House Rules: Tactical Cheat

by Robert Trifts

Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 03:23:00 -0400 From: Robert Trifts To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Comments Sought: A House Rule

House Rules vary. A new member to our circle joined the other weekend and was more-than-a-little-suspicious of our Beloved House Rule, which has been enshrined for - oh - almost 10 years now I guess.

You may see why below. Your comments are appreciated.


House Rule: "Tactical Cheat"

The Tactical Cheat is a House Rule which, admittedly, tends to rig the game in the favour of the PC's, but does so without *totally* destroying the game balance and serves to reflect the "heroic" nature of the PC's. It also is the institutionalization of total disfavour and scorn towards any other "non-tactical" cheating by any player. If you cheat - do it in the open and do it with restrictions, otherwise, you have are truly a CHEATER who is worthy of contempt and scorn.

Operation: Each PC gets one (short gaming session - three hours or less) or TWO (longer session - about 4 - 8 hours+) times during the session to roll the dice and read 'em and weep. The player may accept fate, or may elect to loudly declare "Cheat". The player may then pick 'em up and roll again.

TC's cannot be used to effect someone else's roll, (most especially the GM's). They may not be "loaned" or given to another player. They are personal. If not used during a session they are gone and canot be saved for next session. You get two of 'em MAX and that is all you get - per session.

They do not apply to criticals (GM rolls these - in secret - for all PC's and NPC's/Monsters). They apply only to those rolls made by the player, typically to hit, spell casting rolls, maneuvers etc.. They are not usable during Spell Gain Rolls during character advancement. It is ok to use them during RR's but, we do not ever declare what the RR roll is for prior to rolling, so the player may be in the dark as to whether a TC should or should not be used in such cases (in very severe situations, GM may ask player, after he rolls (and fails), "Do you wish to cheat?". This is our gamespeak for: "better do it or its curtains buddy".

Because of the presence of the overt Tactical Cheat, any other rolling is expected by all players and the GM to be scrupulously honest. There is no "looking the other way" to that sort of conduct. This, of course, does not really apply to the GM who may fudge behind a screen to his heart's content, but we do tend to heavily frown on that. The TC is the equalizer. Let the dice fall, otherwise, as they may.

Effect: If the session is combat intensive, players may choose to fumble spells and weapons earlier in the session for fear that when it is REALLY needed, the TC will not be there later that evening.

Effect: During the planning process of an attack, there are sometimes strategic choices made whether a particular PC has a TC left or not, though this tends to occur in very long gaming sessions only. We tolerate this, though the spirit of the rule is to pay attention to its impact but not to speak about it in such an overt fashion. It is...tacky... to do that.

Major Effect: ESF rolls now tend to be successful when you REALLY need 'em. This can be a problem, but it can also be rather fun. (Cast Death Cloud? I only have *ONE* TC left. Are you nuts?)

Cheating is a re-roll only. Fate can be fickle. Players can and do burn off two TC's in a row when hard pressed - and can still blow it. (its happened countless times). There is general applause and congratulatory smiles from all players when a TC is used and a 96+ follows. (This is known as "A Good One".)

True concern arises when an indifferent roll is made during a crucial climactic phase of a combat. To cheat or not? Many a "44" has become a "16" due to an unwise decision to tactically cheat. It is an all or nothing decision to use a TC. There is no going back to the previous roll. You live with the results of the TC (or use your final one if you dare).

The TC has been institutionalized. I really do not remember precisely HOW we started the practice - I think it arose during my Har-Ohn campaign, which had been going on at that point for about six months to a year. Anyway, our "group myth" is that it happened during a weapon fumble situation at the exact moment when it was certain disaster to fumble and Dymuim, the Dark Elven Ranger of Light fumbled spectacularly. In outrage and horror, Dymuim *brazenly declared* he was going to "Tactically Cheat" (he was dead otherwise and he had grown very attached to Dym) and I just took uncharacteristic pity and made no comment and went forward with the combat. I had been running for almost 8 years at that point, and while I had looked the other way on occasion when my players had subtly cheated, none had yet done it by first loudly DECLARING that he was about to and I was rather taken aback by it. Later, we all attempted to deal with the-by-now-infamous "Tactical Cheating" and began to formalize it. Anyway, it just sort of happened and grew and evolved like all House Rules.

It is a central feature of our game rules now and, overall, we find it does minimize the nastiness and vicissitudes of RM/SpaM while still preserving the real fear of character death in the game. Besides that, all sorts of encounters or combats in which the GM has perhaps misguaged the strength of the party can be "solved" through TC's (usually through ESF's). In a sense, they do cover a manifest number of the sins of the GM without my resorting to outrageous fudging behind a screen.

Objections? Kudos? Indifference?

.Robert
rtrifts@idirect.com


Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 13:19:35 -0400 From: Nicholas Zoss To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments Sought: A House Rule

On Thu, 15 Aug 1996, Robert Trifts wrote:
> ************************************************
> House Rule: "Tactical Cheat"

We do a very similar thing, but we call it a luck point. You have a stat, with no potential. You find the power points for that stat, add one, that is the number of luck points you get per level. (this makes it tougher for the really high level guys, you aren't jumping levels at all, you have to be more careful..). This way, even a 30 luck gets you one. Luck points differ from TC in that you can spend them against the GM's rolls. However, some NPCs have luck points, so this might balance out to about the same effect TCs have. I'd say the idea was great, but I'd be stroking myself.

Nicholas Zoss


Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 23:49:07 -0400 From: jim hoffman To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments Sought: A House Rule

The Tactical Cheat sounds like a great idea to me.

In our campaign, to overcome the lethalness of RM, we used 'luck points', which could be earned by trading in experience points (exchange rate something like 1 luck point for 100 xp). A luck point could adjust a roll by 1 pt. Luck points tended to be reserved for avoiding a 66 or 100 crit against the character, and that's it. As GM, I stopped fudging altogether once we started using this rule. I like being an impartial GM.

I like your way better. Very simple, yet still lets me tone down the fudge factor. I could actually see it adding some enjoyment to the game.


Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 06:59:12 -0400 From: Ralf Huels To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Re: Comments Sought: A House Rule

Robert Trifts wrote:
> Operation:  Each PC gets one (short gaming session -  three hours or 
> less) or TWO (longer session - about 4 - 8 hours+) times during the session to roll the dice 
> and read 'em and weep. The player may accept fate, or may elect to loudly declare "Cheat".  The player 
> may then pick 'em up and roll again.  
{Mega-Schnippel}
> Objections? Kudos? Indifference?

In our group every character gets one re-roll per level. I don't remember where the idea originally came from. I'm pretty certain it wasn't RM. I think some other system had'em. These re-rolls are not applicable in character creation/advacement situations, but can affect any roll made during the game.

It's sort of a freak of fate idea. Let the GM re-roll that killing blow against your character. Get a second chance. It makes you think the life of your PC doesn't depend on the turn of just one friendly card (ooops--wrong metaphor :-)

Tschuess, Ralf

-- 
huels@amadeus.statistik.uni-dortmund.de
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralf H"uls                    | "The only way to get rid of a 
Haydnstr.  21,                |  temptation is to yield to it."
44147 Dortmund, Germany       | O. Wilde - The picture of Dorian Gray
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to the House of Rules.