I'm a little perturbed at one of my players. We haven't even started Age of Worms, yet he's already started to argue with me about a character concept - and one of them sounds strangely like one I've read on these boards.
Is he lurking? Perhaps.
I already had some changes in mind before I noticed this so he might be a bit surprised. But why is it that newer players have this idea that they need to "win" D&D? They become power gamers and munchkins, and apparently lurking cheaters looking for spoilers, hints, and walk-arounds.
I'm a little perturbed at one of my players. We haven't even started Age of Worms, yet he's already started to argue with me about a character concept - and one of them sounds strangely like one I've read on these boards.
Is he lurking? Perhaps.
I already had some changes in mind before I noticed this so he might be a bit surprised. But why is it that newer players have this idea that they need to "win" D&D? They become power gamers and munchkins, and apparently lurking cheaters looking for spoilers, hints, and walk-arounds.
One way to creatively spoil the pre-game espionage:
- Build up your new game under whatever campaign name...and come game time, present an entirely different campaign that you've been keeping secret by using a different AP name for yours...
Another thought;
If your player has a tendency to have foreknowledge of every plot point and manages to ALWAYS make the correct assumptions, simply correct him; ("sorry, your character would have no way of knowing this NPCs alignment, so your immediate suspicion of his actions is poor roleplaying - you get zero XPs for this encounter.")
My 2 cents,
M
Realistically there are so many different challenges that a DM can use with a party that there is little use in trying to min-max. Sure you might be da bomb in combat, but how are you socially? Can you climb a wall? Will you realize that there are some encounters that can't be won? What are the character's morals like?
As a DM you occasionally should press the point. The main character in good book changes over time so to should characters in an RPG. How do characters change in books - mostly by trial and error. The point of a min-max character is to be as complete a package as possible, but there is always a chink in the armor, a flaw in the personality (pride being a big one), a situation they had not counted on that will invariably challenge them. It falls to you to find it and exploit it now and then. Note if you negate your player charater's carefully maxed out character too often you will have destroyed the fun of being a halfling fighter on a dog with spirited charge or whatever and that player will have every right to complain. Besides it's more shocking when after a dozen easy kills the character confronts something that they can't handle alone. So long as he isn't hogging the show from the other players or using out-of-character knowledge to sneak out of a trap or breeze through a dangerous encounter he's only spoiling the fun for himself.
One final note. Really if you present a balance of encounters (combat, character interaction, puzzle, mystery, political, misleading, magical, dangerous enviroments, etc...) perhaps with your own tweaks, you should be good. I mean really how far is Supreme Cleave going to take you in a romance encounter? Don't answer that.
Check out the "Tired of Min-Maxing" thread for more.
GGG
I would play things exactly as written. The only one loosing is the player... I mean, the game would grow really boring, really fast if you knew what was going on ahead of time.
Have you flat out asked him if he has either read these boards or the material itself?
Sean Mahoney
I would play things exactly as written...
Though wouldn't it be a shame if all the DM's die rolls went against the player in question?
(Only half joking)
Jack
occasionally wrathful DM
As I said, I already had some changes in mind BEFORE I started to suspect him of cheating. So things most likely WILL be different a little bit.
- thinking about derro instead of grimlocks in 3FoE.
- more town encounters in Diamond Lake to get them quite interested in staying around
But the real problem is this player is trying to win the adventure path.
Dump the player.
As I said, I already had some changes in mind BEFORE I started to suspect him of cheating. So things most likely WILL be different a little bit.
- thinking about derro instead of grimlocks in 3FoE.
- more town encounters in Diamond Lake to get them quite interested in staying aroundBut the real problem is this player is trying to win the adventure path.
Feh. If he want's to cheat, then let 'em know it all. But make sure to tell him that he's not allowed to make party decisions. He'll save his own skin if he wants to, but there's nothing wrong with that.
I played thorugh Shackled City with a bunch of players who pretty much knew everything. It was fun giving up the goods to Vhalantru, even though we know what he was (most of us did anyway). . . if anything, we were even MORE forthcoming, ready to get rightously honked off when the time came!
We were lucky too. We had a good DM who was willing to make the changes to keep it challenging and interesting despite our player knowledge. It sounds like that'll be your solution too.
I would play things exactly as written. The only one loosing is the player... I mean, the game would grow really boring, really fast if you knew what was going on ahead of time.
Have you flat out asked him if he has either read these boards or the material itself?
Sean Mahoney
I agree with this, and the other advice. If I suspected a player in my group doing this, I would confront them on the subject privately, to give them a chance to change. If they don't change, I would dismiss them from my game, because it wouldn't be fair to everyone else that this guy cheated and would be compromising their fun.
