Players reading the script!

[Aedilred]

I'm currently running a published adventure for my (PbP) group and things are going reasonably well. However one of my players has contacted me saying that he's bought a copy of the adventure, and will be buying the next one in the series as well. As far as I know he's not planning to GM either of them, and although the books contain information irrelevant to the adventures, I suspect that's not why he's buying them.

I'm having trouble understanding why he's even done this, but I guess he's the sort of guy who doesn't like surprises. I could cope with his knowing what was going to happen- although in all honesty he doesn't tend to roleplay any better as a result- but somehow he always manages to give away to everyone else what's imminently about to happen too, not directly, but dropping subtle "hints" that pretty much give the game away.

Not to mention that he seems to have difficulty separating OOC knowledge from in-character stuff. He's the sort of guy who'll (IC) go to the library and then tell the GM and other players what he's found out, rather than asking what he learns. I can always turn round and say "no, that's not what it says" but by that point it's shutting the door after the horse has bolted rather.

I've suggested to him previously that I'd rather he didn't do this, and he's usually contritely agreed, but it hasn't stopped him doing it over and over again- it seems he can't contain himself. I don't want to kick him out of the group, because he's a decent guy generally (not to mention good friends with the forum admin) but I do want to stop all the silly business, as it's making it less fun for me and also, I suspect, for some of the other players.

I've considered ripping up the published adventure and sending them off on one I make up, as that removes the possibility of his ever knowing what's going to happen, but that seems like a waste of money, to start with, and the adventures themselves are actually quite good- I'm not sure I could write anything to match them. I could try modifying the adventure so that he's not always ahead of the game, but that would involve a lot of effort from me just to stop him doing something he shouldn't really be doing in the first place- it seems like he's won, somehow.

Anyone have any suggestions? It's doing my head in rather.

[rakkoon]

Well, it's clearly the player that is at fault here. A hear-to-heart talk should straiten him out but apparently you've already done that, try appealing to his better nature and tell him he's spoiling the game for everyone.
If he continous being childish you could join him and make small adjustments to the story such as make a +3 dagger cursed or adding some weretigers to a normally empty tomb. Then repeat the suggestion that he should either DM or buy novels, perhaps that will appeal to his inner roleplayer

[The Manly Man]

I used to have a player like that, although his speciality was "My character's level 12. Of course he knows all about various oozes/dragons/undead and their weaknesses. No, I haven't taken any ranks in the appropriate knowledge, nor have I encountered any in-game yet, but that's not the point."

Ask him not to buy the adventures until after you're done running them. Tell him that every time he uses OOC knowledge in-game, he'll take an xp penalty. If he thinks that's unfair, tell him it's the cost of trying to ruin the game.

Alternatively, make small changes. Suddenly that enemy is immune to sonic and cold, not acid and fire. The secret lever hidden in the bookcase is now a trap - the real one's in a panel under the desk.

[greenknight]

It's fairly easy to fix this in a PbP game, since you usually have a day or two between posts. Just move a few things around, and put traps/particularly difficult encounters in areas where a player making use of player knowledge would make a beeline for. Do that a few times and your player should get the message.

[Evilfeeds]

Kick him from the group?

Seriously, it sounds like he's being a [annoying person], will continue to be a [annoying person], and has no intention of "playing properly". Whats the problem?

Its pbp, its not like its hard to find new players.

[kamikasei]

Well, he's cheating. Not fudging his die rolls or adding up his modifiers "wrong", but cheating as though he were looking through the DM's notes while you're in the bathroom. Tell him to cop on and cut it out, or boot him. If you want to give him a little more room to correct his behaviour before disinviting him, the suggestion of XP penalties is a good one.

That you've spoken to him and he's continued in his behaviour would suggest he's incorrigible, though, so don't let him damage the play experience of the rest of the group for too much longer just for the sake of punishing him.

[magellan]

step 1: Tell him that this has been one of the biggest No-nos in gaming for 30 years, and he better stop. (you already did that)

Step 2: Kill him using his knowledge. (maybe hurting badly is enough) find a situation in the adventure where "not very obvious but the correct answer is A" and turn things around so that giving answer A results in death. you know, something like: Suprise master of the armies is a red dragon? nope. it's a white. "but thats not in the book" - "the guy who sold you cone of cold scrolls wasn't in the book either". you get the idea.

