I'm amused, mainly because we have seen many threads, with t same (often less) detail about cheating rolls. In pretty much every one, when the rolls go from "honor system" to "everyone sees" the lucky roller SUDDENLY has more normal results. Yet still, most who have a personal vendetta against Vince and his rants (about half of which I find to have any real meat) will say repeatedly that lucky rolls are simply a thing and that's all they see.
I'm one of the ones that said this could just be a series of lucky rolls. So yeah, I feel accused. But even if you were not accusing me, so what. I'm allowed to be annoyed at your repeated attempts to accuse people of being petty because it distracts from the conversation and is mean-spirited. Calling you out isn't an admonition of guilt, but nice try.
I didn't miss the part about people that know Vince in real life. I also never accused Vince of handling this with his table in an overly emotional or confrontational way. That would be impossible because this thread is about the build up to the moment when he approaches them about it. It hasn't happened yet. How could I accuse him of doing it poorly? I have accused Vince of approaching this subject in an overly emotional and confrontational way. So sure, it is possible that Vince turns this around and is respectful and diplomatic about how he actually talks to the DM and/or table. That doesn't change the fact that he's conflating an entire playstyle with cheaters, and condemning a person without proof, which is what I have been responding to and will continue to criticize even if he puts on a calm face for the moment when he talks it out with the group.
Again, if you believe otherwise there are plenty of real life con people who will happily take you to the cleaners. This is about what standards any given table should have and also about means to mitigate such risks.
Open rolls will not prove anything about what happened before the open rolls began but with any possible cheating ended, the issue should be dead. Innocent until proven guilty does not even apply in all courts. Civil courts use a balance of probabilities instead. And this is no court but rather a private gaming table.
I'm not talking about what actually happens thanks to a corrupt court system. Why do I even have to say that? I'm talking about the general idea. Why are you being pedantic about this? Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do.
I'm also not saying anything against holding the table to a certain standard. What exactly did I say to communicate that? Please tell me.
Open rolls won't change how much Vince hates this person's playstyle. Do you think the animosity around suspecting condemning him of cheating will go away? I'm doubtful. That's what I was getting at. Open rolls are great, but the problems at this table seem much deeper.
And the concept of rolling in the open is unfun... why, exactly?
Why are you asking me that? I never said anything of the sorts.
Then if it really is just them having better luck, it is clear that that is all it is.
Mhm. Sure.
If you think no one ever cheats, I am sure there is somewhere out there with a bridge to sell you an a prince from some foreign land who needs your help to recover their wealth, who will reward you handsomely if you just send them money.
Can you please point to where I, or anyone else in this thread for that matter, claimed that no-one ever cheats? I can't find it.
Edit: Similarly, there are players who attempt to misuse the 'Rule of Cool' and who will whine and throw tantrums if the DM denies their 'amazing' ideas.
Absolutely. And if people don't want to play with those people they shouldn't. :)
I was assuming that your post was actually in context with the discussion in this thread.
It was. It's just that you claimed I said something that I didn't.
When you say "...because you think that one guy is cheating just because he has better luck than you..." you outright dismiss the possibility that the other person was cheating,
First of all, no I haven't dismissed anything. Second of all, you falsely implied that I "think no one ever cheats" which is just not true.
Suggesting that all PC rolls should be made openly is a reasonable counter-measure, don't you think?
A counter measure to what? Lucky rolls or vince's aversion to particular ways to have fun? Either way, I haven't said anything about counter measures, I was talking about how to best solve the overall situation.
That way, if it really is a lucky streak, everyone can see it and simply be amazed rather than suspicious or angry. However, seemingly chastizing someone for being suspicious seems more vindictive than constructive.
It's just not someone being "suspicious" now is it? Not that I chastised anyone though so that's a moot point.
Ok, so what, exactly, is your point? You claim it isn't about Vince being suspicious. You claim that you do not object to open rolls (despite seemingly arguing against my suggestion of it as a solution).
If this is over 'Vince's definition of fun," not sure that is actually the topic.
It is very much the topic though.
It's not a simple "I caught a fellow player cheating" topic.
It's a "I hate rule of cool and no wonder because the rule of cool player turns out to be a cheater" topic. Look at the title. Look at the last three sentences of the first post.
There is a correlation. If a player feels constrained by RAW when it comes to described action, why would they follow the constraints when it comes to rolling dice?
