Yes, as I said in my post. There are multiple possibilities for this to work.
Uh huh...if you had bothered to read the past posts, you would know that none of that is the case. He is a freshly leveled up 5th level Light cleric, with a Sailor Background, Human Variant, built with the 27 point buy system, who took the Weapons Master feat at level 0, because he wanted to swing a sword, and his ASI at 4th level was used to bump his Wis to 18, and he told us his Str was 14. Oh, and when he pulled the 30 on a Survival roll, then ooops, meant a 26, he stated he had rolled a 19 + 7 due to Skill and Prof, which means he has Prof in Survival. I also know precisely what magic items he has (armour that does wonderful things protecting from dragons, but nothing else).
Anything else you want to know?
Errr, yeah. If you are soo sure this guy is cheating, why haven't you done anything about it. It clearly bothers you a great deal (to the point you are literally tracking his rolls and stats), but all you have done is come here to complain and say you are going to do something. If you are going to do something, do it.
According to you, you have enough evidence, but all you've done with it is tell us. We have given you suggestions, and you have ignored them. Either do something or stop complaining.
When I started the thread, I had 28 data points, and from a statistical analysis, n=30 is the minimum for meaningful output. As of 40 hours ago, I now have 51 data points in the sample, which does allow for meaningful output. So now the math can be done, which will present a stronger case.
When I started the thread, I had 28 data points, and from a statistical analysis, n=30 is the minimum for meaningful output. As of 40 hours ago, I now have 51 data points in the sample, which does allow for meaningful output. So now the math can be done, which will present a stronger case.
I think you're overdoing it. This isn't a technical issue in the production of something where evidence is fully required to justify making a change. Saying "I noticed he never seems to miss, and I'm worried he might be cheating" is enough to go on. If you say "I have evidence that you are cheating; here is every roll you've made since this date, and their results, and here's a chart plotting them to emphasize that you have never missed" and so on, you're going to come across as petty and I feel like most of the other people at the table are going to be seriously put out by the amount of "behind their back" work you've put in to prove that they are doing wrong. It's going to kill the mood at the table permanently if you go in with evidence and logs of their dice rolls.
Picture the comparison another way - your neighbor comes over and asks if you can play your music a bit quieter, because it often is too loud and they can hear it.
Now compare to your neighbor coming over and showing you a spreadsheet of every day in the last 6 months, with decibel readings, genre of music, and the time of day you played it, to prove to you that you're playing your music too loud for them and they would like you to play it quieter.
The first one is going to come off as a polite request if you are playing too loud, and seem petty if you're not, but the relationship with the neighbor isn't going to be compromised either way. The second one would seem petty even if you were playing death metal at 3am every night, and you will probably not get on as well with your neighbor any more.
If you're putting the evidence together purely for yourself, to make sure you don't make a mistake in accusing them, however, that's a good thing to have done - but leave the evidence behind when you discuss it, and don't bring it up!
Guys. Pop some popcorn, sit back and relax. This is the "watch Vince alienate himself from his playgroup show" and it always has been. It's meaningless to try and get across some meaningful message. If it hasn't sunk in during the last TEN pages, it won't now.
Yes, as I said in my post. There are multiple possibilities for this to work.
Uh huh...if you had bothered to read the past posts, you would know that none of that is the case. He is a freshly leveled up 5th level Light cleric, with a Sailor Background, Human Variant, built with the 27 point buy system, who took the Weapons Master feat at level 0, because he wanted to swing a sword, and his ASI at 4th level was used to bump his Wis to 18, and he told us his Str was 14. Oh, and when he pulled the 30 on a Survival roll, then ooops, meant a 26, he stated he had rolled a 19 + 7 due to Skill and Prof, which means he has Prof in Survival. I also know precisely what magic items he has (armour that does wonderful things protecting from dragons, but nothing else).
Anything else you want to know?
Errr, yeah. If you are soo sure this guy is cheating, why haven't you done anything about it. It clearly bothers you a great deal (to the point you are literally tracking his rolls and stats), but all you have done is come here to complain and say you are going to do something. If you are going to do something, do it.
According to you, you have enough evidence, but all you've done with it is tell us. We have given you suggestions, and you have ignored them. Either do something or stop complaining.
When I started the thread, I had 28 data points, and from a statistical analysis, n=30 is the minimum for meaningful output. As of 40 hours ago, I now have 51 data points in the sample, which does allow for meaningful output. So now the math can be done, which will present a stronger case.
But that's the point: This is only useful if you are going to approach in a confrontational manner, which is unlikely to end well for the group. There are plenty of "soft" ways to deal with this which have been mentioned, any of which would have a good chance of leaving the group feeling positive rather than negative, but if you have even considered them you have not discussed that on here.
All of this, and your comments throughout the thread, leaves it looking like all you want is to get this guy booted out of the group, no matter whether this causes bad feeling within the group or even damages one of the DMs friendships.
I say this as a man who looks at maths and logic as the foundation of his whole world, but there is little to no likelihood of a positive outcome to this. Even if this can be resolved without ejecting a player, you will still be unhappy with his play style and he will resent you for accusing him of cheating. The other players at the table will feel uncomfortable with all of this, especially the DM whose friend is the accused.
I don't understand why this thread is still going. Several people offered good solutions to this on page 1, and a couple more popped up over the next few pages. The OP has ignored them all and pursued his "I will prove they are cheating" model, which has very little chance of ending well. He now has enough data to prove, to a reasonable level of confidence, what he wanted to prove from the start, and still does nothing about it 10 pages later.
Given the amount of notice the OP has taken to what others have said on here (i.e. none), I have a pretty high degree of confidence that it was never intended to be a request for help or anything similar. It is just a thread for the OP to complain about a player he dislikes. Whether it is proved that he was cheating or not is irrelevant at this point.
