My impression of that particular time was that the DM was suspicious because we solved it so quickly.
Basically, what happened is that the module opens up with a scene that is a bit weird and wacky... almost just being playful for playful sake. About halfway through that first Act my meta-analysis started to kick in. One of the cardinal rules of storytelling is that every scene in a story ought to be contributing to the story. Because this scene opened the module and was just kind of weird, I was just settling into playing the game. However once my meta-gaming kicked in a lightbulb light in my brain and suddenly saw how what what seemed silly and goofy was actually going to be pieces in a mystery puzzle.
What likely seemed like a "tell" at that point is just how I was just playing along with the goofiness, but then switched gears and focused on the object of the puzzle. I did all of this in character, and once I saw how this first piece was significant I just followed it out to its logical conclusions. I didn't say out of character, "Oh, this is a mystery puzzle scenario, we have to do this and this and this" Instead I played along, acquired the first piece and then followed through with what that first piece would imply.
Not gonna ask you to spoil the module but I am gonna point out even you said you meta gamed it.
Thats the textbook defination of metagaming man. Using knowledge you the player have even if its logical knowlege that your character doesn't.I'm glad I don't play with anyone like you.Why? Am I doing something wrong?
To be fair to Mok, though, Paizo has a habit of reusing certain types of encounter sets ups from AP to AP. For example, I've seen variations of this in probably a half dozen major combat encounters across three APs so far:
You don't want to play your character using knowledge he wouldn't have, but you also don't want to play him stupid. Just because the character has never in his life been set up to take the fall for a crime someone else commited doesn't mean he should trust the smiling noble who wants you to "take this key and just check up on my country estate for me, OK? Oh, and, don't tell anyone where you're going."
Thats why we have skills like sense motive.
I know there are tons of threads about this sort of thing, and some people don't like it, blah blah.... But all of my players know that I reserve the right to change anything about a monster when I see fit. So they HAVE to role knowledge checks, and they HAVE to listen to what I say. and if their knowledge check is bad, or it is an obscure monster, well, some of what they have heard, might be legend, misinformation, anything really.
I have only ever written my own adventures and campaigns, but if I were using a printed one, I would keep that caveat for the printed material. I have the right to change the material as I see fit to maintain adequate roleplaying suspense, and make the characters figure stuff out with their skills.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
No player, no matter how good of a role player they happen to be, is worth ruining an entire Adventure Path for the rest of the group (and yourself).
Running an AP is a serious commitment of your time and money! Should you have to re-tool your entire adventure because of one module reading ass-hat? I say no way!
Simple:
Confront him away from the game and group.
Share your suspicious and site examples.
Give him the opportunity to do the right thing or be faced with exclusion from your game.
Life is too short for bad gaming.
I agree with Azmyth that you shouldn't have to go to extraordinary lengths to rewrite the AP because one player is reading ahead. It sounds like you've asked them about it and they have denied it. If you don't want to confront them, just ask them how they reached their in-character conclusions about what they did.
If they are ignoring false leads out of hand, ask them about them. Don't accept "just because" answers. If you're not satisfied, then tell them you think they are cheating by reading ahead. At that point you have to decide whether you think you can trust them enough to not do it in the future, or whether they have to be booted from the game. Good luck!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way i understood it though depending on his character it would have been something he wouldn't have known. What he did even made the GM suspicious and that means it wasn't well explained in character.The way I see it, Mok did absolutely nothing "wrong". He read no modules in advance and deduced a puzzle.
He uses the same kind of reasoning that a player uses in order to pick up on an adventure hook.
My impression of that particular time was that the DM was suspicious because we solved it so quickly.
Basically, what happened is that the module opens up with a scene that is a bit weird and wacky... almost just being playful for playful sake. About halfway through that first Act my meta-analysis started to kick in. One of the cardinal rules of storytelling is that every scene in a story ought to be contributing to the story. Because this scene opened the module and was just kind of weird, I was just settling into playing the game. However once my meta-gaming kicked in a lightbulb light in my brain and suddenly saw how what what seemed silly and goofy was actually going to be pieces in a mystery puzzle.
