I posted a thread some weeks ago about how I could not stand the one particular player, called ONE GUY, that was trying to break any rule he could by implementing "rule of cool". One of the more egregious examples was "Curing Wounds" with his foot, while holding a shield and sword, but the DM shut him down on that one.
Anyway, I decided to tough it out, since I really liked the storyline, my Halfling Scout was fun to play, and the DM plus another player had really made an effort to play more within the rules. That was due not to anything I had done, but because a 4th player had been added, and this 4th was also knowledgeable and a stickler for rules. I could sit back and keep my mouth shut. The ONE GUY was of course up to his antics, but the DM seemed on the right track (and still does). The game has been good, except for you know who. But something else started gnawing on me. It seemed like he never missed an attack, never failed a save or ability check.
So 2 sessions ago, late in it, I started tracking his rolls, with whatever modifiers he had. Now, this was a 4th level char at the time, with the best possible bonus of +6 of Prof + Skill. Most would be with significantly less bonuses.
2 sessions ago: 20, 19,19, 6 on a d10, 9 on a d10, 17, 16. He also cast FIVE 1st level spells and two 2nd level spells. I chalked that up to blind luck, my bias, and him upcasting a spell.
So last session, he rolled these. This is the complete session:
21,15 (at advantage), 21, 14, 20, 17, 20, natural 20, 17, 18, 20, 19 (plus 6 on a d6 for Bardic Inspiration), 16 (at Advantage), 24, 19, 10, 22, 15, 16, 16, (33 of 8d6, expected value of 28), 20, 21, 21. He never missed on an attack, never blew a save.
These rolls, as I said, had at most a bonus of +6, and most rolls were less than that. So now, I have the choice of letting this slide, quitting the game and/or telling the DM that one of his oldest friends is a cheater. I am sure that will end well.
And people wonder why I dislike rule of cool players. This ONE GUY has reinforced my beliefs. If a player is willing to ignore the rules to implement rule of cool, why should I be surprised that they cheat on other parts of the game.
How does your table roll? Many just have the rolls in the middle or at least in open view, doing so removes all doubt. Alternatively you can use something like Roll20 where the virtual rolls are publicly shown in the chat.
I have heard of new players stuffing up the maths terribly, such as adding the whole stat rather than just the bonus, but I'm pretty sure you said this guy was an experienced player, so that kind of mistake seems unlikely. If you said to the DM you would like player rolls to be public, you wouldn't have to call out that guy, just say its the same rule for everyone.
I would facepalm if my cleric tryed to heal some dude with his foot, though Divine Soul sorcerer would be different story, (Jesus healed somebody when they touched his cloak ).
TBH, everyone should be using a RNG that can be publicly seen, and on a VTT, this should be a standard feature, plus I think there's some 3rd-party Zoom mod that lets you roll dice.
Or maybe he's just on a hot streak? A friend of mine didn't roll above a 7 for two sessions in a row. It can happen the other way too, as unlikely as it is. I think you should try to rein in the negativity until you have definitive proof they are cheating. And even then, there is no correlation between "rule of cool" and cheating. That is a vitriolic connection to insinuate. We get you don't like that playstyle Vince. Don't be toxic about it.
I’m far from the biggest fan of Rule of Cool (I apply/allow it only very rarely, and even then provide minimal bonuses) but I think you’re misplacing your criticism. This guy is a cheater and a rules lawyer, but “rule of cool” is something else entirely, heck, the cure wounds foot thing is the opposite of cool, it’s ridiculous. Yes, there almost definitely is greater occurrence of cheating and stupid “creativity” in players who like the rule of cool, but saying that the rule of cool is responsible for these actions, or that most rule of cool players end up as cheaters, is a slippery slope fallacy. The vast majority are decent players (many of whom I’ve found are willing to adapt to tougher DMs) who would never pull crap like this. There are issues with rule of cool, depending on the table at least. This is not one of them.
Even the extra casting of a first level spell is not evidence of a blatant cheater. Maybe they got distracted in the moment and forget to mark it off their sheet. The point is you don't actually know and should not be so adamant about it. Is it all a bit fishy? Sure, a bit. But you don't have the proof and are not in the DM chair to officiate over rolls. I suggest if it's making you this angry that you just walk away from the game. You clearly can't stand this person.
How does your table roll? Many just have the rolls in the middle or at least in open view, doing so removes all doubt. Alternatively you can use something like Roll20 where the virtual rolls are publicly shown in the chat.
I have heard of new players stuffing up the maths terribly, such as adding the whole stat rather than just the bonus, but I'm pretty sure you said this guy was an experienced player, so that kind of mistake seems unlikely. If you said to the DM you would like player rolls to be public, you wouldn't have to call out that guy, just say its the same rule for everyone.
