I've got a problem in a campaign I'm about to start running. I was working with the players to create their backstories and one player wanted a villain to be connected to theirs. I really liked the idea, so I agreed and gave them a bit of info about the villain. The short-short version is that the PC is an elf that was attacked as a child and now they are hunting for the leader of their attackers. The villain is meant to be a mastermind type, that they slowly uncover the plot of. However, the player really wanted to know more about the villain, explaining that since he's an elf and he's been hunting this guy for hundreds of years he should have more info. I gave him a bit, but he wanted to know way more, like the villains name, his powers, his goals, he even suggested that his character should have fought the villain a few times. I tried to explain that knowing more beforehand makes the villain much more boring and excludes the rest of the party from the game. Nothing that happens in a backstory is ever as impactful as something that happens at the table. He didn't really get what I was trying to say.
Recently, through no fault of his, he accentually read my notes about the villain and it spoils almost everything. All the twists, his secret powers, his goals. Everything. So I tell this player that since he read everything about this villain I have to scrap the villain and come up with a new one. He is adamant however that its fine, again because his character has been hunting the villain for so long. I explained that this doesn't leave any room for me as DM to craft an interesting narrative around this villain. He is disappointed and doesn't want me to replace the villain, but honestly, I just wouldn't even what to do with a character like that. The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things. But this player insists that it would still be a good story.
Am I missing something or do I just need to tell this player that he's wrong and move on? I'm open to any suggestions.
The villain is obviously a powerful one who has lived for hundreds of years. He would also be extremely smart as well. He would know the PC is chasing him. Therefore, the villain has probably left clues to find. The clues are not 100% accurate, they are in short false. The villain is doing a disinformation campaign.
Basically, the villain has "purposely" gave the PC all the information/clues the PC read/found/knows.
Now instead of redoing the villain, tweak him. if your PC thinks he has lasers coming out of his eyes, instead it is lightning out of the villains toes. The PC will prep for lasers but "shock" it is not lasers it is something else.
The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things.
Tweak these powers and reasonings.
Two things will probably result form this, the PC will see changes and therefore doubt everything he read because it is not lining up, or he will keep believing those things he read are still verbatim, and will actually weaken the party as they Buff for the wrong power.
The above poster has a really good idea. Another option could be that the villian the PC is hunting isn’t actually the villain. Let the player think it is. After a few levels, let him have his confrontation and win. Then he finds some notes or letters that reveal the villian he’s been hunting is really just a flunky. There’s a bigger bad guy pulling the strings. That’s the one who ordered the attack on the PC’s village. But why? Bonus points if you can tie the why to another character’s back story, or the main plot or both, and weave the campaign a little tighter.
And to the issue of the player not getting that he wouldn’t know much about the villian. No matter how old the PC is, he’s still 1st level. How could he have fought this villian, and survived, and still only be level 1? It sounds similar to when some new players want their backstory to be they were the pirate king, or the head of the knightly order. You have to remind them that at 1st level they aren’t the head of anything. That’s a goal their character can work towards, but that’s not where they start. It sounds like you’re trying to explain that, which is good. Just try to stay on top of it, or it might become a problem in future campaigns, as well.
I also think you can place too high a value on twists/surprise reveals in your writing. It sounds like what the player has accidentally read has made them more excited about your story, and I wouldn't too readily throw away that much player buy-in and story work when it seems to be working.
If what your player read concerns boss fight mechanics that mean they'll just waltz through it, then you can change those mechanics, or if it contained details about the villain's plan that they can now stop before they happen, then that can be tweaked, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. You still have other players for whom the twist will still be a surprise, and the one player who knows what's up sounds like they'll still have fun.
The prior posts offer great advice. Personally, I would allow the PC to keep the knowledge, but try to add an unknown motivation behind the BBEG’s activities. Maybe there is a threat to the BBEG that could disrupt his evil plan and he is trying to prevent this. Even the attack on the PC's village hundreds of years ago might have a different motivation than the PC expects.
