D&D 5E player knowlege vs character knowlege (spoiler)

[iserith]

I am just trying to figure out at what point using OOC knowledge makes you 'a jerk.' There seems to be a line for you, I'm just not sure where it is. Why is reading the module and using that information 'jerk' behaviour, but doing the same with the Monster Manual or the setting book is not?

The point at which anything makes you a jerk is when you're purposefully taking actions that cause the group to achieve to fail the goals of play - that is, everyone having a good time and creating an exciting, memorable story together by playing.

The issue then becomes a question of why would I ever let someone's use of their skill and knowledge of a game impact my fun or the story we're telling together, either as DM or player. As a DM, only their actions matter, not how they arrived at deciding on those actions. As a player, a skilled teammate is a boon, and I'm still going to advise the player to verify their assumptions before acting on them so as to mitigate our risk.

This isn't a problem unless someone decides to make it one via the social contract.

 

[Charlaquin]

OK. That is consistent. Bloody bizarre, but consistent.

I used to think it was bizarre too, until I tried it. What I’ve found is that most often when players want to play a module a second time, it’s because they had a lot of fun the first time around, and they want to see what would have happened if they made different choices, or played a different sort of character. They’re not out to ruin anyone else’s fun, they just want to re-experience something familiar in a different way. Same reason people replay games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect over and over again, going for a Renegade playthrough instead of Paragon, romancing Fenris instead of Anders, siding with a different faction, making a different sacrifice. And with a human brain running the game instead of a computer, D&D truly has endless replayability. Like, sure, maybe you remember there was a secret door in this one spot so that isn’t a challenge any more, but that doesn’t mean the rest of the game isn’t still engaging.

 

[Charlaquin]

The point at which anything makes you a jerk is when you're purposefully taking actions that cause the group to achieve to fail the goals of play - that is, everyone having a good time and creating an exciting, memorable story together by playing.

Um, Iserith, I think you mean the gossips of play?

 

[iserith]

I used to think it was bizarre too, until I tried it. What I’ve found is that most often when players want to play a module a second time, it’s because they had a lot of fun the first time around, and they want to see what would have happened if they made different choices, or played a different sort of character. They’re not out to ruin anyone else’s fun, they just want to re-experience something familiar in a different way. Same reason people replay games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect over and over again, going for a Renegade playthrough instead of Paragon, romancing Fenris instead of Anders, siding with a different faction, making a different sacrifice. And with a human brain running the game instead of a computer, D&D truly has endless replayability. Like, sure, maybe you remember there was a secret door in this one spot so that isn’t a challenge any more, but that doesn’t mean the rest of the game isn’t still engaging.

This has been my experience as well. A pickup group for which I ran one of my one-shots on Saturday immediately wanted to play it again. Others have wanted to do the same, going so far as to get a group together who had played the adventure before, but now they wanted to do it with all Small-sized PCs. Or with particular builds to try to "speed run" it. Others want to watch the rest of the group take the lead and see what happens, only helping out when it's necessary or amusing.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I am just trying to figure out at what point using OOC knowledge makes you 'a jerk.' There seems to be a line for you, I'm just not sure where it is. Why is reading the module and using that information 'jerk' behaviour, but doing the same with the Monster Manual or the setting book is not?

As @Charlaquin points out, there are strategies for dealing with player knowledge, even if that knowledge extends to detailed, room-by-room knowledge of a module. But you didn't ask, "How would you handle it if somebody knew all the details to a module". You wrote (which, I will point out, you wrote in declarative not interrogative form):

So if you were running a module, you would be OK with a player arriving with a copy of that exact same module and their character mysteriously knowing everything beforehand?

You weren't asking me, but no, I'm not ok with somebody trying to ruin the fun. But I am ok with somebody knowing information from published books that I am using to DM; I can work around that.

EDIT: So the "line" you speak of is, for me, one of intent, not knowledge. Somebody showing up with the module is categorically different somebody who has DM'd a module several times, even though the level of knowledge might be the same.

And maybe that's really where the disconnect is in this whole debate. For some posters, using player knowledge always suggests ill intent, so of course it always crosses that line. But if you don't assume that, you arrive at a different conclusion.

 

[Charlaquin]

EDIT: So the "line" you speak of is, for me, one of intent, not knowledge. Somebody showing up with the module is categorically different somebody who has DM'd a module several times, even though the level of knowledge might be the same.

And maybe that's really where the disconnect is in this whole debate. For some posters, using player knowledge always suggests ill intent, so of course it always crosses that line. But if you don't assume that, you arrive at a different conclusion.

That’s an astute observation. I think you’re right on the money; obviously if a player was actively trying to use their foreknowledge of a module to ruin the fun for other players, I would not be ok with that. But the problem there is the “ruin the fun for other players” part, not the “trying to use their foreknowledge of a module” part. As I said in my other post, my experience has been that when players want to replay a module, it’s usually to experience it again in a different way, rather than to spoil it for someone else.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

You weren't asking me, but no, I'm not ok with somebody trying to ruin the fun.

Why would someone reading the module and using the information ruin the fun if using OOC information to solve problems is acceptable?

But I am ok with somebody knowing information from published books that I am using to DM; I can work around that.

How is this different from my example? That is literally the example.

EDIT: So the "line" you speak of is, for me, one of intent, not knowledge. And maybe that's really where the disconnect is in this whole debate. For some posters, using player knowledge always suggests ill intent, so of course it always crosses that line. But if you don't assume that, you arrive at a different conclusion.

Now I am even more confused. What is the acceptable intent and what is not and how is policing that easier or more acceptable than just policing what a character would reasonably know?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

That’s an astute observation. I think you’re right on the money; obviously if a player was actively trying to use their foreknowledge of a module to ruin the fun for other players, I would not be ok with that. But the problem there is the “ruin the fun for other players” part, not the “trying to use their foreknowledge of a module” part. As I said in my other post, my experience has been that when players want to replay a module, it’s usually to experience it again in a different way, rather than to spoil it for someone else.

Yes, no one really has a fundamental issue with someone replaying a module. Some of us just have an issue with in such a situation using the OOC knowledge to gain an advantage as that to us that is 'spoiling the fun.'

 

[Charlaquin]

Why would someone reading the module and using the information ruin the fun if using OOC information to solve problems is acceptable?

I don’t know. I haven’t experienced anyone actively trying to ruin the other players’ fun before. I suppose hypothetically maybe they’re just bitter and angry and want to kick the sandcastle over? But in reality, I think most players just want to have a good time, not make others have a bad time.

Now I am even more confused. What is the acceptable intent and what is not and how is policing that easier or more acceptable than just policing what a character would reasonably know?

Like I said, it’s never really been something I’ve needed to “police.” What’s unacceptable is trying to make the game less fun for the other players. As long as you’re working towards the goals of play (have fun and create exciting, memorable stories), it’s all good.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yes, no one really has a fundamental issue with someone replaying a module. Some of us just have an issue with in such a situation using the OOC knowledge to gain an advantage as that to us that is 'spoiling the fun.'

I don’t understand this. In order for using foreknowledge of the module to your advantage to spoil the fun, the fun would have to be predicated on lack of knowledge of the module. And if that’s the case, replaying it should inherently not be fun. And yet, replaying modules is indeed fun, so I have to assume the fun comes from something other than lack of knowledge.