Is every player who lives by rule of cool a cheater? Of course not...that would be silly. It would be equally silly to say EVERY RAW player is not a cheater.
But, in a setting where an honour system is in place, I would feel more comfortable trusting a RAW guy who says "errr...that is not how that works......" to roll dice, than a guy who says "I want to Cure Wounds with my toe, because my hands are full", or "I want to swing around this Large creature to provide me protection from attacks from its pack mates", or "I want to slide down a 60 foot tube, which is on a 60 degree slope, using my sword to control my descent, and then land at the bottom upright, jamming my sword into whatever is at the bottom, all while taking no damage". Yeah, all have happened.
And the concept of rolling in the open is unfun... why, exactly?
Why are you asking me that? I never said anything of the sorts.
Then if it really is just them having better luck, it is clear that that is all it is.
Mhm. Sure.
If you think no one ever cheats, I am sure there is somewhere out there with a bridge to sell you an a prince from some foreign land who needs your help to recover their wealth, who will reward you handsomely if you just send them money.
Can you please point to where I, or anyone else in this thread for that matter, claimed that no-one ever cheats? I can't find it.
Edit: Similarly, there are players who attempt to misuse the 'Rule of Cool' and who will whine and throw tantrums if the DM denies their 'amazing' ideas.
Absolutely. And if people don't want to play with those people they shouldn't. :)
I was assuming that your post was actually in context with the discussion in this thread.
It was. It's just that you claimed I said something that I didn't.
When you say "...because you think that one guy is cheating just because he has better luck than you..." you outright dismiss the possibility that the other person was cheating,
First of all, no I haven't dismissed anything. Second of all, you falsely implied that I "think no one ever cheats" which is just not true.
Suggesting that all PC rolls should be made openly is a reasonable counter-measure, don't you think?
A counter measure to what? Lucky rolls or vince's aversion to particular ways to have fun? Either way, I haven't said anything about counter measures, I was talking about how to best solve the overall situation.
That way, if it really is a lucky streak, everyone can see it and simply be amazed rather than suspicious or angry. However, seemingly chastizing someone for being suspicious seems more vindictive than constructive.
It's just not someone being "suspicious" now is it? Not that I chastised anyone though so that's a moot point.
Ok, so what, exactly, is your point?
It's in my first post in this thread. I'm sure you've read it since you replied to it. But in case you've forgotten: "I completely agree with you vince. You should walk away from the game and make it clear it is because you think that one guy is cheating just because he has better luck than you. No need to throw in your disdain for people having fun differently from you though, that might be overkill."
You claim it isn't about Vince being suspicious.
This is true.
You claim that you do not object to open rolls (despite seemingly arguing against my suggestion of it as a solution).
The first part is true. What you wrote in parentheses is a lie.
If this is over 'Vince's definition of fun," not sure that is actually the topic.
As has been mentioned by others, that is the actual topic. My reply was a suggestion of the best course of action for vince, though.
Again, if you believe otherwise there are plenty of real life con people who will happily take you to the cleaners. This is about what standards any given table should have and also about means to mitigate such risks.
Open rolls will not prove anything about what happened before the open rolls began but with any possible cheating ended, the issue should be dead. Innocent until proven guilty does not even apply in all courts. Civil courts use a balance of probabilities instead. And this is no court but rather a private gaming table.
I'm not talking about what actually happens thanks to a corrupt court system. Why do I even have to say that? I'm talking about the general idea. Why are you being pedantic about this? Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do.
You are very much correct. Most people does actually agree with that even if they might not admit it. If not, you can always ask Kotath if he's still involved in that illegal toddler versus clown bare knuckle fighting business or if he's stopped smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station. Have you seen any evidence that he doesn't do those sorts of things any more?
While I think rolling in the open and using digital dice it's a good way to stop suspicion from building, I still don't think it will be helpful in this case. The OP is convinced that the person has been cheating, and even making all roles in the open from now on will not change that. It won't prove that he wasn't cheating, so they OP will continue to believe it. It won't stop the OP being suspicious about other possible ways the other player could cheat. This will affect his feelings about the game, and that is likely to affect how others enjoy the game, too.
In this case, especially given the intense feelings the OP had towards this guy's play style, I can see only 2 ways this will work out which leave all at the table having fun: the OP leaving, or the other guy leaving, without accusations of cheating being aired in public.