I don't think there actually is a good solution to this problem. There is a certain player type that just has to cheat, or has to be able to have, do, or get, more than the character should reasonably have. I have seen this before. It is quite literally impossible to stop players like this from doing it. If you stop them cheating on rolls, they'll cheat another way. They'll track spell slots incorrectly, so that they have spells available when they shouldn't. They'll track hit points inaccurately, so that their character never goes to 0 h.p. They'll state their AC incorrectly so that they don't get hit as often. They'll misread spell effects to be more powerful than the RAW text says ("accidentally on purpose" as my mom would say). Any solution you find for preventing one of these, they will find another that bypasses this solution. If you could, somehow, via VTT or some other means, find a way to effectively stop each, and every, possible method of dishonest play from this player, he will quit the group (possibly throwing a series of grown-up tantrums on the way out). There is no possible way to get a player like this to actually play the game properly, by the rules, while honestly recording everything about his character. I've seen it before -- it cannot be done. None of the solutions presented here, including mine, are capable of doing the one thing you'd need to do to fix the problem, and that is, change the player. Nothing's going to make the player change.
My solution (in-app die rolling) would ultimately get the player kicked from the group, if the cheating became publicly known and the DM got mad enough about it. In a less extreme possibility, app die-rolling might force the player to quit the group, or cheat another way. But it's not going to get the player to change. That is impossible because the player has a personality flaw that makes him need to do this. I can't really explain it any more than this because I have never had this need, but I've seen it, twice before, when I was younger, and it is literally an unstoppable force. You cannot change players like this. It is a waste of time to even try. That's why the thread is still going on, to some degree -- because there isn't a solution to this. None of the suggestions up the thread will actually work to do what you might want to do: get the player to just stop cheating and "play the game correctly." You can't. He won't. Because he can't, for some reason. Again, I've seen this before.
Let's look at the solutions proposed:
App-die-rolling to prevent die cheating? Stops the incorrect reporting of numbers rolled on dice, yes. Won't stop him from saying he gets a +10 when he's supposed to get a +7. Won't stop him from incorrectly reporting his h.p., skill proficiencies, skill bonuses, etc.
Confront the player? That's even easier for him to solve: he'll just lie. And now that he knows you're onto him, he'll find slyer, harder-to-detect ways of cheating. This only makes it worse. At least right now, he doesn't know anyone's onto him, so the cheating is obvious and maybe the DM can deal with it.
Confront the DM? That will (1) make Vince the bad guy for accusing the DM's friend of something bad, (2) be disbelieved by the DM and the status quo remains, (3) get the DM to confront the player, see above for the result, or (4) in the most extreme case, get the player kicked.
None of these solutions will get the player to stay in the group but actually stop, because it's something he, the player, cannot do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I don't understand why this thread is still going. Several people offered good solutions to this on page 1, and a couple more popped up over the next few pages. The OP has ignored them all and pursued his "I will prove they are cheating" model, which has very little chance of ending well. He now has enough data to prove, to a reasonable level of confidence, what he wanted to prove from the start, and still does nothing about it 10 pages later.
Given the amount of notice the OP has taken to what others have said on here (i.e. none), I have a pretty high degree of confidence that it was never intended to be a request for help or anything similar. It is just a thread for the OP to complain about a player he dislikes. Whether it is proved that he was cheating or not is irrelevant at this point.
I don't think there actually is a good solution to this problem. There is a certain player type that just has to cheat, or has to be able to have, do, or get, more than the character should reasonably have. I have seen this before. It is quite literally impossible to stop players like this from doing it. If you stop them cheating on rolls, they'll cheat another way. They'll track spell slots incorrectly, so that they have spells available when they shouldn't. They'll track hit points inaccurately, so that their character never goes to 0 h.p. They'll state their AC incorrectly so that they don't get hit as often. They'll misread spell effects to be more powerful than the RAW text says ("accidentally on purpose" as my mom would say). Any solution you find for preventing one of these, they will find another that bypasses this solution. If you could, somehow, via VTT or some other means, find a way to effectively stop each, and every, possible method of dishonest play from this player, he will quit the group (possibly throwing a series of grown-up tantrums on the way out). There is no possible way to get a player like this to actually play the game properly, by the rules, while honestly recording everything about his character. I've seen it before -- it cannot be done. None of the solutions presented here, including mine, are capable of doing the one thing you'd need to do to fix the problem, and that is, change the player. Nothing's going to make the player change.
My solution (in-app die rolling) would ultimately get the player kicked from the group, if the cheating became publicly known and the DM got mad enough about it. In a less extreme possibility, app die-rolling might force the player to quit the group, or cheat another way. But it's not going to get the player to change. That is impossible because the player has a personality flaw that makes him need to do this. I can't really explain it any more than this because I have never had this need, but I've seen it, twice before, when I was younger, and it is literally an unstoppable force. You cannot change players like this. It is a waste of time to even try. That's why the thread is still going on, to some degree -- because there isn't a solution to this. None of the suggestions up the thread will actually work to do what you might want to do: get the player to just stop cheating and "play the game correctly." You can't. He won't. Because he can't, for some reason. Again, I've seen this before.
Let's look at the solutions proposed:
App-die-rolling to prevent die cheating? Stops the incorrect reporting of numbers rolled on dice, yes. Won't stop him from saying he gets a +10 when he's supposed to get a +7. Won't stop him from incorrectly reporting his h.p., skill proficiencies, skill bonuses, etc.
Confront the player? That's even easier for him to solve: he'll just lie. And now that he knows you're onto him, he'll find slyer, harder-to-detect ways of cheating. This only makes it worse. At least right now, he doesn't know anyone's onto him, so the cheating is obvious and maybe the DM can deal with it.
Confront the DM? That will (1) make Vince the bad guy for accusing the DM's friend of something bad, (2) be disbelieved by the DM and the status quo remains, (3) get the DM to confront the player, see above for the result, or (4) in the most extreme case, get the player kicked.
None of these solutions will get the player to stay in the group but actually stop, because it's something he, the player, cannot do.
Bio has nailed pretty much all of it.
And to be explicitly clear, I am very much aware that the if anyone gets booted from the group, it will be me. I have told Bio that I really think the group is rounding into form, with the DM doing a fantastic job of telling a story, and every week, he is playing closer and closer to the rules. Much of that is NOT my doing, as the newest player is also an encyclopedia when it comes to the rules and he constantly applies gentle pressure to make sure they are adhered to. Most of the time I just sit back with my mic muted.
