Can you cheat at D&D?

[thethird]

So you would not count someone who just wants to play the game to put down others in front of an audiance as a problem player? Well I would.

What does that have to do with what I quoted or asked? Seriously. If he is not playing the game how is he a problem player?

Having say a dozen forms to polymorph into makes it more equal then every creature in every book. This stops a lot of polymorph abuse. So a spellcaster with polymorph can't dominate a game.

Untrue. First of all you defined things as "equal" not "more equal". You just moved the goalpost (thing that you seem to do consistently). So just preemptively I would say that a caster doesn't need more than a dozen forms to break the game if he so wishes. And that those forms have an int score high enough to be unaffected by your "fix" so the actual broken forms available are not nerfed at all.

So it's a ''whim'' if you don't like it, but it's ''ok'' if you do like it?

No. I dislike whims. What would make you believe otherwise?

Yes, depending on the player.

Then why does the argument against a character with all 3 get refuted because you changed the character to having all stats be lesser than 10?

Yes, unlike every other person on this board, I don't always game with my best, best pals in the whole wide world. I often game with ''I know his name'' type people, or even ''she is my cousin'' type people.

They are not problem players. If they were your house rules would have stopped them.

Not exactly, your falling for the hype. I said the katana is a good way to spot a problem optimizer. I never said that cleric spellcasting is cheating, my fix is to promote more role-play. I never said using class features is cheating in general. And it's not cheating to slay a dragon, um, what?

Here, you said that having a katana is cheating.

Except that doesn't seem to fall under either the normal definition of cheating (breaking the rules), nor the definition of cheating that you have provided for us earlier (abusing a rule to gain an advantage). So you keep using the same phrase, buts its impossible to know what is actually means. That might be a response that gets more attention if you have a consistent meaning, even if it is nonstandard.

To have a character take a feat that they would not have reasonably taken, just so the players optimized build works out, is that. If your making a 5th level homebody fighter who has never seen combat, he just worked as a guard, then they would not have Improved Initiative, Exotic Weapon(katana) and Weapon Focus(katna). A homebody cleric that had never been in a fight would have more non combative feats. But, an optimizer would never want to play a weak character with a feat like Negotiator, as then they could not be the crazy kanta hack and slasher. They would try some crazy backstory....''oh, um, my dad bought the kanta on a trip and my character learned how to use it to make his dad proud. I'm sure it even sounds creative to some...

Well, I see nothing wrong with ''spells are full of wonder and mystery and strange unknown things might happen'', as opposed to (robot voice)* it is just like page 44 says*

How is that "full of wonder and mystery" less vague "than what page 44 says"?