You are very much correct. Most people does actually agree with that even if they might not admit it. If not, you can always ask Kotath if he's still involved in that illegal toddler versus clown bare knuckle fighting business or if he's stopped smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station. Have you seen any evidence that he doesn't do those sorts of things any more?
Either of those would be crimes, subject to the criminal courts, where the standard is much stricter. Plus you are naming me specifically rather than a hypothetical 'That guy.'
Even if he was identifying someone, cheating on dice rolls in a friendly D&D game is not subject to criminal law. However accusing Vince of slander or liable would be potentially subjecting Vince to criminal law. Who is actually condemning whom here?
If you take the time to read my post you'll realize that I haven't said a word about criminal law. I was repying to HeironymusZot's very good point that "Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do." Nothing more, nothing less. But I take it from your answer that you want to us to *not* assume that you are smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station? That you would, in fact, prefer if we treated you as innocent to that outlandish claim unless there is something actual evidence to support it?
Anyway, vince is the only person who can be said to be condeming anyone. Not sure how that is relevant though but I answered your question.
You are very much correct. Most people does actually agree with that even if they might not admit it. If not, you can always ask Kotath if he's still involved in that illegal toddler versus clown bare knuckle fighting business or if he's stopped smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station. Have you seen any evidence that he doesn't do those sorts of things any more?
Either of those would be crimes, subject to the criminal courts, where the standard is much stricter. Plus you are naming me specifically rather than a hypothetical 'That guy.'
Even if he was identifying someone, cheating on dice rolls in a friendly D&D game is not subject to criminal law. However accusing Vince of slander or liable would be potentially subjecting Vince to criminal law. Who is actually condemning whom here?
If you take the time to read my post you'll realize that I haven't said a word about criminal law. I was repying to HeironymusZot's very good point that "Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do." Nothing more, nothing less. But I take it from your answer that you want to us to *not* assume that you are smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station? That you would, in fact, prefer if we treated you as innocent to that outlandish claim unless there is something actual evidence to support it?
Anyway, vince is the only person who can be said to be condeming anyone. Not sure how that is relevant though but I answered your question.
Sigh...I wanted to avoid this, and stay on point, how ever....you keep bringing up innocent until proven guilty. Well, using your analogy, I hear barking coming from a crate destined for the ISS, and I am going to continue to investigate. I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
You are very much correct. Most people does actually agree with that even if they might not admit it. If not, you can always ask Kotath if he's still involved in that illegal toddler versus clown bare knuckle fighting business or if he's stopped smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station. Have you seen any evidence that he doesn't do those sorts of things any more?
Either of those would be crimes, subject to the criminal courts, where the standard is much stricter. Plus you are naming me specifically rather than a hypothetical 'That guy.'
Even if he was identifying someone, cheating on dice rolls in a friendly D&D game is not subject to criminal law. However accusing Vince of slander or liable would be potentially subjecting Vince to criminal law. Who is actually condemning whom here?
If you take the time to read my post you'll realize that I haven't said a word about criminal law. I was repying to HeironymusZot's very good point that "Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do." Nothing more, nothing less. But I take it from your answer that you want to us to *not* assume that you are smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station? That you would, in fact, prefer if we treated you as innocent to that outlandish claim unless there is something actual evidence to support it?
Anyway, vince is the only person who can be said to be condeming anyone. Not sure how that is relevant though but I answered your question.
Sigh...I wanted to avoid this, and stay on point, how ever....you keep bringing up innocent until proven guilty. Well, using your analogy, I hear barking coming from a crate destined for the ISS, and I am going to continue to investigate. I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Good for you! Although I feel like it's probably a use of time if you just followed my (and everyone else's) original advice and leave the group. Probably saves you a lot of frustration.
I'm just going to point out that this is a major inverse of the Gambler's Fallacy.
I also want to point out that I am not saying that the player wasn't cheating, before anyone accuses me of doing that. I'm merely pointing out that rolling high numbers in a session does not equate cheating. Furthermore, as others have pointed out, rolling dice in the open and/or online won't prove whether or not the player was cheating before.
I know that I have had sessions where I have regularly rolled high, and regularly rolled low. Once I only rolled any number above an 11 on the d20 once while DMing, and another time I got 6 natural 20s in one session. My players have experienced similar things, and none of us were cheating.
