100 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

I have not used this console command personally, but have read of its use to examine mods for plotlines and stories rather than test other challenges (ie; combat, traps, etc). Personally, I wish to examine all of this, and generally only wish to remove the tedium of shopping, and slogging routes for trade.

And I am of the 'only one you can cheat solo is yourself' camp; a minority in this on-going debate. Suggestion: Wear a helm for protection....

[WebShaman]

*sigh*

Cheating yourself is a figure of speech, not a factual statement (unless one has multiple personalities).

You never did offer a proof on how one can cheat on themselves.

[WebShaman]

Proof of not being able to cheat in a Closed SP Environment

Also, one can plainly see that ShaDoOoW was active in that thread, and that he agreed that there was no cheating in a Closed SP Environment, but that he does not believe (contrary to the submitted evidence) that a Closed SP Environment is possible.

[SHOVA]

Skildron wrote...

It's probably my lack of understanding of English language, that leads me to a wrong definition of the term "cheating". I do not want to impost my playing style on anyone else, that would be a misunderstanding. But when downloading a module and starting to play, I myself submit to the ruleset someone defined with his or her work and contribution to the community. Disobeying those rules is, in lack of a better word, cheating to me. Of course, it may be necessary to solve a situation a cannot overcome or survive otherwise, but still...

Perhaps someone out there who goes strong against the "cheating" accusation can explain to me what they feel about things like I described in the previous sentence or what they call it.

And by the way:

SHOVA wrote
shut yer trap.

Now, that was rude, don't you think?

Greetings
Skildron

If your going to quote me, please quote the entire sentence, it helps avoid confusion and flamming. Just so you know what the entire sentence was: 

SHOVA wrote "If you don't agree, then as mom said, if you can't say something nice, shut yer trap. "

In responce to your view, it is just that, your view. I am sure it brings you great happieness, but in a game where you can change anything, there is no rule that any particular way must be followed, then there can be no cheating. It is impossible. Of course using the "your cheating logic" Any change to the base game, that does anything not intended by Bio, or the "builder" would be a cheat. that would include HAKs, Overrides, Items from another mod, or any new scripting added in. Since NWN by Design allows those changes, there is not a cheat involved. However since some people must impose their belief onto other no mater what, I humbly submit, you can believe whatever you want. I will still play and build the way I want. I hope you have fun playing the game your way, just as I am having fun playing the game my way. I doubt that your view will change anyone elses mind, you might have better luck tilting at windmills. I also realize that no one is going to switch their base view of cheating no mater what I, or anyone with a grasp of logic, posts here. Its a moot point.

[Elhanan]

WebShaman wrote...

*sigh*

Cheating yourself is a figure of speech, not a factual statement (unless one has multiple personalities).

You never did offer a proof on how one can cheat on themselves.

If cheating is the breakage of rules, and the Player sets some in play and then violates said standards; tis cheating themselves.

[Skildron]

@SHOVA: If the shoe fits, you put it on. Why are you reading out of my postings that I want to enforce my playing style on you? You don't like being called a cheater and you don't see on can cheat oneself in close SP environment. OK, understood and accepted. That is your view. My view is to call it cheating, even if I do it myself. You want to enforce your view on me? Good luck there.

Perhaps I should search out a better word as my understanding of cheating does not fit the definition of Websters dictionary quoted by Kail (thanks for that, btw).

I believe I understand better now what gets everybody so agitated in this discussion. EOD for me, if you agree.

Greetings
Skildron

Modifié par Skildron, 16 septembre 2011 - 01:03 .

[NWN DM]

WebShaman wrote...

*sigh*

Cheating yourself is a figure of speech, not a factual statement (unless one has multiple personalities).

You never did offer a proof on how one can cheat on themselves.

Left hand vs. right.

[SHOVA]

Skildron wrote...

@SHOVA: If the shoe fits, you put it on. Why are you reading out of my postings that I want to enforce my playing style on you? You don't like being called a cheater and you don't see on can cheat oneself in close SP environment. OK, understood and accepted. That is your view. My view is to call it cheating, even if I do it myself. You want to enforce your view on me? Good luck there.