I love it when a player thinks they know what is going on or has read the adventure but is trying to keep me, the DM from knowing that. First it is usually pretty easy to figure out because their character will carefull avoid traps and "stumble" onto hidden magical items. Second, it is fairly easy to deal with. Move traps and change the location of treasure or monsters just a bit. I actually had a player who had read the adventure I was running get so frustraited because I was moving traps on him that he actually said "No way man, the trap is on the other door, and it was suposed to be a shocking grasp trap, not burning hands".
"Reeeeaaaly? Well, your character is still dead because _he_ evidently did not know that."
My current playershowever are great at keeping player knowledge and character knowledge seperate. Inf act, they all almost got smacked by a troll that they "didn't know they were suposed" to burn.
As for the player in question above...Start play and ask the player if they have read the adventure. if they say "no", but instantly find the blue lantern, turn the sarcophagus to the correct position and avoid the beetle swarm, then mix things up.
I've found that by moving things around you can usually confure a player that has the inside scoop.
ASEO out
|
I find adding/deleting a key magic item or two with the NPCs helps to flush out the player that has "snooped" through the documents and really wants that amulet of natural armour +3. Otherwise, there's lots of great suggestions already, some I use as SOP since the days before boxed text. Snoopers are to be expected when a campaign is as widespread as this one with such a convenient medium to discuss it. Damn you Paizo... ::sardonic smile::
That really sucks that your player would cheat. What kind of person would do that? It totally takes all of the fun out of the game. I am tired of players who don't want to have fun.
That really sucks that your player would cheat. What kind of person would do that? It totally takes all of the fun out of the game. I am tired of players who don't want to have fun.
I think sometimes it comes down to intense curiosity. I'll admit that there have been times when not knowing what an item I was carring was really frustrated me. That may actually be one of the reasons why I almost always DM...I like to read adventures and Know everything...and I laugh like Mmmuhhhaaahahahaha...Mmmuuuhhhhahahhhaahahaha!
ASEO out
...I actually had a player who had read the adventure I was running get so frustraited because I was moving traps on him that he actually said "No way man, the trap is on the other door, and it was suposed to be a shocking grasp trap, not burning hands"....
There are some people you just have to stop playing with :/
Jack
...I actually had a player who had read the adventure I was running get so frustraited because I was moving traps on him that he actually said "No way man, the trap is on the other door, and it was suposed to be a shocking grasp trap, not burning hands"....There are some people you just have to stop playing with :/
He actually reformed after that...and I ran several more obscure adventures and kept the tiltes of the adventures I was running well hidden.
ASEO out
...I actually had a player who had read the adventure I was running get so frustraited because I was moving traps on him that he actually said "No way man, the trap is on the other door, and it was suposed to be a shocking grasp trap, not burning hands"....There are some people you just have to stop playing with :/
He actually reformed after that...and I ran several more obscure adventures and kept the tiltes of the adventures I was running well hidden.
ASEO out
There are advantages to playing in a group that doesn't read Dungeon and never buys published adventures (me being the exception).
WaterdhavianFlapjack
|
|
I would play things exactly as written. The only one loosing is the player... I mean, the game would grow really boring, really fast if you knew what was going on ahead of time.
Have you flat out asked him if he has either read these boards or the material itself?
Sean Mahoney
I don't agree with this view at all. The player is not the only one loosing. The DM looses out too as the fun factor for the DM is palpably reduced.
DM'ing is something I enjoy doing for a myriad number of reasons. I don't play - I >>only<< DM. Enjoying the direction of the campaign and the surprise factor is inherent to my enjoyment of running a campaign of this kind. If a player takes that away from me - he just doesn't ruin it for himself - he ruins it for *me* too.
If I had a player who was cheating - there would be grave difficulties. If he was a peripheral player - I'd kick him. If he was a core player of mine (i.e. a good friend) I'd suspect to avoid losing a friendship I'd just quit running the campaign altogether.
In any event - this is not a small issue. Bring it up directly with the player and ask him outright.
I flat out told my group I was going to run AOW and if I caught anyone reading it, their character would die a grusome and permanent death and they would no longer be welcome to play at my house, a substantial threat since we have 3 campaigns running concurrently and the only place we can meet is at my house.
Have you flat out asked him if he has either read these boards or the material itself?
Sean Mahoney
There was an opportunity already for the player to admit to this: when he was arguing over a character concept discussed on this board. If he had simply said, "Hey, I saw this discussed on the boards and I think it's viable." then the DM would know for sure as well as knowing that the player didn't think of what he was doing as cheating. If he really is looking up info here, then he's also hiding it, which means he would likely lie when confronted with a direct question. So.... personally, I never ask a question if I know ahead of time that I can't trust the answer... what's the point?
My suggestion... set him up a nasty munchkin trap. My husband and I both use this type of tactic when DMing with players who develop the habit of relying on player knowledge that the char shouldn't have. Reels them back in.
