|
Reading the same adventure keeps me invested in that story which makes it easier to come back to said story later and roleplay in that story. Reading something else is more likely to detract from my level of investment than it is to help me stay involved. I don't do this but if a DM okayed it I might.
But this is your individual circumstance, and not the "general issue" being discussed. If you ask your GM and he says "go ahead" then there's absolutely no issue at all. OP had a player who maybe thought he had permission when he didn't, obviously booting him is an extreme overreaction as based on the context we have we don't know if he has been or will be cheating, and it seems that his GM being unaware was unintentional.
Whether I ask or not, I will generally assume my players are being honest. Frankly assuming everyone is lying to me doesn't improve anything, as I will be running the entire game expecting my players to cheat, that doesn't sound like fun for anyone, least of all the GM. However if I learn that my trust was misplaced, then there may be an issue.
If I as a GM knew there was some stuff in the AP or module which I wanted to be a surprise, I would certainly ask my players if they've read or played the adventure before. I would also expect them to tell me even if I didn't ask, this is certainly expected (even demanded explicitly in the Guidebook) for PFS. If we get partway into a module and something tips me off that a player has read or played it before (and I hadn't asked)... and I ask him and he admits then depending on the circumstances and the player, I might still let it slide if no metagaming has occurred (especially since some players aren't aware that it could be an issue), but I'll still be wary of the possibility of of it, and will probably make some minor changes to the rest of the module. If moderate to severe metagaming occurs, and the player hadn't told me they'd read it, depending on how impactful the metagaming was I might not tolerate it.
Now if I ask, and they outright lie. As soon as I discover they lied, there are zero excuses, that player is out. End of story. How it affects the game is irrelevant, I refuse outright to play any games with people who abuse my trust.
PS. I always ask but I'd probably make an exception in PFS (I've only GM'd PFS once so far) except for the replayable adventures like The Confirmation, and only so I can know if there's anybody who hasn't and doesn't want to be spoiled... If everybody has, everyone can openly discuss spoilers, which is fun in its own way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What a mess. You need to trust the people you game with, but you don't want to resort to "punishment".There is absolutely no reason for a player to look in the AP without explicit GM permission. It's permission I would never give. It's extremely pretentious to even think that your party actually found every piece of treasure in a campaign.
Tell him that if this is his first and last warning. If anything somewhat fishy happens, he has to get the boot.
|
|
It's extremely pretentious to even think that your party actually found every piece of treasure in a campaign.
Not to mention it reflects very poor record keeping by the players, and suggests they may not be giving the game their full attention while playing. If you have genuine attention issues (perhaps severe ADD) then maybe ask that a loot tracker and/or record keeper be designated, and maybe don't play the leader/face/whatever requires you to know what's happening all the time.
I've heard enough. Time to bring out the Wight Dragon.
Should we be concerned? Do you intend to create your own setting?
I'm not sure why more DMs won't agree to email loot to the players or post it online. I mean, I won't do it because I'm lazy, but it seems like it could save some work especially if the DM has the loot in an electronic format. Maybe I'll rise to my own challenge for this weekend's games...
I'm not sure why more DMs won't agree to email loot to the players or post it online. I mean, I won't do it because I'm lazy, but it seems like it could save some work especially if the DM has the loot in an electronic format. Maybe I'll rise to my own challenge for this weekend's games...
Ughhh
Not all of my group uses Facebook, and I think I'm the only one of us on the forums so we don't have a place to go online.Someone mentioned hangouts, but I've never used it.
Most folks have email though some consider it inconvenient. Gmail and Google Drive are free (at least for enough storage to do stuff like this). That's not to say that anybody should feel compelled to use online tools for gaming. It just seems like it could work out better sometimes.
Of course I haven't taken my own advice on this so far - just a potentially helpful suggestion I guess?
Obsidian Portal is awfully good too.
As a DM, I actually employ my players to keep track of certain things for me.
The party cleric is team treasurer, whose job is to keep track of loot (as it is encountered) and the money gained from it. The party bard keeps track of the logs, how many days are spent during adventuring/downtime, important (and sometimes unimportant) NPCs, and ongoing world events. Having them do the work lets me focus on making a better game.
Similar policy here, but I rotate positions and let my experienced players deal with proud nails.
I solve 'book looters' (Oh, I wish that were my creation!) by swapping out loot for hordes of little treasure, low CR nuisances. The 3rd or 5th po' loot encounter and the players catch on. It is not my baby, but it signals that someone is playing in 'god mode' and the better players deal with it.
I caught my player cheating once, I didn't tell him I caught him, I just sat back and between sessions thought of 3 gruelingly difficult trials. Test one was a test of the character, putting him against what he wasn't built for(east cause the player likes to be a one-trick pony). Second was a test for the player, to show humility since he's "that guy" that talks smug, never feels pain or experiences fear. Third was the toughest of all, I put him in a room with another player character, one that loves to point out what he's doing wrong and F with him, and told him to tolerate everything thrown at him until the designated time was up.
