the concepts very easily. He is a smart guy. Most successful DM's I have found are. We are deep into "what-if" and trying to predict human reactions at this point. I could be very wrong on my approach. But my gut tells me to talk to the DM privately, as opposed to bringing to the table.
I would prefer going to the DM with overwhelming evidence, as opposed to saying "these numbers sure seem out of whack".
You may have said this somewhere else, but I've got to ask. Why can't you just suggest to the DM and/or the other players the option of using a dice-rolling bot in Discord?
Because the bulk of the players are old school, and "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". If I was the DM, and did not know there was a problem, (and I doubt many DM's would pick up on this given how much is on a DM's plate during a session), my first thought would be "Why do you want this?". I am not prepared to answer that question without more data.
Honestly, given the limited numbers you've posted you are going to need to collect a *mountain* of data to get something that is statistically significant enough to "prove" that this guy is cheating. Over 50-100 rolls a likelihood of 1-2% isn't going to prove anything. Two nat 20s in a row is 1 in 400 and nobody is going to be accused of cheating for rolling that. Scientifically speaking, you would need to get to 5 sigma to "prove" your theory, which is a probability of about 1 in 1.7 million (~ 0.0006%).
I mean, in your place I would at least see if the group is open to the idea of using an online dice roller before going on a crusade. Honestly, part of the fun of sitting around a table is *seeing* those crazy rolls that crop up just when the party does (or doesn't) need them. An online dice roller emulates that feeling, and there's plenty of other advantages you could list.
I just don't see that conducting a "crusade" against this guy is going to get you to a happier table all around, assuming that is the actual goal.
And please, stop suggesting that cheating is "just different fun". It is not, and is not across any game you wish to mention.
NO ONE IS SAYING CHEATING IS DIFFERENT FUN.
You don't know this person is cheating. So we don't know this person is cheating.
What we do know is you absolutely abhor this person's style of fun and have gone as far to say that you wouldn't mind if he vanishes out of your life. And you have equated this playstyle with cheaters in general, going as far as to condemn people beyond this situation. That is quintessential gatekeeping.
What has become clear to me is that you wanted this thread to be an echo chamber. Well news flash buddy. You're conducting yourself in a way that would rub most people the wrong way. It's an incredibly anti-social, tactless move to hand this giant list of evidence over when you could have a very simple conversation.
You: "Hey his rolls have been super high and seem a little fishy."
DM: "Okay, thanks for letting me know, I'll look into it."
I still don't think you've given the DM ample time to come to their own conclusions and investigate themselves, but if you're going to bring it up this is how to do it.
I will point out - again - that "overwhelming evidence" is not necessarily your friend in this case, Vince. Even if it wasn't you, a player coming to me with a document wherein he'd recorded hundreds of rolls of another player over the last several sessions, run a ton of numbers, and came up with a multiple-page presentation on why that player is definitely cheating and what I should do about it would not get the response he is hoping for from me.
You're treating this like a hostile audit, which I can almost guarantee will put your DM on edge and forever scupper any chances you have of getting along with "THAT GUY". I know I would never play at a table again with a player who more-or-less cyberstalked me during sessions with the explicit intent of proving me a cheat and a liar. Regardless of whether I am a cheat and a liar (which, by the way, I am not, so please do not go there). Again, not passing judgment of any sort on "THAT GUY" here - simply speaking to the method being employed.
It may make you feel better to document potential wrongdoing in this case, but if you want to keep your game you're going to need to take one of the less confrontational methods suggested in this thread, or some other method better tuned to your table. If you take this case to your DM as-is, you're effectively handing your DM an ultimate, saying "me or him - pick one." I don't know about your DM, but I have a standing policy - if ever I am handed a "them or me" ultimate, it is automatically 'them', and not the guy forcing my hand with a heavy-handed, hostile ultimatum.
Even if your DM rules the way you want him to after you smack him across the face with Overwhelming Evidence, he will not likely think kindly of you for forcing his hand that way. You're escalating the conflict, not resolving it. You're trying to win instead of trying to fix your game. Maybe rearrange your priorities some?
I've been in a game that exploded because somebody wanted to win instead of fix the game. Two players got into a gigantic fight that ended up bursting the game; neither was invited to the game that replaced it. One of them snapped and snarled and ranted and railed and chewed on the DM and everybody else for not playing the right way, and for letting the other guy get away with it.The other said "sorry, guys. I overstepped and made a bad mistake. Mia culpa, and enjoy the next game", after which he simply hung out with us and was a reasonable human being that chatted, played video games, and otherwise just let it go. One of those players was invited to come back into the new game a few months into it and is back to being a regular at our table. The other is permanently and forever barred from our table, and none of us will ever play at a table he is at.
