Whispers and Player character interaction

I'm running a campaign with a fairly heavy RP mindset and i find that many several of the player characters feel run over when there is a room full of people and I as the DM can't see their PCs whispering to eachother, I would like a way to activate this. can this be done?

Hello Bryan, Let me just make sure I'm understanding you correctly before I add my input. From what I gather, you would like to suggest a way for the DM to view private messages sent between player characters. Is that correct?

yes, as we went to run our campaign last night we ran into an issue where our group of four was trying to have meaningful interaction in two separate conversations. this lead to instances were either there were conversations going on between the characters that i didn't know about, as the DM, and were the amount of text present caused strange misinterpretations. now this could be done vocally through the takbox service however a few of my players are new to the role playing aspect and have a hard time separating themselves from their character, so i chose to try a text based setting. given the time I've had since, I've thought that maybe a chat room system would do well, but I feel that the need for the DM to know about PC whispers is equally important to play, In my opinion.

I agree with this, the GM should have an all-seeing eye ability in games (and an all-hearing ear!). If players want to discuss something away from the GM then they have a million other chat room options. It should be very clear to the players though that the GM can view their tabletop interactions at any time. -- Pete.

The whisper function is specifically designed so that no one can see it besides the sender and the recipient, if I'm ploting against the GM , I don't want to go into an alternative service. And a lot of the time we use whispers for non game related chat , that we might not want everyone to know about. If your players wanted you to see the message then they wouldn't be whisoering

Ehh. I think this is neat idea for management of certain games, but maybe you could make this a sort of option that can be disabled/enabled if warranted? Sometimes the whispers among players away from the GM's all-seeing eye can be an important part of gameplay. Not sure if I'm the only one who thinks this >_>

the issue we had was we were all in a skype call for any sort of sidebar conversation. so the chat was reserved for character interactions and DM messages. I agree that it should be an option to disable/enable. but on another note if you feel that you have to hide things from your DM then your DM isn't a very good DM. the idea of omnipotence in the DM isn't supposed to be abused it's supposed to allow for interesting interactions. Also if you DM doesn't know what your character is plotting you're going to run into one of two situations A) your plan will fall apart because the DM hadn't thought of the obstacles that your task would have or B) the DM will outright shoot you down. I get that under certain circumstances and games that whispering between players can be a power piece of gameplay but this option needs to be there.

Exactly this - the GM isn't supposed to be an "opponent" (usually), the GM is there to provide a fun scenario and keep things interesting. The more information they have, the more they can weave it into the game. If your GM only wants to hear your "secret plans" so he can work against them, then you have a crappy GM, get a new one. A good one will take your plans, and use them to make a better story (that doesn't mean your plans will necessarily be allowed to work perfectly, but it does hopefully mean more fun). Any game where people are playing Players vs GM, the GM will (should?) always win... The GM can make whatever they want happen anyway. -- Pete.

If the option were to be there it should be at the discrepancy of the player not the GM. In a lot of games that I have played , such as lair assault style games. In these type of games it is the players against the GM. When the GMs soul purpose is to get a TPK, it raises concern that they could eaeavesdrop on conversations.

If a GM wants a TPK, there is no way he can't get it everytime .

In a lair assault it is the GMs goal to get a TPK, and it is very possible for the players to win. In a lair assault the enemies, traps and map are entirely predetermined. The players are the allowed to build powerful yet limited characters based on level, and get to choose magic items and gear based on the level. Then are required to run through the dungeon in a predetermined number of rounds trying to defeat the GM

Yeah - so there are exceptions, hence the "(usually)" in my post. But in the majority of tabletop roleplay games that isn't the case. If you're playing a "lair assault" game as you describe, then you'll want an entire back channel for the players to discuss in anyway - you won't want to be doing it with individual whispers. -- Pete.

In any type of game, if I want the GM to know something , I'll say it inside regular chat, if I'm having a secret discussion with a player then I do not like the idea that the GM could listen in without me knowing. In a RL game I still have the option for secret table discussion , passing notes. There is no reason that players shouldn't be able to keep using a whisper for secret discussions, after all that's what it was designed for

Jeremy, I believe you're missing the point. I'm not saying that private whispers shouldn't be allowed. I'm saying that I would like a system where I can tick a box to add this. If you're intentionally keeping large secrets from your dm that's cool whatever. I'm just interested in this option for my own campaign since my group had roleplaying issues. if the game is a competition between the "player" and a "dungeon master" sure you wouldn't want that option on but as Pete stated it doesn't make sense to keep secrets from the person who is trying to make an engaging story for and about your character. If you're still opposed to this idea that is your right, but I would prefer constructive alternatives to this drawn out discussion we're having. what I have so far is, an option for the DM to "listen" to PC whispers and the addition of separate chat channels. Are there any other ideas?

Maybe I am missing the point, I'm not trying to be a nuisance here. I admit I don't like the idea of spying on players without their permission. In your campaign why were your players whispering and about what? Maybe if I understand your situation better I can give you some constructive ideas

How about a toggle switch to turn off whispering in your campaign all together?