We are playing online, using Discord, and everyone is rolling at home, on the honour system. Some have more honour than others. This guy have been playing D&D off and on for 40 years. I fear that if asked the DM to have players roll online, that would certainly trigger "why???"
If this was my own game, I would handle it. But given this is another DM, and the cheater is a old friend of his, any suggestions by me require a lot more finesse than I am usually capable, or willing, to use.
...I fear that if asked the DM to have players roll online, that would certainly trigger "why???"
Maybe there is a reasonable answer to justify it.
You could see if the DM would be willing to have one session played with online dice exclusively, so that they can have an experimental Game Log to play with as new DNDBeyond features are released. This would be a non-confrontational one-off that would be hard to argue against and would give both you and your DM a valuable frame of reference.
Make it about the DM wanting to provide a better experience for everyone.
I also hear people regularly complain that digital dice don't roll consistently. Either averaging lower, or being "swingy". Either way, getting a data sample is an easy excuse to try something new without pointing a finger.
I’m far from the biggest fan of Rule of Cool (I apply/allow it only very rarely, and even then provide minimal bonuses) but I think you’re misplacing your criticism. This guy is a cheater and a rules lawyer, but “rule of cool” is something else entirely, heck, the cure wounds foot thing is the opposite of cool, it’s ridiculous. Yes, there almost definitely is greater occurrence of cheating and stupid “creativity” in players who like the rule of cool, but saying that the rule of cool is responsible for these actions, or that most rule of cool players end up as cheaters, is a slippery slope fallacy. The vast majority are decent players (many of whom I’ve found are willing to adapt to tougher DMs) who would never pull crap like this. There are issues with rule of cool, depending on the table at least. This is not one of them.
Yeah, I guess I should not conflate the two issues. But I do see some correlation over decades of playing. This kind of cheating enrages me just about more than anything else.
But he was also merging rule of cool with ridiculous rolls.
He Grappled a Large creature, with a high Str. The player in question has told us he has 14 Str. DM rolled badly, so it was a cakewalk for the initial grapple. Then on the subsequent turn, the DM let it slip he rolled really well and the creature was likely going to pop the Grapple, when the player announced he had rolled the 24...keep in mind the 14 Str. I should have said something right there. Later, the player is asking if he can swing the creature around to avoid any attacks from the rest its pack (modified Wolves). And later still, wants to cast Burning Hands while still grappling the creature. You get the picture.
Even the extra casting of a first level spell is not evidence of a blatant cheater. Maybe they got distracted in the moment and forget to mark it off their sheet. The point is you don't actually know and should not be so adamant about it. Is it all a bit fishy? Absolutely. But you don't have the proof and are not in the DM chair to officiate over rolls. I suggest if it's making you this angry that you just walk away from the game. You clearly can't stand this person.
I really hate allowing cheaters to prosper. If I walk, I will most certainly make it clear WHY I am walking.
...I fear that if asked the DM to have players roll online, that would certainly trigger "why???"
Maybe there is a reasonable answer to justify it.
You could see if the DM would be willing to have one session played with online dice exclusively, so that they can have an experimental Game Log to play with as new DNDBeyond features are released. This would be non-confrontational one-off that would be hard to argue against and would give both you and your DM a valuable frame of reference.
Make it about the DM wanting to provide a better experience for everyone.
I also hear people regularly complain that digital dice don't roll consistently. Either averaging lower, or being "swingy". Either way, getting a data sample is an easy excuse to try something new without pointing a finger.
I will see if I can find a way to finesse that. But ultimately, the DM will ask "if it ain't broke, why fix it?". I am positive the DM is so wrapped in the game he has no idea what it is happening. Most DM's are in that boat. Too many things to juggle to track a player.
Do you have his character sheet? Do you know what feats he has taken, if any, - what race/background, his proficiencies, his class and subclass?
For example if he had expertise or any similar twice-bonus feature for athletics/grapple checks, he could have double-prof in them. Even without that, rolling 20 with +4 bonus would result in 24, and this is a 5% chance of doing so. It is perfectly within the grapple rules to move the enemy and if you have somebody grappled and the other hand is free (or holding an arcane focus) then you can still cast spells. You don't have to keep using actions to maintain a grapple - it remains until the grappled target breaks free.
The rolls you list aren't special. Above average, but not wildly so and a couple are even rather poor. I've rolled better across multiple sessions in a row - and that was using digital dice on a VTT with my results showing to everyone. My best was 4 nat 20's in a row. There were also times where I've rolled poorly across multiple sessions and my record was 3 nat 1's in a row. Welcome to dice and probability.
