D&D 5E Using social skills on other PCs

[iserith]

Honestly. Just kill Insight. It's the only way to be sure.

It's really not a necessary function.

I'm fine with it. Okay, so they know the NPC is lying? What now? Can they do anything about it? Let's find out.

The real advantage for players is as I mentioned to sus out personal characteristics to advantage themselves in social interactions. But then that would require using those pesky DMG social interaction rules.

 

[Charlaquin]

I'm fine with it. Okay, so they know the NPC is lying? What now? Can they do anything about it? Let's find out.

The real advantage for players is as I mentioned to sus out personal characteristics to advantage themselves in social interactions. But then that would require using those pesky DMG social interaction rules.

Yeah, for the record, I would assume from what I know of how @iserith DMs, at their table it wouldn’t be that fidgeting is a reliable indicator that any character is lying. It would be a telegraph that this specific character fidgets as part of one of their background characteristics. Perhaps a Personality Trait or a Flaw. If you act on that, you might be able to determine what that characteristic is.

For example, I might try something like “As we’re talking with him, I pay close attention to when he fidgets to try and see if there’s any noticeable pattern behind it.” I imagine @iserith might then either tell me I notice a pattern and what it is, tell me I don’t notice any such pattern, or ask me to make a check of some sort. At a guess, maybe passive Wisdom, since it is an action my character would be continuously engaged in throughout the course of the conversation, to which I might suggest I add my proficiency bonus for Insight or Investigation if I have either skill. And if whatever trait is behind the fidgeting were to come up again before I announced a different action, @iserith might make a check for the NPC - perhaps Charisma (Deception) if the fidget is a tell and the character lies again, and if it fails to beat my passive Wisdom (+prof if I had a relevant one), @iserith would inform me that I recognize it’s a sign that he’s lying.

Just a hunch.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If you have every one of your characters as being the same in some way--such as never being intimidated--that's perfectly legitimate. It also does not make you a fun player to play with or GM for.

Now we are getting somewhere!

If somebody doesn’t like to play D&D the way you do, and it really spoils the fun for you…don’t play D&D with them!

Do you really need, or honestly even want, rules that try to force people to share your aesthetic preferences?

 

[iserith]

Yeah, for the record, I would assume from what I know of how @iserith DMs, at their table it wouldn’t be that fidgeting is a reliable indicator that any character is lying. It would be a telegraph that this specific character fidgets as part of one of their background characteristics. Perhaps a Personality Trait or a Flaw. If you act on that, you might be able to determine what that characteristic is.

For example, I might try something like “As we’re talking with him, I pay close attention to when he fidgets to try and see if there’s any noticeable pattern behind it.” I imagine @iserith might then either tell me I notice a pattern and what it is, tell me I don’t notice any such pattern, or ask me to make a check of some sort. At a guess, maybe passive Wisdom, since it is an action my character would be continuously engaged in throughout the course of the conversation, to which I might suggest I add my proficiency bonus for Insight or Investigation if I have either skill. And if whatever trait is behind the fidgeting were to come up again before I announced a different action, @iserith might make a check for the NPC - perhaps Charisma (Deception) if the fidget is a tell and the character lies again, and if it fails to beat my passive Wisdom (+prof if I had a relevant one), @iserith would inform me that I recognize it’s a sign that he’s lying.

Just a hunch.

Yes, though probably not passive Wisdom (Insight), but it depends on the length of the interaction. (These days I'm aligning passives more with 1 hour+ activities to put them on par with traveling.) I'm probably going to just pick a DC too rather than make it a contest. Everything else tracks and, upon success, you will have learned a personal characteristic which you can then leverage for advantage on subsequent checks, if any.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Honestly. Just kill Insight. It's the only way to be sure.

Nuke it from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.

 

[Lanefan]

Wait...seriously? You play with people who pass notes to the DM saying "so-and-so is cheating"?

Not so much "so and so is cheating", more like longer more-detailed versions of "I don't think so and so is playing in good faith". And chances are very high that if someone's passing me a note like that I've also already noticed the issue as well; the note just serves as confirmation that I'm not alone in my observations.

That said, I have once or twice in the (distant) past received notes that outright said "so and so is cheating", usually in an attempt to alert me to some - well, let's call it "creative" dice rolling.

 

[Charlaquin]

Not so much "so and so is cheating", more like longer more-detailed versions of "I don't think so and so is playing in good faith". And chances are very high that if someone's passing me a note like that I've also already noticed the issue as well; the note just serves as confirmation that I'm not alone in my observations.

That said, I have once or twice in the (distant) past received notes that outright said "so and so is cheating", usually in an attempt to alert me to some - well, let's call it "creative" dice rolling.

Gotta say, this sounds like an unpleasant environment to game in.

 

[Lanefan]

Do you similarly bring down the hammer if somebody plays a mysterious character with a dark past more than once or twice?

What if somebody plays only melee characters? Is that also bad roleplaying?

To me those are different things, in that playing a string of melee characters or a string of dark-shady-past characters doesn't really provide those characters any in-game advantage over anyone else. Playing a string of characters who won't be swayed by non-combat interactions does, over those players who will allow their PCs to be swayed by such things.

It comes down to either a) give those social abilities and skills some game-mechanical teeth (against PCs and NPCs alike) such that players can't blithely choose to ignore them, or b) get rid of them entirely and truly let people play as they will.

My preference is for b) above.

 

[iserith]

Gotta say, this sounds like an unpleasant environment to game in.

I'm with every quest-giving innkeep - nobody likes a rat.

 

[Lanefan]

I still can't see why that is abuse. That's just people not portraying their characters in a way you prefer. Worthy of a conversation perhaps to get on the same page with regard to the expectations of how the table plays, but hardly abuse in my view.

In D&D 5e, personal characteristics and Inspiration are the way to incentivize portraying the character in a consistent, established manner. Not that any of the people who seem the most concerned about how other people portray their characters ever seem to use it...

Inspiration is the type of meta-mechanic that if I could go back in time and prevent its invention I would.

But yes, there need to be some carrots in with the sticks I suppose.

I'd use xp as the carrot except I know myself well enough to realize I'd inevitably end up playing favourites, which is awful; and the same is true of any other DM-controlled reward system like that. If it was player-driven my concern (borne out by experience in other ways) is that meta-alliances would form, with particular players always rewarding each other and no-one else.