Perhaps I should search out a better word as my understanding of cheating does not fit the definition of Websters dictionary quoted by Kail (thanks for that, btw).

I believe I understand better now what gets everybody so agitated in this discussion. EOD for me, if you agree.

Greetings
Skildron

Its called responding. in a forum such as this, when someone posts something, others respond to it. Its why we are here. I responded to you the way I did, because of how I took your 1st post. It seamed preachy, to tell someone that they are cheating when you are not even playing with them, and to challenge anyone to prove you wrong. I hold that to be rude, just like only quoting part of my sentence is rude, from your 2nd post, and can be the cause for some flamming. Now if you took my responce to be to close to home, perhaps you realized that you were doing what it said, being judgemental about people you were not even playing with.

As I posted earlier, I don't care what you do in your game. I don't care to listen about your game. However do not tell me that how I, or anyone else chooses to play NWN is wrong, or cheating because it isn't to your "style". I do not tell you how to play it. I do not ask you to join in my games. I only ask that you show some respect and not just call "cheater" because you don't agree with it. ((And by the way, I do not cheat, according to any of the current examples being posted by others, at all. in fact in my games, I bet most here would whine about the lack of available power, gear or even XP.)) All that name calling does is drive the community apart. Its unproductive, It is at this stage of NWN, not helping anyone. The single biggest reason, in my opinion of why NWN has lasted as long as it has, and why I still play it is that it is customizable. Even if you want to console command everything. If thats not your cup of tea, you don't have to drink it. But please don't be a jerk and say the tea drinkers are cheating because they don't order off of the main menu, when they paid the same ammount as everyone else. 

I hope your game is as fun for you, as mine is for me. 

[Kail Pendragon]

Elhanan wrote...

WebShaman wrote...

*sigh*

Cheating yourself is a figure of speech, not a factual statement (unless one has multiple personalities).

You never did offer a proof on how one can cheat on themselves.

If cheating is the breakage of rules, and the Player sets some in play and then violates said standards; tis cheating themselves.

If. But cheating implies deceipt, so one cannot cheat himself.

That said, there's even no need to set up rules in the first place; wanting to see rules set up in SP is a very artificial approach, the single player simply plays and acts in total freedom.

[WebShaman]

I have already offered my proof (so no, NWNDM, it is not left vs right) - see the Godwin Law thread for details...I wish there was enough room in sigs to post it.

As I have pointed out Elhanan, one cannot cheat on themselves. It is simply not possible. One may "feel" cheated due to one's own actions - but that is a feeling, a figure of speech. It is not actually being cheated as defined.

To cheat, one needs to have a higher authority that sets rules, and that you agree to abide by. Then you break them (intent is not important here - intentionally or otherwise, you have still broken the rules). That is defined as Cheating. You have Cheated.

Note that if you and the Higher Authority agree to change the rules, that it is not breaking them, but changing them.

But if you are acting as the highest authority and no-one else is involved, when you change your own rules, you are not breaking them. You are changing them. This is because you simultaneously have the authority to do so and agreeance to do this.

As a Single Player in a Closed SP Environment, you cannot break the rules before changing them to be the new rules that you are abiding by. This is because you have to do an action first - since this is so, and you are the only one involved, the action that you take is already determined. Since you have determined beforehand (even if it is a split second, etc), it means that you have agreed to change the rules with the Highest Authority (yourself) and that a change to the rules has been done and agreed with.

You cannot simultaneously hold a set of rules, then do an action to break them in a Closed SP Environment without beforehand changing them, acting as the Highest Authority to do so.

For example : "I am going to play this Mod without Perma-Haste". Rule has been stated by the Highest Authority (you) and you have agreed to abide by it.

Halfway through the Mod, you (for whatever reason, it does not matter) DECIDE that you will play the Mod with Perma-Haste and go to a shop and buy Item X with that property on it, or you spawn it in with a console command, whatever.

You have now changed the previous rules. You decided and agreed beforehand to play without Perma-Haste, but decided to change that. Since you have the absolute authority to do so, and can reach an agreeable consensus without having to include anyone else, this happens the MOMENT YOU DECIDE. Then the actual action takes place.