If you absolutely despise this player, as your posts lead me to believe, I'll do the same thing that I did in your last thread and recommend to you that you just leave the table. You're not having fun here, and you have no trust in the other player to be a truthful (because of differing playstyles, it seems), and you seem to think that the DM is either too weak or busy to deal with the player. If everyone else if having fun, and you have no proof of the player cheating (and high rolls are not proof of cheating, as I have already illustrated above), and you're the only one causing a fuss, you are the problem at the table and it is on you to find a new table.
I unfortunately know from experience that trying to get rid of another player will not work well for you (even if you end up "winning"). I had an experience where I despised a fellow player due to a stark difference in playstyle and previous experiences with the player outside of the game. It lead to a messy situation where I ended up being the one booted out of the campaign, even though it originally started as a campaign for my character and a close friend of mine. I'm not going to go into the details, but you seem to be doing a similar thing here.
If you choose to ignore my advice (which is almost definitely going to happen, due to your opinion of me that you have made abundantly clear), that's on you. You have been warned, and if things go wrong, don't be mad at me for telling you so.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Dude. Kotath. This is unreal. You have missed virtually every single point being made in the posts you are directly quoting and then making the conversation about some ridiculous nonsense. It's getting exhausting trying to sift through this and keep this discussion on a relevant course.
Let's try this on for size: If you just had a couple of hot dice sessions where you were rolling like a god, how would you feel if you found out someone at your table was absolutely determined that you were cheating despite a lack of definitive evidence?
@Vince: I'm going to echo Pangurjan. What's the end goal?
And beyond that, what do you expect the reaction to a spreadsheet of data where you admit you've been tracking this person for sessions is going to be?
I don't know how else to put this: It isn't a socially acceptable way to handle such a situation. Talk about bad vibes. It's a super unfriendly move.
While the dice can be considered above average and potentially suspicious - this is not evidence of cheating and bringing it up as "this guy's a cheater" to the DM, especially if that DM learns that you've been *****ing about this alleged cheater to rando's on the internet multiple times behind everyone's back - it is going to end up poorly, I have no doubt.
Vince, it's a game. That's all. If you're not having fun, and it's just you, just go find a different group. That's the best suggestion anyone can make here. If it was just the dice thing, I'd just bringing up online dice rollers - but it's not, is it? You don't like this player (with the way you come across "you hate him" would be accurate) but judging from things you've said: you're the only one who does. The DM is fine with it. It seems other players are too. And it's the DM's friend. So even just going to the DM, to try and make this player play "your way" is not going to achieve anything positive. It'll just cause problems.
So all these backs and forth and numbers and arguments - this is all ultimately fruitless. The only real advice anyone can give, and has been given by multiple people here: is find a different group that plays more like your style of play. You'll be happier for it. Life is way too ******* short for this bullshit over a game. Move on to a better-suited game and get back to enjoying it.
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.
Personally, if I were Vince, and I had a problem with the cheating (which I personally would, that's understandable), here's what I'd do:
(1) Get a lot more data. As of right now the rolls could just be really good. It's unlikely, but possible.
(2) If something is definitely off, talk to the DM. Let them decide how to handle it. This is their problem from here. Ask them to leave you out of it.
(3) Hope the friendship and group stays together. It could just be a dice issue, in which case the player can buy a new set. Or even if it's cheating, that probably won't kill the game. I cheated once (didn't mark damage on one hit in a final boss fight), though I did take it back when caught. And I've had players admit to more extensive cheating. We're still friends. We don't cheat anymore. The group is still here. Empathy, openness, and forgiveness go a long way, especially when you care about your friendship.
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.
Firstly, you probably shouldn't jump to conclusions based on one guy, even "that one guy".
But main point, there seems to be some misunderstanding if you're talking about players implementing rule of cool. The DM implements it. Players can ask to try a non-standard action, and maybe - maybe - suggest an appropriate roll. Now there can be a problem with a pushover DM. The DM should reward creativity with moderate benefits, not grant every overpowered and uninteresting request.
The irony to this thread is that no one is taking their own advice.
Everyone is so focused on telling Vince to just leave the table or that they’ve given the advice over and over or that no D&D is bad D&D that they can’t stop and start doing introspection on their own actions.
If you’ve come into these threads and posted multiple times, you’re no different than Vince posting these same threads.
