What degree of disclosure does your group have between characters?

[Gothmog]

I started gaming with a group recently where I finally got the chance to make a character from 1st level and be a PC (yay!). I usually DM most of the time, so I was really looking forward to this. Anyway, we started the game, and I was having a lot of fun, but something kept happening at the table that was really disconcerting to me: players were allowing other players to freely look over their character sheets. It even got to the point of other players offering advice on how to run each other's characters in combat. Nothing was kept hidden or secret, and when one guy demanded to see my sheet during a break and I didn't want to share my info, they got suspicious of my character (who happens to be a NG cleric of Pelor).

I don't personally feel that PC stats, items, or background should be open to other players to inspect at their lesiure, and the DM in this group tries to keep the guys from doing this, especially at times when their characters couldn't offer advice, but they pay little attention. Personally, I like all of the people in this group, but this one facet of the game really smacks me wrong. They use meta-game knowlegde to such a degree that the game becomes ridiculous and loses credibility to me. These guys are even halfway decent roleplayers, with interesting characters, backgrounds, etc- but the complete openness regarding each other's characters leaves little room for privacy or personal development.

I was wondering how common this sort of thing is at other gaming tables. Is this way off base, or is it common? The DM isn't too happy about it either- he tries to remind them to only use character knowledge, but it falls on deaf ears. I had always played (since 1E) that a player's character sheet is sacred, and that he could share that info if he wanted to, but usually didn't to keep the game from just becoming a numbers game. I don't want to cause trouble with this group, but this is one thing that really bugs me. I was hoping I might be able to get some input and advice from the helpful folks here. Thanks for your time.

 

[Skade]

I rarely allow this in my games. Once characters have gotten some time around one another, if they all have a go around about equipment and the like, thats fine, and to some extent even the remainder of the sheet. Should I ever see cross table advice like you describe. There would be some serious problems.

I would prefer that the players not use the character sheets as a quick way to get to know one another, which is what I would most often be afraid of. "Oh, you have a 9 CHA, you must be pretty ugly, huh?" It also would lead to accusations of cheating, I think. "Hey, I thought you only had a 12 str?" from a player, not the DM is a real issue I never want to see again.

 

[WayneLigon]

We generally know everything about each other sheets; we don't keep anything secret since if someone cannot be there, then usually someone else will run their character.

Yeah, we give each other advice; it's not really possible for a player to remember everything all the time, but that character certainly knows what he can do. If it's something he might think of, no reason not to give him the benifit of the doubt. We also will sometimes keep each other from getting out of character ('Dude, your character hates orcs; you just going to let that insult go?')

Another facet of our group: we all GM for each other, many times within the same campaign structure. So there's no way we can't know ever PC's capabilities.

 

[Umbran]

I was wondering how common this sort of thing is at other gaming tables. Is this way off base, or is it common? The DM isn't too happy about it either- he tries to remind them to only use character knowledge, but it falls on deaf ears

It is my understanding that such behavior is fairly common. I don't like it myself, but I know many who play as you describe.

The DM should have little trouble reigning in the behavior, if he doesn't like it. Simply have him keep a running tally of the number of times each player does such a thing. Dock them some XP for each offense. After all, their use of meta-game knowledge is making encounters easier fo rthe characters. If the encounters are easy, they should be worth fewer XP. Exactly how much depends on how frequently they commit the offense, and how much XP the DM normally gives out.

 

[MerakSpielman]

None of the players in my group wants anybody else looking at their sheet. Of course, all the characters have a number of secrets. It was some time before we found out that one of our rogues was taking levels of Assassin, and the other rogue has multiclassed, but nobody can figure out into what (I'm guessing fighter, but it could be sorcerer).

My bard has a number of "Ace up his Sleeve" items that he doesn't want anybody knowing about. Even if characters don't have any secrets, the players act like they do just to make the other players wonder.

 

[jmucchiello]

Could those who prefer a closed game (as I'll call it) please post how often/long you play each session and how many players you have in the game?