So it comes down to this:
Do I risk alienating the DM to the extent that he boots me, because his real life friend of 30 plus years, the rule of cool guy and cheater, will most certainly not be going anywhere. I have to weigh the risk of me getting booted versus whether I can handle playing with THAT GUY, if I don't say anything. That is a tough choice.
I plan on asking the DM to install a dice bot. But I know this guy. He is a very logical man, numbers based. He will ask why. I can dance and say "I wanted to try it out". That will unlikely cut it. So I want hard analysis in my back pocket, that I might use if he presses me harder on my reasons.
The best case scenario, for me personally, would be me explaining to the DM what I see, with hard evidence (yeah, this guys grasps stats), and he agreeing with me. He then finds a way to gently suggest to his buddy that his rolls seem REALLY good, and then the rolls suddenly fall in line. But that scenario is unlikely. But before anyone says "this is just your problem", remember, a player cheating affects the game for everyone, as the DM has to alter the encounter difficulty levels as this one guy cuts through everything.
I don't understand why this thread is still going. Several people offered good solutions to this on page 1, and a couple more popped up over the next few pages. The OP has ignored them all and pursued his "I will prove they are cheating" model, which has very little chance of ending well. He now has enough data to prove, to a reasonable level of confidence, what he wanted to prove from the start, and still does nothing about it 10 pages later.
Given the amount of notice the OP has taken to what others have said on here (i.e. none), I have a pretty high degree of confidence that it was never intended to be a request for help or anything similar. It is just a thread for the OP to complain about a player he dislikes. Whether it is proved that he was cheating or not is irrelevant at this point.
I don't think there actually is a good solution to this problem.
OK, the word "good" was probably too strong. Let me rephrase: There have been several solutions presented which are more likely to have significantly less of a negative impact on the group than the confrontational "You're cheating, here is the statistical analysis of your last few sessions to prove it". That approach is guaranteed to cause bad feeling within the group.
There is a certain player type that just has to cheat, or has to be able to have, do, or get, more than the character should reasonably have. I have seen this before. It is quite literally impossible to stop players like this from doing it. If you stop them cheating on rolls, they'll cheat another way. They'll track spell slots incorrectly, so that they have spells available when they shouldn't. They'll track hit points inaccurately, so that their character never goes to 0 h.p. They'll state their AC incorrectly so that they don't get hit as often. They'll misread spell effects to be more powerful than the RAW text says ("accidentally on purpose" as my mom would say). Any solution you find for preventing one of these, they will find another that bypasses this solution. If you could, somehow, via VTT or some other means, find a way to effectively stop each, and every, possible method of dishonest play from this player, he will quit the group (possibly throwing a series of grown-up tantrums on the way out). There is no possible way to get a player like this to actually play the game properly, by the rules, while honestly recording everything about his character. I've seen it before -- it cannot be done. None of the solutions presented here, including mine, are capable of doing the one thing you'd need to do to fix the problem, and that is, change the player. Nothing's going to make the player change.
You are right that it's unlikely that anything is going to make that type of player change. However, we don't have proof that this particular player is one of those. Yes, if the OPs numbers are accurate, it is highly unlikely that they came about naturally. However, there are other options:
He could have a bad set of dice
He could believe that what he is doing enhances the enjoyment of the group
He may be unaware of the purpose of the game, and be "playing to win"
That's just three alternatives. If you come at him with accusations of cheating and he is any of those, it will seriously damage his relationship with the group. Alternatively, one of the softer approaches mentioned in this thread could make him realise that his dice are bad, the rest of the table don't like it, or that he doesn't need to "play to win" in a collaborative storytelling exercise.
My solution (in-app die rolling) would ultimately get the player kicked from the group, if the cheating became publicly known and the DM got mad enough about it. In a less extreme possibility, app die-rolling might force the player to quit the group, or cheat another way. But it's not going to get the player to change. That is impossible because the player has a personality flaw that makes him need to do this. I can't really explain it any more than this because I have never had this need, but I've seen it, twice before, when I was younger, and it is literally an unstoppable force. You cannot change players like this. It is a waste of time to even try. That's why the thread is still going on, to some degree -- because there isn't a solution to this. None of the suggestions up the thread will actually work to do what you might want to do: get the player to just stop cheating and "play the game correctly." You can't. He won't. Because he can't, for some reason. Again, I've seen this before.
Let's look at the solutions proposed:
App-die-rolling to prevent die cheating? Stops the incorrect reporting of numbers rolled on dice, yes. Won't stop him from saying he gets a +10 when he's supposed to get a +7. Won't stop him from incorrectly reporting his h.p., skill proficiencies, skill bonuses, etc.
Confront the player? That's even easier for him to solve: he'll just lie. And now that he knows you're onto him, he'll find slyer, harder-to-detect ways of cheating. This only makes it worse. At least right now, he doesn't know anyone's onto him, so the cheating is obvious and maybe the DM can deal with it.
Confront the DM? That will (1) make Vince the bad guy for accusing the DM's friend of something bad, (2) be disbelieved by the DM and the status quo remains, (3) get the DM to confront the player, see above for the result, or (4) in the most extreme case, get the player kicked.
None of these solutions will get the player to stay in the group but actually stop, because it's something he, the player, cannot do.
You have missed many techniques, and purposely gone for confrontational options. You are also making the assumption that this player is that "certain player type". How about:
Speak nicely to the DM, suggesting in a non-confrontational manner that the player seems to be rolling too well for it to be a fluke, and offer to work with the DM to find solutions.
Call out to the table, in a positive manner, to highlight the pattern of high-rolling results and make him aware that others can see the pattern.
Now, these may not work. However, they have a better chance of working* than shouting "You're a cheater and I can prove it!"
* That is of course assuming your aim is for everyone to play the game and enjoy it, not to just get a player you don't like kicked out of a game, no matter how that affects anyone else at the table. If that's your aim, the OP's solution is the best going.
App-die-rolling to prevent die cheating? Stops the incorrect reporting of numbers rolled on dice, yes. Won't stop him from saying he gets a +10 when he's supposed to get a +7. Won't stop him from incorrectly reporting his h.p., skill proficiencies, skill bonuses, etc.