I'm with Aeso, in that changing the module is probably the best way to prevent cheating. I wouldn't just move the traps and treasure though. I'd consider making Allusten an evil wizard, Smenk a paragon of virtue.
It's not good enough to just confuse them, you have to turn their ill gotten knowledge against them :) Plus, even though I suspect them of cheating, doesn't mean they really are. I've played long enough that some times my hunches are right on. I did a module I had no former knowledge of and figured out three traps in a row on the first guess without making any rolls. I just figured that's what I would do if I wrote the module. Sometimes players just guess right, give them some rope and let them hang themselves... don't hang them yourself.
|
|
Sometimes players just guess right, give them some rope and let them hang themselves... don't hang them yourself.
Amen, brother!
It does no good to get angry at the players if they seem to have precognitive abilities to predict the scope of the scenario. Before you start the game it's a DM's responsibility to establish the game's protocols. Tell them you're using a "canned" adventure and that you'll be tweaking things slightly to fit your DMing style. Tell the players they are not to consult the sources of the adventure or troll the internet for other players going through the scenario.
When you first suspect the players of having some foreknowledge, don't jump to conclusions. Adventures tend to have repeating thematic elements (Faces of Evil reminds me of the Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil for example) that savvy players will pick up on. Only after repeated instances of suspicion should you then turn the tables. Go ahead and play the first two scenarios as written. Take the third and totally change it on them. Replace the lizardfolk with wererats or bullywugs or bonesnapper or giant space hamsters. Replace magic items. Remove treasure. This ought to leave your players frustrated and an observant DM will notice this and have their suspicions confirmed. Then, only then, confront the player about it.
Premature accusations will only ruin a game with hurt feelings and resentment.
What I do in this situation is to make changes. Little changes, big changes. Take a trap off one door, put it on another. Change which monster the PCs are going to fight. The player should not be able to use his out-of-character knowledge reliably to advantage.
He will prepare and cast Resist Energy (fire) and walk into a fight with an earth elemental instead of a fire elemental. He will dig up a warrior's coffin for seemingly no reason, expecting to find him buried in magical gear, only to find him missing (maybe he rose as a vampire and they'll fight him later?). He'll ready an action to shoot the first man who comes through the door, only for the villain to have considered this possibility and sent through a lackey in advance.
Of course, do not change everything, otherwise your changes become reliable.
Player knowledge, and adventure spoilers are a real pain. I try to go far out of my way with modifications to monsters and storylines so as to keep them on their toes. If they are not sure what they are facing, it makes it tougher to metagame.
I had a group of players in Undermountain in a FR campaign. They were teleported into a flooded chamber and we ended for the night. Later on I was on instant messanger and one of the players I was talking with messaged me:
"Next week I want to search under the water for at least 3 rounds"
I thought that was an odd comment, so cracked open the book and came across:
"If the party spends at least 3 rounds searching under the water they will find a magical sword, that blah blah blah"
and he was just telling me how he had been downloading FR stuff from the internet but had said he didn't get the undermountain box set.
So of course I made the sword cursed -2 that glued itself to his hand. Since he was a bard it makes it tough to play his instrament with a sword stuck to it. The best part was he couldn't complain at the slightest with out blowing his cover.
|
I think a possible reason this occurs stems from the current video game RPG environment. Our roommate is heavily into playing X-box and Playstation games and I have observed that many of them pretty much require that you have one of the hint books or online FAQ cheat-sheets in order to complete (e.g., win) the game. Not all, but many. What they player seems to be doing here is an extension of that philosophy/need.
On the other hand, some people have to "win" everything and will go to any lengths to do that, even in a game where technically everyone wins. If so, the player in question is probably reading this now, so you'll need to come up with some things on your own to determine this.
If the player is doing this because this is how they play the video RPGs, you should be able to ask them to stop. If they are doing this because they're cheating, you might be able to get them to change their ways by switching things up or talking with them. If not, drop them like third period French. They are obviously stealing your fun and the rest of the players are probably not too happy with their prescient character either.
There are advantages to playing in a group that doesn't read Dungeon and never buys published adventures (me being the exception).WaterdhavianFlapjack
I'm with you on this - never had this problem intentionally. Closest I've been is when I've run a player through an Adventure I knew full well he had been through before but I had 'disguised' it. The player kept encountering things he recognized but could not actually figure out what adventure he was in. That said he kept warning me that he was pretty sure he'd played this before. Guess I should be thankful I have honest players - I take it for granted but its a major boon.
I kill their character. Harsh, sure, but it gets the point across. For the most part it's a simple matter of changing things up so that the brunt of the changes in the module tend to go against the character. I also have a tendency to blunt rolls in favor of the party so things don't get skewed by lucky dice rolls on my part...for this character such quarter isn't given.
Basically my neutrality with judging the game goes out the window for that particular character.