A dual prophecy trope could work well here. Unbeknownst to the PC, the BBEG’s goal is threatened by a prophecy. This might even be a well known prophecy across the land. But, being much older and wiser, the BBEG interprets it differently. For example the prophecy that vaguely implies a child of light will be born and will be a beacon of man. To a commoner, this sounds like a leader of man who will help fight evil. To the centuries old BBEG, this means the child will attract an ancient dark evil of the cosmos that desires to consume everything, including his goals. Or, "when the child of light draws the blood of evil, darkness will fall." Again, this sounds like a good thing, right? But, this is actually a warning that if the blood is drawn, then darkness will fall upon the world. From what? Who knows.
I also 100% agree with Xalthu, a level 1 PC has never come into direct contact with this BBEG simply because the BBEG too powerful and would destroy them without breaking a sweat. At best, they have learned this information by following bread crumbs over the years, talking to others impacted by their evil and hearing rumors. They may have come close to seeing the BBEG, but they are always gone upon arrival.
I liked Character77006's idea, and I have my own take of it.
Try saying that the villain's powers are fluid or growing, and then hit the character with something they didn't expect. After all: it makes sense that as your players get stronger and find new powers that the villain would do it too! Perhaps they gained a level in Warlock (if they have class levels) because they made a dark pact to enhance their power? Or perhaps a bit of Oathbreaker Paladin?
Another idea: If you don't want their character to know so much about the villain, just tell the player that their knowledge of the villain should remain above-table. Have them roleplay their character as if their character doesn't know all that stuff about the villain. Or they just don't know as much.
I myself haven't had issues like this before this is just what I'd do and what I've seen done by other DMs.
Everyone else has offered great advice that I’ve not got a lot to add to but I will offer a bit of criticism instead and that’s that the player seems to have major main character syndrome and you’re at risk of feeding into that. If one player has a stronger connection to the BBEG than any of the others, especially if they’re trying to add previous encounters with them into their back story, if they think they should know more about the campaign than the other players, and if everyone else’s backstories don’t tie in to the main plot than you have to be really careful as the DM that the campaign doesn’t become “The Adventures of X and a couple of other dudes that follow him around”
I'm going to add something here that I don't think many people like hearing on the internet.
'Spoilers' don't spoil anything
Sure, maybe you don't like hearing that your favourite character dies in an upcoming book/film/TV show. Thing is the mere fact that the character dies isn't really as impactful as how and why they die. Was it a heroic sacrifice? Was it a long overdue just desserts for their past crimes? Was it a terrible tragic accident that will snap the other characters back in reality showing that life is short and precious?
The story of a TTRPG campaign invariably is about the player characters, not the main villain. You might know for example that your big bad is a Tarrasque, you might know all their strengths and weaknesses...does that really take away from the threat? Think Jurassic Park - we all know that the T-Rex is going to be made out as this big bitey animal that can't see you if you don't move. That in fact doesn't spoil anything. It actually builds into classic storytelling tropes. We the audience know that if that character even twitches the T-Rex will eat them. It's the Hitchcock's bomb theory at work. Show the audience people around a table and it's a basic scene. Show the audience a ticking bomb beneath the table and now you have suspense, anticipation, and drama.
Make the spoilers work for you. The audience in your case are the players. And if your players have a healthy line between what they as players know and what their characters know...well even knowing that will help to build the tension within future conflicts between them and the bad guy.
Sure, maybe the players now know why the BBEG goes round capturing certain people, but the characters don't. And internally a frustration, a tension can be built around the players knowing what the solution is, but the characters not quite getting the solution. Not quite having enough pieces of the puzzle to work out the why. This is a tension that can be utilised by a GM to help enhance the story rather than weaken it.
If used right, this player in question can even be an ally in building this tension. Have them be a patsy in the group. Ask them maybe to play up being nervous when they are investigating things. Let the group know that quite by accident that player knows why failing these rolls would be bad for the party. If your players trust each other, if they trust that this player is nervous because said person know something they don't...yeah it can actually be bad. As much as I hate CR as a show, think about how the players react when Mercer goes and whispers in a player's ear or when a secret note gets handed out. This gets played up largely because spoilers when used well don't spoil anything - they act as another tool in the kit that the GM can use to enhance enjoyment of a story.