I leave it to you to decide which player is which, and what the value of simply resolving a conflict rather than escalating it would be.
But my gut tells me to talk to the DM privately, as opposed to bringing to the table.
I'm giving you the beneft of the doubt here, but I do have to point out that to an objective bystander the most obvious reason for that choice is not your gut. It'd be that it's easier for you to have the DM confront this instead of bringing it up yourself, and that you get to steer the outcome more. The reason I have to point this out is not to make you look bad, but because it's not unlikely that that will be what your DM's gut tells them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Even if there was a statistically relevant deviation, it still doesn't mean the person is cheating intentionally. They may 'just' happen to have imbalanced dice.
Even if that person rolls 20s for the rest of their life (with varying dice) that is *not* impossible, merely improbable. Each roll has a 1/20 *chance*, independent of previous rolls.
Casinos take huge steps to even the odds, so that the statistics are in their favor, and still people can win big there.
Accusing someone to cheat is a pretty big call, and it's next to impossible to actually prove it. If you do, be prepared to show *convincing* evidence, or this will likely backfire. People may call you a sore loser.
If you don't enjoy this group anymore, I strongly suggest you tell them you need to move on and part as cordially as you can manage.
Blacklist the person you didn't get along with in your mind, and never let them join any of your games if necessary, but take the high road on your way out.
It will be beneficial for you, more than anyone else.
More Interesting Lock Picking Rules
So why do you bring up criminal law? It's completely irrelevant to anything in this thread.
No I haven't.
Do you not read the messages you reply to? It was an example to illustrate HZ's point that even in everyday life the presumtion of innocence is the respectful thing to do. Even when it comes to the horrible act of Dachshund space smuggling.
I haven't claimed anything about the absolutism of the presumption of innocence. Do you mind terrible if I asked you to please stop lying all the time?
No-one has ever said there shouldn't be. That is a strawman.
First of all, I am only one person. Please don't accuse me of things that other people may or may not have done. Second of all, would you please stop with the incessant lying? I have literally not brought up criminal law, you yourself even aknowledged that just a few posts ago. Proof beyond reasonable doubt has nothing to do with the presumption of innocence. Or are you seriously saying that you presume everyone guilty of galactic Dachshund smuggling until you see evidence that they aren't?
Well, kind of. Because it is irrelevant.
This is another lie. I haven't ignored vince's "evidence collecting", in fact, I have barely even touched upon his "evidence". I do howveer see that it's fairly obvious that it won't solve the situation so I haven't really bothered with it.
Why do you keep on lying? I haven't said anything about whether or not he should be suspiscious, at all. Are you confusing me with someone else again? Like I mentioned, I don't think it will solve the situation so I see no reason for him doing so. If you would've bothered to read my posts in this thread you would see that my advice for vince is quite clear.
What are you even talking about? :D No-one has ever claimed a "right to keep die rolls secret even from the DM". What kind of silly strawman is that? Are you saying that the "that guy" that vince loaths so much has argued that?
And literally no-one has been arguing the last thing you mention.
I see that you once again avoid the actual topic in lieu of actually adressing the issue. You can, of course, presume someone's innocence even in matters not concering criminal law. You haven't questioned the position, you have questioned your own strawman version of said position.
Again with the ridiculous strawmen. No-one has said anything about "blindy trust". What's up with that nonsense.
This is literally the first time you've mention blind trust. I can't answer a question you haven't asked yet. :)
Also not sure what that has to do with the actual topic of the thread. Maybe you can start your own thread about that completely different, totally irrelevant topic?
Good for you. Now if you could just find anyone in this thread who disagress with you on that maybe you can direct your respones to them. :)
Wow, this is like what, your fourth strawman and just as many lies in just this replY? Impressive. I've never once said that "nothing should be changed" (this is both a lie and a strawman). My suggestion on how to handle the situation is in my very first reply in this thread.
the reason I'm "arguing" against you is because you keep on posting lies and strawmen arguments. It's not really arguing as pointing out the fact that you lie and build strawmen. And of course I don't agree with your lies. Agreeing with someone's lies is kind of like condoning cheating as far as I'm concerned. Now, do you have anything that is actually relevant to the topic or something that I have said that isn't just another lie or strawman?