If you’ve come in here and pointed out that no D&D is better than bad D&D, you’re no different than Vince replying to these posts.
I want to believe that Vince wants help and advice, but it’s already been given. Person has to make a choice. Nothing I post is gonna change that. Why bother.
I would be arguing in favour of players, me included, rolling openly, to avoid such even being a suspicion. Which is what I have been arguing in favour of this entire thread.
The only person that has raised any sort of obstinance towards this idea is Vince.
Again, to me, this is not over whether someone really is cheating or not but over the bad blood that comes with such suspicions. Much as you and others play it down, there are people who do cheat. Whether this person actually is such a person is irrelevant to risk management.
They might be, so rolls should be open. And when rolls are open for all, not just for them, neither they nor anyone else can claim unfairness.
How exactly have I played down that people cheat? I have said Vince doesn't have definitive evidence. That is not even close to being the same thing.
You're also missing the repeated point being made by me and others. The problems at this table run deeper than preventing any possible cheating. The bad blood will still be there after open rolls are instituted.
And regardless of how personal Vince's tone comes across, all the personal vitriol on both sides should be set aside on that basic principle of openness. With such openness no tracking is necessary, but rather than agreeing that such openness is likely a good idea, you you seem to be insisting that nothing should be investigated, ever, regardless of how much evidence does exist, simply because the person might be innocent.
I already went over this with Falwith. Personal vitriol has nothing to do with what I am saying. I am disgusted with Vince's behavior in this thread, and I am responding to it. I don't appreciate someone accusing someone of cheating so adamantly without definitive proof, and I especially don't appreciate someone equating an entire playstyle with cheating.
And again. I never said anything against open rolling. I am saying it won't make a meaningful difference in this situation. Can you understand the difference?
To accuse me of saying nothing should ever be investigated because they might be innocent is possibly the biggest stretch of logic I've ever seen on these forums. I disapprove of Vince's methods and don't think eliminating the possibility of cheating will solve the issues he is having at this table. I have spoken up as a proponent of "innocent until proven guilty". I'm flummoxed. How does this translate to "don't investigate anything, they might be innocent"? How do you think people are proven guilty?
'Relevant' is looking for practical solutions, not telling people to go away or quit playing, nor tossing insults around.
Me telling Vince to leave the game is my honest conclusion after reading what he is saying and how he is saying it. It is the most practical solution I see to the problems at hand. If you don't agree, fine. But don't tell me it isn't relevant.
Okay. So not only did you not answer my very simple question Kotath, but you preceded to accuse me(and others) of saying a bunch of nonsensical things that weren't even close to what has been discussed. I'm done with this. Don't expect any more replies.
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Talk to your table about it. Don't accuse anyone, don't be confrontational, just ask if everyone could roll in plain sight. Wether or not he was cheating before...wouldn't really matter, as long as the problem is resolved. I wouldn't outright accuse them, or talk to the DM (You said they were friends) or you may end up offending someone.
When you have their answer, you can then decide what to do next, but the best course of action is usually to try and resolve it peacefully first.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Let's take that up once I have those numbers.
Vince, try not to take this the wrong way, but why are you letting this guy take away from your fun?
My advice is to look at it from a different perspective.
Set aside this "one guy" for the moment. Ask yourself if you are enjoying everything else about the game, on the balance?
If the answer is yes, then ask yourself if you can try to find a way to just let it slide?
By all means, if the opportunity comes up, suggest that the group move to an open dice-rolling app of some variety. There's plenty of options for Discord.
But this obsession with "proving" that this guy is cheating seems counter-productive. The amount of statistics you would need to collect to "prove" this is actually quite a lot. The odds of rolling 11 or better on a d20 10 times in a row is about 1 in 1000. 11+ at 20 times in a row is about 1 in a million. But these are all theoretically possible, if increasingly unlikely. In my group I've witnessed 3 nat 20's or 3 nat 1's in a row (1 in 8000 chance) more than once.
Even if you do arrive with "overwhelming" evidence, how do you suppose the DM is going to react when confronted with this?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm one of the ones that said this could just be a series of lucky rolls. So yeah, I feel accused. But even if you were not accusing me, so what. I'm allowed to be annoyed at your repeated attempts to accuse people of being petty because it distracts from the conversation and is mean-spirited. Calling you out isn't an admonition of guilt, but nice try.
