Ethical Question

[Archamedius]

So I came upon this conundrum:

preface: These questions are from a tournament mindset, not a friendly game. I know exactly how I would react in a friendly game, I am looking at this issue strictly from a competitive experience.


Is it cheating if you discover your opponent is cheating, but by cheating he is risking hurting himself, so you let it play out and wait to call him on the cheat until after it has resolved one way or the other, letting it go if the cheat ends up in your favor?

For example:

Suppose I go to a tournament, and I table my first opponent. I am in the top of the pack and belly up against my second opponent. He has in his army a level 1 necromancer with the ruby ring of ruin. He begins to use it to cast fireballs at boosted levels. The ruby ring of ruin is a bound spell and so he would only ever be allowed to cast it at the lowest level. Suppose I understand the rule ahead of time, and when my opponent picked up 3 power dice intending to cast the highest boosted fireball, if I chose to wait to see if he successfully cast the spell before calling him on it, am I cheating? (The intention being if he gets it off, I correct him then and resolve it with him; if he doesn't, I let him waste the power dice and wait to call him on it when he does later in the game).

You could say perhaps my opponent didn't understand the rule himself, but based on my performance game 1, he should have done about the same right? Which suggests he should have known better, right? Does this change if it's table 1, game 5 of a 2 day tournament? Does it matter if my opponent is not intentionally cheating and simply doesn't know the rules well enough? Should that matter?

Ethically I feel obligated to inform my opponent the moment I realize something isn't happening right. But the competitive person in me gets a little hot under the collar when someone tries to cheat against me, and if that cheat may cost them power dice, the competitive side of me wants to say "F*** you, waste those power dice."

I am just curious how other people feel.

Thanks.

Arch

[Choombatta]

I would ask how you want to feel after the win.
Do you want to feel you won due to better tactics?
Do you want to feel you won due to an ignorant ( or cheating ) opponent.

Personally, I always point out inaccuracies, even if they go against me. I want to know I won due to my tactics and army composition ( and luck at dice ), not because my opponent was ignorant of rules or trying to cheat me and failing at it.

[Thraundil]

Well. I would immediately call him out on it. If you keep your mouth shot, YOU are the cheater - even if noone can prove it. Its in the BRB; be a good sportsman, and remind your opponent about obvious mishaps. For example if a guy goes to shooting right after movement, you remind him of his magic phase instead of letting it roll. I would never let my opponent misunderstand a rule that could go either way, and then only if it goes against me call him out. If he makes what I believe is against the BRB, I immediately call it. Whether im right or wrong, we correct it such that any action is as right as possible before its carried out. Thats sportsmanship; if you dont have it, dont play games.

[Dyvim tvar]

If I see that an opponent has a misunderstanding of the rules and is therefore playing in some way that I benefit, it would be the same as me purposefully misplaying a rule to benefit me.

Either way is cheating.

[Archamedius]

Thanks for the input guys! Glad to see the way my gut reaction to a situation is what other people here would do. I appreciate it!

[Tarbo]

My feeling is, yes, the ethical thing to do is to correct him. I would have a lesser opinion of someone who wouldn't point out this error--perhaps, however doubtful, an honest mistake--except when to their advantage. Assume ignorance over malice.

I would not go so far as to claim you would be cheating, but it would make you complicit or, at the very least, negligent. After all, your hypothesis would put you in a situation where you have both knowledge and the opportunity to act, but choose not to.

Interesting question.

[Dragonarmy]

Your asking for the communities opinion because your question is not addressed in the rule book. Other games, such at Magic the Gathering, do address your question at varying levels of tournament play. Most commonly, players are encouraged to point out when the game is played incorrectly, but as one reaches a higher and higher level play, the onus and consequence is placed on the player who made the mistake. Notice that there are simple games, like cribbage, where the rules state you may take your opponent's point if he miscounts. This rule often adds to the cribbage gaming experience. There is no universal game rule regarding your question.

It is my feeling, however, that in all games it is both player's responsibility to make sure the game is played correctly, unless otherwise directed. Calling an opponent out on a mistake at the opportune moment that maximizes his loss in a situation is ethically wrong; you are cheating. My ruling best fits "in the spirit" of Warhammer. I do know players who choose to perverse this spirit of the game, but to me, they are going against the game creators intentions.

Now there may be time when it is appropriate to cheat in games, but I rarely find it to be the best solution to cheat back. Although everyone once in while, it's an ok solution. One risks the situation blowing up.

Now if there was ruling by the tournament organizer prior to the event, that would over rule my feelings over the matter. Often tournaments do have a clause to address your question, most notably explaining the consequences two both parties if caught.

DragonArmy

[CitizenKhaine]

I would point it out. Warhammer is a game and if both players aren't enjoying it then it is being played wrong.

