No, they are cheating, just with the blessing of the public. Like gerrymandering isn’t a thing you should be able to do, fullstop, but it isn’t something normally possible to do in California.
Yes, there’s a California rule that states that redistricting is done by a non-partisan commission. This explicitly sidesteps that process. They’re breaking a rule with permission but they’re still breaking a rule.
If your DM rules that you can have two actions in a turn without reason, it’s still cheating.
I’d argue this is explicitly not cheating. Revising the rules though a democratic process IS democracy.
The D&D example is closer since it doesn’t explicitly call for buy-in from the whole table, but the first and only rule of D&D is to have fun with the DM being chief facilitator. The PHB and DMG are just suggestions. If this favoritism caused others in the party to feel slighted, then it would be ‘cheating’.
Things are so bad that ‘not cheating’ is taking the high road, yeah
No, they are cheating, just with the blessing of the public. Like gerrymandering isn’t a thing you should be able to do, fullstop, but it isn’t something normally possible to do in California.
Working within a broken system isn’t cheating though. Cheating means you’re breaking the rules.
Yes, there’s a California rule that states that redistricting is done by a non-partisan commission. This explicitly sidesteps that process. They’re breaking a rule with permission but they’re still breaking a rule.
If your DM rules that you can have two actions in a turn without reason, it’s still cheating.
I’d argue this is explicitly not cheating. Revising the rules though a democratic process IS democracy.
The D&D example is closer since it doesn’t explicitly call for buy-in from the whole table, but the first and only rule of D&D is to have fun with the DM being chief facilitator. The PHB and DMG are just suggestions. If this favoritism caused others in the party to feel slighted, then it would be ‘cheating’.