The point is, I think, that sometimes there can be a need for some players to discuss with each other, but not with all players listening. The GM may have a good reason to know their discussions. For example, two players suspect a third of plotting against them, they start to work through a plan to catch him. If this is done via whisper, the GM can't be a part of that discussion at the moment - if the GM could listen in, then he could suggest necessary rolls, or even work their discussion into the campaign plot. Given that the GM is (normally) working towards maximising the fun for everyone, there is rarely a need to discuss something without their knowledge. It would be better if the campaign allowed for "channels" of discussion (and GM controls who can see what channel). Any old-school internet users who used IRC in a non-tabbed environment would know how this might work. Channels could be "In character", "Out of character", "Secret plot", etc. The chat screen might then have entries like: [IC] GM: The room begins to shake as the wizard completes his spell. [OOC] Bob: I hope Mike doesn't freak out like last time! [IC] Eldor looks for something to hold onto. [IC] Thanan: I charge the wizard! [SecretPlot] Seth takes the distraction as an opportunity to rifle through Eldor's pockets. By default, anyone could create a channel, and the channel would have (by default) the creator and the GM as members. The GM can add/remove people to a channel, and can delegate this power to a player if needed. The GM could be removed from a channel if needed, but can add himself at any time - the channel is by default configured to broadcast additions/removals from the channel, but this can be disabled (unknown spies). The GM can always see a list of channels and members. This would be the most flexible solution, and it would meet everyone's needs...no? --Pete.

Pete, I would agree that this is a reasonable solution, as long as a full list of the members (including the GM) is listed in the channel for everyone to see. Imagine for a moment, that a beginning GM decides to run some campaigns here, and he or she isn't that great at it yet, but they have room for growth, they will get better with time. Now imagine, in this beginning GMs game , that the players think the GMs campaign sucks, whether it does or not is besides the point. It is human nature to express negative feeling like this, and the players would probably use whispers or what they believe to be a secret channel away from the GMs eyes, to either make fun of or in some other way bash on his campaign. I am not saying that everyone is like this, but we can all attest to the fact that there are many jerks out there. How do you suppose that GM , new to gaming is going to feel, when he/she reads the negative comments about their campaign. Hopefully they shrug it off and find new players , but what if the negativity sours them to gaming all together. I know I would be more than a little upset to find someone spouting off negative comments about my campaign, heck , I get harassed in other forums for offering a free e-zine that is supposed to help people with different facets of their games. It is not my wish to keep the GM in the dark, but merely to protect the GM and the players. Secrecy is a normal thing around the table, like you said one PC wanting to steal from another, or secret alliances and what have you. Most of the time, I don't make any efforts to keeps secrets from the GM, but sometimes circumstances call for it. So long as everyone is aware of whom they are talking to inside of chat, I see no problem with Pete's solution.

Erm, no - that isn't part of what I suggested. I even suggested "unknown spies" in a channel, so if a GM sees the need, they can add a player to a channel without the other players knowing (if there's a game-need for it). The only person who can see all channels and all members if the GM. Sorry, but if the players want to have a dig at the GM behind his back, then they should at least have the decency not to do it at his gaing table. Start a discussion via the message capabilities of this forum (you can have a shared discussion there), do it via mail, or find somewhere else to do it. The GM "owns" the game, and should have power over everything at the table. They can choose to exclude themselves from a channel, but there should be no way for the players to force this. -- Pete.

In a perfect world, people would not take a stab at a GM at all, or anybody for that matter, but unfortunately we dont live in a perfect world, and some people can be down right cruel. And I agree with you, it should not be done at the table, but if someone is going to be a jerk about it in the first place, I doubt they would have the decency to find alternative avenues to express it when they can just as easily express it via a whisper, that they believe to be secret. In any case, yes players that want to talk secretly can Indeed do so via other messaging platforms, I just dont think that should be necessary, whether their conversation be of good or ill nature. I see the whole spy issue resulting in hurt feelings and possibly broken friendships. Ill leave it at that , and call it a night

Well yes - but also if we have "channels", then whispers can remain between two players. You open a channel for any ongoing in-game discussion, you whisper a quick comment. -- Pete.

I would think the ability to whisper to multiple people at once would solve both of these problems. I agree with Jeremy that it should show everyone who is involved in the whisper.

I have to agree that the addition of channels would be the best solution to this conundrum, because the issue that I was having is that players were whispering in character under the assumption that I could read what they were saying and then acting upon it and getting confused. I agree with the ideas that Pete has shared and i believe that they would open many avenues for a creative campaign. On another note I understand that people come on here to meet complete strangers and play campaigns with them. I however am not doing this and I don't believe that this should limit how I can play with my close friends whom i don't often get into a single room together. While i would enjoy these options I do agree with the idea that they should be toggle-able and these options should be visible to the players so that they at least know what environment they are playing in. if you're a budding DM and you want players to play with you and help you learn how to DM you should share this information to your potential players when trying to start a group. I understand that there are trolls out there and i'm sure they will harass people, luckily as DM you (should) have the ability to boot people from your campaign. If you don't like someone campaign so much that you want to make fun of them, then just go play a different game, since you obviously didn't pick the right game to play.

So yeah, after a long thread we finally came up with a workable solution...now will the devs read down this far, or should we create a new thread with just the suggestion in it? -- Pete. Edit, I'll create a new thread.