The Forge Archives

Hi all,

Matt Gwinn's thread on Cheating and GNS triggered some thoughts for me about why I occasionally change dice in a game.

As Matt's thread has wandered into a discussion of what is cheating and when is it wrong, I thought I'd start a new thread focused on what I thought was an interesting question.

Specifially, I want to restrict discussion to the phenomenon of players changing dice results (or mis-adding modifiers, etc.).  

When have you (as player not GM) done it and why?  What were contributing details - game system, group culture, expectations, a tournement at stake, a defining moment for your character?

Good question.

Lets see, two primary different sets of circumstances for me, when I cheated.

First:  RPGA Living City Campaigns.  I cheated like a bastard in these.  Why?  
1)  Cheating was rife (I assume still is).   Magic items were on certificates that were routinely forged.  XP awards were routinely Forged.   Cheating on a die roll to get a legitimate certificate was essentially an easier alternative to being honest with the die roll, failing, and then forging the certificate.

2) Living City was set up with lots of gimmicks that only the "elite" would benefit from.  Invitation only parties where certificates for the really cool stuff was traded and auctioned.  Scenarios where you only got the "cool stuff" if you knew the gimmick and the "top echelon" were all tipped off about what the gimmick was so they'd get them.  Cheating was the only way for the casual Living City gamer to even hope to maintain character parity.


Second:  Part of my life long hatred of the whiff factor.  I have cheated in games to avoid die roll based deprotaginization.  This was in an environment where in game discussion about events with other players and the GM was unheard of, where there was a very clear sense of competition ("you screwed up, sucks to be you") and the system was very whiff prone (AD&D2e non weapon proficiencies, BRP skills, etc).


Today I've long since stopped even thinking about participating in Living City, and for the most part endeavor to find systems less prone to whiffage and environments more prone to cooperative mutually empowering play.

I 'misread' rolls in one of my favorite games, Mage: the Ascension.  As a player.  It was a big dose of the whiff factor-- I'm supposed to be that cool and I fail continuously?!

  So I adjusted the rules before the next game of it that I ran; 1s stopped cancelling successes, wrote out a clear sheet of 'a one in this is like ___ experience' (which contradicted the somewhat jokey tone the rulebook had for many of the low skills), etc. Autosuccesses in narrow specializations.

  Sure, there were still failures, and an occassional botch.  But very rarely in a character's strong suit.  Less whiffing- it seemed to make a big difference.  [But I was back on the other side of the screen, so it could all be ego, I suppose.]

Scott

I've fudged rolls only while in the GM chair, and it frustrated me that I felt the need to do it. It's mostly happened with systems where the die roll carried too much weight as the decision maker, or I at least perceived it as such.

Also, I did it in a Fudge-based game I ran, as I hadn't got the hang of Fudge, and I was getting unpredictable results at every turn.

Hi Alan,

Cool approach to this issue. I'm glad you found the right phrasing.  I couldn't figure it out on the other thread.

And to put Alan's elegent phrasing right before everyone, please remember the title is "Changing Dice Results" (and Modifiers).  Therefore there's no need for labels of "cheating," "fudging" or whatnot.  These judgements don't help answer Alan's question.  When did you change the results, what were the circumstances, and why.

It's my belief that by removing the judgements and looking at the when and why, something interesting might be revealed.  And I actually think it will have something to do with GNS.

So...

I used to cheat during really long battles in AD&D.  If I was forty minutes into rolling a d20 sometimes I would just "snap" and think, "Dear God, what are we doing, we know we're going to wear this thing down eventually, why are we going through these damned motions making pretend that each one matters."

I'd give myself a hit on the beast just to get the fight over with sooner.  In these particular games a weren't a lot of tactics flying around.  It really was you-hit-I-hit.

I have done this about three times.

I think I once cheated on a Saving Throw as well.  There was this sense of, "That's it?  Get struck with a poison dart, make one lousy random roll to see if I live or die?  My guy's a hero!  WTF!  No way!"

