NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8446994" data-attributes="member: 29398">I don't assume any such thing!I also want to give the scout's player the ability (dare I say, agency) to give the report in his own words when he returns.  This allows the player, in-character as the scout, to (intentionally or otherwise) ignore or emphasize particular elements of what the scout discovered; while also being far more believable in that getting an own-words report is how it'd work in real life.Obviously if the waiting party have means of scrying the scout that's a different matter, but that's pretty rare IME at anything other than high levels.For me, both as DM and player, metagaming ruins the game.  People metagaming has been the cause of more out-of-character arguments over the years than has any other single element - even alignment, if you can believe that! - as some players just can't help themselves from (ab)using player knowledge their characters wouldn't have and, further, can't help themselves from telling other players what their characters should do in situations their own PCs have no knowledge of.Provided the waiting PCs allow a reasonable amount of in-game time to pass before getting worried about their scout, fine. (most of the time they set a vague in-character deadline e.g. "If I'm not back by dawn send in a search party 'cause it means I've found trouble I can't handle")It's when the waiting PCs start mounting a rescue mission as soon as (unknown to them) the scout finds trouble that believability goes out the window.  Or when non-involved players keep making suggestions instead of letting the scout's player make his own decisions about what the scout will do, where it will go, etc.</blockquote>

Verification