I run an afterschool D&D club in a middle school and I currently have 12 players in the 11-14 year-old age range separated into two groups. Several of them are multi-language learners and need help finding the correct skill/ability/weapon on their sheet quite often. I can look at their sheets whenever I need to through the DDB campaign page and I will track their HP by hand during a session. I have all their ACs and other important info on index cards so I don't need to keep asking what they are during play. Since we had to move online because of the pandemic and began using Discord the Avrae bot has been a godsend, especially since it has been fully integrated with their character sheets. The children can perform checks, saves, and attacks by directly pressing the buttons on their sheets so incorrectly reporting skills, etc isn't an issue. I cannot say enough good things about how Avrae has helped streamline virtual games for me. The few corner cases that do not yet have support are easily rectified with manual rolls. All the results are posted directly in a Discord channel without the students needing to type anything.
I plan on asking the DM to install a dice bot. But I know this guy. He is a very logical man, numbers based. He will ask why. I can dance and say "I wanted to try it out". That will unlikely cut it. So I want hard analysis in my back pocket, that I might use if he presses me harder on my reasons.
An analysis is unlikely to help here (with most people), because even if it is accepted as proof that the other player is cheating, it is also proof that you have gone behind the group's back, spying on them in an attempt to discredit them (accurately or not).
I can understand why you want to do this. As a logical guy, I would want to do this myself. My first instinct is always to look to the numbers. This does not work with "normal" people though. An effort put into statistical analysis will likely be seen as an attack on the player, and probably the DM and the group, too. This is especially the case if you have let on that you dislike the guy or his play style, and I doubt that you have managed to keep such strong feelings as you have shown here hidden.
You know the DM, so it may be that what I am saying doesn't apply to him. However, most people I know would react better to a person approaching them with a softer stance ("His rolls seem too good to be true"), maybe with the suggestion of a defective set of dice, than being presented with a statistical analysis of several sessions worth of rolls.
(Edit: The reason most people would not like this, apart from the general aversion to mathematics, is that it backs them into a corner. If you bring proof that a player is cheating to the DM, they have very few options and none of them good. Nobody likes being backed into a corner or having to choose between 2 really bad options, and they will resent the person who forced them into that position. If they end up coming to that realisation on their own, or with a gentle nudge, they will feel more in control and less trapped.)
The best case scenario, for me personally, would be me explaining to the DM what I see, with hard evidence (yeah, this guys grasps stats), and he agreeing with me. He then finds a way to gently suggest to his buddy that his rolls seem REALLY good, and then the rolls suddenly fall in line. But that scenario is unlikely. But before anyone says "this is just your problem", remember, a player cheating affects the game for everyone, as the DM has to alter the encounter difficulty levels as this one guy cuts through everything.
I agree that a player cheating affects everybody and it needs to be dealt with. I just feel the way you are going about this is one of the worst available. Given the way you have stated your feelings about this player beforehand and the way you have dismissed (or ignored) every possible alternative except the course you already had planned, it looks like you just want to attack the player. Whether true or not, it makes it look like you have no intention of finding any way for the table to continue playing together and never did, you just want your pound of flesh no matter the consequences.
App-die-rolling to prevent die cheating? Stops the incorrect reporting of numbers rolled on dice, yes. Won't stop him from saying he gets a +10 when he's supposed to get a +7. Won't stop him from incorrectly reporting his h.p., skill proficiencies, skill bonuses, etc.
I run an afterschool D&D club in a middle school and I currently have 12 players in the 11-14 year-old age range separated into two groups. Several of them are multi-language learners and need help finding the correct skill/ability/weapon on their sheet quite often. I can look at their sheets whenever I need to through the DDB campaign page and I will track their HP by hand during a session. I have all their ACs and other important info on index cards so I don't need to keep asking what they are during play. Since we had to move online because of the pandemic and began using Discord the Avrae bot has been a godsend, especially since it has been fully integrated with their character sheets. The children can perform checks, saves, and attacks by directly pressing the buttons on their sheets so incorrectly reporting skills, etc isn't an issue. I cannot say enough good things about how Avrae has helped streamline virtual games for me. The few corner cases that do not yet have support are easily rectified with manual rolls. All the results are posted directly in a Discord channel without the students needing to type anything.
Exactly. DM should have up to date copies of character sheets period. Even in a perfect world with no trust issues, they are important to have for planning purposes.
I agree with that.
But I really have yet to see a DM implement that, including myself. I think I know my player's chars well enough not to need that, especially in a small group. Large group, or playing with strangers online, absolutely.
App-die-rolling to prevent die cheating? Stops the incorrect reporting of numbers rolled on dice, yes. Won't stop him from saying he gets a +10 when he's supposed to get a +7. Won't stop him from incorrectly reporting his h.p., skill proficiencies, skill bonuses, etc.
I run an afterschool D&D club in a middle school and I currently have 12 players in the 11-14 year-old age range separated into two groups. Several of them are multi-language learners and need help finding the correct skill/ability/weapon on their sheet quite often. I can look at their sheets whenever I need to through the DDB campaign page and I will track their HP by hand during a session. I have all their ACs and other important info on index cards so I don't need to keep asking what they are during play. Since we had to move online because of the pandemic and began using Discord the Avrae bot has been a godsend, especially since it has been fully integrated with their character sheets. The children can perform checks, saves, and attacks by directly pressing the buttons on their sheets so incorrectly reporting skills, etc isn't an issue. I cannot say enough good things about how Avrae has helped streamline virtual games for me. The few corner cases that do not yet have support are easily rectified with manual rolls. All the results are posted directly in a Discord channel without the students needing to type anything.
Exactly. DM should have up to date copies of character sheets period. Even in a perfect world with no trust issues, they are important to have for planning purposes.
I agree with that.
But I really have yet to see a DM implement that, including myself. I think I know my player's chars well enough not to need that, especially in a small group. Large group, or playing with strangers online, absolutely.
I have always asked for a copy of the charsheet between session zero and the first real session, and for the players to tell me their choices every time they level up. So has every other DM I ever played with. I don't really bother asking for a currently prepared spells list, that's about where I draw the line, but anything on a charsheet that isn't likely to change between long rests I'm usually aware of. Of course, if the DM uses DDB for their campaign they can look up character sheets any time they want.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I plan on asking the DM to install a dice bot. But I know this guy. He is a very logical man, numbers based. He will ask why. I can dance and say "I wanted to try it out". That will unlikely cut it. So I want hard analysis in my back pocket, that I might use if he presses me harder on my reasons.