Five 1st levels? Is that all? My record at 4th level was 8. Variant human Sorcerer with Magic Initiate and Aberrant Dragonmark feats using my Sorc Points. Didn't need to upcast or sacrifice higher slots. There's a lot of ways to get some 1st level spells cast for free. So, without knowing his class, subclass, race, magic items and such, we have no way of knowing if the 5x 1st levels was genuine or not and EVEN IF it was an error, there's nothing indicated, in your words, whether this is a common deliberate thing or just a mistake - a mistake a lot of people make, just to note that. I play spellcasters a lot and I've still made this mistake before.
I remember reading your previous thread and not seeing much of an issue, and now another with even less of an issue. Personally, I think you just don't like this person and trying to make up reasons to justify your dislike. You're calling him a cheater without evidence, citing dice rolls that don't actually indicate such, and you keep mentioning about their "rule of cool" when it seems less "rule of cool" and mostly just somebody trying to be creative but might be a bit much at times but your DM is fine with it and keeps a balance.
So far, out of these two threads, all I have seen is you being toxic about somebody behind their back. If I had to pick between them and you to play with, I'd pick them. I'm not trying to be mean here, just it's how you're coming across with what you're saying and doing. So far all you've done is showcase an enthusiastic player that others and the DM are fine with, who's getting a slight bit of luck on some dice and it's somehow rubbed you the wrong way enough to rant to randos on the internet calling him a cheater, insinuate him as a bad player, and all behind his back.
Now, perhaps everything you're saying is justified - if so, provide actual evidence of it. So far, you haven't and it's not making you look good at all.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I've been doing some early Alpha testing for a company that is doing social AR for D&D, and they're about to go into Open Alpha. (Full body masks for video chat + on screen dice rollers, maps, and various tools for Players and DMs.) It's pretty basic at the moment, but the essentials are there and it's making steady progress. Jump onto their Discord server and poke around a bit. Once that becomes available, it should be novel enough to warrant experimentation.
Do you have his character sheet? Do you know what feats he has taken, if any, - what race/background, his proficiencies, his class and subclass?
For example if he had expertise or any similar twice-bonus feature for athletics/grapple checks, he could have double-prof in them. Even without that, rolling 20 with +4 bonus would result in 24, and this is a 5% chance of doing so. It is perfectly within the grapple rules to move the enemy and if you have somebody grappled and the other hand is free (or holding an arcane focus) then you can still cast spells. You don't have to keep using actions to maintain a grapple - it remains until the grappled target breaks free.
The rolls you list aren't special. Above average, but not wildly so and a couple are even rather poor. I've rolled better across multiple sessions in a row - and that was using digital dice on a VTT with my results showing to everyone. My best was 4 nat 20's in a row. There were also times where I've rolled poorly across multiple sessions and my record was 3 nat 1's in a row. Welcome to dice and probability.
Five 1st levels? Is that all? My record at 4th level was 8. Variant human Sorcerer with Magic Initiate and Aberrant Dragonmark feats using my Sorc Points. Didn't need to upcast or sacrifice higher slots. There's a lot of ways to get some 1st level spells cast for free. So, without knowing his class, subclass, race, magic items and such, we have no way of knowing if the 5x 1st levels was genuine or not and EVEN IF it was an error, there's nothing indicated, in your words, whether this is a common deliberate thing or just a mistake - a mistake a lot of people make, just to note that. I play spellcasters a lot and I've still made this mistake before.
I remember reading your previous thread and not seeing much of an issue, and now another with even less of an issue. Personally, I think you just don't like this person and trying to make up reasons to justify your dislike. You're calling him a cheater without evidence, citing dice rolls that don't actually indicate such, and you keep mentioning about their "rule of cool" when it seems less "rule of cool" and mostly just somebody trying to be creative but might be a bit much at times but your DM is fine with it and keeps a balance.
So far, out of these two threads, all I have seen is you being toxic about somebody behind their back. If I had to pick between them and you to play with, I'd pick them. I'm not trying to be mean here, just it's how you're coming across with what you're saying and doing. So far all you've done is showcase an enthusiastic player that others and the DM are fine with, who's getting a slight bit of luck on some dice and it's somehow rubbed you the wrong way enough to rant to randos on the internet calling him a cheater, insinuate him as a bad player, and all behind his back.
Now, perhaps everything you're saying is justified - if so, provide actual evidence of it. So far, you haven't and it's not making you look good at all.
Ummm...let's see...27 point buy, Light Cleric, Human Variant, taking Weapons Master at level 0 (note above a Cleric is wielding a sword), then took 4th level ASI to get 18 Wisdom, and he told us he has a 14 Str. So, you want to try plugging those stats and information into your machine and get back to me on the probability of rolling those numbers?
I know precisely what I am talking about, as does anyone who does the math on this.
Do you have his character sheet? Do you know what feats he has taken, if any, - what race/background, his proficiencies, his class and subclass?
