Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="irdeggman" data-source="post: 1889940" data-attributes="member: 16285">So when is metagame thinking a substitute for role playing and what the character nows instead of what the player knows?It appears to me that too many people are sustituting what they would know as players for what the PCs know and have evidence to back it up.I listed all the evidence present and no one has been able to dismiss that.  Saying the PCs didn't look somewhere only applies if they have a reason to want to look.  In this case the result of the sense motive would have (IMO) been an indication to the PCs that their long time attempts to work on diplomatic relationship with the gnomes had indeed worked - i.e., the payoff of all that previous effort. And I wasn't refering to the effects of a charm on the NPCs but was making reference to any divination type spells they could have cast. Charm person per the rules only puts the affected creature at friendly (not helpful) which is more limiting in the aid being offered. Augury might well have been the best choice, but with a 1 minute casting time and the odds that most clerics don't have it memorized (its one of those spells best kept on a scroll) it is probably not real likely it was an viable option.  Likewise Divination would work, but also not likely to have on hand and be used in the situation. Detect Thoughts, Discern Lies, etc. would only give the same reaction as did the Sense Motive check. And since it appears that 1 out 5 and quite likely 2 out of 5 (nearly half of the players) weren't satisfied then quite clearly something needs to be looked at in regards to the situation.  A single person is not a reason to look too hard that something might be awry, but 2 out 5 is another story.That is exactly the point I've been trying to make.</blockquote>

Verification