As a storyteller professionally (actor, director, published screen, stage and novel writer) I hate when I hear audiences moan that their friends spoiled something for them. It's often a child's response and cuts out that largely many 'spoilers' aren't really spoiling things, they're just letting you know that a specific thing happened. You likely won't know how or why it happened which is the entire journey that good storytelling will take you on. My antagonist in a current campaign literally has the name Gyltend. It's a corruption of the old english for 'Guilty'. I have players whose first languages are more germanic and as such they've probably known from the first time of meeting this person that Gyltend isn't the paper-pushing assistant. Spoilers don't spoil anything.
I'm going to add something here that I don't think many people like hearing on the internet.
'Spoilers' don't spoil anything
Sure, maybe you don't like hearing that your favourite character dies in an upcoming book/film/TV show. Thing is the mere fact that the character dies isn't really as impactful as how and why they die. Was it a heroic sacrifice? Was it a long overdue just desserts for their past crimes? Was it a terrible tragic accident that will snap the other characters back in reality showing that life is short and precious?
It doesn’t seem so much the problem that the player has some spoilers. Yes, if you get spoiled that “this character dies” it may not be that big a deal, but if someone shows you the exact script before you even start the show, you know how and why they died, which, as you said, is the most impactful part. Assuming the DM had quite a lot written down about the BBEG, it most likely will have information like that.
Quote from martintheactor>> The story of a TTRPG campaign invariably is about the player characters, not the main villain. You might know for example that your big bad is a Tarrasque, you might know all their strengths and weaknesses...does that really take away from the threat? Think Jurassic Park - we all know that the T-Rex is going to be made out as this big bitey animal that can't see you if you don't move. That in fact doesn't spoil anything. It actually builds into classic storytelling tropes. We the audience know that if that character even twitches the T-Rex will eat them. It's the Hitchcock's bomb theory at work. Show the audience people around a table and it's a basic scene. Show the audience a ticking bomb beneath the table and now you have suspense, anticipation, and drama.
This can absolutely work but so can hiding the villain. Giving little hints and clues towards who or what is the villain is how so many mysteries and horror movies work. For example, The Thing is seen as a great movie and a cult classic because of its mystery element. Another example would be It Follows. It was a great success because, while you know about the entity, you’re never sure if it’s there, who it could be.
Make the spoilers work for you. The audience in your case are the players. And if your players have a healthy line between what they as players know and what their characters know...well even knowing that will help to build the tension within future conflicts between them and the bad guy.
Sure, maybe the players now know why the BBEG goes round capturing certain people, but the characters don't. And internally a frustration, a tension can be built around the players knowing what the solution is, but the characters not quite getting the solution. Not quite having enough pieces of the puzzle to work out the why. This is a tension that can be utilised by a GM to help enhance the story rather than weaken it.
Again, this may work, but the player to me doesn’t seem to know the boundaries between player and character. From what we know so far, they pushed the DM to tell him, accidentally read everything about the villain, and now wants their character to know every single detail he’s seen. This also seems unfair to the other players as the player hasn’t said that the others should know anything. This player and his character are the only ones who know, and as plaguescarred said, it seems like it could be a major case of main character syndrome.
As a storyteller professionally (actor, director, published screen, stage and novel writer) I hate when I hear audiences moan that their friends spoiled something for them. It's often a child's response and cuts out that largely many 'spoilers' aren't really spoiling things, they're just letting you know that a specific thing happened.
I’m not sure what spoilers you’ve been hearing, but one of my friends (who I have now cut off), told me in detail, everything about a game that I planned to get. Why the twist happens, how the character does something and why. It elicits a childish response because, most of the time, it’s a childish action and something someone does to hurt someone. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve heard spoilers like “that person dies” but it doesn’t create childish responses because it’s not done to be harmful. What this player is telling the DM to me seems harmful, as he doesn’t want to bargain at all. He knows everything, so his character does, and he is upset because the DM wants to change up the character because of that.
I'm leaning towards N47...'s view here. Accidentally reading the entire notes on a person could be fine if the person is capable of compartmentalizing player from character. The character hasn't read any of that, and therefore should only know what the CHARACTER reasonably knows. But if the person doesn't want to compartmentalize the information, that's a sign they might become a problem.
