I think you're missing the point of what I'm saying..

I'm not saying that the rules should be the focus of the game, what I'm suggesting is that the rules (whatever they are - from super intricate to near freeform) are obeyed.

I'm saying that if you allow people to break rules, and the use the excuse 'it was to enhance fun/roleplaying'  then you're heading for a game that's chaos.

Let me give you an example. At an event I was unconscious. The rules said i would come round after 5 minutes. Because the medical team was having such fun playing 'Casualty' with me, I stayed unconscious longer. How does that cause chaos?

_____________________________________________________

It is not a competition. It is a web forum.

Why is it cheating when James does it but not when you do it?

Or is changing the rules justified as long as the player doing it believes it will make the game more fun?

___________________________

You gotta burn to grow!

Staying unconscious longer than it says in the rules to make things more fun for other players isn't cheating.

Simple isn't it?

Ascendancy LRP: Redvers Fenn-Cooper

Crimson Requiem: Crew

Real Life: Doug McKerracher

Quis custodiet ipsos custard?

I never accused James of cheating, I have no idea how you have managed to interpret things that way.

As Mr Dreadful says, there is a huge difference. Changing the effect of poison in such a way that means the original effect is lost (for example adding the ability to speak to one that should be instant unconciousness) is very obviously cheating. It benefits the person making the change to the detriment of the poisoner.

How is staying unconscious longer than the letter of the rules cheating? How does it benefit me to the detriment of others? Another example, in my original example of having to choose between two options, how is choosing the one that is more RP fun cheating?

Hows this for a summary of my position?

Cheating = major changes to effects in a way that benefits you to the detriment of others. For example, the example being used here of changing the poison effect to grab the throat and mutter 'poison' instead of just falling over, or lengthening a death count.

Slight changes to effects in a way that doesnt benefit you or anyone else to increase enjoyment for others = roleplaying. For example, staying unconscious longer than the rules state.

Do you understand where I'm coming from now? The key thing is what benefit one gains from it - if the answer is 'more fun + x benefit' then be wary. If the answer is 'more fun + no benefit' then its OK.

Roleplaying needs to complement skills or there is no point. Another example is tracking - technically rules will state that the tracker finds the tracks, but they wont specify how much digging around for tracks they should do. Most people will roleplay looking for tracks rather than just spotting them from thin air.

_____________________________________________________

It is not a competition. It is a web forum.

Example - my character in Maelstrom has tuberculosis, and is very ill from this.  However, there is nothing in the rules about illnesses of this type, or how to roleplay them - all I know about it is my own research before playing.  However, I realised that, as an invalid, she is not going to be as resilient to things as an ordinary character would be.  So what do I do?  If she gets into a fight, or gets poisoned, neither of which have happened (yet) but might, am I able to exaggerate the damage done to her on the grounds of her illness, or do I stick to the standard behaviour?

This is definatly not playing to her IC advantage, so is it OK?

Maelstrom - Elspeth Grigori - Holy Martyr
Lilith Sartia - I see weird people!

EOS - Maram-amma Suran - The Very Important Wife

Reality - Rebecca Willatts

I'd personally say it was fine, and give you kudos for nobbing your own character.

_____________________________________________________

It is not a competition. It is a web forum.

I understand where you are coming from. Your position seems contradictory because its not okay to roleplay drinking poison as this gives away information about poisoning but it is okay to feign increased susceptibility to damage (possibly gaining later advantage through being the recipient of better protection because you're the one who is unconscious for twice as long when knocked out). The difference is the subjective judgement of the player at the time as to what constitutes 'no benefit' and I don't think players should be making that call.

In essence, I dispute the idea that it's okay for players to make such subjective judgements about when its okay to ignore the rules.

If you were making a solo last stand against some monsters who were really enjoying the fight, is it okay to ignore a few blows because it's no benefit to you (you're going to die anyway) but more fun for the monsters?

___________________________

You gotta burn to grow!

Personally, I'