For example if he had expertise or any similar twice-bonus feature for athletics/grapple checks, he could have double-prof in them. Even without that, rolling 20 with +4 bonus would result in 24, and this is a 5% chance of doing so. It is perfectly within the grapple rules to move the enemy and if you have somebody grappled and the other hand is free (or holding an arcane focus) then you can still cast spells. You don't have to keep using actions to maintain a grapple - it remains until the grappled target breaks free.
The rolls you list aren't special. Above average, but not wildly so and a couple are even rather poor. I've rolled better across multiple sessions in a row - and that was using digital dice on a VTT with my results showing to everyone. My best was 4 nat 20's in a row. There were also times where I've rolled poorly across multiple sessions and my record was 3 nat 1's in a row. Welcome to dice and probability.
Five 1st levels? Is that all? My record at 4th level was 8. Variant human Sorcerer with Magic Initiate and Aberrant Dragonmark feats using my Sorc Points. Didn't need to upcast or sacrifice higher slots. There's a lot of ways to get some 1st level spells cast for free. So, without knowing his class, subclass, race, magic items and such, we have no way of knowing if the 5x 1st levels was genuine or not and EVEN IF it was an error, there's nothing indicated, in your words, whether this is a common deliberate thing or just a mistake - a mistake a lot of people make, just to note that. I play spellcasters a lot and I've still made this mistake before.
I remember reading your previous thread and not seeing much of an issue, and now another with even less of an issue. Personally, I think you just don't like this person and trying to make up reasons to justify your dislike. You're calling him a cheater without evidence, citing dice rolls that don't actually indicate such, and you keep mentioning about their "rule of cool" when it seems less "rule of cool" and mostly just somebody trying to be creative but might be a bit much at times but your DM is fine with it and keeps a balance.
So far, out of these two threads, all I have seen is you being toxic about somebody behind their back. If I had to pick between them and you to play with, I'd pick them. I'm not trying to be mean here, just it's how you're coming across with what you're saying and doing. So far all you've done is showcase an enthusiastic player that others and the DM are fine with, who's getting a slight bit of luck on some dice and it's somehow rubbed you the wrong way enough to rant to randos on the internet calling him a cheater, insinuate him as a bad player, and all behind his back.
Now, perhaps everything you're saying is justified - if so, provide actual evidence of it. So far, you haven't and it's not making you look good at all.
Ummm...let's see...27 point buy, Light Cleric, Human Variant, taking Weapons Master at level 0 (note above a Cleric is wielding a sword), then took 4th level ASI to get 18 Wisdom, and he told us he has a 14 Str. So, you want to try plugging those stats and information into your machine and get back to me on the probability of rolling those numbers?
I know precisely what I am talking about, as does anyone who does the math on this.
I agree with Vince on this, even with modifiers added, those rolls insanity.
Do you have his character sheet? Do you know what feats he has taken, if any, - what race/background, his proficiencies, his class and subclass?
For example if he had expertise or any similar twice-bonus feature for athletics/grapple checks, he could have double-prof in them. Even without that, rolling 20 with +4 bonus would result in 24, and this is a 5% chance of doing so. It is perfectly within the grapple rules to move the enemy and if you have somebody grappled and the other hand is free (or holding an arcane focus) then you can still cast spells. You don't have to keep using actions to maintain a grapple - it remains until the grappled target breaks free.
The rolls you list aren't special. Above average, but not wildly so and a couple are even rather poor. I've rolled better across multiple sessions in a row - and that was using digital dice on a VTT with my results showing to everyone. My best was 4 nat 20's in a row. There were also times where I've rolled poorly across multiple sessions and my record was 3 nat 1's in a row. Welcome to dice and probability.
Five 1st levels? Is that all? My record at 4th level was 8. Variant human Sorcerer with Magic Initiate and Aberrant Dragonmark feats using my Sorc Points. Didn't need to upcast or sacrifice higher slots. There's a lot of ways to get some 1st level spells cast for free. So, without knowing his class, subclass, race, magic items and such, we have no way of knowing if the 5x 1st levels was genuine or not and EVEN IF it was an error, there's nothing indicated, in your words, whether this is a common deliberate thing or just a mistake - a mistake a lot of people make, just to note that. I play spellcasters a lot and I've still made this mistake before.
I remember reading your previous thread and not seeing much of an issue, and now another with even less of an issue. Personally, I think you just don't like this person and trying to make up reasons to justify your dislike. You're calling him a cheater without evidence, citing dice rolls that don't actually indicate such, and you keep mentioning about their "rule of cool" when it seems less "rule of cool" and mostly just somebody trying to be creative but might be a bit much at times but your DM is fine with it and keeps a balance.
