Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?
|
The Guide to Organized play has a statement about foreknowledge. While that portion specifically calls out replay a scenario, I'd consider this when dealing with said player.
How did they bring it up?
Also, to the best of my understanding, you're always able to turn a player away if you aren't comfortable GMing for them.
|
Back in season 2 and before it actually had a paragraph in the Guide titled "Do Not Read the Scenario". It was tantamount to cheating at that time. It was removed from being specifically called out in season 3, however.
Interesting. I didnt start playing until season 3 so I never saw a season 2 guide.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The ability to compartmentalize player and character knowledge and only act on the latter is a required skill in organized play, where replay and GMs as players is a reality. So long as this responsibility is understood and respected, you should not have a problem with a player having read the scenario. As soon as the player begins using his knowledge of the scenario to inform his characters actions, he has broken that trust and acted irresponsibly.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?
It's cool that he actually told you about it as that is what he is supposed to do. As to whether or not it was cool for him to have read it depends entirely upon why he read it. Obviously, if his intent was to cheat then that's uncool. If his intent was to run the adventure some time in the near future, that is not uncommon.
If this is a problem for you, for whatever reason, my understanding of the rules is that you have the following recourse.
1) You may NOT refuse to GM a particular player. However...
2) You may refuse to simply GM.
3) You may ask the event organizer to move the player to another table, including informing the GM that you will not GM that table if the player remains at it.
4) You may ask the event organizer to have the player leave.
In short, the GM has the authority over whether or not he will GM. While the event organizer has the authority to decide who gets to play and where they get to play. As long as you are being reasonable about it, then the organizer is likely to side with the GM as he would usually rather have 1 person go home then an entire table.
|
There's a line in the section that discusses replay in the PFSGtOP that mentions that if someone is replaying a scenario and is spoiling the scenario, the GM may ask them to leave. (I don't have a quote at the moment, so if someone could provide that to support my claim or correct me that would be much appreciated.)
I believe the same logic could be applied to a situation where someone has read the scenario in advance (for whatever reason) and is metagaming or spoiling it.
But the GM should do whatever is easier/least confrontational.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A player with knowledge or familiarity of the scenario is supposed to inform the GM when they sit down at the table. The GM can then say please don't spoil it for anyone else and include how he or she defines 'spoiling' the scenario. Locally, this usually means the player is unable to take a roll in decision-making including asking questions that a knowledge skill might grant. If that player happens to have the party face, the party puts questions/dialogue to the GM but the knowledgeable player still makes the roll.
Most players gain knowledge of a scenario because they GMed it already. Though talk between tables does happen, I personally have never seen that knowledge used in a spoilering way let alone full on cheating.
(OK once in AD&D but that was 30+ years ago :)
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's a line in the section that discusses replay in the PFSGtOP that mentions that if someone is replaying a scenario and is spoiling the scenario, the GM may ask them to leave. (I don't have a quote at the moment, so if someone could provide that to support my claim or correct me that would be much appreciated.)
I believe the same logic could be applied to a situation where someone has read the scenario in advance (for whatever reason) and is metagaming or spoiling it.
But the GM should do whatever is easier/least confrontational.
If you spoil the plot for the table, the GM has the right to ask you to leave the table. Be very careful about character knowledge versus player knowledge. If you’re concerned about possibly spoiling something during the course of play, take the GM aside and ask how she would like it handled. Remember: the goal of replay is to make sure fun gaming happens, not to remove the fun from gaming.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Intent is hard to prove. If the player has a history of poor play or being disruptive, then you might have to take action which could be as much as banning them from your table if its serious enough.
But, before you get too ban-happy, look at some of the reasons why someone would read a scenario before playing it.
Replay. They've played it before and for whatever reason are playing it again. Clearly they will have meta-knowledge. The trick is being cooperative without revealing information or taking actions your character wouldn't possibly be able to do without said knowledge.
GM. There are lots of occurrences where someone GMs a scenario before playing it. Its not cheating. Its just the nature of our hobby. Again, they need separate player vs. character knowledge
Perhaps they are just excited about new content and wanna read all the juicy background material that the author provided. I was this way for the first few years of PFS. The moment a new scenario dropped, I downloaded it and read it cover to cover. Course, I have been mostly a GM for most of my time with PFS so chances are I would GM it before playing it anyway. These days, I just wait so I can at least have a chance of playing something "legit" before I GM it. If not, oh well.
As others have said, reading beforehand is not the best case scenario, but its something we have to accept. The issue is more what the player does with said knowledge. The "don't be a jerk" rule applies. Just don't assume that just because a player read the scenario before playing it that their intentions are to cheat
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?