What likely seemed like a "tell" at that point is just how I was just playing along with the goofiness, but then switched gears and focused on the object of the puzzle. I did all of this in character, and once I saw how this first piece was significant I just followed it out to its logical conclusions. I didn't say out of character, "Oh, this is a mystery puzzle scenario, we have to do this and this and this" Instead I played along, acquired the first piece and then followed through with what that first piece would imply.
Your explanation has only reaffirmed what I thought before, i'm glad I don't play with anyone like you. But its cool, people have different styles, and ours wouldn't get along at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my view any player who pre-reads and adventure is obligated to help the GM walk the rest of the party onto any traps that may exist. That is to say with for knowledge comes deliberate obfuscation.
It is a painful responsibility to *not* point out the secret door or the insta murder death trap. Or worse be the one to put their character on the sacrificial block if the situation calls for it. As player who read ahead it's your duty.
Also let the GM know because sometimes it actually is helpful to have an inside man if the party gets stuck.
For the current player I'd still talk to him directly. Usually best solution. Offer him the chance to play with you and not against you. As I say above, he now has a duty to use his foreknowledge to keep things running on track. If the other players are going to expose the "who done it" to fast, it is now his job to help apply the breaks.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The thread's a bit longer than I care to comb through, so forgive me if this is redundant, but I think it's imperative that you make sure there's an actual problem before implementing a solution. It is very possible to know a module without metagaming.
I recently played in a PFS scenario which I had GM'd the previous week. It wasn't that hard to keep from metagaming, everyone seemed to have fun (I'm not sure if the players even knew I was familiar with the mod), and the GM commented afterward that he felt I did a very good job of not metagaming (I even walked right into a sneak-attack-fueled ambush that I knew was there; cost more than half my HP in one hit).
So first see if the player's out-of-character knowledge is actually hurting anything. If not, then you're fine. If so, well, I'm sure there are plenty of good suggestions in this thread already.
Last resort: Rocks fall, everyone dies. ;)
I guess what remains a mystery to me is the "why?"
How do you and your friends play that would leave me ruining your game?
I just curious because I'm always trying to understand the nature of play and seeing how I can adjust and adapt my own approach.
Most people that are at a game, come to play. Skipping 50 minutes of game play is skipping 50 minutes of what they came to enjoy. I'll be the first to admit I'm bad about meta-gaming, however I never let my character make a decision based on out of game knowledge.
I find this interesting mainly because the tables I run and play in normally Meta-gaming of most any sort is a one way street to a dead character.
My example: I play a rouge in carrion crown. I checked a door for traps/locks I failed the check by more than 10. I believe the door is trapped and I can't disarm it. Even though I know (as a player) due to what I rolled and the way the GM described it that the door isn't trapped and is in fact not even locked. All players avoid the door based on the rouges report that its locked and trapped. 1 PC ignores the rouge b/c he saw what I rolled (a 1) and proceeded to open the door based on that knowledge. The DM declared that the door was indeed trapped and a trap that swung a log into his face dealt him 5d6 damage not quite killing him.
Most all of our Players know a fair bit of meta knowledge due to consultation out of game on how specific rules are supposed to work in regards to individual monsters and encounters. But there is a set in stone rule that using that knowledge in character if the character has no way of knowing it = dead character.
Your explanation has only reaffirmed what I thought before, i'm glad I don't play with anyone like you. But its cool, people have different styles, and ours wouldn't get along at all.I guess what remains a mystery to me is the "why?"
How do you and your friends play that would leave me ruining your game?
I just curious because I'm always trying to understand the nature of play and seeing how I can adjust and adapt my own approach.
