Sharing Information

[Fauchard1520]

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.

 

[Anoth]

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.

It’s called having a jackass player. It can be hard to deal with.

 

[Arilyn]

Never. My players are always eager to share what they learned or witnessed. Spotlight!

 

[Zaukrie]

Both?

There have been times when I communicated information that the PC only would know, and it fit his character's overall plans not to fully share the information. But that was unusual, in that in that game every character had secrets from each other to see how that kind of game worked for us. It was both fun, and sometimes not.

Mostly my players have shared all the info they had. And, while I feel that one of the biggest issues with fiction is how stupid the characters are for not sharing stuff they should, there are probably times when it makes sense in the fiction not to.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

There are several of possible solutions to this... One that I like is from a quote by Raymond Chandler, "When in doubt have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand."

 

[ccs]

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.

 

[Umbran]

It’s called having a jackass player. It can be hard to deal with.

Well, we should probably consider why the player is being a jackass...

Information is power. It is status. So long as you have information, you have something other people want, and that makes you important. And, of course, as soon as you let information out... your possession of it isn't special, and your status is reduced.

Now, there will be some (hopefully small) number of players who apply this to get spotlight and attention above that which they really deserve at the table. These may be actual jackasses.

But, for others, it may behoove the GM to consider the player, the character, the adventures, and the table dynamic, and see... is the player otherwise getting the short end of the stick, in terms of spotlight and attention (whether through insufficient forethought on the GM's part, or player error)? Is the information you hand out always leading to someone else getting spotlight time?

If it is always, "Yeah, I'm the social character. I go, get the information. That tells us where the BBEG is, and the fighter and wizard get all the glory choppign and frying them," or something of similar dynamic, then, yes, you might well expect the player to sit on the info... because releasing it isn't really a win for them, in terms of the drama.

How awesome is the moment when the information is gathered? Is it as awesome as fighting the BBEG? Why not?

 

[aco175]

I recall a younger player doing this playing 'in game', I think I just said something about while you all were at lunch discussing your plan the mage tells you about...

 

[Legatus Legionis]

.

 

[Razjah]

I have seen it happen a lot. If the group is cool with secrets, then go about the secret keeping (detailed notes help). But it should be part of your group's social contract and it's worth taking a moment to discuss. The GM taking aside a player can then be a really dramatic and memorable moment.

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 think this leads to more fun where a player isn't being surprised, but the character is definitely screwed by some secret or another (Dungeon World bonds are one example).