Why did he bring it up? What was the point of letting you know?
If he was planning to cheat with metagame knowledge, he probably wouldn't have told you.
If his comment was "I've run this before, so I'm going to take a back seat and let you guys control things", then it's cool. Polite, even. Some of our GMs even let the rest of the group choose which character they play because that they don't want to let their metagame knowledge influence what character they play.
If his comment was "I've already read this, so you'd better get it right", then not cool.
If it was "I've run this before and it gets kind of tricky--let me know if you have any questions", probably cool, if a little presumptuous.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like to read scenarios after I have played them, and it is pretty nice to know that sometimes GMs manage to make copper look like gold ^^
Of course I have purchased adventures that I haven't run yet, that is just one of the realities or our situation.
|
|
I personally have never seen that knowledge used in a spoilering way let alone full on cheating.
(OK once in AD&D but that was 30+ years ago :)
Several times during Scenarios it seemed that my players knew the adventure. However, sometimes the players stumble on the correct path the way the writers intended.
Also, I know I have had this happen in my home game. I was running Runelords back when it first came out and a new player knew everything that was going to happen. He kinda derailed my game until I asked him to leave.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?
If they tell the GM when they sit down at the table, don't gloat about it, and don't spoil it for those who haven't played it then it is totally cool.
It wasn't cool when I was playing through a scenario and had the highest level character next to me stealing the show. He seemed to know exactly what was supposed to be at each encounter, and then 'admitted' about two-thirds of the way through that he had read the scenario. I don't know why he had read it, but I do know that he hadn't told the GM.
I talked to the GM about it afterwards, and she wasn't happy about it either. She hadn't kicked him out, but was considering it after one of his stunts. Had he admitted it before we started, it is unlikely he would have been allowed at the table since it was at maximum size and a tier below his character.
The scenario was cool, but it would have been better if someone hadn't been spoiling what the fights were.
|
Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?Why did he bring it up? What was the point of letting you know?
The replay rules require you to inform your GM if you're replaying because "Some GMs may not be comfortable running an adventure for players who have foreknowledge of what is to come."
If you happen to have foreknowledge for other reasons, such as having read the adventure, or GMed it previously, read through a GM thread with spoilers in it, are the author of the scenario, helped develop it, etc.
It makes sense to tell your GM, hopefully common sense, courtesy and respect were the reasons in this particular case.
---
If you have a player that's disruptive, talk with your event coordinator and don't be afraid to ask them to leave.
OP Guide pg 19: "GMs should work with their event coordinators to resolve any out of-game conflicts. If you are both the GM and the coordinator, use your own discretion. Extreme or repetitive cases should be resolved by asking the offender to leave the table."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?
It is cheating. A shameful display.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He's not familiar with organized play and it's idiosyncrasies.
So he couldn't have gotten a hint from the 20 or so posts that came before his? I am of the belief that if you are going to make definitive statements you should at least has some idea of what you are talking about.
|
|
Unimportant anecdote...
The only time I had a problem with players knowing the scenario, was waay back in season one when we briefly dabbled with unlimited (or nearly so) replay. I sat down as a guest GM at a game store out of my local area with a group who regularly gamed together. It wasn't until we were about an hour into the slot when I noticed that their actions were particularly coordinated and uber-effective against the challenges.
I made an off-comment about how they were probably the best intuitive players I had encountered in PFS and they said they should be since it was the Nth (I don't recall the exact number) time they had played that scenario.
As it turned out, the only reason they were playing was to "farm" the chronicle for the boon and a particular item. I lost all interest in GMing that table. I ended the game and just issued them chronicles since that's what they wanted anyway. I saw no reason to proceed with the charade. I never went back to that store.
|
|
For the most part I have not had a problem with people playing adventures they have for knowledge of. Most of them are so conscientious about not metagaming and usually let the players without inside knowledge make all the major decisions. In some cases I have seen players try so hard to avoid using their metagame knowledge that their character actually makes a bad choice when they likely wouldn't have if they hadn't read the adventure.
There have been a few exceptions.
1) In a previous campaign that had unlimited replay we had a player who had a tendency to try to rush the party through all non-combat situations so he could get to the combat. He did this to some degree even if he wasn't familiar with the adventure, but if he was then he was far worse.
2) There is a guy I know who does a lot of GMing, so he ends up running a lot of adventures before he plays them. For the most part he is pretty good at metagaming with the sole exception that he NEVER misses a secondary success condition.