Well it's like i said before, it's like skipping to the end of the movie. The good parts are all the things inbetween that you said you used meta-knowledge to skip. Which I find odd, since in another of your posts you said you like a game to be the story of how your character achieves greatness, and not a story of IF they will. Sounds like you're skipping the part you like, either that or you have an issue with being the "Main Character" of that story and want to be the guy who does everything.
My group likes to work as a team, and we all like to demonstrate our character development with RP. My group likes the threat of someone dying, because lots of deaths can be a source of character growth, and it adds immersion.
More than that, my group goes well out of our way to keep character knowledge just that way. Recently a player had to slay a werewolf which the player knew was a misfortunate innocent person, but since he failed his check to learn about lycanthropy, he believed the creature was evil, it even detected as so. It was a big deal to him, but he did what he was sure his character would do. You can't play a low int and/or wis character like they know how a "narrative will play out" when that just isn't feasible.
So maybe you should be glad not to play with us, because if you tried to skip much of the adventure, we'd probably dismiss your claims and say, "What, do you think we live in a book or something?"
This thread has caused me more anxiety than any I have ever read on these boards. This played is wasting YOUR money and time. The player is also trivializing everyone else's as well.
If this player has as little respect for you in RL as he does as the table, I wouldn't be surprised.
Very RARELY do I recommend booting someone from the game.....
But this is ridiculous.
I recommend that Mok play a bard at all times. They are, after all, masters of narrative form.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I once caught a player red handed in a book store reading the module I was running. I still let him come over with after telling him not to read anymore. He walked up to a statue with a magic amulet around its neck and WHOOSH we was plane shifted to hell . He asked why I had him come over just to screw him . I siad don't waste my time in the future and banned him from playing.
The way you are telling the story makes you look like a biggest immature jerk than the player.
Good stuffThanks, that makes sense.
Thank you. I appreciate your maturity in discussing a matter we seem to disagree on. That is somewhat rare on the internet.
First of all: Many many good posts with good advice here, kudos to the community!
Most seem to go to one of two solutions though: - Change the adventure or kick the player out / make him stop reading the adventure.
As a GM with limited time on my hands, I can see that changing the adventure is just too much work, it's hard enough trying to weave the pre-written story to fit the characters with the limited time one often has.
As for making him stop reading the adventure, it's fairly certain he won't do that. Once he's done it once, he'll keep doing it.
I myself have read all the AP's (I'm the one in our gang that GMs most of the time, and I'm the one buying all the APs) but I don't let that stop me from playing from time to time.
The key is being able to let the other players work out the IMPORTANT puzzles, and perhaps drop suble hints if the rest are completely off base. (my group mainly likes to SMASH! their way through a riddle :D )
The point is this:
My having read the adventure doesn't hurt the game for the others (it actually does a little for myself though... The only AP I haven't read is Curse of the Crimson Throne, and we're running that atm, and I'm enjoying it alot as a player)
I know it is difficult going in to a confrontation like this, but it is the BEST way to resolve the situation.
Pull him aside before (or after, if you want to give him some time to think about it) your next session, and tell him in a friendly way:
"Look, I would appreciate it if you let the other players lead the way some of the time as well. I know it can be frustrating rambling on when you're certain you're going in the wrong direction, but you have to allow the others to lead some of the time as well. That way we can all enjoy the game"
If he doesn't catch on, fine, at least you've told him how you feel, and if he keeps it up, or grows difficult, THEN you can confront him with his reading the module more directly.
for instance:
"Look, I was trying to be tactful, but I think you've read the module, and thats fine, but please don't spoil it for the others by leading them by the direct route to every solution."
Thats how I would handle it anyway...
TLDR: Be nice and, and ask him not to ruin the fun for the rest of the group, yourself included.
So many good ideas, and a couple bad, on handling something like this. I have had this issue myself with some players, and I A.) change things up a bit via new encounters, B.) add new bits of knowledge to be learned and or found C.) pulled offending persons aside and say "I know what ya did last summer" and all that and I go from there.