We have 6 players for precisely 4 hours a week. For most of us it is the only time we get to play and it is for some their only "fun" time outlet during the week. We have one player who is being secretive and it grates on the nerves of several other players because it intrudes on the normal "we're just having fun" attitude the game usually has. Being secretive is hard with 3 DMs who are players when not the current DM.

Secrets also make no sense in the context of the game. I don't understand how adventurers can go into life threatening situations and not know the abilities of their companions. Every member of the team should be as familiar with your talents, your strengths and your weaknesses as they are with their own. Anything less is foolish.

One of your fellow adventurers took a level in assassin and you didn't know? How could you not realize he was evil? Another one took an unknown level and you cannot decid eif it is sorcerer or fighter? In our group, we'd find out or kick him out of the party. You have no idea how annoying puzzling over something for game days can be when someone pops in with, "Hey I have a wand of sleep, will that help?"

I realize this is not everyone's cup of tea but logically, if you don't know everything about your companions, how can you be sure they have your back when you face your next tough fight? How "insane" is your character for trusting someone who will not tell you he's recently learned how to cast magic missile?

We condone seeing each other's character sheets because player's play missing player's characters when someone cannot make it. But we usually resolve "what can you do?" in game. Fighters will spare with one another to give one another pointers and to gauge one another's abilities. They help the wizards and others with target practice as necessary. The mage/cleric types always discuss spell selection so that there is not useless overlap: striving for spell synergies.

But,... you play your way and I'll play mine. As long as you are having fun. Just do me the favor of having your character think about how much trust he putting into those around him and whether or not being ignorant about their abilities is rational.

 

[DM_Matt]

Granted, pbp is different, but it seems that here almost everyone has their characters up in a rogues gallery thread for all to see.

 

[Skade]

But,... you play your way and I'll play mine. As long as you are having fun. Just do me the favor of having your character think about how much trust he putting into those around him and whether or not being ignorant about their abilities is rational.

Who said anything about trust? I'm guessing that those who posted the scenarios you mentioned do not have parties who are together on the basis of trust, but rather mutual need or habit. I rarely see d20 games closed to this extent, but its pretty common in Vampire, or other Storyteller games, and the sort of intrigue that might inspire such roleplaying tactics is, while not to everyones taste, something that can be a lot of fun, no matter the system.

As to rationality - again, I don't often see people totally ignorant of each others capabilities, but would you really know every feat and skill your friends have, or everything they carry in their backpack? This is why I prefer that if metagaming comes up in game that my players gainied their knowledge from conversation, or in game examples.

 

[Gothmog]

Well jmucchiello, most games I have played in have 4-8 players, and game anywhere from 1-4 times per month, for 6-8 hours per session. Since I have been in grad school (the last 5 years) time has been a little more scarce, so the group I run now meets once per month for a whole weekend of gaming (about 20-26 hours total) and has 4 players. I run that game in a closed fashion- the PCs know each other's capabilities through watching each other's actions, not through inspecting each other's sheets. I also remind the players not to give suggestions to other players when their character couldn't do so.

In the open group I started playing with, there are 5 players (including me) and the DM. They game once every 2 weeks for about 6 hours per session. They are quite a bit more hack-n-slash then the group I run, but I also understand they are trying to de-stress more than my group. I guess it bothers me because they seem to think they have the right to inspect my sheet at will, and they don't seem to understand that you can play D&D without meta-gaming so much. I know this might seem minor to some people, but this is more than just a difference in playing style- it seems like an invasion of privacy to me, and somewhat like an attempt at trying to enforce party unity rather than earning it.

 

[Skade]

The way I generally handle cross talk is the six seconds rule. A round is six seconds. If they can say it in that space, and they are in the combat, fine. Sometimes, if a player asks me if he can give a suggestion, or even ask for one from a player, I'll allow it. I don't expect players to always come up with the best idea, nor to always have an idea. I would rather they do something cool, and feel good about it, than die cause they got brain freeze.