An analysis is unlikely to help here (with most people), because even if it is accepted as proof that the other player is cheating, it is also proof that you have gone behind the group's back, spying on them in an attempt to discredit them (accurately or not).
I can understand why you want to do this. As a logical guy, I would want to do this myself. My first instinct is always to look to the numbers. This does not work with "normal" people though. An effort put into statistical analysis will likely be seen as an attack on the player, and probably the DM and the group, too. This is especially the case if you have let on that you dislike the guy or his play style, and I doubt that you have managed to keep such strong feelings as you have shown here hidden.
You know the DM, so it may be that what I am saying doesn't apply to him. However, most people I know would react better to a person approaching them with a softer stance ("His rolls seem too good to be true"), maybe with the suggestion of a defective set of dice, than being presented with a statistical analysis of several sessions worth of rolls.
(Edit: The reason most people would not like this, apart from the general aversion to mathematics, is that it backs them into a corner. If you bring proof that a player is cheating to the DM, they have very few options and none of them good. Nobody likes being backed into a corner or having to choose between 2 really bad options, and they will resent the person who forced them into that position. If they end up coming to that realisation on their own, or with a gentle nudge, they will feel more in control and less trapped.)
The best case scenario, for me personally, would be me explaining to the DM what I see, with hard evidence (yeah, this guys grasps stats), and he agreeing with me. He then finds a way to gently suggest to his buddy that his rolls seem REALLY good, and then the rolls suddenly fall in line. But that scenario is unlikely. But before anyone says "this is just your problem", remember, a player cheating affects the game for everyone, as the DM has to alter the encounter difficulty levels as this one guy cuts through everything.
I agree that a player cheating affects everybody and it needs to be dealt with. I just feel the way you are going about this is one of the worst available. Given the way you have stated your feelings about this player beforehand and the way you have dismissed (or ignored) every possible alternative except the course you already had planned, it looks like you just want to attack the player. Whether true or not, it makes it look like you have no intention of finding any way for the table to continue playing together and never did, you just want your pound of flesh no matter the consequences.
Pardon, but how is it spying? Are players not allowed to keep transcripts of sessions? How in blazes would any DM enforce that?
I'm not in any way saying players should not keep records, or that the DM should try to stop them doing so. In fact, keeping some records should be encouraged.
However, this is not such a situation. This is one player deciding that they don't like another player, then deciding that they are suspicious of their rolls, then deciding to target that player with additional recording and analysis, without discussion with the DM or anyone else in the group (i.e. behind their back). I would feel horrible if I discovered somebody had done that with someone in my group. I would feel that all trust had broken down in the group if somebody pulled that against someone at a table I was playing with whether or not there was cheating involved by anyone else. I would constantly suspect that the same person could be recording and analysing my own rolls, looking for any abnormality, and would struggle to trust them enough to continue playing with them again.
This is similar to when I am walking/driving around and see the police. I know that I am doing nothing wrong, but seeing somebody there looking for trouble makes me nervous (especially having seen cops unfairly target others, making big mistakes which have a devastating effect on the lives of others). The same is true here: feeling that someone is looking over my shoulder would ruin the game for me, and I would not want to play with that person again.
No, I have not asked the DM about him installing a dice bot on the server, but I will.
THAT GUY was up to his tricks last night, but I think the DM is catching on, when THAT GUY saiI d he rolled a 30 on a Survival check, at now 5th level. The DM and I both called him out on it. It turned out to be "player error", and he had "only" rolled a 26 (19 + 7, due to Prof in Survival). The DM also commented that a Nat 20 THAT GUY had rolled using Guiding Bolt was likely the 3rd time he had done that in about 4 sessions.
I now have 50 data points (of d20's), which is more than enough to do a statistical analysis. That allows me to brush up on my skills (yeah, I find that kind of thing fun), and if the DM asks me why I am wanting a dice roller, and I feel ornery, maybe I will pull out the results.
Oh, and a question, in general: If a char has the Sailor background, what is the appropriate bonus to rolls, when operating a boat?
I believe they get proficiency with sea vehicles, the skill isn't affected by any ability score, so a +3 for a level 5 character.
There is a difference between keeping transcripts of a session so you know where you were, who the NPCs, were, etc, and recording someone's every dice roll.
Guys. Pop some popcorn, sit back and relax. This is the "watch Vince alienate himself from his playgroup show" and it always has been. It's meaningless to try and get across some meaningful message. If it hasn't sunk in during the last TEN pages, it won't now.
No, I have not asked the DM about him installing a dice bot on the server, but I will.
THAT GUY was up to his tricks last night, but I think the DM is catching on, when THAT GUY saiI d he rolled a 30 on a Survival check, at now 5th level. The DM and I both called him out on it. It turned out to be "player error", and he had "only" rolled a 26 (19 + 7, due to Prof in Survival). The DM also commented that a Nat 20 THAT GUY had rolled using Guiding Bolt was likely the 3rd time he had done that in about 4 sessions.
I now have 50 data points (of d20's), which is more than enough to do a statistical analysis. That allows me to brush up on my skills (yeah, I find that kind of thing fun), and if the DM asks me why I am wanting a dice roller, and I feel ornery, maybe I will pull out the results.
Oh, and a question, in general: If a char has the Sailor background, what is the appropriate bonus to rolls, when operating a boat?
I believe they get proficiency with sea vehicles, the skill isn't affected by any ability score, so a +3 for a level 5 character.
Apologies, but this is blatantly incorrect.
All 'skill' checks in D&D are actually ability checks. Every check in D&D is and must be associated with an ability score, unless the DM enjoys arbitrarily ruining their players' chances for success. The check for 'operating a boat' would be dependent on what operating the boat actually means. If the check is for the physical act of helming the ship, keeping it on course during difficult maneuvers? That would be a Dexterity (Water Vehicles) check. Is the check more concerning knowledge and the correct application of one's learning to correctly operate the ship? Then it's an Intelligence (Water Vehicles) check.