[KillianHawkeye]

My approach to this problem has always been "Don't tell your players what adventure you're running." At least that way, they have to figure it out before they can even begin cheating like this.

[pita]

I was a similar player to this, where I would just end up knowing more about the (DM's invented) campaign world because I knew how the DM thinks ("How can I screw this bunghole over?"). There is no real solution to this unless the player is mature enough, and from your post, he isn't. Remove him from the game is what I think you should do. Or get a different adventure book. Try Blood Bayou by Sword & Sorcery games. It adds an excellent setting to your world that you can do a lot in, even if it does work better in the campaign setting it was released as part of.
EDIT-What adventure is this? Maybe there are editable parts people in this thread can help you with.

[Quietus]

Another alternative : don't tell them what module you're running. Grab a few sheets of paper to tape over the cover of the book, if you have to bring it to the game, or just photocopy the individual pages, or make quick notes along with photocopies of maps. If he doesn't know what you're running, he can't go out and buy it.

Also, experience penalties as noted. Say, 10% per bit of metagame information he manages to use? He'll still level, but more slowly than his friends, if he's not SO bad... but if he gets bad enough about it, he'll end up not even gaining ANY experience. The problem with changing the encounters ("That dragon is white instead of red!") is that if this guy is passing hints to the other players, they may, consciously or not, be following his lead. This means that they're preparing for the fight with the same metagame information, and ultimately, by changing that around backwards you're going to end up punishing everyone. Experience penalties? They only punish the <coughcough> that needed to go out and buy the books.

[Blackjackg]

Well, if he's really the kind of guy who doesn't like surprises (ignoring for the moment the possibility that D&D might not be the game for him), I can't fault him too much for peeking ahead. Like all things in D&D, it's really a question of what's the most fun for everyone involved. If knowing what's about to happen is more comfortable and less anxiety-provoking for him, what the heck, let him go nuts.

The problem is clearly that he's not just using that knowledge to make himself more comfortable, he's disseminating it among the party and rather shamelessly rubbing it in your (the DM's) face. That is totally unacceptable because it's ruining the fun for everyone else.

You say you don't want to kick him out of the group, which is fine. However, since you aren't willing to alienate your friend, I would not recommend changing things up on him. If he's genuinely upset by surprises, he won't be happy about combat encounters and traps being sprung on him where he doesn't expect them to be. And if he just enjoys being a jerk about it, well, being a jerk back could cost you a friend.

My recommendation is to tell him, in no uncertain terms, that anytime he demonstrates or spreads out-of-character knowledge, his character will take an XP hit for poor roleplaying. Give him a couple of warnings so he knows what you're talking about, then start docking him. And don't let him weasel out of it, either ("I didn't know there was a fire elemental in the next room! I just cast Protection from Fire on a hunch!" or "Everyone knows you never step on the third stair! It's always trapped!"). You'll know when he's abusing player knowledge.

If that doesn't stop him, and you're still determined to let him keep playing, probably your only option is to split the group. Run it with him solo one night and with your other friends some other time. More work, but at least everyone will be having fun.

EDIT: Just re-read the OP. Didn't realize this was a PbP game. Well... most of my advice still stands.

[Leon]

I had a player do that once, after being told not to and doing so anyway
He also revealed all that he had read to the rest of the group which they were not to happy about aswell.
Handled it by a) having the party arrested for Break and Entering church property and then b) letting them run all over the city looking for a NPC that wasn't open to them yet in the process getting hassled by a gang at the docks (only reason it didnt end in a brawl was smart gang members knowing not to tangle with a Ogrun and instead trying to bribe him to join them, almost succeed too...)

They then left that players PC to sit out the front of a Nobles house all day while they went to do other things - he was convinced that he could bail up a servant for info - i'd have let he too if he'd found one, but the Servants don't come and go via the front of the nobles houses typically.

Later on the party as a whole got back at his PC by leaving it blind in a room with a nest of Devil rats, they also locked the door.

[magellan]

They may, consciously or not, be following his lead. This means that they're preparing for the fight with the same metagame information, and ultimately, by changing that around backwards you're going to end up punishing everyone. Experience penalties? They only punish the <coughcough> that needed to go out and buy the books.

Thats actually the thing that opens the 2nd front so to speak: Of course situations where only he is the one punished are preferrable but if he draws in others: They let themselves get drawn in because he is right, and not doing so would be stupid. Now when he starts to be wrong with his percognition they would be stupid to still follow his lead. And will start to object to him giving (wrong and because of that suddenly irrelevant) hints.

