What degree of disclosure does your group have between characters?

[hong]

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.

Let's turn that around. Do _you_ understand that it's perfectly possible and reasonable to play D&D with more metagaming than you're used to?

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.

This is not an invasion of privacy. At the end of the day, your character is basically a bunch of numbers on a piece of paper, and has no "privacy" to be invaded. It may be a breach of etiquette from your point of view, but rules of etiquette vary all over the place. Since you're in someone else's game, and the other players all seem to feel the same way, the onus is on you to fit in, not make the others fit you.

This is a play style thing, nothing more. If it's that important to you, it might be best for you to quit the group before things get out of hand (ie, before they kick you out).

 

[DanMcS]

My group doesn't look at each other's sheets exactly (except the guy I helped a friend of mine build because he's new to roleplaying) but we know what the characters are, generally. And we do a lot of tabletalk. I think both of these are because we're playing in slightly unfamiliar systems (d20modern and Mutants'n'Masterminds), so when one guy had a gun pulled on him, we said "wouldn't it be cool if you jet li-ed it away from him?" And then we looked up the rules for disarming a ranged weapon We tabletalk to learn the rules.

 

[SpringPlum]

Although my group does not sit around and look at each other's sheets, we all have a basic idea of everyone's abilities. We help keep each other in check. One of my friend's characters suggested a jog in the desert with full packs. We pointed out that no way would a guy with a Con of 10 think that was a swell idea. Another time, I forgot that I'd taken Whirlwind Attack and someone else reminded me at a crucial time. I don't believe that this is cheating as long as we don't break player/PC knowledge. My character would have known to use this ability, I was the one not playing up to her potential.

This is not to say that we don't keep secrets from each other. But it is usually about knowledge about characters' pasts, lovelives, and other stuff that it is fun to reveal at the perfect moment. It just looses something if all the players know that Bob is Joe's illegitimate son who was born a woman even if it's still a surprise for the PCs.

These things are the meat that make up a good character and should be closely guarded, not the numbers and statistics.

 

[Thresher]

I got away with playing a character no one knew much about, quiet, innoculous little type, who tended not to be overly forceful or charming. Just a little elf fighter-wizard of no particular sub-race with a sabre, robes, big floppy hat, kinda poor and a really 'meh' collection of spells who was a 'tutor from Greyhawk' for someone who was multiclassing in the group.
It was half my idea and half the GM's, mostly as an 'ace' to get the party outa trouble which they where headed. So, I played along, he played along and we dropped plently of hints along the way, but no one noticed! Kept going and going... dwarves and pallys arent real smart
That lasted from about 9th level which was where we're finishing up ToEE the end of 'Slavers' and did a few other games. We'd gotten to about 12-13th level and starting on 'Against the giants'.

Still more hints, no one cared, no one really asked me about where I was from or what my sub-type was, we just bumbled along killing monsters and doing good. As a wizard having a lot of skills back then I could get away with several 'arcane and odd' languages, stange skills and no one really cared, just a scholarly type.
I think it was halfway through the Hill giants bit and we got into a huge scrap and someone popped off the mother of all Dispels against a nasty there, natural 20 type of thing. Im half dead from a severe beating already and they didnt really appreciate having a rather big cranky drow appear behind them where their 'little wizzy' was hiding and proceeded to pound me down to about 2hp's.
Least they let me live after I pretended to be dead.

Well that ruse lasted 5months real time and about 3 years game time and it was a damn fun time. No one really trusted the character (and much less me!) for about another 3 years after
Still playing that character 11 or so years down the track.

 

[Hygric]

I was about to chime in with an anecdote, but I see that Thresher beat me to it!

 

[bret]

I've played it both ways. It really depends on the group and setting.

In groups with new players, it is usually best to have open character sheets. This allows the new player to find out what various abilities are and which classes get them. Allows them to see more of the rules in play than they would off their own character sheets. It also doesn't make it a special exception that everyone knows the new player's sheet but no one elses.

In groups that have been playing a while, most of the groups I've been in go to closed character sheets. You don't usually show your character sheet, people don't know your exact attributes, and they have to pay attention to learn many of your skills.

In a couple of those games, the first introduction was when the new character interviewed to join the group. Doesn't matter if you call them adventurers, mercenaries, whatever; sometimes the group needs a few more members. During the interview, you get asked what skills do you have that are useful to the group. It can add a bit of flavor doing it this way.

 

[WayneLigon]

I did much the same thing once, Thresher My character's ability was an inate type of shapeshift (some Doppleganger blood in the background; the GM didn't want a Dispel revealing me too soon) but there finally came a time when I was knocked unconscious and reverted to my true form. A couple people in the group actually applauded me being able to carry off the ruse for that long

The best bluff like that I ever personally saw was done by a friend of mine. It was not unusual for us to play two or more characters in this game, so we didn't think anything of the quiet fighter-type and 'Foo', the flamboyant mage. Save that the 'quiet fighter type' was an assassin/illusionist and at any given time Foo might be an illusion and the 'fighter' real, or Foo might be the fighter in disquise and the 'fighter' the illusion.

 

[Wraithdrit]

Worst case direction A (all secrets): I played in a game in Montgomery, where everyone was so out for themselves and into secrets that one in every five or six sessions everyone got into a fight and killed off half the party. Ugh.

Worst case direction B (all open): Massive out of character discussions and combined tactical brain syndrome takes all realism out of the game.

Best games I have played are a combination of the two. In my CotSQ game, I have given each player a sub plot that only they know about. Notes are passed and players have their own agendas, but I know they are all in this thing together, and their subplots will in the end work to keep them together. Its how I brought the party together in the first place.

A game I used to play in had similar aspects. Lots of characters had secrets, and we had a limited amount of crosstalking during fights. But these are some seriously veteran players that are hardcore RPers. The story and the interaction are more important to them than the fighting or advancing.

I think that some secrecy is fine, and some openness is fine. Too much in either direction can be problematic.

- Wraith

 

[Noldor Elf]

We have tried a "secret character sheet" game once. Usually we remind ourselves about that game as a warning. Althought it was good campaing, there were too many interparty conflicts and too few reasons for a party to stay together for our liking. But our current gaming style is not totally open either, it's good to have some secrets, but there need to be some basis for trust.

 

[Arnwyn]

My players generally know each others' character's abilities pretty well, but not to the point where they are passing around character sheets. (Such a request would likely get a quick "up yours" response from them, I imagine.) Advice seems to be given freely, and we're all okay with that - we haven't seen anything get ridiculous or out-of-hand so far.