I tend to be solution-oriented (occupational hazard). The thing is, I don't see you really coming to a good solution either way like this. But I'm pretty sure I'm not going to dissuade you, so do your thing. I would suggest at least thinking about what you're going to do once you have your data points though.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Oh, I know there is no happy ending, where we all gather for group hugs. Best case scenario, THAT GUY suddenly starts rolling with expected values, and I say "oh well, folks, looks like he was just on a ridiculous hot streak that Vegas pit bosses would have been alerted to", (and yeah, you can be banned from Vegas casinos for being "too lucky", with no proof of cheating).
But, what I expect to happen, is I collect more data, the trend does not change, and the evidence become overwhelming. Then I have the lovely time of going to the DM and saying "here is my evidence, here is the math, and can you keep track also, which I know is a huge ask given all the other stuff a DM is doing in a game."
I have detailed in one of the previous posts how I am enjoying the game otherwise. But I simply can't stand cheating. Others have stated that "it does not hurt you", and I have stated the obvious reasons how it does. But for me, cheating in general enrages me, because of the disrespect the cheater is displaying of the other players and the game itself, whatever the game.
One could say that complaining on how other people have fun (in this case, the rule of cool) to the point where you want them kicked out of the game is also a bit disrespectful but hey, to each their own. I still say you'd save a lot of time and energy just leaving the game.
Honest question, since you yourself admit that you don't want a happy ending, what do you think you'll get out of this in the case you present the DM with "overwhelming" "evidence" or that the "that guy" suddenly starts rolling with expected values? What then? Will that be enough for you? Will you be able to enjoy the game even though it seems that at least some of the other players have fun differently from you? What if the DM just goes "yeah, don't care" and everything just goes on as before?
As DM, your huge ask wouldn't be my main takeaway (in fact, I might just say, nope, not gonna do that). My main takeaway would be I'm getting this hot potato dropped in my lap that seems to have been spinning out of control for a few weeks already before I'm hearing any of it. You know your DM, I don't, but if it was me and you'd be dumping this on me (which, let's be fair, you are) I'd much rather have been apprised sooner rather than later.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I would prefer going to the DM with overwhelming evidence, as opposed to saying "these numbers sure seem out of whack".
Will that guy get kicked? Not a chance.
Will I get kicked? That is a non-zero probability.
Will I quit if the DM says "yeah, I don't care "? Depending on how the DM qualifies that answer, yeah.
But that is a lot of what if's. Not there yet.
And please, stop suggesting that cheating is "just different fun". It is not, and is not across any game you wish to mention.
You may have said this somewhere else, but I've got to ask. Why can't you just suggest to the DM and/or the other players the option of using a dice-rolling bot in Discord?
Because the bulk of the players are old school, and "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". If I was the DM, and did not know there was a problem, (and I doubt many DM's would pick up on this given how much is on a DM's plate during a session), my first thought would be "Why do you want this?". I am not prepared to answer that question without more data.
Sure, but what it is that you actually hope to achieve?
If I ever had suggesting anything of the sort I might consider it. But since it's a blatant lie to say that I am "suggesting that cheating is "just different fun"" I see no reason to validate your lies by doing that. I'm sure a reasonable person would understand that. :)
I would prefer not making this the DM's problem to solve. It's a player problem, not a game problem. The DM is not the group's babysitter, they're the game master. Player problems are for the group to deal with, not for the DM to sit in sole judgement over. At worst you're putting all the responsibility with the DM, at best you're strategically positioning. Obviously if it's between going to the DM with an airtight case and going to the DM with a circumstantial one the former is to be preferred, but there's a lot more nuance to your options than just those two choices. What you're doing right now is making your DM's position more difficult. Depending on your end goal that might pragmatically serve your interests best, but it sucks for them. Again, you know your DM and I don't, but if I were that DM my best solution when you came to me would be to turn it over to the group right away - and in that case, it'd have been better if that had been done two-three weeks earlier and without you taking your grievance to me in private first.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
My best gauge of the situation is for me to gather more evidence that is totally damning. The DM, while not educated in statistics, certainly grasps the concepts very easily. He is a smart guy. Most successful DM's I have found are. We are deep into "what-if" and trying to predict human reactions at this point. I could be very wrong on my approach. But my gut tells me to talk to the DM privately, as opposed to bringing to the table.