[valadil]

He must not think there's anything wrong with this behavior if he's telling you he bought the book. Is it possible he usually plays with prewritten modules? Some players go through the same campaign books several times over. Maybe he doesn't feel comfortable in a game he hasn't seen before?

Don't rip up your book. But don't play by it either. Just make a few changes periodically. Change what spells you use or what elemental they'll be fighting. It'll keep him on his toes and show him that there's more to the game than what's in the book.

[The Dark Fiddler]

I'd say just change a few things.

The secret item in the library? Nope, someone found it and threw it in the forest.

The Sorcerer is the villain? Nope, that's just a rumor and its really a Bard. (This is nigh-impossible if they've already encountered the villain though.)

[Alejandro]

I'm currently running a published adventure for my (PbP) group and things are going reasonably well. However one of my players has contacted me saying that he's bought a copy of the adventure, and will be buying the next one in the series as well. As far as I know he's not planning to GM either of them, and although the books contain information irrelevant to the adventures, I suspect that's not why he's buying them.

I'm having trouble understanding why he's even done this, but I guess he's the sort of guy who doesn't like surprises. I could cope with his knowing what was going to happen- although in all honesty he doesn't tend to roleplay any better as a result- but somehow he always manages to give away to everyone else what's imminently about to happen too, not directly, but dropping subtle "hints" that pretty much give the game away.

Not to mention that he seems to have difficulty separating OOC knowledge from in-character stuff. He's the sort of guy who'll (IC) go to the library and then tell the GM and other players what he's found out, rather than asking what he learns. I can always turn round and say "no, that's not what it says" but by that point it's shutting the door after the horse has bolted rather.

I've suggested to him previously that I'd rather he didn't do this, and he's usually contritely agreed, but it hasn't stopped him doing it over and over again- it seems he can't contain himself. I don't want to kick him out of the group, because he's a decent guy generally (not to mention good friends with the forum admin) but I do want to stop all the silly business, as it's making it less fun for me and also, I suspect, for some of the other players.

I've considered ripping up the published adventure and sending them off on one I make up, as that removes the possibility of his ever knowing what's going to happen, but that seems like a waste of money, to start with, and the adventures themselves are actually quite good- I'm not sure I could write anything to match them. I could try modifying the adventure so that he's not always ahead of the game, but that would involve a lot of effort from me just to stop him doing something he shouldn't really be doing in the first place- it seems like he's won, somehow.

Anyone have any suggestions? It's doing my head in rather.

You asked him not to do this, and he agreed not to, and then continued to do it? It's time to dump him like a bag of armpit hair. Would you play Battleship with someone who looks at your side of the board before announcing his shots?

Not only is he hurting you, he is hurting the other players. Their respect for you has probably dropped, because you as the GM are allowing yourself to be controlled by one of the players, at the expense of their fun. To use another game analogy, from the perspective of the other players, would they play the lottery, knowing that one of the other players already knows the winning numbers and is going to use them?

It sounds to me like, rather than being someone who "doesn't like surprises", this is an individual who has a deep need to win at something, and has thus resorted to blatant cheating. I'd almost wager money that this person is also a powergamer, as such player types are usually driven by a need to "beat the game."

If you are feeling kinder than I and really don't want to get rid of him, then warn him one more time if you must. But if he does it again, in my opinion, it's time to get rid of him, pronto.

[Fitz10019]

I don't want to kick him out of the group, because he's a decent guy generally (not to mention good friends with the forum admin) but I do want to stop all the silly business, as it's making it less fun for me and also, I suspect, for some of the other players.

Describe the situation to this forum admin friend of his, without naming names. It will be better to get the admin's neutral opinion before he knows who is involved. Ask the admin what he would do in your situation. Tell him you plan to dock XP for the offending player. He'll tell you what he would do, or how much XP he would dock. THEN tell him who the culprit is.

[Another_Poet]

Don't rip up your book. But don't play by it either. Just make a few changes periodically. Change what spells you use or what elemental they'll be fighting. It'll keep him on his toes and show him that there's more to the game than what's in the book.

I'd say just change a few things.

The secret item in the library? Nope, someone found it and threw it in the forest.

The Sorcerer is the villain? Nope, that's just a rumor and its really a Bard. (This is nigh-impossible if they've already encountered the villain though.)

These. 100% these.

