Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Oops, Players Accidentally See Solution to Exploration Challenge
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7890179" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>I think the experience of players seeing what is meant to be a secret map is not that uncommon. I've had it happen back when I used to run somewhat map-heavy Rolemaster.</p><p></p><p>I don't think I've ever changed a map in response. (I could be wrong - I'm recalling play from over two decades ago - but the recollections are stated sincerely.) Sometimes I haven't worried - I've never run a game, as best I can recall, where the map is everything. But I'm pretty sure there must have been occasions when I have asked players to politely ignore what they've inadvertently seen. Of course it's not <em>ideal</em> to metagame reveal a secret map (or any other secret) if part of the goal of play is for the players to discover it via play. But it can happen, and if it does I don't really see the point of debating whose "fault" it is. </p><p></p><p>Often players - at least those I play with - will engage in the sort of decision-making process I've just described themselves, without any GM request to that effect. They will consider what other information - ie information that was not just a metagame reveal - that they as their PCs had that would have influenced their decision about where to go, and will act on that My players will self-enforce "no metagaming" in other situations, too - eg declare actions that they believe make sense from their PCs' perspectives which are less total than the players' perspectives. In non-gamist play I don't see this as a big deal, because there is no "self-hindering" involved (given that the play is not gamist and so not aimed at beating the dungeon/whatever). If a player wants to do this it's no skin off my nose as GM.</p><p></p><p>This is part of why I'm so relaxed about having maps on open display, such as in my most recent session - because we're not playing a very gamist game, and to the extent that there are "victory conditions" they're not really map-based, and so the players have no real incentive to study the map for metagame clues like unique vs repeated numbers. The action will be brought via GM control over scene-framing, and the point of the map is to provide an expository aid and a constraint on/context for action declaration <em>within </em>a framed scene.</p><p></p><p>Robin Laws wrote about this sort of thing in an essay that is part of the Over the Edge rulebook (p 193 of my 20th anniversary edition):</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">When viewing role-playing as an art-form [ie analogous to improvised theatre, as per earlier material in Laws' essay), rather than a game [ie aimed primarily at achieving victory conditions], it ecomes less important to keep from the players things their characters wouldn't know. When characters separate, you can "cut" back and forth between scenes involving different characters. . . .</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The price of this is allowing players access to information known to PCs other than their own. But it's simple enough to rule out of play any actions they attempt based on forbidden knowledge. </p><p></p><p>If a player wants to self-enforce such a rule then it's even simpler!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7890179, member: 42582"] I think the experience of players seeing what is meant to be a secret map is not that uncommon. I've had it happen back when I used to run somewhat map-heavy Rolemaster. I don't think I've ever changed a map in response. (I could be wrong - I'm recalling play from over two decades ago - but the recollections are stated sincerely.) Sometimes I haven't worried - I've never run a game, as best I can recall, where the map is everything. But I'm pretty sure there must have been occasions when I have asked players to politely ignore what they've inadvertently seen. Of course it's not [I]ideal[/I] to metagame reveal a secret map (or any other secret) if part of the goal of play is for the players to discover it via play. But it can happen, and if it does I don't really see the point of debating whose "fault" it is. Often players - at least those I play with - will engage in the sort of decision-making process I've just described themselves, without any GM request to that effect. They will consider what other information - ie information that was not just a metagame reveal - that they as their PCs had that would have influenced their decision about where to go, and will act on that My players will self-enforce "no metagaming" in other situations, too - eg declare actions that they believe make sense from their PCs' perspectives which are less total than the players' perspectives. In non-gamist play I don't see this as a big deal, because there is no "self-hindering" involved (given that the play is not gamist and so not aimed at beating the dungeon/whatever). If a player wants to do this it's no skin off my nose as GM. This is part of why I'm so relaxed about having maps on open display, such as in my most recent session - because we're not playing a very gamist game, and to the extent that there are "victory conditions" they're not really map-based, and so the players have no real incentive to study the map for metagame clues like unique vs repeated numbers. The action will be brought via GM control over scene-framing, and the point of the map is to provide an expository aid and a constraint on/context for action declaration [I]within [/I]a framed scene. Robin Laws wrote about this sort of thing in an essay that is part of the Over the Edge rulebook (p 193 of my 20th anniversary edition): [indent]When viewing role-playing as an art-form [ie analogous to improvised theatre, as per earlier material in Laws' essay), rather than a game [ie aimed primarily at achieving victory conditions], it ecomes less important to keep from the players things their characters wouldn't know. When characters separate, you can "cut" back and forth between scenes involving different characters. . . . The price of this is allowing players access to information known to PCs other than their own. But it's simple enough to rule out of play any actions they attempt based on forbidden knowledge. [/indent] If a player wants to self-enforce such a rule then it's even simpler! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Oops, Players Accidentally See Solution to Exploration Challenge
Top