So, as you can plainly see, you cannot break your own rules, because the action of breaking the old rules takes place AFTER the decision to change the old rules takes place. In other words, you have decided (and agreed) to change the rules before they are broken - and are actually following the newly decided upon rules...no breakage here.

And therefore, no cheating.

[WebShaman]

Oh, one more thing - changing rules is not equal to breaking them.

Breaking rules involves changing established rules (from a Higher Authority and previous agreeance to obey them) WITHOUT having the authority and agreeance to do so.

Changing rules (not breaking them) involves agreeance between the Higher Authority who set them and those who agreed to follow them to abide by the changes to the old rules.

Note that a Higher Authority can change rules, but that I do not necessarily have to agree to follow them. Normally that means that I am no longer able to play with others who have agreed to follow those rules without being a cheater.

In a Closed SP Environment, however, the Player is the Highest Authority and the only one involved in the agreeance process. Note that in this situation, you CANNOT establish rules and and then disagree to follow them. It is simply not possible. In the moment that one decides not to follow the old rules and takes an action that violates them, one has already agreed to to change them to the new rules that allows the action taken.

You cannot violate yourself. Perhaps if you were sleep-playing...or had multiple personalities. But for a healthly human being that is awake, it is not possible.

You cannot cheat on yourself.

[Elhanan]

Kail Pendragon wrote...

If. But cheating implies deceipt, so one cannot cheat himself.

That said, there's even no need to set up rules in the first place; wanting to see rules set up in SP is a very artificial approach, the single player simply plays and acts in total freedom.

We deceive ourselves all the time; how many are convinced to take paths against our better judgement. Jails, hotels, and bars are full of them, as are hospitals and morgues. Etc.

There is also a difference between altering rules to adapt to the game environment, and violation of self-imposed restrictions. When a Player accepts the rules, and then breaks them to achieve some new quest or goal, that would appear to be cheating.

[WebShaman]

You do not deceive yourself! That is a figure of speech!

You do something - action. You decided to do that action. The consequences of such are yours to bear!

Now, it may be that you did not plan for the outcome. It may be that you did not consider it. You may be totally taken by surprise - sure.

But you did not deceive yourself.

Are you seriously suggesting that you can actively, consciously deceive yourself?

That would totally change the entire legal system, you know.

"I am sorry your Honor, but I was deceived! I wouldn't have pulled the trigger if I had known that I was being deceived!!!! I am innocent!!!!"

Meaning that then someone is innocent of INTENT here, merely because they were deceived...by themselves??!!

I would love to see this defense!!!!

YOU are held responsible for your actions.

When you do something against your better judgement, you are not deceiving yourself. YOU ARE MAKING A MISTAKE!!!!! You are AWARE that you are doing this - you DECIDE to do something that you know you should not. You are aware that there will be consequences (but perhaps not exactly which ones).

If not, then you are either a child, or insane.

Also, no, there is no difference between changing rules for one reason or another. The result is the same - one has decided to change the rules. For the proof, it is irrelevant for what reason, intent, etc. The end effect is the same.

I already pointed out that there is no breaking involved - it is a change. You decide to change them the moment you make your decision and take an action.

To whom does it appear to be cheating??!! There is no-one else involved but yourself!!!!!

And that itself is besides the fact - appearance does not equate actually doing something, does it? Appear to be cheating is not the same as actually cheating. One could be true (the former) and the other is true (the latter).

The difference between a subjective position and an objective one.

When you (Player) accepts "the rules" (doesn't matter what they are, does it?) and then CHANGES them (because you cannot break your own rules due to the reasons given) to accomplish some quest, goal, whatever, it does not constitute cheating.

You can make the case that it has made things easier. You may hold the opinion that it is cheesey, blah blah blah. You may even believe in your mindset, worldview, whatever that it is cheating...

But it is not. Not for THAT PLAYER! You have no Higher Authority over that Player. And you and that Player have not reached any consensus or agreement to play by a pre-agreed upon set of rules.

That Player has not cheated. That Player has played the game according to the rules that that Player has decided upon.

What you think, believe, etc to the contrary is not relevant, not to that Player and the game that they are playing.