I didn't miss the part about people that know Vince in real life. I also never accused Vince of handling this with his table in an overly emotional or confrontational way. That would be impossible because this thread is about the build up to the moment when he approaches them about it. It hasn't happened yet. How could I accuse him of doing it poorly? I have accused Vince of approaching this subject in an overly emotional and confrontational way. So sure, it is possible that Vince turns this around and is respectful and diplomatic about how he actually talks to the DM and/or table. That doesn't change the fact that he's conflating an entire playstyle with cheaters, and condemning a person without proof, which is what I have been responding to and will continue to criticize even if he puts on a calm face for the moment when he talks it out with the group.
I'm not talking about what actually happens thanks to a corrupt court system. Why do I even have to say that? I'm talking about the general idea. Why are you being pedantic about this? Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do.
I'm also not saying anything against holding the table to a certain standard. What exactly did I say to communicate that? Please tell me.
Open rolls won't change how much Vince hates this person's playstyle. Do you think the animosity around
suspectingcondemning him of cheating will go away? I'm doubtful. That's what I was getting at. Open rolls are great, but the problems at this table seem much deeper.There's a lovely sentiment.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
There is a correlation. If a player feels constrained by RAW when it comes to described action, why would they follow the constraints when it comes to rolling dice?
Is every player who lives by rule of cool a cheater? Of course not...that would be silly. It would be equally silly to say EVERY RAW player is not a cheater.
But, in a setting where an honour system is in place, I would feel more comfortable trusting a RAW guy who says "errr...that is not how that works......" to roll dice, than a guy who says "I want to Cure Wounds with my toe, because my hands are full", or "I want to swing around this Large creature to provide me protection from attacks from its pack mates", or "I want to slide down a 60 foot tube, which is on a 60 degree slope, using my sword to control my descent, and then land at the bottom upright, jamming my sword into whatever is at the bottom, all while taking no damage". Yeah, all have happened.
It's in my first post in this thread. I'm sure you've read it since you replied to it. But in case you've forgotten:
"I completely agree with you vince. You should walk away from the game and make it clear it is because you think that one guy is cheating just because he has better luck than you. No need to throw in your disdain for people having fun differently from you though, that might be overkill."
This is true.
The first part is true. What you wrote in parentheses is a lie.
As has been mentioned by others, that is the actual topic. My reply was a suggestion of the best course of action for vince, though.
You are very much correct. Most people does actually agree with that even if they might not admit it. If not, you can always ask Kotath if he's still involved in that illegal toddler versus clown bare knuckle fighting business or if he's stopped smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station. Have you seen any evidence that he doesn't do those sorts of things any more?
While I think rolling in the open and using digital dice it's a good way to stop suspicion from building, I still don't think it will be helpful in this case. The OP is convinced that the person has been cheating, and even making all roles in the open from now on will not change that. It won't prove that he wasn't cheating, so they OP will continue to believe it. It won't stop the OP being suspicious about other possible ways the other player could cheat. This will affect his feelings about the game, and that is likely to affect how others enjoy the game, too.
In this case, especially given the intense feelings the OP had towards this guy's play style, I can see only 2 ways this will work out which leave all at the table having fun: the OP leaving, or the other guy leaving, without accusations of cheating being aired in public.
If you take the time to read my post you'll realize that I haven't said a word about criminal law. I was repying to HeironymusZot's very good point that "Treating people with the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is the respectful thing to do." Nothing more, nothing less. But I take it from your answer that you want to us to *not* assume that you are smuggling Dachshunds to the International Space Station? That you would, in fact, prefer if we treated you as innocent to that outlandish claim unless there is something actual evidence to support it?
Anyway, vince is the only person who can be said to be condeming anyone. Not sure how that is relevant though but I answered your question.
Sigh...I wanted to avoid this, and stay on point, how ever....you keep bringing up innocent until proven guilty. Well, using your analogy, I hear barking coming from a crate destined for the ISS, and I am going to continue to investigate. I have 28 data points (actually more like 35 if you add in all the d6's that rolled above average). I plan on tracking until I have at least 50. If they continue to track as I expect they will, that will be put this from the statistically outlandish into something more like "beyond lottery chances".
Good for you! Although I feel like it's probably a use of time if you just followed my (and everyone else's) original advice and leave the group. Probably saves you a lot of frustration.