3) There is a guy in a nearby region I occasionally get to play with (mostly at regional cons). When he GMs he has a tendency to drop very strong hints about the party's correct course of action in a "Nudge, nudge, wink, wink" sort of manner. That's sort of annoying I would just chalk it up to his GMing style, except he does the exact same thing when he plays an adventure he has previously read.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
I personally have an issue with iPads at the table and ask they be place flat down as I have had players check online Bestiary's whilst in the middle of combat.
I'm curious what you do when they have their character sheets and prepared materials on there. I use Hero Lab for my character sheet and for my summoner I've put together a document of all the creatures I am likely to summon.
In other words, I'm using it to help run my character in an efficient manner.
I know it can be a problem, but it can also help keep the game going. Especially since I've got PDFs of all the rule books I own, so I can sometimes help look something up when required. For my own resources, my notes typically include page numbers.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
He said exactly what he does. He asks that they be placed flat down, so he can see what's on their screen.I personally have an issue with iPads at the table and ask they be place flat down as I have had players check online Bestiary's whilst in the middle of combat.I'm curious what you do when they have their character sheets and prepared materials on there. I use Hero Lab for my character sheet and for my summoner I've put together a document of all the creatures I am likely to summon.
In other words, I'm using it to help run my character in an efficient manner.
I know it can be a problem, but it can also help keep the game going. Especially since I've got PDFs of all the rule books I own, so I can sometimes help look something up when required. For my own resources, my notes typically include page numbers.
Which in turn makes me wonder what happens when a player is trying to be on top of things by looking up the rules for the spell they're planning to cast on their next turn (maybe even stats for a monster they're planning on summoning) and he just sees them scrolling through some upside-down text. I think I'd be pretty disinclined to be courteously prepared for my turn if every time I did so the GM asked me if I was verifying monster stats.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Since I use a tablet, have the PRD on there as well as plenty of pdfs, I have to say that trying to stop metagaming this way is utterly irrelevant.
Players will metagame if they are willing to do so, and frankly there is nothing strictly wrong with a player sitting at the table with the bestiary in hand. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to do so, summons, polymorph spells, looking up specific abilities from their animal companions ... the list goes on.
Trying to stop metagaming is impossible, and if a player really wants to do it... well I would prefer to avoid them, but wasting energy on it seems like a waste.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He said exactly what he does. He asks that they be placed flat down, so he can see what's on their screen.My misunderstanding then. I thought that meant screen side down making it useless.
I had the exact same misunderstanding. I run a lot of games online. You kind of have to just give up and trust your players in that format. Makes me much more tolerant when running games in person.
|
|
Unlimited replay is bad, m'kay?Speaking from personal experience, I have to agree. Though maybe not for the same reasons you are thinking.
I'm inclined to disagree based on my own personal experiences from other organized play ventures. Guess I've had the rare privilege of GMing for some awesome people. ^_^
Unknown reason as to why he read it before hand. He has extremely limited GMing experience to my knowledge so I doubt it was for GM prep.
|
|
Unknown reason as to why he read it before hand. He has extremely limited GMing experience to my knowledge so I doubt it was for GM prep.
Well, then the only recourse is to ask him. And if it proves to be for unsportsmanlike reasons, then tell him that behavior will not be allowed at your tables in the future. Though, to be honest, since he actually did follow the PFS rules and tell you ahead of time, I would be disinclined to believe that his reasons for reading the adventure were so he could brake a different rule.
|
|
I'm inclined to disagree based on my own personal experiences from other organized play ventures. Guess I've had the rare privilege of GMing for some awesome people. ^_^Unlimited replay is bad, m'kay?Speaking from personal experience, I have to agree. Though maybe not for the same reasons you are thinking.
Oh, for the most part I think my players did just fine trying to avoid metagaming. Though I did hear of other groups that would game the system to replay certain scenarios repeatedly just for their rewards. No, my biggest problem with unlimited replay was that it made it just that much harder to get people to GM because everyone always had the option to play and that is exactly what most of them did.
|
|
I used to read books by first checking the resolution/twist and then taking my time enjoying the rest, free of the tension. I'm not quite sure what made me do the same for games and rpgs, but it's hard to drop the compulsion nowadays. Sometimes reading beforehand works ok since suggesting scenarios or picking things to GM kinda requires foreknowledge, but often I'm unfortunately more of an audience member than an actor in a scene.
And by golly does that irk some people. I wish I actually was a metagaming cheatbag so the backlash wouldn't bother so much. I don't understand what's so damn bothersome about spoiling my own fun. It's just my session that's being ruined, ok?
Oops, I've played scenarios that I'd already GM'd. I guess I'm a shameful cheater.Player admits to reading the scenario before sitting down to play it. Cool or not cool?It is cheating. A shameful display.
Did you then read it again before you played? lol