Now, IF we are not talking about a Closed SP Environment, well...that would be different. Now facts come into being, being that there *is* a Higher Authority, and an agreed-upon set of rules. Now one can actually be cheating, as the case may be.

Modifié par WebShaman, 16 septembre 2011 - 02:31 .

[Elhanan]

Not going to debate this again, as I deceived myself that there was any reason to try in the first place.

[Kail Pendragon]

Elhanan wrote...

Kail Pendragon wrote...

If. But cheating implies deceipt, so one cannot cheat himself.

That said, there's even no need to set up rules in the first place; wanting to see rules set up in SP is a very artificial approach, the single player simply plays and acts in total freedom.

We deceive ourselves all the time; how many are convinced to take paths against our better judgement. Jails, hotels, and bars are full of them, as are hospitals and morgues. Etc.

That's not deceiving oneself, that's taking a bad decision. You might want to get acquainted with the meaning of the words you use.

There is also a difference between altering rules to adapt to the game environment, and violation of self-imposed restrictions. When a Player accepts the rules, and then breaks them to achieve some new quest or goal, that would appear to be cheating.

Only to the uneducated mind ignoring the meaning of cheating.

[Kail Pendragon]

Elhanan wrote...

Not going to debate this again, as I deceived myself that there was any reason to try in the first place.

That's not deceipt, it' ssimply bad judgement. And indeed there's nothing to debate nor any reason to, since it's a fact cheating in SP is not possible. No matter what delusional and unintelligent minds might think.

[NWN DM]

WebShaman wrote...

I have already offered my proof (so no, NWNDM, it is not left vs right) - see the Godwin Law thread for details...I wish there was enough room in sigs to post it.

Yeah, I was being somewhat facetious and tongue-in-cheek... seems like almost all of my posts are like that nowadays.  Oh well.

[Elhanan]

Kail Pendragon wrote...

That's not deceiving oneself, that's taking a bad decision. You might want to get acquainted with the meaning of the words you use.

Good advice.

Only to the uneducated mind ignoring the meaning of cheating.

Perhaps. Maybe I like the company.

That's not deceipt, it' ssimply bad judgement. And indeed there's nothing to debate nor any reason to, since it's a fact cheating in SP is not possible. No matter what delusional and unintelligent minds might think.

"If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself" (Gal 6:3)

"If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight reign on his tongue, he deceives himself, and his religion is worthless" (Ja 1:26)

Thus heeding the latter while offering the former, I am done with this discussion.

Modifié par Elhanan, 16 septembre 2011 - 10:24 .

[Skildron]

Elhanan wrote...

"If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself" (Gal 6:3)

"If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight reign on his tongue, he deceives himself, and his religion is worthless" (Ja 1:26)

Thus heeding the latter while offering the former, I am done with this discussion.

That was a good one. And yes, every day, we think better of us than we really are. And no, deceiving oneself does not take away the responsibility for our actions.

Greetings
Skildron

[Kail Pendragon]

Elhanan wrote...

Kail Pendragon wrote...

That's not deceiving oneself, that's taking a bad decision. You might want to get acquainted with the meaning of the words you use.

Good advice.

Only to the uneducated mind ignoring the meaning of cheating.

Perhaps. Maybe I like the company.

I noticed a long time ago. In fact I have little respect for your intellectual capabilities.

That's not deceipt, it' ssimply bad judgement. And indeed there's nothing to debate nor any reason to, since it's a fact cheating in SP is not possible. No matter what delusional and unintelligent minds might think.

"If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself" (Gal 6:3)

"If anyone considers himself religious and yet does not keep a tight reign on his tongue, he deceives himself, and his religion is worthless" (Ja 1:26)

Thus heeding the latter while offering the former, I am done with this discussion.

Nice BS, using translations of dubious accuracy in addition portrayed as figures of speech. Not to mention the fact the supposed authors evidently suffered from delusions... serious ones, considering they believed in a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father and who can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree... 

Luckily you are done with the discussion, since there's just so much one can stomach.

Modifié par Kail Pendragon, 17 septembre 2011 - 12:14 .

[Frith5]

Removed my rant.

Removing myself from this idiotic discussion too.

Modifié par Frith5, 17 septembre 2011 - 01:20 .

