Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
An "Insightful" Question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 7499753" data-attributes="member: 1465"><p>I found the original post to be a bit confusing, so I am not sure I'm answering the actual question here...</p><p></p><p>I think there can be problems depending on what kind of rolling procedure the DM chooses to use, so choose wisely <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>In the scenario when an NPC is talking (possibly lying), the DM usually makes a Deception roll in secret, or no roll at all if there is no lie.</p><p></p><p>Then there is a first choice: the DM may decide to give the PC a chance at spotting the lie only if the player declares so, or she may decide to give that chance anyway, just like you often get a Perception roll to notice something even without asking. Whatever the choice here I don't think it affects the problem much.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, when an Insight check is rolled, the DM can choose to roll herself (hidden) or have the player roll (in the open). Quite obviously, if you want to make sure the player won't metagame after seeing the check result, then just do not let the player roll in the open, but have the DM make the check instead and hide the results.</p><p></p><p>At the same time however, I don't think you <em>have</em> to include the chance of a critical failure in every roll, which in this case would be to completely misunderstand the NPC's intentions. So another valid option, is to let the player roll in the open, but on a failure have the result be simply "you have no idea".</p><p></p><p>The problem exists only if you want to both have the PC roll in the open <em>and</em> have an opposite reading on a very low roll.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Mmm... I don't think <em>passive</em> checks are such problem when used in a <em>contest</em>. As long as at least one of the two parties is actually rolling, there is no 'baseline' of automatic success/failure (well, at least unless the bonus difference between the two is huge). I think the problem you are referring to happens when passive checks are used against a static DC.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 7499753, member: 1465"] I found the original post to be a bit confusing, so I am not sure I'm answering the actual question here... I think there can be problems depending on what kind of rolling procedure the DM chooses to use, so choose wisely :) In the scenario when an NPC is talking (possibly lying), the DM usually makes a Deception roll in secret, or no roll at all if there is no lie. Then there is a first choice: the DM may decide to give the PC a chance at spotting the lie only if the player declares so, or she may decide to give that chance anyway, just like you often get a Perception roll to notice something even without asking. Whatever the choice here I don't think it affects the problem much. On the other hand, when an Insight check is rolled, the DM can choose to roll herself (hidden) or have the player roll (in the open). Quite obviously, if you want to make sure the player won't metagame after seeing the check result, then just do not let the player roll in the open, but have the DM make the check instead and hide the results. At the same time however, I don't think you [I]have[/I] to include the chance of a critical failure in every roll, which in this case would be to completely misunderstand the NPC's intentions. So another valid option, is to let the player roll in the open, but on a failure have the result be simply "you have no idea". The problem exists only if you want to both have the PC roll in the open [I]and[/I] have an opposite reading on a very low roll. Mmm... I don't think [I]passive[/I] checks are such problem when used in a [I]contest[/I]. As long as at least one of the two parties is actually rolling, there is no 'baseline' of automatic success/failure (well, at least unless the bonus difference between the two is huge). I think the problem you are referring to happens when passive checks are used against a static DC. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
An "Insightful" Question
Top