I agree with everything except the last 2 , both CD is fine in my opinion . <| sep |> Let him get 1 grand slam before we start talking about 10 . Only Rod Laver has a grand slam in open era . <| sep |> Yeah , I wouldn ' t act on it if OOC I knew a party member was betraying me . But , let ' s run the hypothetical . As a player , I know character X is trying to betray us , but my character doesn ' t . When character X gets back from betraying us , DM says that they look somewhat reserved and distant , so I ask if I notice anything amiss and what I should roll . You ' re saying that ' s metagaming , acting on an in character description given by the DM . At what point would a character not be metagaming if they find out about the betrayal , because it sounds like the party is supposed to ignore any and all signs of deceit otherwise it ' s metagaming . What , if anything , would you do if the DM is giving you visual clues that something is off ? Well , I guess you wouldn ' t do anything because acting in information given by the DM in describing the situation is metagaming . If I ' m lining up a sniper shot , and the DM tells me the guard isn ' t surprised before I say anything about using Assassinate , acting on the description of events given by the DM is metagaming to you . We may have to agree to disagree on this . I ' m assuming that a DM describing the visuals of something happening means I can act on it . The guard no longer is surprised , the party member is acting strange . You think this is metagaming , I think the DM is giving me clues to interact with the world . At what point is the DM responsible to hold back because the character shouldn ' t know something ? If the DM says , There ' s an explosive rune across the room they probably shouldn ' t get mad when my character says there is an explosive rune across the room . But your character wouldn ' t know that , then why did you tell me that in the description of the room ? This might also stem from having DMs who have NPCs react to OOC conversations , which makes this a two way street . But thanks for assuming I ' m not acting like am adult when I play . I won ' t say you must be a jerk to play for since I don ' t know you outside this one post , but based on this I don ' t know how I would play in your game . Is it metagaming to know someone is armed after you go into detail about how they have multiple weapons on them ? Is it metagaming to know that the trail I ' m following goes left when you described footprints going left ? At some point , you as DM can ' t describe everything to me and expect nothing to happen . You told me the guard isn ' t surprised . That has no relevance until I declare Assassinate I still need to roll to hit before I declare the autocritical . But , I shouldn ' t take seriously your depictions of things or people , that would be metagaming apparently .