[WebShaman]

So, we have finally reached a consensus! Nice to see that some are beginning to accept facts and are realizing that in a Closed SP Environment there is no cheating.

This thread was very constructive.

@ NWNDM - sorry I missed the connotations in your post. My bad.

[WebShaman]

BTW - the whole "deceive yourself" is being seen from the third person. I hope those quoting such realize that. In other words, a second person (observer) is making a judgement about your person, one you cannot see (or do not realize). Thus, they are stating that you are deceiving yourself because you cannot see the truth about yourself AS PERTAINING TO THAT SECOND PERSON!

However, you are not *truly* deceiving yourself, as you are not aware of this! In those quotes, one is being reprimanded for not being aware of this.

Instead, one is acting upon what one perceives, themselves. Whether or not this is true, does not really matter in a Closed SP Environment, where there is no second person (observer) to take notice.

This does not exist in a Closed SP Environment, as there is no second person (observer) present.

I would very much like to see how one can explain how one succeeds in deceiving oneself. How can you trick yourself? It does not make any sense, whatsoever. One can be in denial, sure. But that is not self-deception. One can consider oneself something that one is not (to a second person, observer) - but one is still not deceiving oneself here, not from one's own perception. One may even consider one's own worth to be more than what another (observer, second person, whatever!) does, but that is NOT SELF-DECEPTION!

Deceiving oneself would require one to be simultaneously aware of the true state, but truly believing in another. It contradicts itself. One cannot simultaneously be two different states of being, be aware of it, and then decide one is the wrong one. It would involve being dishonest. One would be aware that it is WRONG! This is not deception.

If one is not aware of the true state, then one cannot deceive oneself about it. Instead, one is in a state of unawareness. It is a state of not knowing. This does not involve deception. There is no dishonesty involved here.

[Kail Pendragon]

WebShaman wrote...

BTW - the whole "deceive yourself" is being seen from the third person. I hope those quoting such realize that. In other words, a second person (observer) is making a judgement about your person, one you cannot see (or do not realize). Thus, they are stating that you are deceiving yourself because you cannot see the truth about yourself AS PERTAINING TO THAT SECOND PERSON!

However, you are not *truly* deceiving yourself, as you are not aware of this! In those quotes, one is being reprimanded for not being aware of this.

Instead, one is acting upon what one perceives, themselves. Whether or not this is true, does not really matter in a Closed SP Environment, where there is no second person (observer) to take notice.

This does not exist in a Closed SP Environment, as there is no second person (observer) present.

I would very much like to see how one can explain how one succeeds in deceiving oneself. How can you trick yourself? It does not make any sense, whatsoever. One can be in denial, sure. But that is not self-deception. One can consider oneself something that one is not (to a second person, observer) - but one is still not deceiving oneself here, not from one's own perception. One may even consider one's own worth to be more than what another (observer, second person, whatever!) does, but that is NOT SELF-DECEPTION!

Deceiving oneself would require one to be simultaneously aware of the true state, but truly believing in another. It contradicts itself. One cannot simultaneously be two different states of being, be aware of it, and then decide one is the wrong one. It would involve being dishonest. One would be aware that it is WRONG! This is not deception.

If one is not aware of the true state, then one cannot deceive oneself about it. Instead, one is in a state of unawareness. It is a state of not knowing. This does not involve deception. There is no dishonesty involved here.

Web, that's what anyone exercising logical reasoning would understand in a matter of seconds. I'm losing hope those opposing the "no cheat in SP" fact are capable of that and hence to understand the fallacy of the deceive yourself proposition.

[WebShaman]

Well, the last bastions of irrationality, and all that.

I mean, we still have Flat Earthers, fer cryin' out loud!

We will always have There is Cheating in a Closed SP Environment (TiCiaCSErs). Trying to convince them otherwise has never been my intent. Rather, it has been my intent to reach those who are capable of rational thought.

This I have succeeded in doing.

And so we finally have a consensus here on these boards, just like we did on the Legacy board. We now have defining threads to link to, with a solid Proof for no Cheating in an SP Environment, and factual rebuttals to those who attempted to debunk it.

And that is all that I wanted.