I have had one player continue on with this even after asking them not to, after the group caught said player red handed when be bragged about it when I wasn't around. I simply tell them they aren't welcome at your table. They are meta-gaming the fun out of it.
It sucks losing a player and all the drama it makes, and when I booted this one person it wasn't a issue, but a whole damned subscription. But in the end, the group was on my side, ignore said person, resume fun of the game.
Reaper Miniatures
|
Your explanation has only reaffirmed what I thought before, i'm glad I don't play with anyone like you. But its cool, people have different styles, and ours wouldn't get along at all.Basically, what happened is that the module opens up with a scene that is a bit weird and wacky... almost just being playful for playful sake. About halfway through that first Act my meta-analysis started to kick in. One of the cardinal rules of storytelling is that every scene in a story ought to be contributing to the story. Because this scene opened the module and was just kind of weird, I was just settling into playing the game. However once my meta-gaming kicked in a lightbulb light in my brain and suddenly saw how what what seemed silly and goofy was actually going to be pieces in a mystery puzzle.
What likely seemed like a "tell" at that point is just how I was just playing along with the goofiness, but then switched gears and focused on the object of the puzzle. I did all of this in character, and once I saw how this first piece was significant I just followed it out to its logical conclusions. I didn't say out of character, "Oh, this is a mystery puzzle scenario, we have to do this and this and this" Instead I played along, acquired the first piece and then followed through with what that first piece would imply.
No Kidding! I'm so glad I don;t game with people that can recognize a puzzle event for what it is and solve it in-character!
/sarcasm
I dont know the adventure but my suggestion is to use the old switcheroo.
make an important good NPC actually the bad guy and a bad guy the good guy. You can just switch the name maybe some background not the stats.
the best way to do this is when the party cames across an NPC who pretends to be good but in the module is actually a bad guy. Make him actually a good guy who is what he says he is---then make the 'good' NPC patron take this bad guys role.
The first time I encountered this was in AD&D in the G3 module. We rescued a dwarven prince who claimed to have been captured by the bad guys---one of the players 'didnt trust him' for no reason I could see and killed him out of hand.
The GM later told us that in the module he is an evil guy pretending to have been captured but he had made him actually be a good dwarven prince. I cant remember what the repercusions were in game (it was about 25 years ago) but out of game we all knew what had been going on.
The player didnt cheat after that -- I think he was just being a smart alek and he then realised what a douche he was being for the rest of us.
Your explanation has only reaffirmed what I thought before, i'm glad I don't play with anyone like you. But its cool, people have different styles, and ours wouldn't get along at all.Basically, what happened is that the module opens up with a scene that is a bit weird and wacky... almost just being playful for playful sake. About halfway through that first Act my meta-analysis started to kick in. One of the cardinal rules of storytelling is that every scene in a story ought to be contributing to the story. Because this scene opened the module and was just kind of weird, I was just settling into playing the game. However once my meta-gaming kicked in a lightbulb light in my brain and suddenly saw how what what seemed silly and goofy was actually going to be pieces in a mystery puzzle.
What likely seemed like a "tell" at that point is just how I was just playing along with the goofiness, but then switched gears and focused on the object of the puzzle. I did all of this in character, and once I saw how this first piece was significant I just followed it out to its logical conclusions. I didn't say out of character, "Oh, this is a mystery puzzle scenario, we have to do this and this and this" Instead I played along, acquired the first piece and then followed through with what that first piece would imply.
No Kidding! I'm so glad I don;t game with people that can recognize a puzzle event for what it is and solve it in-character!
/sarcasm
I know right! And I'm also glad I don't game with you.
Mok may i ask what your character was and what ranks in any relevent skills and stats you had for your in character sleuthing?
And please be honest i dont want to flame you i just want to know if the chacater could do what was done fine but if it couldn't thats the problem.
|
Just another idea for you, reward the other PCs with Hero Points every time the offending player uses his out of character knowledge. Don't be shy about explaining that this applies to everyone. Any apparent* act of OOC knowledge being used IC will result in the other PCs being granted a Hero Point. Awarding Hero Points is completely at the GM's discretion, so he will have no ground on which to stand a complaint.