[KiRaHyuU]

i feel your scenario is kinda niche...the ploy of letting him do something that u know he can't do and then telling him after that he can't do it and say it's worth naught as he's spent the dice already is to me, your a real douche if you are gonna insist he can't do anything from that position cause what should of happened is because he can't do something means that act shouldn't of happened in the first place, whether it be he was attempting to cheat or make a mistake, that is something that you cannot say for sure nor can anyone say for sure...

I feel the better scenario what if,

Your playing a smaller game and he has 8 power dice with only a level 1 necromancer and ruby ring, and he states i'm gonna use 2 dice for raise dead, and then 6 dice for the empowered fire ball before rolling the 2 dice for raise dead. I feel that in the spirit of the game and just being a decent bloke to begin with u should tell him that he can't actually cast the "empowered" fire ball spell, he in fact is wasting dice...

In that respect if a player just doesn't say a thing and rolls the 2 dice for raise dead, and then tries to cast the "empowered" version of fire ball with 6 dice, then u proceed to stop him, and he goes back on his word and say well then i'd like to throw more dice into raise dead since u dispelled it for some reason...? Then sorry it would have to be his problem...it was his decision to try to cheat u and he failed or he just made a mistake and thus he should pay the consequence himself....

The difference in this scenario is what done has been...he has no other like options...unless ur kind enough to let him redo his entire magic phase.

[Olderplayer]

In a tournament environment, sports should be part of the scoring. It is still a game; so letting your opponent misplay a rule and then waiting until later to call it is totally wrong. You owe it to your opponent to point it out in a timely manner. Even in tournaments, with so many rules to remember and time limited, even the most experienced and top players occasionally get a rule wrong. It is surprising to me how often I find out after a game in a tournament that an item was misplayed when reviewing the army book. It is not cheating if unintended and you have the duty to correct the opponent on the rule but do it politely and without accusation. I sometimes do let minor rules issues go, like sloppy movement and stuff, and am guilty of them at times, but anything significant or clearlly wrong should be corrected.

[Saintofm]

You could word it like a question "like are you aware you can't do that in 8th ed now" or ask them to find it in the current rule book, preferably your own so.


If they act like a jerk then you can out them some other way. Clearly they arn't going to play nice any ways (persle before swine, but you tried).

If they do take it with stride, even if they are just hiding their feelings, you gave them an out without looking too much like a fool.

[Heartsbane]

I think that there are shades of grey to this one. The example given if fairly black and white, in that the rules explicitly cover that eventuality. Where it gets grey is things that are open to interpretation.

For instance, if my opponent declares a charge that will put a unit somewhere where it will let me crush them with a counter charge, and I'm pretty sure he's half an inch out of charge range, but he fudges the measurement (or begins moving it after a cursory check and declaring himself to be in range, intentionally or otherwise). Or if he wants to shoot off one of my units and that unit is blocking a key charge, and there's a tLOS issue as to wether they get cover. Both cases might be open to interpretation, is it ok in cases like that to go along with the interpretation my opponent wants and is arguing for even if I don't think it's right?

[Saintofm]

I think that there are shades of grey to this one. The example given if fairly black and white, in that the rules explicitly cover that eventuality. Where it gets grey is things that are open to interpretation.

For instance, if my opponent declares a charge that will put a unit somewhere where it will let me crush them with a counter charge, and I'm pretty sure he's half an inch out of charge range, but he fudges the measurement (or begins moving it after a cursory check and declaring himself to be in range, intentionally or otherwise). Or if he wants to shoot off one of my units and that unit is blocking a key charge, and there's a tLOS issue as to wether they get cover. Both cases might be open to interpretation, is it ok in cases like that to go along with the interpretation my opponent wants and is arguing for even if I don't think it's right?

I could see that in 7th ed, but wouldn't the fact things can be pre measured delt with that issue?

[Tarbo]

For instance, if my opponent declares a charge that will put a unit somewhere where it will let me crush them with a counter charge, and I'm pretty sure he's half an inch out of charge range, but he fudges the measurement (or begins moving it after a cursory check and declaring himself to be in range, intentionally or otherwise). Or if he wants to shoot off one of my units and that unit is blocking a key charge, and there's a tLOS issue as to wether they get cover. Both cases might be open to interpretation, is it ok in cases like that to go along with the interpretation my opponent wants and is arguing for even if I don't think it's right?

From the ethical point of view, this is a similar issue to the one Archamedius posed:

• Your opponent is (knowingly or not) not following the agreed game rules.
• You are aware of this.
• You let your reaction depend on whether or not you have an advantage in the outcome.

It's true that this example looks more fudgeable than the other, but the fundamental ethical issue is not about how easy it is to turn a blind eye to it; that just makes it more tempting. It's about whether you're willing to be complicit in compromising the game's integrity to gain an advantage.