I'm just going to point out that this is a major inverse of the Gambler's Fallacy.
I also want to point out that I am not saying that the player wasn't cheating, before anyone accuses me of doing that. I'm merely pointing out that rolling high numbers in a session does not equate cheating. Furthermore, as others have pointed out, rolling dice in the open and/or online won't prove whether or not the player was cheating before.
I know that I have had sessions where I have regularly rolled high, and regularly rolled low. Once I only rolled any number above an 11 on the d20 once while DMing, and another time I got 6 natural 20s in one session. My players have experienced similar things, and none of us were cheating.
If you absolutely despise this player, as your posts lead me to believe, I'll do the same thing that I did in your last thread and recommend to you that you just leave the table. You're not having fun here, and you have no trust in the other player to be a truthful (because of differing playstyles, it seems), and you seem to think that the DM is either too weak or busy to deal with the player. If everyone else if having fun, and you have no proof of the player cheating (and high rolls are not proof of cheating, as I have already illustrated above), and you're the only one causing a fuss, you are the problem at the table and it is on you to find a new table.
I unfortunately know from experience that trying to get rid of another player will not work well for you (even if you end up "winning"). I had an experience where I despised a fellow player due to a stark difference in playstyle and previous experiences with the player outside of the game. It lead to a messy situation where I ended up being the one booted out of the campaign, even though it originally started as a campaign for my character and a close friend of mine. I'm not going to go into the details, but you seem to be doing a similar thing here.
If you choose to ignore my advice (which is almost definitely going to happen, due to your opinion of me that you have made abundantly clear), that's on you. You have been warned, and if things go wrong, don't be mad at me for telling you so.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Ok, so what's the goal then? What's the intended outcome?
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Dude. Kotath. This is unreal. You have missed virtually every single point being made in the posts you are directly quoting and then making the conversation about some ridiculous nonsense. It's getting exhausting trying to sift through this and keep this discussion on a relevant course.
Let's try this on for size: If you just had a couple of hot dice sessions where you were rolling like a god, how would you feel if you found out someone at your table was absolutely determined that you were cheating despite a lack of definitive evidence?
@Vince: I'm going to echo Pangurjan. What's the end goal?
And beyond that, what do you expect the reaction to a spreadsheet of data where you admit you've been tracking this person for sessions is going to be?
I don't know how else to put this: It isn't a socially acceptable way to handle such a situation. Talk about bad vibes. It's a super unfriendly move.
I agree with HeironymusZot and Third_Sundering.
While the dice can be considered above average and potentially suspicious - this is not evidence of cheating and bringing it up as "this guy's a cheater" to the DM, especially if that DM learns that you've been *****ing about this alleged cheater to rando's on the internet multiple times behind everyone's back - it is going to end up poorly, I have no doubt.
Vince, it's a game. That's all. If you're not having fun, and it's just you, just go find a different group. That's the best suggestion anyone can make here. If it was just the dice thing, I'd just bringing up online dice rollers - but it's not, is it? You don't like this player (with the way you come across "you hate him" would be accurate) but judging from things you've said: you're the only one who does. The DM is fine with it. It seems other players are too. And it's the DM's friend. So even just going to the DM, to try and make this player play "your way" is not going to achieve anything positive. It'll just cause problems.
So all these backs and forth and numbers and arguments - this is all ultimately fruitless. The only real advice anyone can give, and has been given by multiple people here: is find a different group that plays more like your style of play. You'll be happier for it. Life is way too ******* short for this bullshit over a game. Move on to a better-suited game and get back to enjoying it.
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.
Personally, if I were Vince, and I had a problem with the cheating (which I personally would, that's understandable), here's what I'd do:
(1) Get a lot more data. As of right now the rolls could just be really good. It's unlikely, but possible.
(2) If something is definitely off, talk to the DM. Let them decide how to handle it. This is their problem from here. Ask them to leave you out of it.
(3) Hope the friendship and group stays together. It could just be a dice issue, in which case the player can buy a new set. Or even if it's cheating, that probably won't kill the game. I cheated once (didn't mark damage on one hit in a final boss fight), though I did take it back when caught. And I've had players admit to more extensive cheating. We're still friends. We don't cheat anymore. The group is still here. Empathy, openness, and forgiveness go a long way, especially when you care about your friendship.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Firstly, you probably shouldn't jump to conclusions based on one guy, even "that one guy".