This is why so many tables have no idea what to do with tools, or any proficiency that isn't one of the eighteen prebaked skills - as well as why so many tables have severe issues with doing 'off' skill checks, such as Strength (Intimidation) or Intelligence (Persuasion). The default roll in 5e is not a skill check, it's an ability check to which a skill may or may not apply. It's honestly one of the worst mistakes on the 5e character sheet - the entire list of rigid, eternally unchangeable skills sitting there on the sheet artificially limits both character capabilities and player imaginations so much.
No, I have not asked the DM about him installing a dice bot on the server, but I will.
THAT GUY was up to his tricks last night, but I think the DM is catching on, when THAT GUY saiI d he rolled a 30 on a Survival check, at now 5th level. The DM and I both called him out on it. It turned out to be "player error", and he had "only" rolled a 26 (19 + 7, due to Prof in Survival). The DM also commented that a Nat 20 THAT GUY had rolled using Guiding Bolt was likely the 3rd time he had done that in about 4 sessions.
I now have 50 data points (of d20's), which is more than enough to do a statistical analysis. That allows me to brush up on my skills (yeah, I find that kind of thing fun), and if the DM asks me why I am wanting a dice roller, and I feel ornery, maybe I will pull out the results.
Oh, and a question, in general: If a char has the Sailor background, what is the appropriate bonus to rolls, when operating a boat?
I believe they get proficiency with sea vehicles, the skill isn't affected by any ability score, so a +3 for a level 5 character.
There are no skill checks in 5E that don't use an ability score. All skill checks are ability checks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
No, I have not asked the DM about him installing a dice bot on the server, but I will.
THAT GUY was up to his tricks last night, but I think the DM is catching on, when THAT GUY saiI d he rolled a 30 on a Survival check, at now 5th level. The DM and I both called him out on it. It turned out to be "player error", and he had "only" rolled a 26 (19 + 7, due to Prof in Survival). The DM also commented that a Nat 20 THAT GUY had rolled using Guiding Bolt was likely the 3rd time he had done that in about 4 sessions.
I now have 50 data points (of d20's), which is more than enough to do a statistical analysis. That allows me to brush up on my skills (yeah, I find that kind of thing fun), and if the DM asks me why I am wanting a dice roller, and I feel ornery, maybe I will pull out the results.
Oh, and a question, in general: If a char has the Sailor background, what is the appropriate bonus to rolls, when operating a boat?
I believe they get proficiency with sea vehicles, the skill isn't affected by any ability score, so a +3 for a level 5 character.
Apologies, but this is blatantly incorrect.
All 'skill' checks in D&D are actually ability checks. Every check in D&D is and must be associated with an ability score, unless the DM enjoys arbitrarily ruining their players' chances for success. The check for 'operating a boat' would be dependent on what operating the boat actually means. If the check is for the physical act of helming the ship, keeping it on course during difficult maneuvers? That would be a Dexterity (Water Vehicles) check. Is the check more concerning knowledge and the correct application of one's learning to correctly operate the ship? Then it's an Intelligence (Water Vehicles) check.
This is why so many tables have no idea what to do with tools, or any proficiency that isn't one of the eighteen prebaked skills - as well as why so many tables have severe issues with doing 'off' skill checks, such as Strength (Intimidation) or Intelligence (Persuasion). The default roll in 5e is not a skill check, it's an ability check to which a skill may or may not apply. It's honestly one of the worst mistakes on the 5e character sheet - the entire list of rigid, eternally unchangeable skills sitting there on the sheet artificially limits both character capabilities and player imaginations so much.
Well, while I would like to agree with you in principle, I don't believe I have ever read any documentation that proves that every skill check is associated with any particular ability. And in the specific, sorry, but maneuvering a 100 x 20 foot boat (posted those stats earlier) away from a dock has nothing to do with Dexterity. Maybe Int, maybe Str, but not Dex. In any case, the fact that all seven checks related to the Sailor background ranged from 20 to 25 is, shall we say, eyebrow raising.
We have been through this, Any individual roll is never questionable. But a growing body of numbers, that is a whole different matter.
Well, while I would like to agree with you in principle, I don't believe I have ever read any documentation that proves that every skill check is associated with any particular ability.
You might want to re-read chapter 7 of the PHB/Basic Rules, particularly the entry for 'Skills':
Each ability covers a broad range of capabilities, including skills that a character or a monster can be proficient in. A skill represents a specific aspect of an ability score, and an individual's proficiency in a skill demonstrates a focus on that aspect. (A character's starting skill proficiencies are determined at character creation, and a monster's skill proficiencies appear in the monster's stat block.)
For example, a Dexterity check might reflect a character's attempt to pull off an acrobatic stunt, to palm an object, or to stay hidden. Each of these aspects of Dexterity has an associated skill: Acrobatics, Sleight of Hand, and Stealth, respectively. So a character who has proficiency in the Stealth skill is particularly good at Dexterity checks related to sneaking and hiding.
Well, while I would like to agree with you in principle, I don't believe I have ever read any documentation that proves that every skill check is associated with any particular ability.
The fact that the use of skills is explained in Chapter 7: Using Ability Scores seems like a pretty big hint. There being no reference to "skill checks" in the PHB would be another one.
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.
When I started the thread, I had 28 data points, and from a statistical analysis, n=30 is the minimum for meaningful output. As of 40 hours ago, I now have 51 data points in the sample, which does allow for meaningful output. So now the math can be done, which will present a stronger case.
I think you're overdoing it. This isn't a technical issue in the production of something where evidence is fully required to justify making a change. Saying "I noticed he never seems to miss, and I'm worried he might be cheating" is enough to go on. If you say "I have evidence that you are cheating; here is every roll you've made since this date, and their results, and here's a chart plotting them to emphasize that you have never missed" and so on, you're going to come across as petty and I feel like most of the other people at the table are going to be seriously put out by the amount of "behind their back" work you've put in to prove that they are doing wrong. It's going to kill the mood at the table permanently if you go in with evidence and logs of their dice rolls.
Picture the comparison another way - your neighbor comes over and asks if you can play your music a bit quieter, because it often is too loud and they can hear it.
