Sharing Information

[Nagol]

Have you ever seen a player refuse to share plot-relevant information? Like, their PC is the only one who witnessed the thing, the next phase of the campaign assumes that the party acts on that information, but the PC chooses to sit on the info? Is it a mistake on a GM's part to give that kind of insight to a single player rather than the whole group, or is it good form for a player to share knowledge?

Comic for illustrative purposes.

All the frikkin time!

Often the information isn't "given" so much as the PC is the only one present and/or the instigator who ferrets it out (like opening the safe when others aren't watching and handing over the treasure, but keeping the diary and map).

Whether or not it's good form depends on the campaign style. I tend to think stuff like that should generally be shared widely and quickly (if for no other reason so more than one memory can be dredge the fact up when it is relevant). Some campaigns are expected to have secrets though. It's hard to fault someone from keeping a secret when that is an expectation.

 

[Nagol]

Nope. Nope. Nope. If player isn't sharing info, I just tell the rest of group that Umbran let slip the information. Or give the information to the other members. If Umbran gets tick off and leaves the group good.
Repeat after me gamers.
Life is too short to play with jerks.
Life is too short to have jerks ruin our fun.
I will not play with jerks.

LOL I'm sure some of those players repeat the same mantra.

 

[jasper]

Nope. Nope. Nope. If player isn't sharing info, I just tell the rest of group that Umbran let slip the information. Or give the information to the other members. If Umbran gets tick off and leaves the group good.
Repeat after me gamers.
Life is too short to play with jerks.
Life is too short to have jerks ruin our fun.
I will not play with jerks.

LOL I'm sure some of those players repeat the same mantra.

If I see no jerks around the table. ……… Then I am the jerk....

 

[Nebulous]

Yes. A few years back we had a player do this in our PF game. Any info his character alone acquired he simply sat on. He didn't forget about it. Or fail to realize its importance. Or write it down & lose the note.... Nope, he just refused to share it with the rest of the group. Did the same to plot important items as well.
Made the AP pretty hard to play.

Huh.

 

[Fauchard1520]

I vastly prefer games where the PCs keep secrets and the players all know what's up. I like that when all the players know the rogue is a traitor, naive knight can lean into that and trust the rogue to make a better story or dramatic moment.

I call it "metagame pvp." I tend to prefer it too.

 

[Umbran]

Nope. Nope. Nope.
....
Repeat after me gamers.
Life is too short to play with jerks.

I think you may have missed the point. Let me state this another way...

Maybe you're the jerk. Maybe you're being really selfish in play, and this is the way the player is coping.

Who gets kicked out now?

 

[jasper]

I think you may have missed the point. Let me state this another way...

Maybe you're the jerk. Maybe you're being really selfish in play, and this is the way the player is coping.

Who gets kicked out now?

I do, And I have been kicked out a group for being a jerk.

 

[Umbran]

I do, And I have been kicked out a group for being a jerk.

And, maybe still not getting it...

Rather than just kick someone out, why not see if you can fix the problem first? People aren't worth having a discussion first?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

1) I’ve withheld info, for in-character or campaign relevant purposes.

2) I’ve had players of other PCs withhold info.

3) I’ve had players in campaigns I’m running withhold information from other players.

So far, it’s worked out far more often than it hasn’t.

However, if a GM ruled a PC ”let info slip” by fiat against the wishes of the player, I’d walk. That’s a jerk move.

The GM controls the universe in which the players control only their PCs. If the info is so crucial to the campaign, pull some OTHER threads in the campaign world to disseminate it to the rest of the party. Leave the PCs alone.

 

[jasper]

Umbran let see if I am reading this thread correctly.
1. Gm gave very important information to one player.
2. Player did not share very important for reasons.
In all the games I have been in where this has happened, this has led to arguments. Most of the time the player was being a jerk because they thought they could be the solo hero in the climax or they had other stupid reasons for withholding information. And yes always talk first to a player who is being a jerk. But you only get one free pass on sitting on important information.
Dannyalctraz what type of info are you talking about.
A. Shoot the bad guy in the right ankle for instant kill.
B. 60 feet around the corner, the guard on the left is reading his IPad. The one on the right is alert.
C. other.
I DMed with a lot of randoms, so I assume A and B automatically get shared. This also prevents half the group asking the player if they are going to share that information as soon as the scout returns to party.