But main point, there seems to be some misunderstanding if you're talking about players implementing rule of cool. The DM implements it. Players can ask to try a non-standard action, and maybe - maybe - suggest an appropriate roll. Now there can be a problem with a pushover DM. The DM should reward creativity with moderate benefits, not grant every overpowered and uninteresting request.
The irony to this thread is that no one is taking their own advice.
Everyone is so focused on telling Vince to just leave the table or that they’ve given the advice over and over or that no D&D is bad D&D that they can’t stop and start doing introspection on their own actions.
If you’ve come into these threads and posted multiple times, you’re no different than Vince posting these same threads.
If you’ve come in here and pointed out that no D&D is better than bad D&D, you’re no different than Vince replying to these posts.
I want to believe that Vince wants help and advice, but it’s already been given. Person has to make a choice. Nothing I post is gonna change that. Why bother.
The only person that has raised any sort of obstinance towards this idea is Vince.
How exactly have I played down that people cheat? I have said Vince doesn't have definitive evidence. That is not even close to being the same thing.
You're also missing the repeated point being made by me and others. The problems at this table run deeper than preventing any possible cheating. The bad blood will still be there after open rolls are instituted.
I already went over this with Falwith. Personal vitriol has nothing to do with what I am saying. I am disgusted with Vince's behavior in this thread, and I am responding to it. I don't appreciate someone accusing someone of cheating so adamantly without definitive proof, and I especially don't appreciate someone equating an entire playstyle with cheating.
And again. I never said anything against open rolling. I am saying it won't make a meaningful difference in this situation. Can you understand the difference?
To accuse me of saying nothing should ever be investigated because they might be innocent is possibly the biggest stretch of logic I've ever seen on these forums. I disapprove of Vince's methods and don't think eliminating the possibility of cheating will solve the issues he is having at this table. I have spoken up as a proponent of "innocent until proven guilty". I'm flummoxed. How does this translate to "don't investigate anything, they might be innocent"? How do you think people are proven guilty?
Me telling Vince to leave the game is my honest conclusion after reading what he is saying and how he is saying it. It is the most practical solution I see to the problems at hand. If you don't agree, fine. But don't tell me it isn't relevant.
Okay. So not only did you not answer my very simple question Kotath, but you preceded to accuse me(and others) of saying a bunch of nonsensical things that weren't even close to what has been discussed. I'm done with this. Don't expect any more replies.
Right now, 28 d20's and about 8 d6's give huge indication this guy is cheating. Or at the very least, he should be buying lottery tickets. If I can get 22 more d20 rolls, which can be one session, if we are busy, that is 50 d20's. If this trend continues, and I see no reason why it won't, then I will work out precisely the probability. I believe that one person puts it at less than 3%, assuming A +6 t each roll (we know that said +6 could not be on each roll), and around 1.1% if a +4 was applied to all rolls. 50 data points would be a solid sample, as n=30 is statistically relevant.
Let's take that up once I have those numbers.
Talk to your table about it. Don't accuse anyone, don't be confrontational, just ask if everyone could roll in plain sight. Wether or not he was cheating before...wouldn't really matter, as long as the problem is resolved. I wouldn't outright accuse them, or talk to the DM (You said they were friends) or you may end up offending someone.
When you have their answer, you can then decide what to do next, but the best course of action is usually to try and resolve it peacefully first.
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Vince, try not to take this the wrong way, but why are you letting this guy take away from your fun?
My advice is to look at it from a different perspective.
Set aside this "one guy" for the moment. Ask yourself if you are enjoying everything else about the game, on the balance?
If the answer is yes, then ask yourself if you can try to find a way to just let it slide?
By all means, if the opportunity comes up, suggest that the group move to an open dice-rolling app of some variety. There's plenty of options for Discord.
But this obsession with "proving" that this guy is cheating seems counter-productive. The amount of statistics you would need to collect to "prove" this is actually quite a lot. The odds of rolling 11 or better on a d20 10 times in a row is about 1 in 1000. 11+ at 20 times in a row is about 1 in a million. But these are all theoretically possible, if increasingly unlikely. In my group I've witnessed 3 nat 20's or 3 nat 1's in a row (1 in 8000 chance) more than once.
Even if you do arrive with "overwhelming" evidence, how do you suppose the DM is going to react when confronted with this?