D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[Charlaquin]

I mean, the difference is very straightforward:

• Rules are rules
• Guidance is sorta rules but the DM can ignore
• Also, the DM can ignore all the rules because rulings not rules

Right, so if both rules and guidance can support the DM in making a ruling, and the DM can ignore guidance and can also ignore rules… What’s the difference again?

 

[Lanefan]

I don't see how this can be abused. The orc tries to intimidate them. The player decides they are or aren't intimidated. That's fine.

It's abused when the player decides every single time that the PC isn't intimidated, unless there's mechanics to back it up (e.g. a failed save vs a Fear effect); no matter which PC that player is playing or what the circumstances are.

 

[Mordhau]

Right, so if both rules and guidance can support the DM in making a ruling, and the DM can ignore guidance and can also ignore rules… What’s the difference again?

Only rules can be turned alchemically into RAW and then used to make entities of pure theory that win the game on a transcendental plane.

 

[Lanefan]

The player who would decide that their character is not going to be intimidated no matter what the situation described by the DM, is probably not the kind of player who is going to be able to work well with a system that gives their character some kind of enforced direction anyway.

IME it's quite the opposite: players will generally bow to things forced by the game mechanics but if it ain't forced, it ain't happening.

 

[iserith]

It's abused when the player decides every single time that the PC isn't intimidated, unless there's mechanics to back it up (e.g. a failed save vs a Fear effect); no matter which PC that player is playing or what the circumstances are.

Why does it matter to you that the PC never describes their character as intimidated? Why is that abuse?

 

[Faolyn]

I'm not sure where you're getting this. I've said what Wisdom (Insight) resolves. As well, always trust the DM. Don't always trust NPCs!

So if the DM says that the NPC is acting fidgety while saying something, what does that mean? Because as I just said, that can be interpreted in several ways.

Which is why making an Insight check is good, because then we can straight-up learn, with minimal ambiguity, that we (the PC) feel that the NPC is being evasive. I as the player don't have worry that I'm gotten what the DM may or may not have meant to be a clue, and I as the DM don't have to worry that my players understood my hints. (This is doubly true for me because I'm an aspie and sometimes don't read people well.)

 

[Charlaquin]

So if the DM says that the NPC is acting fidgety while saying something, what does that mean? Because as I just said, that can be interpreted in several ways.

Which is why making an Insight check is good, because then we can straight-up learn, with minimal ambiguity, that we (the PC) feel that the NPC is being evasive. I as the player don't have worry that I'm gotten what the DM may or may not have meant to be a clue, and I as the DM don't have to worry that my players understood my hints. (This is doubly true for me because I'm an aspie and sometimes don't read people well.)

Indeed! I actually agree with you. That’s why an NPC acting fidgety is a useful telegraph to the players that they might want to consider taking an action to try and discern the NPC’s intentions - which may indeed require a successful Wisdom (Insight) check to accomplish. The fidget is akin to the slight draft or off-colored section of tile in a dungeon. There are many things it could indicate - a trap? A secret door? A mimic? You might be able to make a reasonable guess and act on your suspicions, or you may consider it safer to first take steps to verify them. The decision is yours to make.

 

[Faolyn]

I don't see how this can be abused. The orc tries to intimidate them. The player decides they are or aren't intimidated. That's fine.

Because it's a role-playing game. If you unilaterally decide your character isn't intimidated, no matter how much bigger, tougher, scarier, or more powerful the other guy is, then you're not really role-playing. And you might be knocking other people out of their immersion in the process.

 

[Charlaquin]

Because it's a role-playing game. If you unilaterally decide your character isn't intimidated, no matter how much bigger, tougher, scarier, or more powerful the other guy is, then you're not really role-playing. And you might be knocking other people out of their immersion in the process.

Sure you are. You’re playing the role of someone who ain’t scared of nothing, nohow. That’s a legitimate choice.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

So if the DM says that the NPC is acting fidgety while saying something, what does that mean? Because as I just said, that can be interpreted in several ways.

Which is why making an Insight check is good, because then we can straight-up learn, with minimal ambiguity, that we (the PC) feel that the NPC is being evasive. I as the player don't have worry that I'm gotten what the DM may or may not have meant to be a clue, and I as the DM don't have to worry that my players understood my hints. (This is doubly true for me because I'm an aspie and sometimes don't read people well.)

Indeed! I actually agree with you. That’s why an NPC acting fidgety is a useful telegraph to the players that they might want to consider taking an action to try and discern the NPC’s intentions - which may indeed require a successful Wisdom (Insight) check to accomplish. The fidget is akin to the slight draft or off-colored section of tile in a dungeon. There are many things it could indicate - a trap? A secret door? A mimic? You might be able to make a reasonable guess and act on your suspicions, or you may consider it safer to first take steps to verify them. The decision is yours to make.

The check isn’t to determine how the PC feels, however. The player is already stating that their PC feels something is amiss and wants to check this NPC out further for signs of lying. The WIS(Insight) check called by the DM is to validate the feeling as right on a success or perhaps inconclusive on a failure or perhaps validated but with some other consequence on a failure (success with a setback). The player can then indicate how, if in any way, the PC’s feelings have then changed. The dice do not tell the player that.