Honestly, given the limited numbers you've posted you are going to need to collect a *mountain* of data to get something that is statistically significant enough to "prove" that this guy is cheating. Over 50-100 rolls a likelihood of 1-2% isn't going to prove anything. Two nat 20s in a row is 1 in 400 and nobody is going to be accused of cheating for rolling that. Scientifically speaking, you would need to get to 5 sigma to "prove" your theory, which is a probability of about 1 in 1.7 million (~ 0.0006%).
I mean, in your place I would at least see if the group is open to the idea of using an online dice roller before going on a crusade. Honestly, part of the fun of sitting around a table is *seeing* those crazy rolls that crop up just when the party does (or doesn't) need them. An online dice roller emulates that feeling, and there's plenty of other advantages you could list.
I just don't see that conducting a "crusade" against this guy is going to get you to a happier table all around, assuming that is the actual goal.
NO ONE IS SAYING CHEATING IS DIFFERENT FUN.
You don't know this person is cheating. So we don't know this person is cheating.
What we do know is you absolutely abhor this person's style of fun and have gone as far to say that you wouldn't mind if he vanishes out of your life. And you have equated this playstyle with cheaters in general, going as far as to condemn people beyond this situation. That is quintessential gatekeeping.
What has become clear to me is that you wanted this thread to be an echo chamber. Well news flash buddy. You're conducting yourself in a way that would rub most people the wrong way. It's an incredibly anti-social, tactless move to hand this giant list of evidence over when you could have a very simple conversation.
You: "Hey his rolls have been super high and seem a little fishy."
DM: "Okay, thanks for letting me know, I'll look into it."
I still don't think you've given the DM ample time to come to their own conclusions and investigate themselves, but if you're going to bring it up this is how to do it.
I will point out - again - that "overwhelming evidence" is not necessarily your friend in this case, Vince. Even if it wasn't you, a player coming to me with a document wherein he'd recorded hundreds of rolls of another player over the last several sessions, run a ton of numbers, and came up with a multiple-page presentation on why that player is definitely cheating and what I should do about it would not get the response he is hoping for from me.
You're treating this like a hostile audit, which I can almost guarantee will put your DM on edge and forever scupper any chances you have of getting along with "THAT GUY". I know I would never play at a table again with a player who more-or-less cyberstalked me during sessions with the explicit intent of proving me a cheat and a liar. Regardless of whether I am a cheat and a liar (which, by the way, I am not, so please do not go there). Again, not passing judgment of any sort on "THAT GUY" here - simply speaking to the method being employed.
It may make you feel better to document potential wrongdoing in this case, but if you want to keep your game you're going to need to take one of the less confrontational methods suggested in this thread, or some other method better tuned to your table. If you take this case to your DM as-is, you're effectively handing your DM an ultimate, saying "me or him - pick one." I don't know about your DM, but I have a standing policy - if ever I am handed a "them or me" ultimate, it is automatically 'them', and not the guy forcing my hand with a heavy-handed, hostile ultimatum.
Even if your DM rules the way you want him to after you smack him across the face with Overwhelming Evidence, he will not likely think kindly of you for forcing his hand that way. You're escalating the conflict, not resolving it. You're trying to win instead of trying to fix your game. Maybe rearrange your priorities some?
I've been in a game that exploded because somebody wanted to win instead of fix the game. Two players got into a gigantic fight that ended up bursting the game; neither was invited to the game that replaced it. One of them snapped and snarled and ranted and railed and chewed on the DM and everybody else for not playing the right way, and for letting the other guy get away with it. The other said "sorry, guys. I overstepped and made a bad mistake. Mia culpa, and enjoy the next game", after which he simply hung out with us and was a reasonable human being that chatted, played video games, and otherwise just let it go. One of those players was invited to come back into the new game a few months into it and is back to being a regular at our table. The other is permanently and forever barred from our table, and none of us will ever play at a table he is at.
I leave it to you to decide which player is which, and what the value of simply resolving a conflict rather than escalating it would be.
Please do not contact or message me.
I'm giving you the beneft of the doubt here, but I do have to point out that to an objective bystander the most obvious reason for that choice is not your gut. It'd be that it's easier for you to have the DM confront this instead of bringing it up yourself, and that you get to steer the outcome more. The reason I have to point this out is not to make you look bad, but because it's not unlikely that that will be what your DM's gut tells them.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].