So far, out of these two threads, all I have seen is you being toxic about somebody behind their back. If I had to pick between them and you to play with, I'd pick them. I'm not trying to be mean here, just it's how you're coming across with what you're saying and doing. So far all you've done is showcase an enthusiastic player that others and the DM are fine with, who's getting a slight bit of luck on some dice and it's somehow rubbed you the wrong way enough to rant to randos on the internet calling him a cheater, insinuate him as a bad player, and all behind his back.
Now, perhaps everything you're saying is justified - if so, provide actual evidence of it. So far, you haven't and it's not making you look good at all.
Ummm...let's see...27 point buy, Light Cleric, Human Variant, taking Weapons Master at level 0 (note above a Cleric is wielding a sword), then took 4th level ASI to get 18 Wisdom, and he told us he has a 14 Str. So, you want to try plugging those stats and information into your machine and get back to me on the probability of rolling those numbers?
I know precisely what I am talking about, as does anyone who does the math on this.
Do you know what background, and what proficiencies? If you had prof with Athletics and rolled a 20, then with +2 strength mod, +2 proficiency, that makes 24. So, yes, his roll seems plausible unless you know the result of the die itself. I can only go with the information you supply, here, and you did not state the die roll or his proficiency, just that he had 14 Str and the total was 24 - which is entirely possible. As variant human he can get a skill prof of choice, and his background might provide it (let's not forget, backgrounds can be customised even by RAW, so even if he chose a background that didn't normally provide it, he could still get it through customised background as long as the DM ok's it).
I also don't know what you mean by into my "machine". Do you mean calculator? I don't use one for this. My mental math may not be too great or anything, but this is a level of math taught to 5-year-olds, so no need for a calculator yet.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Do you have his character sheet? Do you know what feats he has taken, if any, - what race/background, his proficiencies, his class and subclass?
For example if he had expertise or any similar twice-bonus feature for athletics/grapple checks, he could have double-prof in them. Even without that, rolling 20 with +4 bonus would result in 24, and this is a 5% chance of doing so. It is perfectly within the grapple rules to move the enemy and if you have somebody grappled and the other hand is free (or holding an arcane focus) then you can still cast spells. You don't have to keep using actions to maintain a grapple - it remains until the grappled target breaks free.
The rolls you list aren't special. Above average, but not wildly so and a couple are even rather poor. I've rolled better across multiple sessions in a row - and that was using digital dice on a VTT with my results showing to everyone. My best was 4 nat 20's in a row. There were also times where I've rolled poorly across multiple sessions and my record was 3 nat 1's in a row. Welcome to dice and probability.
Five 1st levels? Is that all? My record at 4th level was 8. Variant human Sorcerer with Magic Initiate and Aberrant Dragonmark feats using my Sorc Points. Didn't need to upcast or sacrifice higher slots. There's a lot of ways to get some 1st level spells cast for free. So, without knowing his class, subclass, race, magic items and such, we have no way of knowing if the 5x 1st levels was genuine or not and EVEN IF it was an error, there's nothing indicated, in your words, whether this is a common deliberate thing or just a mistake - a mistake a lot of people make, just to note that. I play spellcasters a lot and I've still made this mistake before.
I remember reading your previous thread and not seeing much of an issue, and now another with even less of an issue. Personally, I think you just don't like this person and trying to make up reasons to justify your dislike. You're calling him a cheater without evidence, citing dice rolls that don't actually indicate such, and you keep mentioning about their "rule of cool" when it seems less "rule of cool" and mostly just somebody trying to be creative but might be a bit much at times but your DM is fine with it and keeps a balance.
So far, out of these two threads, all I have seen is you being toxic about somebody behind their back. If I had to pick between them and you to play with, I'd pick them. I'm not trying to be mean here, just it's how you're coming across with what you're saying and doing. So far all you've done is showcase an enthusiastic player that others and the DM are fine with, who's getting a slight bit of luck on some dice and it's somehow rubbed you the wrong way enough to rant to randos on the internet calling him a cheater, insinuate him as a bad player, and all behind his back.
Now, perhaps everything you're saying is justified - if so, provide actual evidence of it. So far, you haven't and it's not making you look good at all.
Ummm...let's see...27 point buy, Light Cleric, Human Variant, taking Weapons Master at level 0 (note above a Cleric is wielding a sword), then took 4th level ASI to get 18 Wisdom, and he told us he has a 14 Str. So, you want to try plugging those stats and information into your machine and get back to me on the probability of rolling those numbers?
I know precisely what I am talking about, as does anyone who does the math on this.
I agree with Vince on this, even with modifiers added, those rolls insanity.
Most of the numbers he gave is without indication of what was being rolled. If they're all attacks with a sword - which his weapons master feat could provide him prof with - then a 24 or less is entirely probable, and he's rolling lower most of the time. In fact the only max of 24 he seemed to roll was the Athletics check and again, if he was proficient with such, then 24 is indeed possible.