*This is the important part, make it clear that anything that even looks like it is OOC knowledge being used will have consequences, so that there is no room for argument as far as whether or not he did indeed cheat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know right! And I'm also glad I don't game with you.
Sure is elitist in here.
Snarkiness aside, Talonhawke is asking the right question to Mok. If his character could reasonably have figured out a puzzle pretty quickly (based on his skills, stats and background) then it isn't metagaming at all. If he does it as the dumb as bricks barbarian, then you can call him on it. You jumped the gun on that judgement.
Also, waving around that phrase just makes you seem arrogant. Based on what I've seen, I'd game with Mok. He's reasonable and obviously spends time thinking about the method behind the madness. That's pretty rare. I'd also give Bryan Stiltz a spot at my table. He's amusing, which is a good way to start.
Instead of telling people they're doing it wrong and would be unworthy to game with such a lofty one as yourself, you might try being a little more personable. Most people would rather play with a nice metagamer than a jerk immersionist.
So your plan is to reward the group for a player reading the module? This only seems like a punishment if the player in question is hyper competitive (which is a possibility).Just another idea for you, reward the other PCs with Hero Points every time the offending player uses his out of character knowledge. Don't be shy about explaining that this applies to everyone. Any apparent* act of OOC knowledge being used IC will result in the other PCs being granted a Hero Point. Awarding Hero Points is completely at the GM's discretion, so he will have no ground on which to stand a complaint.
*This is the important part, make it clear that anything that even looks like it is OOC knowledge being used will have consequences, so that there is no room for argument as far as whether or not he did indeed cheat.
That is what I was thinking. That would only encourage him. That is like my boss telling me every time I am late to work my coworkers get a raise. It does not hurt them, and I still get to break the rules. I am sure once their salary doubles he will rethink his idea.
I had a Player I suspected of doing something like this. He 'found' all the hidden goodies, avoided all the snags and was one step ahead of me the whole time, it seemed.
So, in a crucial part of the Module, I pretended to be hung up on an encounter and asked him a question about it. Now, I hadn't told them the hang up I had and this Player gives me the EXACT frigging strategy from the module.
I give him 'The Look', he gives me 'The Look' and the rest of the Players booted his keester from the game. He himmed and hawed about it, trying to make excuses and finally got up and got gone.
~ You really don't need to do a lot of work to switch things up. Just the names! Make Sauron's name Gandalf, Gollum's name Gimli. Also, you could switch up Magic. Especially magic his character is going to want. Make it something else that would benefit one of the other Players.
You won't need to do the whole AP, just enough to keep him on top of things and always wondering what is going on.
Oh, if he EVER calls you for doing it... D4s to his seat when he goes to the restroom!! Then, boot his cheating sore arse outta the game!!!!
Don't play with jerks.
Have Fun Out There!!
~ W ~
I know right! And I'm also glad I don't game with you.Sure is elitist in here.
Snarkiness aside, Talonhawke is asking the right question to Mok. If his character could reasonably have figured out a puzzle pretty quickly (based on his skills, stats and background) then it isn't metagaming at all. If he does it as the dumb as bricks barbarian, then you can call him on it. You jumped the gun on that judgement.
Also, waving around that phrase just makes you seem arrogant. Based on what I've seen, I'd game with Mok. He's reasonable and obviously spends time thinking about the method behind the madness. That's pretty rare. I'd also give Bryan Stiltz a spot at my table. He's amusing, which is a good way to start.
Instead of telling people they're doing it wrong and would be unworthy to game with such a lofty one as yourself, you might try being a little more personable. Most people would rather play with a nice metagamer than a jerk immersionist.
Funny...
I was thinking the exact same thing but about Davick.I don't care for metagaming, and I wont tolerate deliberate metagaming as a GM or as a player.