Christopher

I've been gaming since I was 13, and I've given in to the occasional "misreported" die roll, although I've done so less and less over the years.  The motivation usally boiled down to either:

a) a favorite character in extreme peril, i.e, don't make this die roll and you'll be reaching for a new character sheet...

or

b) frustration after a long series of whiffs.  In a game of Traveller I once rolled snake-eyes 5 consecutive times on 2d6.

So yeah, I'd say the usual motivator for me was deprotaginization, either in the extreme (no more protaganist) or simply the fustration of being ineffective.

I also have some experience in gaming in groups where cheating is rampant.  In my late teens, my usual gaming group included some guys who would rarely report rolling anything below 98 on a pair of percentiles, and while I never was quite so blatant about it myself, it does create a degree of frustration when such behavior is tolerated that leads to those members of the group who would normally be honest to begin fudging rolls themselves.

An interesting thing I wish to point out is that it is easier for a player to adjust his result if the GM just asks if you succeed or not.  I've never actually made up a number, but I have told the GM that I succeeded.  Only did it a few times and it was mostly an urge not to make my character suck.

-Joshua

I can't say I've ever misreported a number as a player.

Basically this is due to 1) the relative lack of chances to play and 2) a penchant for rules-lawyering when I really want something.  I guess the rules-lawyering falls into the category of misreporting modifiers, so I'm probably guilty there.  

My reasons have been varied.  At the core, it's probably a personality thing (I like to be the expert, which is why GMing suits me just fine).  There were a few occasions where I did it to save a beloved character, and a few times where I felt like the GM was being a dick and I just wanted to be done with whatever he was making me do.

I did discover a way to "cheat" with the true d100 die, where you could roll it along its equator to essentially guarantee numbers between 30 and 70.  I can't actually say why I did it except just to see if it worked.  I stopped using the die to remove the temptation.

In my case, I haven't tended to change die rolls for my PC to survive or win.  I think somehow games I have been in have either been ones where it was fun to die (CoC and Paranoia, or any one-shot game), or ones where there was some degree of script immunity (usually that the PC had to do something actively stupid to get killed).  

I think I have changed die rolls more to liven things up.  This might mean that I claim a good roll when I try an unusual maneuver.  However, I also have sometimes claimed a worse roll than what I actually rolled -- such as a critical failure.  Am I alone in this?  This partly may have come out of a desire for balance: i.e. I should have low rolls to match the rolls I changed to high.  But it also came I think from thinking that failure would be interesting at that point.  

Overall, though, I find it hard to remember what I did.  I definitely think I used to change rolls more than I do in present times.  

One specific thing that has always annoyed me is percentile dice, in which I find it is very common to switch the "ones" and the "tens" die, if they are distinguished by color.  In my own game I have made sure to supply a bunch of clearly-marked "00" to "90" dice.  I'm not sure why I particularly dislike this, given that I am not concerned over die roll changing otherwise.  I think it could be that I find it distracting, in that it requires minor but active effort to get the true roll.

Quote from: John Kim
I think I have changed die rolls more to liven things up.  This might mean that I claim a good roll when I try an unusual maneuver.  However, I also have sometimes claimed a worse roll than what I actually rolled -- such as a critical failure.

Hi John,

What do you mean "liven things up"?  For whom?

Also what game system(s) did you do this in, and which did you choose to crit in?

This goes for otehr posters too - which systems did your reported events happen in?

Annoying occasional poster here.

I've cheated (my term for what I did, so no judgments here on anyone else) a few times - I wouldn't call it 'regularly' but perhaps... 'predictably'.

Usually, as the other posters, its (I hope this is the right understanding of this term) the whiffing, or neutralizing non-productive results, such as doing good rping, good planning, good aiding of the story, then having a crappy roll which is just generally disappointing, for the story overall, not necessarily just my character - I'll read it as *slightly* less bad if possible (moving a critical failure down to a failure), but from there, I'll use... "player fiat" for lack of a better word, staying within the social contract (in my eyes) to make an outcome more conducive to whatever the issue at hand is. As others, also, if the ref asks, I'll just say 'yah, I succeeded' if I feel it would have been close enough - usually, if its a VERY bad failure though, I don't call it a success.

And yes, numerous times I have fudged it the OTHER way, so I DO fail, sometimes spectacularly, sometimes with other players' wellfare depending on me, if I felt the outcome would be funny or interesting or somehow really add an oomph to the story.