Vince has indicated some of the rolls were +6 total bonus, indicating they were for a variety different types. And +6 would make the rolls even more possible and even less impressive (with couple even actually being poor).
So "insanity" doesn't seem an apt description.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I recently took a stats class for my psych minor, and I can confirm those numbers are absolutely absurd. The guy’s either a literal leprechaun or he’s cheating. Sure, there is a chance it’s legit, but the chance is so low as to be beyond any reasonable doubt.
Edit: even assuming each roll has a max bonus of +6, which is a big assumption, he only rolled less than 8 once in around 20 rolls. There is a just over 1/3 chance of rolling less than 8, so the odds of getting 20 rolls of 8+ in a row is less than (1/3)^20 = about 1 in 20 billion. That’s like three times as many as the people on Earth. Of course, that number is not accurate by any means, but it gives a good idea of the ballpark we’re playing in.
How does your table roll? Many just have the rolls in the middle or at least in open view, doing so removes all doubt. Alternatively you can use something like Roll20 where the virtual rolls are publicly shown in the chat.
I have heard of new players stuffing up the maths terribly, such as adding the whole stat rather than just the bonus, but I'm pretty sure you said this guy was an experienced player, so that kind of mistake seems unlikely. If you said to the DM you would like player rolls to be public, you wouldn't have to call out that guy, just say its the same rule for everyone.
We are playing online, using Discord, and everyone is rolling at home, on the honour system. Some have more honour than others. This guy have been playing D&D off and on for 40 years. I fear that if asked the DM to have players roll online, that would certainly trigger "why???"
If this was my own game, I would handle it. But given this is another DM, and the cheater is a old friend of his, any suggestions by me require a lot more finesse than I am usually capable, or willing, to use.
I play on Discord all the time and the Avrae bot has improved immensely. You can now tie a campaign from DDB with a text channel and every player with a PC in the campaign can roll right on their sheet and the bot automatically displays the result in the channel, as long as everyone has their discord account linked to the website. Why not ask your DM to try it out? No reason to bring up your suspicion at all. Just act all excited about how cool it is for the DDB sheet to be so interactive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I posted a thread some weeks ago about how I could not stand the one particular player, called ONE GUY, that was trying to break any rule he could by implementing "rule of cool". One of the more egregious examples was "Curing Wounds" with his foot, while holding a shield and sword, but the DM shut him down on that one.
Anyway, I decided to tough it out, since I really liked the storyline, my Halfling Scout was fun to play, and the DM plus another player had really made an effort to play more within the rules. That was due not to anything I had done, but because a 4th player had been added, and this 4th was also knowledgeable and a stickler for rules. I could sit back and keep my mouth shut. The ONE GUY was of course up to his antics, but the DM seemed on the right track (and still does). The game has been good, except for you know who. But something else started gnawing on me. It seemed like he never missed an attack, never failed a save or ability check.
So 2 sessions ago, late in it, I started tracking his rolls, with whatever modifiers he had. Now, this was a 4th level char at the time, with the best possible bonus of +6 of Prof + Skill. Most would be with significantly less bonuses.
2 sessions ago: 20, 19,19, 6 on a d10, 9 on a d10, 17, 16. He also cast FIVE 1st level spells and two 2nd level spells. I chalked that up to blind luck, my bias, and him upcasting a spell.
So last session, he rolled these. This is the complete session:
21,15 (at advantage), 21, 14, 20, 17, 20, natural 20, 17, 18, 20, 19 (plus 6 on a d6 for Bardic Inspiration), 16 (at Advantage), 24, 19, 10, 22, 15, 16, 16, (33 of 8d6, expected value of 28), 20, 21, 21. He never missed on an attack, never blew a save.
These rolls, as I said, had at most a bonus of +6, and most rolls were less than that. So now, I have the choice of letting this slide, quitting the game and/or telling the DM that one of his oldest friends is a cheater. I am sure that will end well.
And people wonder why I dislike rule of cool players. This ONE GUY has reinforced my beliefs. If a player is willing to ignore the rules to implement rule of cool, why should I be surprised that they cheat on other parts of the game.
How does your table roll? Many just have the rolls in the middle or at least in open view, doing so removes all doubt. Alternatively you can use something like Roll20 where the virtual rolls are publicly shown in the chat.
I have heard of new players stuffing up the maths terribly, such as adding the whole stat rather than just the bonus, but I'm pretty sure you said this guy was an experienced player, so that kind of mistake seems unlikely. If you said to the DM you would like player rolls to be public, you wouldn't have to call out that guy, just say its the same rule for everyone.