Regardless of whether or not Moks character was able to solve a puzzle, there are NO red herrings in RL. The recognition of them as a narrative device IS METAGAMING
Regardless of whether or not Moks character was able to solve a puzzle, there are NO red herrings in RL.
I disagree.
Whether you define "red herring" as "a distraction intentionally put there by an adversary to divert your attention," or just "something that looks like it might help with your objective but doesn't," there certainly are red herrings in RL. In fact, in RL, it's usually more difficult to filter out the irrelevant details and lines of inquiry from the relevant.|
|
We had such same "cheats" on our old group. Since we played AD&D, there was some players that recorded all monsters manuals on their mind.
I used and still used a clever solution from a fórum. Use a creature description, with another stats and attacks, with a third look. After a while, they stopped to recorded because it´s useless, the suprised came back to the encounters. If you don´t like to prepare the adventure before (I recommend), you can do it on the fly (just getting same DC monsters).
About minigames inside de game, sometimes i incluse some. My opinion is Minigames is for players not for characters. You can use the Knowledge or others Skills fo the character for have some tips, but the ones that will answer the minigame is the players. IMHO even if the players is hard-cores Roleplayers (like the other game with vampires), they can´t emulate the way of thinking of a medieval wizard per exemple. We have a lot of phisics, maths knowledge to avoid use then to solve a puzzle. Plan a minigame for players, or plan something for characters skills, i´m doing that in a while and works.
Remember only one thing: the RPG is for fun, if the player is having fun with cheats, demand he to spend skills on the right Skills for represent these extra Knowledge, and forbid him to tell the information to anothers. That will work too, if the cheater won´t have fun without the cheat.
PS: sorry for typos, english is my 2nd languege. :D
there are NO red herrings in RL. The recognition of them as a narrative device IS METAGAMING
Your joking right? I constantly make use of timed lights and audio systems to create random inabatance patterns that mimic my normal nocturnal dwelling habits when on vacation. This is a deliberate "red herring" to mislead and distract would casual smash and grab thieves from disturbing my property.
Similarly I tend to prefer rather trashy looking carry bags and cases for my expensive electronics. Non-white (non-expensive looking) headphones, and so on. Again in an attempt to divert attention away from me as best I can.
Experienced players can spot hooks even before they make it over the metaphorical horizon line and know how to "grab on". This is also a form of metagaking and a very critical one to keep the game rolling. Likewise as has been said there are times and places where certain degrees of metagaming are healthy to the process. Knowing the difference between a cave-in that can (and should) be cleared vs one that is just corridor deadend. Again another red herring you can encounter in real life, one that can deadly consiqnaces if your wrong during rescue efforts.
there are NO red herrings in RL. The recognition of them as a narrative device IS METAGAMINGYour joking right? I constantly make use of timed lights and audio systems to create random inabatance patterns that mimic my normal nocturnal dwelling habits when on vacation. This is a deliberate "red herring" to mislead and distract would casual smash and grab thieves from disturbing my property.
Similarly I tend to prefer rather trashy looking carry bags and cases for my expensive electronics. Non-white (non-expensive looking) headphones, and so on. Again in an attempt to divert attention away from me as best I can.
Experienced players can spot hooks even before they make it over the metaphorical horizon line and know how to "grab on". This is also a form of metagaking and a very critical one to keep the game rolling. Likewise as has been said there are times and places where certain degrees of metagaming are healthy to the process. Knowing the difference between a cave-in that can (and should) be cleared vs one that is just corridor deadend. Again another red herring you can encounter in real life, one that can deadly consiqnaces if your wrong during rescue efforts.
Ok maybe I should clarify. There are no PLOT DEVICES to be solved in real life similar to how there are no chapters.
Again people can argue that.
All I wanna say is you live a strange life if you audibly call them out.
For the record, I'm coming down on the side that if you don't allow it to affect the enjoyment of the other players at the table, using spoilers is fine if it works for you.
All I wanna say is you live a strange life if you audibly call them out.
