Recently, the topic of player’s versus character’s knowledge and secrets at the table became hot in both of the groups I play with.

The discussion boils down to the question – whether all players should participate in each scene? Spoiler alert – for me the answer is YES.

Is he in danger?

In one of my last games Mythanthar – elven ranger I play – jumped in pursuit after the orcish scouts. It was critical that the orc and gnoll do not reach the rest of the warband, or the whole party would be in trouble. Other player characters lost the sight of Myth and didn’t follow.

After a couple of rolls and a few moments later both scouts were dead. It took lots of time though and scouts have almost reached their destination. In the meantime rest of the party was concerned about the long disappearance of the elf. They have started discussing whether to continue the journey or send a rescue party. One of the players pressed on continuing while the rest, playing in character, wanted to find out whatever happened to Myth. After a lengthy discussion, they all have decided to continue the journey.

Sometime after the session, one of the players admitted with remorse that he lost immersion during that scene. His decision to continue journey was based on the player’s knowledge that Myth was safe. To avoid that in the future, he would prefer that we have returned to playing some of the scenes behind closed doors with selected players only.

A real loss of immersion

Story from the other side of the very same table. I remember my first session playing Myth. He was new in the party. Not even a member of the party yet, learning the other characters’ past stories through in character chatter.

The party was in possession of a magical mirror – a prison for some powerful mage. Upon discovering unpleasant side effects of carrying the artefact, the party have decided to confront the prisoner of the mirror. Not in the public, of course. That led to a couple of scenes played on the balcony with only those players, whose characters participated in the scene. For few moments I played in character getting to know better Aegon, an elven fighter of another player. But since the scenes on the balcony were getting long, I and the other player got bored and started losing immersion talking out of the game.

After this game I was dissatisfied. The most interesting part of the session was played behind closed doors and I wasn’t a part of it.

Is it abuse if it gets me into trouble?

As you may already know I run Burning Wheel game where we explore the GRRMs A Song of Ice and Fire in times of Dunk and Egg. Things happen in the North in year 211 AC with Lord Beron Stark fighting off Iron Raiders on the Stoney Shore.

Drachu (Dra-who) plays the honourable ser Garret Ramstark on his journey to clean his father’s name and reclaim what was taken from him (lands and beloved one) by Hornwoods. Tajfun (Typhoon) plays opportunistic Lucan Lake, the Lord of Lonely Hills, who seeks to increase his influence by helping young Ramstark.

Ser Garret managed to kidnap his beloved one and escape his enemies. At the same time, Lord Rickon Bolton gave Lord Lucan an opportunity to prove to Bolton his good intentions. Bolton asked Lake’s help in raiding a tower of a knight loyal to Ramstark accused of supporting Black Dragon. Acknowledging the power of Bolton, Lord Lucan agreed. All that was said openly at the table and Drachu heard every single word of the deal.

With that knowledge, Drachu could decide whether to continue north to Lake’s Lofty Fort on Lonely Hills or take the hiding at the tower of his loyal vassal. He had a choice between playing it safe or getting into trouble. Changing the initial plan of playing it safe would mean using player’s knowledge, of course.

He did not seek to hide at his loyal vassal’s place in the end, for the sake of the logic. There was no realistic chance that he would reach the loyal vassal before his enemies did. It would not make the story more interesting. So the person to blame for it not playing out was me, the GM.

Profit and loss of no secrets at the table

The way I see it – I find bigger profits in playing without secrets at the table.

Playing without secrets means losing an element of surprise. Immersion may also be impacted – when your character discovers something that you as a player knew all way along more effort is required to play out the surprise. Players may abuse the knowledge for the sake of the character ie. playing it safe. I can live with that.

On the other side – the game can get more interesting if the player will put his or other characters in the way of troubles on purpose using the knowledge that character doesn’t have. A player who doesn’t participate in the scene is still a member of the audience. There is a lesser chance of jumping out of the game if what he is watching is interesting.

There is a reason why books, most often than not, give you an opportunity to experience the action from several points of view. It helps you get a better picture of the story as a whole. The reception is fuller.

Conclusion

There is no question which wouldn’t be answered best with – it depends. The question, whether you should play behind closed doors, has no single answer and each option has its profits and losses, but at my table, there are no scenes for the selected players’ eyes and ears only and most of the secrets are public. It has proven to enrich the game. I recommend you give it a try if you haven’t.