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 LIVE! 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
If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
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="Oofta" data-source="post: 7589265" data-attributes="member: 6801845"><p>I seem to be falling flat on my face in expressing what is just my opinion and way of doing things. What I thought at the time was just light-hearted sarcasm is upsetting people and I get too caught up in the argument/debate at times.</p><p></p><p>In any case, different people play for different reasons, I make no claim one way or another that my way is better. If I don't understand something, it's okay. It's difficult at best to really understand other people play style without actually being at the table. In addition, not every DM is going to work for every player. That's okay.</p><p></p><p> [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]: I will <em>allow</em> for an insight check on someone telling the truth, in general I won't ask for one. People only get vague answers for insight checks something like "they seem to be telling the truth" or maybe "they seem to be a bit nervous, but your not sure why".</p><p></p><p>So I never tell anyone with 100% certainty that someone is lying or telling the truth with an insight check. It's just a skill, not magic. Even if an NPC is using deception, the insight check won't be a guarantee more of a feeling that they're hiding something or their unconsciously glancing at someone or something nervously.</p><p></p><p>I always allow people to ask if they can do any skill check. I'll only tell them they can't if it should be obvious from the perspective of the PC that it's not possible. Superman may be able to leap buildings with a single bound, PCs by and large cannot. But otherwise they're always allowed to try even if it will fail because it reflects the effort. I don't care if I know the skill check won't alter the outcome. In the case of the OP it's not obvious from the perspective of the PC that the skill check will always have the same result.</p><p></p><p> [MENTION=6919838]5ekyu[/MENTION], I pre-map almost nothing. I'm quite lazy and rarely even pre-draw maps lower than region or maybe a city down to the neighborhood level. I gave up on trying to figure out what my players were going to do ahead of time a long time ago. So I focus on organizations, conflicts, alliances, general environment and ecology. But I do set things in place that I think make sense. If the NPC should have traps, they probably will. Related to that, I almost never use complex traps unless they're powered by magic or maintained by undead/automatons because I find them silly.</p><p></p><p>While I frequently have multiple ways around obstacles or allow the players to come up with something I didn't think of, describing how you're doing what I deem a skill check is not one of them. Coming up with a different way to do the skill check (arcana to freeze the trap with Ray of Frost for example) is fine. Some people indicate that they will allow a good description to bypass just about any obstacle and feel like they were wasting time if it does not. That's just not my style of play, although they may get advantage on the check or inspiration.</p><p></p><p>Players are allowed to take 10 on mundane tasks like keeping an eye out for traps so there's never a need to ask for an investigation check every 10 feet. In the same way, if there is no time pressure and no setback on failure they may get an auto-success if the task is possible. They may also get an auto-success if their skill is high enough that a 1 succeeds.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 7589265, member: 6801845"] I seem to be falling flat on my face in expressing what is just my opinion and way of doing things. What I thought at the time was just light-hearted sarcasm is upsetting people and I get too caught up in the argument/debate at times. In any case, different people play for different reasons, I make no claim one way or another that my way is better. If I don't understand something, it's okay. It's difficult at best to really understand other people play style without actually being at the table. In addition, not every DM is going to work for every player. That's okay. [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION]: I will [I]allow[/I] for an insight check on someone telling the truth, in general I won't ask for one. People only get vague answers for insight checks something like "they seem to be telling the truth" or maybe "they seem to be a bit nervous, but your not sure why". So I never tell anyone with 100% certainty that someone is lying or telling the truth with an insight check. It's just a skill, not magic. Even if an NPC is using deception, the insight check won't be a guarantee more of a feeling that they're hiding something or their unconsciously glancing at someone or something nervously. I always allow people to ask if they can do any skill check. I'll only tell them they can't if it should be obvious from the perspective of the PC that it's not possible. Superman may be able to leap buildings with a single bound, PCs by and large cannot. But otherwise they're always allowed to try even if it will fail because it reflects the effort. I don't care if I know the skill check won't alter the outcome. In the case of the OP it's not obvious from the perspective of the PC that the skill check will always have the same result. [MENTION=6919838]5ekyu[/MENTION], I pre-map almost nothing. I'm quite lazy and rarely even pre-draw maps lower than region or maybe a city down to the neighborhood level. I gave up on trying to figure out what my players were going to do ahead of time a long time ago. So I focus on organizations, conflicts, alliances, general environment and ecology. But I do set things in place that I think make sense. If the NPC should have traps, they probably will. Related to that, I almost never use complex traps unless they're powered by magic or maintained by undead/automatons because I find them silly. While I frequently have multiple ways around obstacles or allow the players to come up with something I didn't think of, describing how you're doing what I deem a skill check is not one of them. Coming up with a different way to do the skill check (arcana to freeze the trap with Ray of Frost for example) is fine. Some people indicate that they will allow a good description to bypass just about any obstacle and feel like they were wasting time if it does not. That's just not my style of play, although they may get advantage on the check or inspiration. Players are allowed to take 10 on mundane tasks like keeping an eye out for traps so there's never a need to ask for an investigation check every 10 feet. In the same way, if there is no time pressure and no setback on failure they may get an auto-success if the task is possible. They may also get an auto-success if their skill is high enough that a 1 succeeds. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
If an NPC is telling the truth, what's the Insight DC to know they're telling the truth?
Top