If you are a detective and the criminal sets up false clues then wouldn't it make sense to let others know they are being led away from the crime?
If you are a detective and the criminal sets up false clues then wouldn't it make sense to let others know they are being led away from the crime?
All I wanna say is you live a strange life if you audibly call them out.
You totally missed the point.
No detective has ever said:
No Watson, those fingerprints are all red herrings, we aren't high enough level for the AP to be over. From my field guide I have here in my hands, this sixty foot corridor leads to a CR9 trap but behind it is a lot of loot.
If you are a detective and the criminal sets up false clues then wouldn't it make sense to let others know they are being led away from the crime?
All I wanna say is you live a strange life if you audibly call them out.
You totally missed the point.
No detective has ever said:
No Watson, those fingerprints are all red herrings, we aren't high enough level for the AP to be over. From my field guide I have here in my hands, this sixty foot corridor leads to a CR9 trap but behind it is a lot of loot.
Of course he won't use the exact words "red herring", but the point is how you point it out, not the exact words you use, and nobody uses game language in real life. I don't think anyone suggested that anyway. The point was that people will point things out in real life that look suspicious, and that is all the other poster was saying.
I tried to mix this up, such as adding a red herring/subplot and last night he openly identified it as such. I don't want to confront him in the middle of a game, and I enjoy his role playing.
I just don't understand the point of knowing the adventure ahead of playing it and am looking ways to combat it.
I might be wrong Wraith, but this is what I was referring to.
Perhaps I read to much into it, perhaps not.
I think the OP should elaborate a bit more.
I tried to mix this up, such as adding a red herring/subplot and last night he openly identified it as such. I don't want to confront him in the middle of a game, and I enjoy his role playing.
I just don't understand the point of knowing the adventure ahead of playing it and am looking ways to combat it.
I might be wrong Wraith, but this is what I was referring to.
Perhaps I read to much into it, perhaps not.
I think the OP should elaborate a bit more.
I wish the OP would be specific also. I have had players call things out, and I have figured things out as player due to my real life knowledge of how things go.
Pretending to not know that there is a secret door in the room, as an example, is not really fun, and all you are doing by intentionally not searching for it is wasting time. I think that if your character has the mental stats to figure it out then you may as well go ahead and deal with the issue. Now if I were playing a low int/wis character I might not say anything, but I don't know for sure since I try to have a decent int/wis when I play.
I ran into this situation from the player's point of view a few months ago. In our 4E campaign, I saw my DM pull out a copy of Keep on the Borderlands. After the session I told him that it could be tough for me if he runs it with insufficient changes, since I had run that very module for other players 10 and 20 years earlier and had been working on a 4E conversion for that very module.
Fortunately, he made enough changes that my intimate knowledge of the module did not help -- I was as clueless as the other players were about how to deal with the spriggan cave. (And if those of you who are familiar with the module are asking "What spriggan cave?" -- That is the point.)
|
I think the OP should elaborate a bit more.
I'll give the four examples. This is from the Carrion Crown Adventure Path. If you are playing it, don't read this:
Each one of these by themselves is just good deduction. But all of them?
You be the judge.
So, why not make the "red herring" necessary to the plot, the guy who's "obviously behind it" having nothing to do with it, etc?
Basically, every time he guesses right in a circumstance where the facts don't require him to be right, he's absolutely wrong!
I think the OP should elaborate a bit more.I'll give the four examples. This is from the Carrion Crown Adventure Path. If you are playing it, don't read this:
2.That is pretty specific, and combined with the other evidence I would think he is reading also.
3.If the name had been mentioned before it is possible, but I don't know exactly how you ran the game.
4.As written there is no way to say that it is obviously Gibs. Too much coincidence going on here
I believe his is reading. I would tell him to stop reading, or keep his mouth shut. That is actually the least I would do.
I would also put an official ban on reading anything that I am running as a GM. It might be a good idea to change the names of the characters in the story if you don't want to confront him on the issue.