I'm not sure how a person acting in good faith accidentally reads ALL your notes, instead of going "whoops I shouldn't have seen this, I'm going to stop reading." You really need to firmly emphasize that your character does NOT know most of the secret lore.
Humans love storytelling, and exercising their imagination to come up with stories and story arcs. But in D&D, storytelling is different - you're supposed to start with the hook, and let the rest play out in real time. Every time I've come up with a hook, I emphasize that "where does this go? I have no idea." At most I throw out a handful of possible directions to spur the imagination.
Alternatively, you could handle this like Character77006 suggests: He wants his character to know all the info he's learned out of character? He wants to have confrontations with the bad guy in the past? He may not have had confrontations, but he might have come to the bad guy's notice, in which case, the bad guy has arranged for some false information to accidentally leak on purpose.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I've got a problem in a campaign I'm about to start running. I was working with the players to create their backstories and one player wanted a villain to be connected to theirs. I really liked the idea, so I agreed and gave them a bit of info about the villain. The short-short version is that the PC is an elf that was attacked as a child and now they are hunting for the leader of their attackers. The villain is meant to be a mastermind type, that they slowly uncover the plot of. However, the player really wanted to know more about the villain, explaining that since he's an elf and he's been hunting this guy for hundreds of years he should have more info. I gave him a bit, but he wanted to know way more, like the villains name, his powers, his goals, he even suggested that his character should have fought the villain a few times. I tried to explain that knowing more beforehand makes the villain much more boring and excludes the rest of the party from the game. Nothing that happens in a backstory is ever as impactful as something that happens at the table. He didn't really get what I was trying to say.
Recently, through no fault of his, he accentually read my notes about the villain and it spoils almost everything. All the twists, his secret powers, his goals. Everything. So I tell this player that since he read everything about this villain I have to scrap the villain and come up with a new one. He is adamant however that its fine, again because his character has been hunting the villain for so long. I explained that this doesn't leave any room for me as DM to craft an interesting narrative around this villain. He is disappointed and doesn't want me to replace the villain, but honestly, I just wouldn't even what to do with a character like that. The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things. But this player insists that it would still be a good story.
Am I missing something or do I just need to tell this player that he's wrong and move on? I'm open to any suggestions.
The answer is both and/or neither.
The villain is obviously a powerful one who has lived for hundreds of years. He would also be extremely smart as well. He would know the PC is chasing him. Therefore, the villain has probably left clues to find. The clues are not 100% accurate, they are in short false. The villain is doing a disinformation campaign.
Basically, the villain has "purposely" gave the PC all the information/clues the PC read/found/knows.
Now instead of redoing the villain, tweak him. if your PC thinks he has lasers coming out of his eyes, instead it is lightning out of the villains toes. The PC will prep for lasers but "shock" it is not lasers it is something else.
The plot for that villain revolves around figuring out why he captures certain people, what powers allow him to go unnoticed, and he does to those he captures. But this player already knows all of those things.
Two things will probably result form this, the PC will see changes and therefore doubt everything he read because it is not lining up, or he will keep believing those things he read are still verbatim, and will actually weaken the party as they Buff for the wrong power.
The above poster has a really good idea. Another option could be that the villian the PC is hunting isn’t actually the villain. Let the player think it is. After a few levels, let him have his confrontation and win. Then he finds some notes or letters that reveal the villian he’s been hunting is really just a flunky. There’s a bigger bad guy pulling the strings. That’s the one who ordered the attack on the PC’s village. But why? Bonus points if you can tie the why to another character’s back story, or the main plot or both, and weave the campaign a little tighter.
And to the issue of the player not getting that he wouldn’t know much about the villian. No matter how old the PC is, he’s still 1st level. How could he have fought this villian, and survived, and still only be level 1? It sounds similar to when some new players want their backstory to be they were the pirate king, or the head of the knightly order. You have to remind them that at 1st level they aren’t the head of anything. That’s a goal their character can work towards, but that’s not where they start. It sounds like you’re trying to explain that, which is good. Just try to stay on top of it, or it might become a problem in future campaigns, as well.
I also think you can place too high a value on twists/surprise reveals in your writing. It sounds like what the player has accidentally read has made them more excited about your story, and I wouldn't too readily throw away that much player buy-in and story work when it seems to be working.