I would facepalm if my cleric tryed to heal some dude with his foot, though Divine Soul sorcerer would be different story, (Jesus healed somebody when they touched his cloak ).
Mystic v3 should be official, nuff said.
TBH, everyone should be using a RNG that can be publicly seen, and on a VTT, this should be a standard feature, plus I think there's some 3rd-party Zoom mod that lets you roll dice.
Mystic v3 should be official, nuff said.
Or maybe he's just on a hot streak? A friend of mine didn't roll above a 7 for two sessions in a row. It can happen the other way too, as unlikely as it is. I think you should try to rein in the negativity until you have definitive proof they are cheating. And even then, there is no correlation between "rule of cool" and cheating. That is a vitriolic connection to insinuate. We get you don't like that playstyle Vince. Don't be toxic about it.
I’m far from the biggest fan of Rule of Cool (I apply/allow it only very rarely, and even then provide minimal bonuses) but I think you’re misplacing your criticism. This guy is a cheater and a rules lawyer, but “rule of cool” is something else entirely, heck, the cure wounds foot thing is the opposite of cool, it’s ridiculous. Yes, there almost definitely is greater occurrence of cheating and stupid “creativity” in players who like the rule of cool, but saying that the rule of cool is responsible for these actions, or that most rule of cool players end up as cheaters, is a slippery slope fallacy. The vast majority are decent players (many of whom I’ve found are willing to adapt to tougher DMs) who would never pull crap like this. There are issues with rule of cool, depending on the table at least. This is not one of them.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Even the extra casting of a first level spell is not evidence of a blatant cheater. Maybe they got distracted in the moment and forget to mark it off their sheet. The point is you don't actually know and should not be so adamant about it. Is it all a bit fishy? Sure, a bit. But you don't have the proof and are not in the DM chair to officiate over rolls. I suggest if it's making you this angry that you just walk away from the game. You clearly can't stand this person.
We are playing online, using Discord, and everyone is rolling at home, on the honour system. Some have more honour than others. This guy have been playing D&D off and on for 40 years. I fear that if asked the DM to have players roll online, that would certainly trigger "why???"
If this was my own game, I would handle it. But given this is another DM, and the cheater is a old friend of his, any suggestions by me require a lot more finesse than I am usually capable, or willing, to use.
Maybe there is a reasonable answer to justify it.
You could see if the DM would be willing to have one session played with online dice exclusively, so that they can have an experimental Game Log to play with as new DNDBeyond features are released. This would be a non-confrontational one-off that would be hard to argue against and would give both you and your DM a valuable frame of reference.
Make it about the DM wanting to provide a better experience for everyone.
I also hear people regularly complain that digital dice don't roll consistently. Either averaging lower, or being "swingy". Either way, getting a data sample is an easy excuse to try something new without pointing a finger.
Yeah, I guess I should not conflate the two issues. But I do see some correlation over decades of playing. This kind of cheating enrages me just about more than anything else.
But he was also merging rule of cool with ridiculous rolls.
He Grappled a Large creature, with a high Str. The player in question has told us he has 14 Str. DM rolled badly, so it was a cakewalk for the initial grapple. Then on the subsequent turn, the DM let it slip he rolled really well and the creature was likely going to pop the Grapple, when the player announced he had rolled the 24...keep in mind the 14 Str. I should have said something right there. Later, the player is asking if he can swing the creature around to avoid any attacks from the rest its pack (modified Wolves). And later still, wants to cast Burning Hands while still grappling the creature. You get the picture.
I really hate allowing cheaters to prosper. If I walk, I will most certainly make it clear WHY I am walking.
I will see if I can find a way to finesse that. But ultimately, the DM will ask "if it ain't broke, why fix it?". I am positive the DM is so wrapped in the game he has no idea what it is happening. Most DM's are in that boat. Too many things to juggle to track a player.
Do you have his character sheet? Do you know what feats he has taken, if any, - what race/background, his proficiencies, his class and subclass?
For example if he had expertise or any similar twice-bonus feature for athletics/grapple checks, he could have double-prof in them. Even without that, rolling 20 with +4 bonus would result in 24, and this is a 5% chance of doing so. It is perfectly within the grapple rules to move the enemy and if you have somebody grappled and the other hand is free (or holding an arcane focus) then you can still cast spells. You don't have to keep using actions to maintain a grapple - it remains until the grappled target breaks free.
The rolls you list aren't special. Above average, but not wildly so and a couple are even rather poor. I've rolled better across multiple sessions in a row - and that was using digital dice on a VTT with my results showing to everyone. My best was 4 nat 20's in a row. There were also times where I've rolled poorly across multiple sessions and my record was 3 nat 1's in a row. Welcome to dice and probability.
