NPC Deception/Persuasion and player agency

[Wolfpack48]

I've played in a number of scenarios where the entire premise of the adventure was a deception, and the questgiver was an unreliable narrator. In these cases, there usually aren't any rolls for deception - the entire setup is entirely plausible and no reason is given for not believing it unless a player specifically asks or investigates. In that case, they'd need to gather more info to prove the deception.

That is to say, deceiving the characters may also mean deceiving the players.

 

[dpdx]

Isn't Deception playable as an opposed check to Persuasion or other countervailing skill that makes sense? If so, why shouldn't an NPC or even a monster have ranks in it?

 

[Celebrim]

Isn't Deception playable as an opposed check to Persuasion or other countervailing skill that makes sense? If so, why shouldn't an NPC or even a monster have ranks in it?

I let players make rolls to see if their characters can see through deception, but I don't force players to play their characters as deceived if they themselves aren't, simply because I enforce no rules on metagaming.

I allow players to play their characters while under a compulsion for convenience, and they are generally good about it. But I try not to make mind control such a regular thing as to greatly interfere with agency.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If you dig through the 5e MM you will find (some) monsters with ranks in social skills. Some people have cited this as evidence that, in 5e at least, NPCs are meant to be able to “use” these skills on PC.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Isn't Deception playable as an opposed check to Persuasion or other countervailing skill that makes sense? If so, why shouldn't an NPC or even a monster have ranks in it?

The question isn't whether there's an easy way to mechanic it; the question is about enforcement when directed at a PC.

 

[Celebrim]

If you dig through the 5e MM you will find (some) monsters with ranks in social skills. Some people have cited this as evidence that, in 5e at least, NPCs are meant to be able to “use” these skills on PC.

One of the things that greatly annoyed me about every edition after 3e is that the monsters had removed from their stat blocks all the minor powers and skills that had to do with establishing how they could interact with other NPCs and were slimmed down to just entities that existed in combat and were otherwise run by fiat.

 

[Bill Zebub]

One of the things that greatly annoyed me about every edition after 3e is that the monsters had removed from their stat blocks all the minor powers and skills that had to do with establishing how they could interact with other NPCs and were slimmed down to just entities that existed in combat and were otherwise run by fiat.

If you kill them (and take their stuff) fast enough, there’s no chance for social interaction anyway.

 

[payn]

If you kill them (and take their stuff) fast enough, there’s no chance for social interaction anyway.

Loot first ask questions of the dead later.

 

[Micah Sweet]

One of the things that greatly annoyed me about every edition after 3e is that the monsters had removed from their stat blocks all the minor powers and skills that had to do with establishing how they could interact with other NPCs and were slimmed down to just entities that existed in combat and were otherwise run by fiat.

Yup. Extremely frustrating. I want the statbock (and other information) in a monster's entry to represent them in the game, not just in a fight.

 

[cranberry]

If you kill them (and take their stuff) fast enough, there’s no chance for social interaction anyway.

This.

/end thread.