ARGH! Sense Motive is NOT frigging mind reading!

[Sebastian Francis]

I'd like some help on how best to handle Sense Motive. It keeps coming up with my players, to the point that EVERY FRIGGING TIME they talk to an NPC they say, "I'm going to sense motive." [Roll]

Not only does this completely destroy any hope of ROLE-PLAYING (I fondly remember the days of AD&D 2e when we actually *talked* to NPCs and tried to sense their motives through *conversation* and *role-playing*), but it also reduces Sense Motive to a form of mind-reading, which of course it is not.

The problem with Sense Motive as a skill is that if the "impression" the characters get after a high roll is too detailed, then it is, in my opinion, unrealistic. We're saying that Sense Motive is essentially ESP. But if the impression the characters get after a high roll is too vague ("You think the NPC might be lying but you aren't sure) then it's useless, so what's the point of the skill?

I friggin' hate this skill. I want to ban it. But I try to avoid house rules and DM fiats.

For the record, I play 3.0.

HELP!

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

How're your NPC's Bluff checks?

 

[sfedi]

I can see your predicament.
But it doesn't have to be so.

When the use of SM would destroy the mood of the conversation I tell the player to wait until he finish the convesation to get the results of his SM (unless it's really important to get the information right there).
I try to avoid this, because it takes out a huge power from the skill.

I use the skill also when the characters hear enemies or conversation in languages they don't understand, to get the mood of the conversation.
These are usually pretty low DC checks.
(like knowing if the bunch of orcs that are approaching are in for a full-out attack or an angry revenge or whatever).

But answering further your question, I think the problem you may have is that you think that the SM skill kicks in only when the NPC is lying.
The player could get info from the skill when the speech of NPC didn't match the NPC's mood/intentions/feelings.

Suppose a Neutral Officer of the local militia asks for their help in a mission.
When briefing them the SM player notices that the officer is holding back information or that he is not telling things just like they are.
Note that the player wouldn't know if the officer is lying, leading them into a trap, or if he's just not telling them everything because of a leak of information.

Another situation is when someone is afraid of telling something, or holding back something because of shame (or whatever reason), etc, etc.

Basically, the skill detects when someone is not being honest or straightforward. That is faaaaar from reading someone's thoughts.

 

[sfedi]

This is not to pick on you.

It always strikes me as how we tend to nerf down things that people can do in real life, but we happily allow more world shaterring/disrupting things like high level spells.

Poisons and melee attacks count too.

 

[CronoDekar]

No significant changes in 3.5 AFAIK, so nothing there will probably help you with the issue. If they beat the check, I would say something to the effect of "You feel the NPC is being dishonest to you." (This is different from lying: being dishonest may involve misleading the PCs with truths, not revealing the entire truth, or even being completely honest so far but having the intention to be dishonest.) I also say that usually only one Sense Motive check is made in a conversation unless the content or emotion of it changed substantially enough, and you don't know what in particular the NPC is being dishonest about -- only that they are being generally dishonest (Discern Lies can cover particulars). So they can use Sense Motives to try to figure out an NPC's honesty, but they still have to rely on RPing to deduce what is wrong with what is being said.

Could also use it to get a feel for someone's emotional state, like smiling when the person is in actuality really sad. Or you can just say "happiness is not their actual emotion" in this situation.

Depending, I might give a penalty to Sense Motive checks if there is too little verbal or body langugage to accurately judge, so you might require that they actually have interacted with the NPC for a reasonable amount of time before they can Sense Motive. Hell, they might even get the point that there are other ways to assess what someone's saying besides with a roll!

 

[Christopher Lambert]

See Bullet Points (www.wizards.com/d20modern); they actually described the way Sense Motive works (it isn't a lie detector, which is actually a Modern class ability).

Sense Motive only lets you know if someone is suspicious. A spy who doesn't reveal his employer but is on your side would still be deemed "suspicious" as your BS meter goes off. Furthermore, you should only get one skill check per conversation... at the end, not per statement.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Hi Sebastian Francis,

Here's a couple of ideas that might make this easier for your innuendo/ sense motive checks.

Rule 1) Player's don't ask for sense motive checks - they get a SM check by writing a note with a question to the DM.

Rule 2) The SM check must be in relation to a question that the DM can answer with Y/N or Maybe.

eg.

Player's Note: "Is this guy overcharging us? [10gp seems a little pricey for a couple of cloth sacks]
DM's written response: "Maybe"

In this way there is a minimum of fuss in taking away attention from roleplaying, information is only given to the selected person and the level of information given to that player is not detailed, it just confirms or rejects a players suspicions of an NPC's motives. Thus the players have to think up the information, not have it handed to them by the DM. Normally, this will encourage players to just focus on roleplaying rather than mindreading.

Your thoughts?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Saeviomagy]

The social skills should be used as a framework for roleplaying.

When the NPC is about to tell a lie - roll the bluff/sense motive check.

Then roleplay out the consequences. If the bluff succeeds, tell the lie as barefacedly as you can. If the bluff fails, hesitate, umm and err, contradict yourself, whatever.

The same applies for diplomacy and intimidate. Make the roll first, then roleplay the result.

Saying "oh, but the rules stop you from roleplaying" is just being silly. Roleplay and rules have very few points of contact. The rules on occasion act as a guide for roleplay. That is all.

 

[dvvega]

When I run games I do one of two things in the Sense Motive realm:

1) I have pregenerated all my NPC skill checks for general use (or assume they rolled 10 on everything to speed things up for myself). I then make secret rolls if I don't want players alerted, or let them make the rolls if it matters not. For example a Sense Motive is secret while a general spot need not be.

2) I wait until the player says "I wish to Sense Motive", however they need to justify the suspicion. If it was "just some guy off the street" they have very little reason to think he was lying - but if it was a beggar from the guild giving them vital information then it could valid to check them out.

In case (2) I have sometimes "fudged" the person as honestly believe what he/she is saying so that Sense Motive returns a "not dodgy" result. This has made players less likely to Sense every single NPC, and just focus on the suspicious characters.

 

[Henrix]

Sense motive is one of the skills I almost never let the players choose when to roll, and of course never let them roll. I roll it behind the screen when I feel it's appropriate, never forgetting to roll some random dice without significance now and then to confuse them.

If they succeed I tell them that the person seems a bit nervous, answered the question a little too fast, or whatever, depending on the NPC and situation.
And of course this might be the result of a failed sense motive. The honest shopkeeper might feel a little intimidated by a bunch of armed and evidently dangerous strangers barge into his shop demanding to know where some other dangerous fellow went, and might stutter a little. Which generally isn't eased when one of them idles up to him saying "Are you certain he ran out the back door?"