D&D 5E Oops, Players Accidentally See Solution to Exploration Challenge

[Iry]

It’s not just difficult to do, it’s literally impossible.

While you can never eliminate it entirely, you can do a good job of coming close to it. It depends on their ability to compartmentalize, which is a trait I look for when choosing players.

As for my own answer to the OP, I either don't care since my players are very good about keeping things separate, or I randomize the numbers to eliminate the temptation in the first place.

 

[Mistwell]

It’s not just difficult to do, it’s literally impossible. You can choose not to follow the safe path based on the reasoning that your character doesn’t know it’s there. But that’s still acting on the knowledge that it’s there, it’s just doing so in the negative.

It's not impossible and players have done it since the 1970s. You simply ask what direction your character would go based on what they do know. However they made decisions about which direction to head prior to the player finding out that information, that's the same decision they should make now. So if they were using tracks to follow, or trying to keep below the hills to not be seen from afar, or staying on the hill to try and see ahead, or trying to stay out of difficult terrain, or avoiding areas where there could be an ambush, or all the things which go into overland travel - those are the same things they should use now.

This idea that you cannot separate player knowledge from character knowledge is absurd. It's a key element of role playing. You can do it to play an elf rather than the human you are, you can do it to play a spellcaster or sword fighter instead of whatever profession you are, why can't you do it to play a character who didn't see a map you as a player have seen?

 

[Charlaquin]

It's not impossible and players have done it since the 1970s. You simply ask what direction your character would go based on what they do know. However they made decisions about which direction to head prior to the player finding out that information, that's the same decision they should make now. So if they were using tracks to follow, or trying to keep below the hills to not be seen from afar, or staying on the hill to try and see ahead, or trying to stay out of difficult terrain, or avoiding areas where there could be an ambush, or all the things which go into overland travel - those are the same things they should use now.

This idea that you cannot separate player knowledge from character knowledge is absurd. It's a key element of role playing. You can do it to play an elf rather than the human you are, you can do it to play a spellcaster or sword fighter instead of whatever profession you are, why can't you do it to play a character who didn't see a map you as a player have seen?

I didn’t say you can’t separate player knowledge from character knowledge. I said it’s not possible to act based on character knowledge and not player knowledge. You can choose not to take the safe path you as a player know is there, but that’s still acting based on your knowledge that the path is there. You can choose not to attack the troll with fire, but that’s still acting based on knowledge that the troll is weak to fire. You can choose to act like you imagine an elf would act, but your idea of how an elf would act is still informed by your experiences as a human.

 

[Charlaquin]

While you can never eliminate it entirely, you can do a good job of coming close to it. It depends on their ability to compartmentalize, which is a trait I look for when choosing players.

You can choose to act contrary to what your player knowledge would suggest is the best choice. But at that point what you are doing is using player knowledge to act in a way you imagine someone without that knowledge would; you are making a conscious decision not to do what you would have done based on that knowledge, which is not something someone who lacked that knowledge would be able to do.

 

[Mistwell]

I didn’t say you can’t separate player knowledge from character knowledge. I said it’s not possible to act based on character knowledge and not player knowledge. You can choose not to take the safe path you as a player know is there, but that’s still acting based on your knowledge that the path is there. You can choose not to attack the troll with fire, but that’s still acting based on knowledge that the troll is weak to fire. You can choose to act like you imagine an elf would act, but your idea of how an elf would act is still informed by your experiences as a human.

You can choose to act contrary to what your player knowledge would suggest is the best choice. But at that point what you are doing is using player knowledge to act in a way you imagine someone without that knowledge would; you are making a conscious decision not to do what you would have done based on that knowledge, which is not something someone who lacked that knowledge would be able to do.

Informed by your experience isn't the same as informed by direct knowledge of this particular event. Metagaming is more the later.

I outlined how you would choose to travel in a way which 1) does not use the direct player knowledge, and 2) does not force you to act specifically contrary to what your player knowledge would suggest is the best choice. You didn't seem to talk about that part of my response so I will repeat it in hopes we can drill down on that issue - since I think it's the heart of this issue:

"However they made decisions about which direction to head prior to the player finding out that information, that's the same decision they should make now. So if they were using tracks to follow, or trying to keep below the hills to not be seen from afar, or staying on the hill to try and see ahead, or trying to stay out of difficult terrain, or avoiding areas where there could be an ambush, or all the things which go into overland travel - those are the same things they should use now. "

So I didn't say you act specifically contrary to what your player knowledge would suggest is the best choice - I said you should choose to take WHATEVER path it was your character would have chosen to take BUT-FOR you as a player having seen that map. That might still be the safest path if your character was likely going to choose those travel tactics and strategies. You should be able to make that determination. There are not that many factors in play. You know how you were playing your character before, you know the tactics and strategies they were using for overland travel before, so why can't you just do those same things? Be informed by your general experience as opposed to that particular direct knowledge.

 

[Iry]

You can choose to act contrary to what your player knowledge would suggest is the best choice. But at that point what you are doing is using player knowledge to act in a way you imagine someone without that knowledge would; you are making a conscious decision not to do what you would have done based on that knowledge, which is not something someone who lacked that knowledge would be able to do.

That's normal. Players are always compartmentalizing what they know of morality, science, and culture to get a 'Best Guess' of what their character should know and be doing. Heck, even in real life I'm constantly acting in a way I imagine someone without certain knowledge would. Such is office politics.

 

[Ashrym]

If it's important I would change a few things on the fly. If it's not that impirtant I would have an NPC met along the way go gave that info through roleplay.

Maybe a mix of both.

 

[DragonBelow]

I would just suspend the game for a week or two, it would be impossible for the players to remember everything unless they took a screenshot or something

 

[Jer]

Caveat: I haven't used Roll20 in depth as anything more than a shared whiteboard, so I don't know if this is actually feasible:

As the DM I'd say "OK timeout - you all saw that so I'm going to reshuffle a few things so we don't kill the suspense with that knowledge".

Then I'd spend 5 minutes jiggering the map encounters around a bit - or not - to my taste and then pick back up again.

I'd hope that spending that amount of time and changing a few things around would be enough to give the players the sense of not knowing what's going on so they could have the fun of doing a challenge like that the way its intended (i.e. as a challenge to the players not the characters).

If I didn't think I was able to do that, then alternatively I'd turn it into a straight up challenge for the characters, let them roll some dice to find the "best path" and call it a bit of a wash. And remind myself to check my map settings in the future.

 

[Weiley31]

Captain Whiskers: Where the mew is that bloody map I had!?!?

First Mate: I think we lost it Cap'n!

Captain Whiskers: BUGGER ME!!!