If what your player read concerns boss fight mechanics that mean they'll just waltz through it, then you can change those mechanics, or if it contained details about the villain's plan that they can now stop before they happen, then that can be tweaked, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. You still have other players for whom the twist will still be a surprise, and the one player who knows what's up sounds like they'll still have fun.
The prior posts offer great advice. Personally, I would allow the PC to keep the knowledge, but try to add an unknown motivation behind the BBEG’s activities. Maybe there is a threat to the BBEG that could disrupt his evil plan and he is trying to prevent this. Even the attack on the PC's village hundreds of years ago might have a different motivation than the PC expects.
A dual prophecy trope could work well here. Unbeknownst to the PC, the BBEG’s goal is threatened by a prophecy. This might even be a well known prophecy across the land. But, being much older and wiser, the BBEG interprets it differently. For example the prophecy that vaguely implies a child of light will be born and will be a beacon of man. To a commoner, this sounds like a leader of man who will help fight evil. To the centuries old BBEG, this means the child will attract an ancient dark evil of the cosmos that desires to consume everything, including his goals. Or, "when the child of light draws the blood of evil, darkness will fall." Again, this sounds like a good thing, right? But, this is actually a warning that if the blood is drawn, then darkness will fall upon the world. From what? Who knows.
I also 100% agree with Xalthu, a level 1 PC has never come into direct contact with this BBEG simply because the BBEG too powerful and would destroy them without breaking a sweat. At best, they have learned this information by following bread crumbs over the years, talking to others impacted by their evil and hearing rumors. They may have come close to seeing the BBEG, but they are always gone upon arrival.
I liked Character77006's idea, and I have my own take of it.
Try saying that the villain's powers are fluid or growing, and then hit the character with something they didn't expect. After all: it makes sense that as your players get stronger and find new powers that the villain would do it too! Perhaps they gained a level in Warlock (if they have class levels) because they made a dark pact to enhance their power? Or perhaps a bit of Oathbreaker Paladin?
Another idea: If you don't want their character to know so much about the villain, just tell the player that their knowledge of the villain should remain above-table. Have them roleplay their character as if their character doesn't know all that stuff about the villain. Or they just don't know as much.
I myself haven't had issues like this before this is just what I'd do and what I've seen done by other DMs.
Everyone else has offered great advice that I’ve not got a lot to add to but I will offer a bit of criticism instead and that’s that the player seems to have major main character syndrome and you’re at risk of feeding into that. If one player has a stronger connection to the BBEG than any of the others, especially if they’re trying to add previous encounters with them into their back story, if they think they should know more about the campaign than the other players, and if everyone else’s backstories don’t tie in to the main plot than you have to be really careful as the DM that the campaign doesn’t become “The Adventures of X and a couple of other dudes that follow him around”
Another twist if you keep the villain is to have it, or some of its powers, in fact be its Sentient weapon instead.
What if the villan is not BBEG but Thranaxx his magic scimitar?
I'm going to add something here that I don't think many people like hearing on the internet.
'Spoilers' don't spoil anything
Sure, maybe you don't like hearing that your favourite character dies in an upcoming book/film/TV show. Thing is the mere fact that the character dies isn't really as impactful as how and why they die. Was it a heroic sacrifice? Was it a long overdue just desserts for their past crimes? Was it a terrible tragic accident that will snap the other characters back in reality showing that life is short and precious?
The story of a TTRPG campaign invariably is about the player characters, not the main villain. You might know for example that your big bad is a Tarrasque, you might know all their strengths and weaknesses...does that really take away from the threat? Think Jurassic Park - we all know that the T-Rex is going to be made out as this big bitey animal that can't see you if you don't move. That in fact doesn't spoil anything. It actually builds into classic storytelling tropes. We the audience know that if that character even twitches the T-Rex will eat them. It's the Hitchcock's bomb theory at work. Show the audience people around a table and it's a basic scene. Show the audience a ticking bomb beneath the table and now you have suspense, anticipation, and drama.
Make the spoilers work for you. The audience in your case are the players. And if your players have a healthy line between what they as players know and what their characters know...well even knowing that will help to build the tension within future conflicts between them and the bad guy.