Now compare to your neighbor coming over and showing you a spreadsheet of every day in the last 6 months, with decibel readings, genre of music, and the time of day you played it, to prove to you that you're playing your music too loud for them and they would like you to play it quieter.
The first one is going to come off as a polite request if you are playing too loud, and seem petty if you're not, but the relationship with the neighbor isn't going to be compromised either way. The second one would seem petty even if you were playing death metal at 3am every night, and you will probably not get on as well with your neighbor any more.
If you're putting the evidence together purely for yourself, to make sure you don't make a mistake in accusing them, however, that's a good thing to have done - but leave the evidence behind when you discuss it, and don't bring it up!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Guys. Pop some popcorn, sit back and relax. This is the "watch Vince alienate himself from his playgroup show" and it always has been. It's meaningless to try and get across some meaningful message. If it hasn't sunk in during the last TEN pages, it won't now.
But that's the point: This is only useful if you are going to approach in a confrontational manner, which is unlikely to end well for the group. There are plenty of "soft" ways to deal with this which have been mentioned, any of which would have a good chance of leaving the group feeling positive rather than negative, but if you have even considered them you have not discussed that on here.
All of this, and your comments throughout the thread, leaves it looking like all you want is to get this guy booted out of the group, no matter whether this causes bad feeling within the group or even damages one of the DMs friendships.
I say this as a man who looks at maths and logic as the foundation of his whole world, but there is little to no likelihood of a positive outcome to this. Even if this can be resolved without ejecting a player, you will still be unhappy with his play style and he will resent you for accusing him of cheating. The other players at the table will feel uncomfortable with all of this, especially the DM whose friend is the accused.
I don't think there actually is a good solution to this problem. There is a certain player type that just has to cheat, or has to be able to have, do, or get, more than the character should reasonably have. I have seen this before. It is quite literally impossible to stop players like this from doing it. If you stop them cheating on rolls, they'll cheat another way. They'll track spell slots incorrectly, so that they have spells available when they shouldn't. They'll track hit points inaccurately, so that their character never goes to 0 h.p. They'll state their AC incorrectly so that they don't get hit as often. They'll misread spell effects to be more powerful than the RAW text says ("accidentally on purpose" as my mom would say). Any solution you find for preventing one of these, they will find another that bypasses this solution. If you could, somehow, via VTT or some other means, find a way to effectively stop each, and every, possible method of dishonest play from this player, he will quit the group (possibly throwing a series of grown-up tantrums on the way out). There is no possible way to get a player like this to actually play the game properly, by the rules, while honestly recording everything about his character. I've seen it before -- it cannot be done. None of the solutions presented here, including mine, are capable of doing the one thing you'd need to do to fix the problem, and that is, change the player. Nothing's going to make the player change.
My solution (in-app die rolling) would ultimately get the player kicked from the group, if the cheating became publicly known and the DM got mad enough about it. In a less extreme possibility, app die-rolling might force the player to quit the group, or cheat another way. But it's not going to get the player to change. That is impossible because the player has a personality flaw that makes him need to do this. I can't really explain it any more than this because I have never had this need, but I've seen it, twice before, when I was younger, and it is literally an unstoppable force. You cannot change players like this. It is a waste of time to even try. That's why the thread is still going on, to some degree -- because there isn't a solution to this. None of the suggestions up the thread will actually work to do what you might want to do: get the player to just stop cheating and "play the game correctly." You can't. He won't. Because he can't, for some reason. Again, I've seen this before.
Let's look at the solutions proposed:
None of these solutions will get the player to stay in the group but actually stop, because it's something he, the player, cannot do.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Bio has nailed pretty much all of it.
And to be explicitly clear, I am very much aware that the if anyone gets booted from the group, it will be me. I have told Bio that I really think the group is rounding into form, with the DM doing a fantastic job of telling a story, and every week, he is playing closer and closer to the rules. Much of that is NOT my doing, as the newest player is also an encyclopedia when it comes to the rules and he constantly applies gentle pressure to make sure they are adhered to. Most of the time I just sit back with my mic muted.
So it comes down to this:
Do I risk alienating the DM to the extent that he boots me, because his real life friend of 30 plus years, the rule of cool guy and cheater, will most certainly not be going anywhere. I have to weigh the risk of me getting booted versus whether I can handle playing with THAT GUY, if I don't say anything. That is a tough choice.
I plan on asking the DM to install a dice bot. But I know this guy. He is a very logical man, numbers based. He will ask why. I can dance and say "I wanted to try it out". That will unlikely cut it. So I want hard analysis in my back pocket, that I might use if he presses me harder on my reasons.
The best case scenario, for me personally, would be me explaining to the DM what I see, with hard evidence (yeah, this guys grasps stats), and he agreeing with me. He then finds a way to gently suggest to his buddy that his rolls seem REALLY good, and then the rolls suddenly fall in line. But that scenario is unlikely. But before anyone says "this is just your problem", remember, a player cheating affects the game for everyone, as the DM has to alter the encounter difficulty levels as this one guy cuts through everything.
OK, the word "good" was probably too strong. Let me rephrase: There have been several solutions presented which are more likely to have significantly less of a negative impact on the group than the confrontational "You're cheating, here is the statistical analysis of your last few sessions to prove it". That approach is guaranteed to cause bad feeling within the group.
You are right that it's unlikely that anything is going to make that type of player change. However, we don't have proof that this particular player is one of those. Yes, if the OPs numbers are accurate, it is highly unlikely that they came about naturally. However, there are other options:
That's just three alternatives. If you come at him with accusations of cheating and he is any of those, it will seriously damage his relationship with the group. Alternatively, one of the softer approaches mentioned in this thread could make him realise that his dice are bad, the rest of the table don't like it, or that he doesn't need to "play to win" in a collaborative storytelling exercise.
You have missed many techniques, and purposely gone for confrontational options. You are also making the assumption that this player is that "certain player type". How about:
Now, these may not work. However, they have a better chance of working* than shouting "You're a cheater and I can prove it!"
* That is of course assuming your aim is for everyone to play the game and enjoy it, not to just get a player you don't like kicked out of a game, no matter how that affects anyone else at the table. If that's your aim, the OP's solution is the best going.
