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

[Ovinomancer]

Oh naughty word.

If you disagree, please explain how this would be the DMs fault:
My friend Alex is DMing the 1st PF2 AP for our Sunday game. Other than 2 one shots, this is his first time actually DMing.
He has no idea that I've got the first module sitting at home on my shelf. Bought & read it day one. Mostly because that's a great way to see how Paizo thinks a PF2 adventure should look, + maybe I'll run this(?). When he announced he wanted to run this AP I canceled any plans on buying #s 2+.
If I use the info I already know to my/the parties benefit before making the rolls or whatever - where the key items/clues are, what monsters are where, etc? That meta-gaming is on me, not the DM.

I'd say you've moved past "metagaming" into outright bad faith play.

I don't need to do any analysis of actual play to reach this conclusion because it's plainly evident that getting a copy of the GM's secret notes, hiding that fact, and then exploiting those two secrets is in bad faith. I don't need to consider at all what your PC's goals are in any scene because you've already broken fairh when you failed to disclose you knew the adventure.

Now, if you do disclose to your DM, then it is on them, not you.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I'd just skip to the next scene with a brief description and some roleplaying about how the characters navigate the 'challenge', possibly with a skill check or two to see if they suffer a setback while doing so.

While of course it would be possible to play the whole thing out with the players roleplaying that their characters don't know the solution, at that point you're missing out on the actual challenge part, aka the fun part.

Better to move on quickly to the next scene. It sucks for the DM who doesn't get to use the content he spent time preparing, and for the players who don't get to experience it as it was meant to, but that's too late to worry about.

 

[cmad1977]

Oh naughty word.

If you disagree, please explain how this would be the DMs fault:
My friend Alex is DMing the 1st PF2 AP for our Sunday game. Other than 2 one shots, this is his first time actually DMing.
He has no idea that I've got the first module sitting at home on my shelf. Bought & read it day one. Mostly because that's a great way to see how Paizo thinks a PF2 adventure should look, + maybe I'll run this(?). When he announced he wanted to run this AP I canceled any plans on buying #s 2+.
If I use the info I already know to my/the parties benefit before making the rolls or whatever - where the key items/clues are, what monsters are where, etc? That meta-gaming is on me, not the DM.

That’s not meta-gaming: it’s cheating.

 

[cmad1977]

Honestly, I’ve done this in Roll20 before. Given that the heroes are PROBABLY gonna find the thing (path, trap, tracks etc) l I just brought it to the fore and didn’t worry about it.

 

[iserith]

So here's what happened in our game:

We lovingly busted the DM's chops for a good 5 minutes for the rookie mistake. Once it was fixed, the player of the druid in the group suggested that he use his bear form's Keen Smell trait to sniff around for a trail to follow. Of course he found it and off we went following the path that was accidentally revealed.

Along the way, we found a strange object that we interacted with in our usual foolish manner, setting off an encounter with some undead which was pretty harrowing. During the fight, an NPC tied to another PC's backstory turned up and shared some information. The NPC's information, the object we found, plus the presence of the undead revealed an important detail about our enemies and their alliances. After a short rest we continued to the pirate camp, taking the fight to our foes.

Ultimately, we probably left some XP on the table by not wandering around the dunes exploring. But we wagered that we could just make it up with the time we saved by not pretending to be unaware of the safe path.

 

[ccs]

I mean... your friend offered to run that AP, knowing you have some of the material, and didn’t make changes to that material? I wouldn’t say it’s his “fault,” but it was certainly within his power to make your attempt at leveraging that information not be a problem.

No, he has no clue I have it.

Unless he's been closely examining my
oddly/badly organized bookshelves in a room that we don't game in....

 

[Charlaquin]

No, he has no clue I have it.

Unless he's been closely examining my
oddly/badly organized bookshelves in a room that we don't game in....

Ahh. Yeah, then that’s your fault. Perhaps it would be best to clarify Ovinomancer’s assertion with, “provided no one is acting in bad faith.”

 

[GrahamWills]

The style of play that says that you expect players to take advantage of out-of-character knowledge and so the GM's job is to make sure that such a situation cannot exist seems a bit too old-school and adversarial to me. Sure, there's no reason not to play that way, but I'm not a fan of the confrontational approach that it pre-supposes.

In my games, I expect players not to be dicks. If I accidentally reveal something, I'll sigh, and say "please ignore that", and I except them to do so. It's not that hard. If they happen to see the safe path on a map, then they simply decide whether their characters would have been likely to follow it. End of problem. If they can't do that or feel that since it was my fault they have a right to take full advantage of the knowledge, then they're not the sort of person I want to game with. I want to game with people who are fun, who help each other and who help the GM to create a co-operative fun experience.

I've played in the adversarial mode, and it's just not for me.

 

[iserith]

The style of play that says that you expect players to take advantage of out-of-character knowledge and so the GM's job is to make sure that such a situation cannot exist seems a bit too old-school and adversarial to me. Sure, there's no reason not to play that way, but I'm not a fan of the confrontational approach that it pre-supposes.

Why do you say this is adversarial or controversial? I expect players to advocate for their characters given the information they have so that they can better achieve their goals. That seems like reasonable behavior to me in a game. To the extent that I can align what the player and character knows as DM, that just makes it easier for all of us.

 

[ccs]

Ahh. Yeah, then that’s your fault.

Exactly. If I use info my character doesn't have, however I've acquired it, it's my fault, not the DMs. Especially if the DM has no idea that I have the info.
Doesn't matter if it's common MM knowledge that every player knows ooc after their 1st ever Troll encounter, like Iserith accidentally seeing the map, or because I've read/run something at some prior point.

Ovinomancer specifically stated that "Metagaming" is ALWAYS the fault of the GM.
Wich is the pure naughty word.

Because while DMs can do alot, none of them can MAKE me meta-game/cheat. Only I can do that.

Perhaps it would be best to clarify Ovinomancer’s assertion with, “provided no one is acting in bad faith.”

One would think that this bit of my reply would suffice....
If I use the info I already know to my/the parties benefit before making the rolls or whatever - where the key items/clues are, what monsters are where, etc? That meta-gaming is on me, not the DM.