All was done in character, by a omniponent fourth wall breaking God, deened to punish him for acts out of his characters control. Should he fail the test his character would be gone forever. When he passed them all, I was impressed, but I still told him at the end, why I punished him, and to not do it again or this time the test would be designed to be failed and he would lose the character in awful ways. It's nasty, but it did get my point across and it didn't happen again so point for me lol
|
I've heard enough. Time to bring out the Wight Dragon.Should we be concerned? Do you intend to create your own setting?
A Wight Dragon is a red dragon with the wight template. (from Savage Species) It's a funny way to teach the players not to metagame. They'll assume you're talking about a WHITE dragon.
I do intend to create my own setting though. It's something I've been thinking about for a longer time, and this seems like a good time to do it.
I've heard enough. Time to bring out the Wight Dragon.Should we be concerned? Do you intend to create your own setting?A Wight Dragon is a red dragon with the wight template. (from Savage Species) It's a funny way to teach the players not to metagame. They'll assume you're talking about a WHITE dragon.
I do intend to create my own setting though. It's something I've been thinking about for a longer time, and this seems like a good time to do it.
It's a lotta work man, I have my own that I've been developing for years. Hours of work. Tedious map drawing. I wrote over 30 gods!!!
Just be careful, leave things open on purpose because I can guarantee your players will come up with something you couldn't think of.
So I caught a player redhanded. Now he claims he only wanted to help by listing all the loot. What he did was copy paste all of the loot from the module we nearly finished. I figured it out when he added loot from encounters they've missed.
So what should I do? I think I have 3 options.
1. Boot the player from my campaign. Players are scarce around here though.
2. Change every important detail for the remainder of the campaign. Lot of work for a prewritten campaign.
3. Write my own campaign. A lot more work, but it might be more enjoyable in the end.
I had already read pretty much everything in Kingmaker when I played it as a player in the group I was in. The big thing to keep in mind is to determine if the player is going to be using Player Knowledge as Character Knowledge.
I have tried to do 2 and 3, and while both options are fun, they also take a metric ton of time. You don't actually need to boot the player, but instead inform him that, considering he has already read everything, he is allowed to neither make any party choices nor influence the party in one direction or another.
You also have the option of making him the Co-GM that manages the loot, initiative and other important party resources.
The whole thing about cheating is that it boils down to intent. If you can prove his intentions are "to cheat" instead of "to help," then boot him in a heartbeat.
In short, your job at this point is to find out what his intentions are and come up with some sort of plan that you both agree on.
My point is to first verify that he will or wont be a problem before you decide to get rid of him. I have played with people who were great on separating character and player knowledge.
My recommendation as a DM is to use obsidianportal and track loot in the adventure log. This way you can create a loot list for each encounter that they have. It works well in my group. Because the player has access to the book (many do) I would customize my stuff. For example, replace the monsters with monsters from the bestiary 5. Just to mess with them. Stick with the theme. If doing carrion crown book 4, use deep ones. For the big guy, use the deep one elder. Just find the common theme for the adventure.
|
I think the best thing to do is to tell him not to use anything he knows OOC, in character. Failure to do so will result in the boot. He does not need to mislead the party, if OOC he knows who the murderer is(just an example), his character must remain silent. If in doubt whether it would be metagaming, say NOTHING at all. His spell list should be selected as per if he were going on a normal adventure. Like if the party hears they're assaulting a human bandit camp, if he wants to load his spell loadout with command/hold person, it's entirely legit. But if there was no prior information to the group that there was evil outsiders in the fort, his spell loadout should not be full of dismissals.
I've been told to prepare for PFS scenarios I've never played. Occasionally I prepare a module, on that day it doesn't run, because not enough people showed up. Does that mean I'm barred from those scenarios and modules for life? That's a bit unfair on the would-be GMs, since they're being penalised for services to the community.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am planning to start a game soon and I've asked the players not to look online for information, and I trust they all will respect my request. None of them have played the campaign I plan to run. It's not a GM vs PCs thing, its that I enjoy their surprises and accomplishments. I've given a fairly detailed idea of what the campaign will be (enough that they can make a character without worrying that they will be useless).
In the game I am currently playing, I inadvertently spoiled the campaign twice for myself. Once it was when researching a different game I was running and looking to use a unique creature, and in the wiki it said "it's been featured in the following campaigns..." and it was in the one I was playing. The second time in a game I am a PC I picked up a set of sheets on the floor (helping the DM clean) and happened to see three words (name + template) that ruined a major plot point/mystery for me which I *KNOW* I would have had more fun in the game if I didn't know it. Until the party came to the information naturally, I played a less idea-offering mode then I usually do to not spoil it for everyone else, and when I was asked I always offered ideas away from the truth, to not even mistakenly ruin it. It was worth it when we did find out. The players all had lots of fun.
If someone did know specifics of the game I am going to run, I would like to know, so I can change things up to give them more fun quite frankly. I don't know about you, but if my fave books had a "alternate scenarios" button so when I re-read it I DID NOT know what would happen, I would enjoy re-reading it more.
It's more fun gaming when no one knows the outcome. The players don't know all the answers, and the GM doesn't know what the players are going to do. Otherwise, in my experience, it's less enjoyable for all involved. Again, that's my experience.
Edited for clarity.