Now, if its wacky or a weird, even bad thing, I'll let it go too and NOT fudge it - it all depends on the situation. Like I had a character, we were in the middle of a battle with Orcs and Goblins, I had my whip (yes), my sword, I was on the coach trying to rein in the horses. I swing at a goblin and absolutely fumbled, fell off the wagon, failed ALL my luck, dexterity and ref-feels-sorry-for-you rolls, took 11(!) on 2D6 damage roll, doing TWICE my entire health, knocking me out and causing a bleeding wound. Heh. Not heroic but hilarious to envision, and helped me decide on an Owen Wilson type personality of the skilled yet bumbling unrealized hero.

Just a reminder that I'd also like to know the _system_ your story occured in.  And why you did it - espeically when you choose to fail.

here's a little story that Alan may find interesting... and Ron, too, since he was recently surprised when someone mentioned a GM who fudged dice rolls without keeping it a secret.

twenty-some years ago, I and my friends played D&D and The Fantasy Trip. when we played TFT, I GMed, and I don't remember any changing die rolls or any players changing die rolls. however, I and two of my friends each ran D&D campaigns, and each of us, while acting as GM, would reroll particularly bad rolls. there was no real rule of when we rerolled, since it wasn't always for dramatic effect or to prevent a whiff. sometimes, we'd reroll high damage rolls when the PC victim was already near death.

the players didn't always get to see the die roll, but everyone knew what was going on, because the GM's reroll was usually accompanied by shouting at the dice, either saying "bah!" or "OH COME ON!". I remember in some cases where the dice were particularly stubborn and a GM would reroll four or five times.

thinking back on this, I'm wondering why I don't remember doing this in TFT. I think it's because D&D has a linear die roll while TFT has a curve.

Quote from: AlanJust a reminder that I'd also like to know the _system_ your story occured in.  And why you did it - espeically when you choose to fail.

In my case, various Palladium games and WFRP for the most part, but they're the ones I played most.  Rules-lawyering seemed to be particularly effective in Palladium, perhaps because we were using a mishmash of Robotech, TMNT and Beyond the Supernatural (each with all of their supplements).  Basically, we invented Rifts long before they published it.

I didn't include the systems, though, because I don't think they're part of why or what I did, exactly.  I think I'd have been equally prone to "cheating" in any other system.

I guess this thread is starting to drift.  The original question was:

When have you (as player not GM) changed dice rolls (misreported modifiers or success/failure) and why? What were contributing details - game system, group culture, expectations, a tournement at stake, a defining moment for your character?:

From looking at the responses to date, I'd suggest that most appear to be motivated by a range of feelings:

REBELLION at unequal power distribution
- Corrupt environment & unequal distribution of "cool stuff" - RPGA Living City (Ralph)

Fear of player SHAMING rituals
- Player competitiveness ("Sucks to be you") - AD&D2e (Ralph)

FRUSTRATION of player effort
- Dice neutralized player preparation - no system mentioned
(Dr. Velocity)
- After a long series of failures - Traveller (Wilhelm)

BETRAYAL of Player Vision of Character
- "I'm supposed to be cool and I fail all the time?"  - Mage: the Ascension (Scott)
- " ... one lousy random roll to see if I live or die? My guy's a hero! WTF! No way!" - AD&D (Christopher)
- also mentioned as secondary reason in one or two other responses

BETRAYAL of Player's desire for Influence
- I suspect this is also an underlying reason, but it hasn't been mentioned explicitly.

BOREDOM
- To liven things up - both success and fumbles - no system mentioned  (John)
- Frustration with a long and repetitiive Conflict - AD&D (Christopher)

HUMOR
- Humor - choosing to fail - no system mentioned (Dr. Velocity)


Betrayal of Vision and Betrayal of Influence are two tightly bound categories.  Would it be useful to separate them?  Are they always bound up?  Are all acts of changing results attempts to increase influence?

Also, I'd really like to hear more from John, Dr. Velosity, and others on choosing to fail.  Why'd you do it? Can you give an example?  In what system?  What else was going on?