I run an afterschool D&D club in a middle school and I currently have 12 players in the 11-14 year-old age range separated into two groups. Several of them are multi-language learners and need help finding the correct skill/ability/weapon on their sheet quite often. I can look at their sheets whenever I need to through the DDB campaign page and I will track their HP by hand during a session. I have all their ACs and other important info on index cards so I don't need to keep asking what they are during play. Since we had to move online because of the pandemic and began using Discord the Avrae bot has been a godsend, especially since it has been fully integrated with their character sheets. The children can perform checks, saves, and attacks by directly pressing the buttons on their sheets so incorrectly reporting skills, etc isn't an issue. I cannot say enough good things about how Avrae has helped streamline virtual games for me. The few corner cases that do not yet have support are easily rectified with manual rolls. All the results are posted directly in a Discord channel without the students needing to type anything.
An analysis is unlikely to help here (with most people), because even if it is accepted as proof that the other player is cheating, it is also proof that you have gone behind the group's back, spying on them in an attempt to discredit them (accurately or not).
I can understand why you want to do this. As a logical guy, I would want to do this myself. My first instinct is always to look to the numbers. This does not work with "normal" people though. An effort put into statistical analysis will likely be seen as an attack on the player, and probably the DM and the group, too. This is especially the case if you have let on that you dislike the guy or his play style, and I doubt that you have managed to keep such strong feelings as you have shown here hidden.
You know the DM, so it may be that what I am saying doesn't apply to him. However, most people I know would react better to a person approaching them with a softer stance ("His rolls seem too good to be true"), maybe with the suggestion of a defective set of dice, than being presented with a statistical analysis of several sessions worth of rolls.
(Edit: The reason most people would not like this, apart from the general aversion to mathematics, is that it backs them into a corner. If you bring proof that a player is cheating to the DM, they have very few options and none of them good. Nobody likes being backed into a corner or having to choose between 2 really bad options, and they will resent the person who forced them into that position. If they end up coming to that realisation on their own, or with a gentle nudge, they will feel more in control and less trapped.)
I agree that a player cheating affects everybody and it needs to be dealt with. I just feel the way you are going about this is one of the worst available. Given the way you have stated your feelings about this player beforehand and the way you have dismissed (or ignored) every possible alternative except the course you already had planned, it looks like you just want to attack the player. Whether true or not, it makes it look like you have no intention of finding any way for the table to continue playing together and never did, you just want your pound of flesh no matter the consequences.
I agree with that.
But I really have yet to see a DM implement that, including myself. I think I know my player's chars well enough not to need that, especially in a small group. Large group, or playing with strangers online, absolutely.
I have always asked for a copy of the charsheet between session zero and the first real session, and for the players to tell me their choices every time they level up. So has every other DM I ever played with. I don't really bother asking for a currently prepared spells list, that's about where I draw the line, but anything on a charsheet that isn't likely to change between long rests I'm usually aware of. Of course, if the DM uses DDB for their campaign they can look up character sheets any time they want.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I'm not in any way saying players should not keep records, or that the DM should try to stop them doing so. In fact, keeping some records should be encouraged.
However, this is not such a situation. This is one player deciding that they don't like another player, then deciding that they are suspicious of their rolls, then deciding to target that player with additional recording and analysis, without discussion with the DM or anyone else in the group (i.e. behind their back). I would feel horrible if I discovered somebody had done that with someone in my group. I would feel that all trust had broken down in the group if somebody pulled that against someone at a table I was playing with whether or not there was cheating involved by anyone else. I would constantly suspect that the same person could be recording and analysing my own rolls, looking for any abnormality, and would struggle to trust them enough to continue playing with them again.
This is similar to when I am walking/driving around and see the police. I know that I am doing nothing wrong, but seeing somebody there looking for trouble makes me nervous (especially having seen cops unfairly target others, making big mistakes which have a devastating effect on the lives of others). The same is true here: feeling that someone is looking over my shoulder would ruin the game for me, and I would not want to play with that person again.
I believe they get proficiency with sea vehicles, the skill isn't affected by any ability score, so a +3 for a level 5 character.
Mystic v3 should be official, nuff said.
There is a difference between keeping transcripts of a session so you know where you were, who the NPCs, were, etc, and recording someone's every dice roll.
Brilliant!
Apologies, but this is blatantly incorrect.
All 'skill' checks in D&D are actually ability checks. Every check in D&D is and must be associated with an ability score, unless the DM enjoys arbitrarily ruining their players' chances for success. The check for 'operating a boat' would be dependent on what operating the boat actually means. If the check is for the physical act of helming the ship, keeping it on course during difficult maneuvers? That would be a Dexterity (Water Vehicles) check. Is the check more concerning knowledge and the correct application of one's learning to correctly operate the ship? Then it's an Intelligence (Water Vehicles) check.
This is why so many tables have no idea what to do with tools, or any proficiency that isn't one of the eighteen prebaked skills - as well as why so many tables have severe issues with doing 'off' skill checks, such as Strength (Intimidation) or Intelligence (Persuasion). The default roll in 5e is not a skill check, it's an ability check to which a skill may or may not apply. It's honestly one of the worst mistakes on the 5e character sheet - the entire list of rigid, eternally unchangeable skills sitting there on the sheet artificially limits both character capabilities and player imaginations so much.
Please do not contact or message me.
There are no skill checks in 5E that don't use an ability score. All skill checks are ability checks.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Well, while I would like to agree with you in principle, I don't believe I have ever read any documentation that proves that every skill check is associated with any particular ability. And in the specific, sorry, but maneuvering a 100 x 20 foot boat (posted those stats earlier) away from a dock has nothing to do with Dexterity. Maybe Int, maybe Str, but not Dex. In any case, the fact that all seven checks related to the Sailor background ranged from 20 to 25 is, shall we say, eyebrow raising.
We have been through this, Any individual roll is never questionable. But a growing body of numbers, that is a whole different matter.
You might want to re-read chapter 7 of the PHB/Basic Rules, particularly the entry for 'Skills':
More Interesting Lock Picking Rules
The fact that the use of skills is explained in Chapter 7: Using Ability Scores seems like a pretty big hint. There being no reference to "skill checks" in the PHB would be another one.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].