Five 1st levels? Is that all? My record at 4th level was 8. Variant human Sorcerer with Magic Initiate and Aberrant Dragonmark feats using my Sorc Points. Didn't need to upcast or sacrifice higher slots. There's a lot of ways to get some 1st level spells cast for free. So, without knowing his class, subclass, race, magic items and such, we have no way of knowing if the 5x 1st levels was genuine or not and EVEN IF it was an error, there's nothing indicated, in your words, whether this is a common deliberate thing or just a mistake - a mistake a lot of people make, just to note that. I play spellcasters a lot and I've still made this mistake before.
I remember reading your previous thread and not seeing much of an issue, and now another with even less of an issue. Personally, I think you just don't like this person and trying to make up reasons to justify your dislike. You're calling him a cheater without evidence, citing dice rolls that don't actually indicate such, and you keep mentioning about their "rule of cool" when it seems less "rule of cool" and mostly just somebody trying to be creative but might be a bit much at times but your DM is fine with it and keeps a balance.
So far, out of these two threads, all I have seen is you being toxic about somebody behind their back. If I had to pick between them and you to play with, I'd pick them. I'm not trying to be mean here, just it's how you're coming across with what you're saying and doing. So far all you've done is showcase an enthusiastic player that others and the DM are fine with, who's getting a slight bit of luck on some dice and it's somehow rubbed you the wrong way enough to rant to randos on the internet calling him a cheater, insinuate him as a bad player, and all behind his back.
Now, perhaps everything you're saying is justified - if so, provide actual evidence of it. So far, you haven't and it's not making you look good at all.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Oh, I've got something that might work for you!
I've been doing some early Alpha testing for a company that is doing social AR for D&D, and they're about to go into Open Alpha. (Full body masks for video chat + on screen dice rollers, maps, and various tools for Players and DMs.) It's pretty basic at the moment, but the essentials are there and it's making steady progress. Jump onto their Discord server and poke around a bit. Once that becomes available, it should be novel enough to warrant experimentation.
Ummm...let's see...27 point buy, Light Cleric, Human Variant, taking Weapons Master at level 0 (note above a Cleric is wielding a sword), then took 4th level ASI to get 18 Wisdom, and he told us he has a 14 Str. So, you want to try plugging those stats and information into your machine and get back to me on the probability of rolling those numbers?
I know precisely what I am talking about, as does anyone who does the math on this.
I agree with Vince on this, even with modifiers added, those rolls insanity.
Mystic v3 should be official, nuff said.
Do you know what background, and what proficiencies? If you had prof with Athletics and rolled a 20, then with +2 strength mod, +2 proficiency, that makes 24. So, yes, his roll seems plausible unless you know the result of the die itself. I can only go with the information you supply, here, and you did not state the die roll or his proficiency, just that he had 14 Str and the total was 24 - which is entirely possible. As variant human he can get a skill prof of choice, and his background might provide it (let's not forget, backgrounds can be customised even by RAW, so even if he chose a background that didn't normally provide it, he could still get it through customised background as long as the DM ok's it).
I also don't know what you mean by into my "machine". Do you mean calculator? I don't use one for this. My mental math may not be too great or anything, but this is a level of math taught to 5-year-olds, so no need for a calculator yet.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Most of the numbers he gave is without indication of what was being rolled. If they're all attacks with a sword - which his weapons master feat could provide him prof with - then a 24 or less is entirely probable, and he's rolling lower most of the time. In fact the only max of 24 he seemed to roll was the Athletics check and again, if he was proficient with such, then 24 is indeed possible.
Vince has indicated some of the rolls were +6 total bonus, indicating they were for a variety different types. And +6 would make the rolls even more possible and even less impressive (with couple even actually being poor).
So "insanity" doesn't seem an apt description.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I recently took a stats class for my psych minor, and I can confirm those numbers are absolutely absurd. The guy’s either a literal leprechaun or he’s cheating. Sure, there is a chance it’s legit, but the chance is so low as to be beyond any reasonable doubt.
Edit: even assuming each roll has a max bonus of +6, which is a big assumption, he only rolled less than 8 once in around 20 rolls. There is a just over 1/3 chance of rolling less than 8, so the odds of getting 20 rolls of 8+ in a row is less than (1/3)^20 = about 1 in 20 billion. That’s like three times as many as the people on Earth. Of course, that number is not accurate by any means, but it gives a good idea of the ballpark we’re playing in.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
I play on Discord all the time and the Avrae bot has improved immensely. You can now tie a campaign from DDB with a text channel and every player with a PC in the campaign can roll right on their sheet and the bot automatically displays the result in the channel, as long as everyone has their discord account linked to the website. Why not ask your DM to try it out? No reason to bring up your suspicion at all. Just act all excited about how cool it is for the DDB sheet to be so interactive.