While I tend to agree you should just dump the player, you said you don't want to. And killing him off intentionally will just make things worse. So this kind of light-handed corrective measure is really your best bet.

[aivanther]

Without telling him, change modules...you can probably find a bridge over to it some where. Confuse the bajesus out of him.

Then there's the ever useful "Rocks fall, everyone dies."

[HamsterOfTheGod]

I agree with what the suggestion of changing the adventure a little to keep him on his toes. It's not too hard. Move encounter A from room 1 to room 2 and encounter B from room 2 to room 1. Flip some of the map around, say at point X, turning left is actually a turn to the right. Change some of the encounter stats. If encounter #12 is a CR 3 monster right from the book, just substitute another CR 3 monster right from the book. If the wizard in room #27 is going to cast fireball, make him cast stinking cloud. You can even change the plot hooks. For ex, if the PCs are supposed to rescue the princess from the dungeon and get a reward at the end, change it to the PCs are supposed to retrieve the crime lord's mcguffin from the dungeon and for a reward get the crime lord's friendship.

[Aedilred]

OK, thanks for the advice all. So the general consensus is to maybe switch stuff around a bit to limit the impact of his, er, cheating, hit him with a XP penalty every time I catch him using OOC knowledge, and if he persists in doing it, try to find a way to ditch him.

I'd almost wager money that this person is also a powergamer, as such player types are usually driven by a need to "beat the game."

You would be correct in that.

EDIT-What adventure is this? Maybe there are editable parts people in this thread can help you with.

It's the Paths of the Damned campaign, from WFRP2. The first part, which we're on at the moment, can only be affected in a limited way with advance knowledge (although the big reveal at the end would be somewhat spoilt), so I'm not too worried about that, but it would totally ruin the second part, as it's an intrigue-based adventure which relies on the players not having access to all the information. In fact at one point it plays on their metagaming assumptions to get them to do the wrong thing. If they already know who has what they need, there's really no point in playing it.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

In fact at one point it plays on their metagaming assumptions to get them to do the wrong thing.

Hey, if you change the module around, this player is actually doing you a favor!

[ZeroNumerous]

While I tend to agree you should just dump the player,

I do not, at all, understand this sentiment. I personally have both played and DMed countless 3.5 modules, so if everyone thought this way there'd be no way I'd get into a game centered around a module. Why advocate removing a player just because he knows what's going to happen? Wouldn't it be both fairer and smarter to wait and see if he acts upon what he knows instead?

[Random832]

In fact at one point it plays on their metagaming assumptions to get them to do the wrong thing. If they already know who has what they need, there's really no point in playing it.

Why not just write a book?

Seriously - if it depends on the players to act in a particular way (rather than having potential for equally interesting outcomes no matter what they do)... there's a word for that - it's called a railroad plot.

[Aedilred]

I've had another chat with him and he's admitted that he's read the module we're currently in, but has also pointed out that there isn't really any way for him to use his OOC knowledge to affect things too badly, which is to a large extent true, as I can fiddle with the encounters sufficiently that they're still a surprise (I've been doing this anyway to an extent as the group is a bit larger than the module anticipated).

Seriously - if it depends on the players to act in a particular way (rather than having potential for equally interesting outcomes no matter what they do)... there's a word for that - it's called a railroad plot.

There are three "successful" outcomes at the end of the module, of which one is great, one is rather sucky and one is utterly awful. The way to get them into the last one is to present it in such a way that it looks like the "backup" option provided in case they fail on the first two, so as not to arouse their suspicions. There's no compulsion for them to act on it, it just recognises that the players are going to be thinking in that way and uses it to draw them into an undesirable outcome.

The module works in such a way that different people have access to different resources, and things will play out differently depending on who they talk to. It's one of the least railroaded adventures I've encountered, in fact. The problem is that if one player knows the right people to talk to to get the best result, and how to persuade them to help, the interest and intrigue evaporates, and it becomes a box-checking exercise rather than a roleplaying challenge.

I do not, at all, understand this sentiment. I personally have both played and DMed countless 3.5 modules, so if everyone thought this way there'd be no way I'd get into a game centered around a module. Why advocate removing a player just because he knows what's going to happen? Wouldn't it be both fairer and smarter to wait and see if he acts upon what he knows instead?

I'd agree, but he has form for acting on OOC knowledge and I have no reason to suspect that he's not going to do it again.