Sure, maybe the players now know why the BBEG goes round capturing certain people, but the characters don't. And internally a frustration, a tension can be built around the players knowing what the solution is, but the characters not quite getting the solution. Not quite having enough pieces of the puzzle to work out the why. This is a tension that can be utilised by a GM to help enhance the story rather than weaken it.
If used right, this player in question can even be an ally in building this tension. Have them be a patsy in the group. Ask them maybe to play up being nervous when they are investigating things. Let the group know that quite by accident that player knows why failing these rolls would be bad for the party. If your players trust each other, if they trust that this player is nervous because said person know something they don't...yeah it can actually be bad. As much as I hate CR as a show, think about how the players react when Mercer goes and whispers in a player's ear or when a secret note gets handed out. This gets played up largely because spoilers when used well don't spoil anything - they act as another tool in the kit that the GM can use to enhance enjoyment of a story.
As a storyteller professionally (actor, director, published screen, stage and novel writer) I hate when I hear audiences moan that their friends spoiled something for them. It's often a child's response and cuts out that largely many 'spoilers' aren't really spoiling things, they're just letting you know that a specific thing happened. You likely won't know how or why it happened which is the entire journey that good storytelling will take you on. My antagonist in a current campaign literally has the name Gyltend. It's a corruption of the old english for 'Guilty'. I have players whose first languages are more germanic and as such they've probably known from the first time of meeting this person that Gyltend isn't the paper-pushing assistant. Spoilers don't spoil anything.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
It doesn’t seem so much the problem that the player has some spoilers. Yes, if you get spoiled that “this character dies” it may not be that big a deal, but if someone shows you the exact script before you even start the show, you know how and why they died, which, as you said, is the most impactful part. Assuming the DM had quite a lot written down about the BBEG, it most likely will have information like that.
This can absolutely work but so can hiding the villain. Giving little hints and clues towards who or what is the villain is how so many mysteries and horror movies work. For example, The Thing is seen as a great movie and a cult classic because of its mystery element. Another example would be It Follows. It was a great success because, while you know about the entity, you’re never sure if it’s there, who it could be.
Again, this may work, but the player to me doesn’t seem to know the boundaries between player and character. From what we know so far, they pushed the DM to tell him, accidentally read everything about the villain, and now wants their character to know every single detail he’s seen. This also seems unfair to the other players as the player hasn’t said that the others should know anything. This player and his character are the only ones who know, and as plaguescarred said, it seems like it could be a major case of main character syndrome.
I’m not sure what spoilers you’ve been hearing, but one of my friends (who I have now cut off), told me in detail, everything about a game that I planned to get. Why the twist happens, how the character does something and why. It elicits a childish response because, most of the time, it’s a childish action and something someone does to hurt someone. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve heard spoilers like “that person dies” but it doesn’t create childish responses because it’s not done to be harmful. What this player is telling the DM to me seems harmful, as he doesn’t want to bargain at all. He knows everything, so his character does, and he is upset because the DM wants to change up the character because of that.
I'm leaning towards N47...'s view here. Accidentally reading the entire notes on a person could be fine if the person is capable of compartmentalizing player from character. The character hasn't read any of that, and therefore should only know what the CHARACTER reasonably knows. But if the person doesn't want to compartmentalize the information, that's a sign they might become a problem.
I'm not sure how a person acting in good faith accidentally reads ALL your notes, instead of going "whoops I shouldn't have seen this, I'm going to stop reading." You really need to firmly emphasize that your character does NOT know most of the secret lore.
Humans love storytelling, and exercising their imagination to come up with stories and story arcs. But in D&D, storytelling is different - you're supposed to start with the hook, and let the rest play out in real time. Every time I've come up with a hook, I emphasize that "where does this go? I have no idea." At most I throw out a handful of possible directions to spur the imagination.
Alternatively, you could handle this like Character77006 suggests: He wants his character to know all the info he's learned out of character? He wants to have confrontations with the bad guy in the past? He may not have had confrontations, but he might have come to the bad guy's notice, in which case, the bad guy has arranged for some false information to accidentally leak on purpose.