[kamikasei]

I do not, at all, understand this sentiment. I personally have both played and DMed countless 3.5 modules, so if everyone thought this way there'd be no way I'd get into a game centered around a module. Why advocate removing a player just because he knows what's going to happen?

I don't think anyone's suggesting that.

Wouldn't it be both fairer and smarter to wait and see if he acts upon what he knows instead?

Which is what the OP has done, and the player is indeed acting on what he knows.

I could cope with his knowing what was going to happen... but somehow he always manages to give away to everyone else what's imminently about to happen too... Not to mention that he seems to have difficulty separating OOC knowledge from in-character stuff.

Not to mention that it's not as if this is a module the player happens to have been through before - he's buying the adventure specifically so he can read ahead in it.

[Random832]

There are three "successful" outcomes at the end of the module, of which one is great, one is rather sucky and one is utterly awful. The way to get them into the last one is to present it in such a way that it looks like the "backup" option provided in case they fail on the first two, so as not to arouse their suspicions. There's no compulsion for them to act on it, it just recognises that the players are going to be thinking in that way and uses it to draw them into an undesirable outcome.

So in other words you are "cheating" by using your metagame knowledge of how players can be expected to act. Since it relies on player metagame knowledge in the first place, there should absolutely be nothing against players using more metagame knowledge to avoid it. You (or, rather, the module writer), made the decision to play that game.

[Alejandro]

I do not, at all, understand this sentiment. I personally have both played and DMed countless 3.5 modules, so if everyone thought this way there'd be no way I'd get into a game centered around a module. Why advocate removing a player just because he knows what's going to happen? Wouldn't it be both fairer and smarter to wait and see if he acts upon what he knows instead?

I am not advocating removing the player because they know what is going to happen. I am advocating removing the player because they are directly disobeying the reasonable instructions of the GM, and doing so in front of the rest of the players and at their expense.

[Aedilred]

His latest reply (after I asked him not to read the second module, and warned that if he did there would be consequences for everyone, possibly including my not running the thing at all and doing something else instead):

As for Spires of Altdorf... (the second module -ed) I have no idea what you're talking about there (a good sign, I know ) and therefore I'll just have to see. I won't say I'm not going to read it seeing as how I'm a wee bit of a data addict, but keep in mind I'm RPing a religious nut who feels it is his job to "Burn the Heretic" and a Norse Beserker who operates according to a strict code of honor that boils down to "If they're an enemy, we kill'em as fast as possible. If they're a friend, we kill their enemies as quick as possible", so I have a feeling a few of the "solutions" I come up with in the Web of Intrigue are going to cause a bit more in the way of issue to arise

So in other words you are "cheating" by using your metagame knowledge of how players can be expected to act. Since it relies on player metagame knowledge in the first place, there should absolutely be nothing against players using more metagame knowledge to avoid it. You (or, rather, the module writer), made the decision to play that game.

I'd disagree with that. I've DMed for players before who think in such a way and it's tiresome coming up with ways to circumvent their suspicion as players as well as their PC counterparts. In this instance, the PCs have reasons to go either way, but the players are going to be suspicious depending on when the option is introduced. All this is doing is recognising that and suggesting that it's introduced at such a time as not to arouse their suspicions as players. I don't think that's reverse metagaming; I think that's common sense, personally.

Of course, in a group that does everything exactly as the characters would, using absolutely none of their knowledge and/or experience as players, this wouldn't be an issue, but groups composed entirely of such players are extremely rare.

[Random832]

His latest reply (after I asked him not to read the second module, and warned that if he did there would be consequences for everyone, possibly including my not running the thing at all and doing something else instead):

So basically he's announced an intention to... roleplay his character properly. Normally that's a good thing, but you've taken offense because you want to play the metagame game and trick metagaming players into making the wrong decision. I'm not inclined to side with you, but more to the point, once the DM ( / module author, and you picked the module) decides to play the metagame game, there is no longer a moral high ground from which to tell the players not to.

All this is doing is recognising that and suggesting that it's introduced at such a time as not to arouse their suspicions as players.

The way you first described it, it's doing more than "not to arouse their suspicions", but trying to actually look like the better option (not just not-worse) than not doing it.

But anyway - if they have to pick the bad option for you to get enjoyment out of the module - well, "why not just write a book" is the standard response, but since you're not the one who wrote it maybe that should be modified to: maybe the actual writer should have written a novel instead of a module.