D&D 5E Charisma to prevent giving out info during interrogation?

[Oofta]

I don't allow torture, in the real world it's not effective and I don't allow evil PCs.

If an NPC is lying, that's a deception vs insight check. Other types of getting information is generally against either a DC I set based on the NPC or a wisdom save. There is no real hard guideline though - if an NPC is just a hired guard they may spill the beans in exchange for being let go. Others will be susceptible to bribes, some are unwilling or unable to talk no matter what you do.

The trick to making interrogations interesting to me is to think about the motivation and bonds of the NPC. Can they be tricked into giving away information? In some cases I'll roll a straight up intelligence check to see if they let something slip unintentionally. Other times they want to bargain, or they feed he PCs a line of B.S. Can the PCs offer the NPC something they care about? Give them enough of a reason to talk? Threaten or reveal a threat to someone else the NPC cares about?

There are many ways to handle this, even sometimes just a persuasion check.

 

[Umbran]

This is a flat-out Intimidation vs Deception head-to-head check. Torture is Intimidation, and refusing to give out information is Deception, whether just waking down the street, or tied to the rack. Advantage or disadvantage to one or the other, depending on the circumstances.

I would say making them believe what you say under duress would be Deception. Having the will to refuse to cooperate under that duress would (again, in my book) be Wisdom.

Also, from a game design perspective, Charisma is already overloaded, as the primary casting stat for four classes and the primary stat for social interaction.

 

[Asisreo]

I think you might need to back up and consider the whole "torture PCs"scene context. Why is this even happening?

"Torture" might be a strong word for it. It's more like a possible batman/vigilante interrogation scenario. Less about inflicting pain or disfiguring the PC's, but more about inciting fear into their characters.

Most players, imx, would simply refuse to give info once it's established there being a negative consequence, even if it's in-character. I was thinking of making the outcome less predictable but still somewhat controllable using ability checks/dice rolls.

I had first thought of Wisdom, but Wisdom more has to do with worldly attunement and discernment, which doesn't feel as relevant. Wisdom saves do invoke resistance to something that assaults your willpower, but I don't think I want it to be a simple save.

 

[Guest 7034872]

[...] Also, from a game design perspective, Charisma is already overloaded, as the primary casting stat for four classes and the primary stat for social interaction.

I certainly agree with that. While I understand the need to strengthen its role in the past (in AD&D it was almost a nothing-stat (in practice)), they've gone overboard with it now.

 

[seebs]

The practical answer is that everyone gives information if tortured but the information is extremely unreliable, so it doesn't do much good. I wouldn't call it a charisma thing, or much of an anything. People break pretty easily and say anything-and-everything, but they're completely unreliable in what they say.

 

[Umbran]

The practical answer is that everyone gives information if tortured but the information is extremely unreliable, so it doesn't do much good. I wouldn't call it a charisma thing, or much of an anything. People break pretty easily and say anything-and-everything, but they're completely unreliable in what they say.

In the real world, true. In heroic fiction, however, there's a trope that folks may want to work with, however inaccurate it may be.

 

[ECMO3]

How does it sound to use Charisma to prevent giving out information during an interrogation/torture sequence involving the characters as the subject of torture? Most players would simply refuse to give information because they don't feel the pressure of giving the information out without death outright being a consequence. Because otherwise, there's nothing for them to lose.

At first, I was thinking of using Charisma saves because they're being involuntarily pushed to do something that requires willpower to prevent, but then I thought of a skill contest, since the torturer can torture indefinitely, it's up to the character to persuade the torturer that they won't give any information.

So, it would be a Persuasion vs Intimidation check and on success, the character gives out no information during the interrogation and on failure, they share one bit of information.

How does that sound? Too much? Would you enjoy this type of interaction? Would you prefer a different ruling or just let the player decide whether they break or not?

I would say giving false information would be a contest deception check with advantage vs insight. Advantage because information gained under torture is very unreliable. When people are tortured they will say anything to make the torture stop including falsehoods. I would normally use Charisma for that but I could see intelligence or wisdom in some abnormal case.

If the intent is to "John Wayne" and tell them nothing at all I would make that probably a constitution check with a very high DC (maybe 25) to remain quiet. If you are successful I would have you make a death saving throw to see if you die. If you fail the first check you say something at which point it is another contested deception check, this time with disadvantage because you were broken.

 

[iserith]

In my games, unless magically compelled, the players decide what their characters think, say, and do, full stop.

In the interrogation scene the OP imagines, because there's no uncertainty as to the outcome of the action - the player decides if the character reveals information or not - there's no ability check or saving throw to be used here.

If I absolutely needed the NPCs to have information the PCs have, I'd figure out some other way to get it to them (though personally I wouldn't likely be in this situation anyway).

 

[John R Davis]

5th ed isn't a gritty enough system to go to in depth into this.
I'd make it a Saving throw to resist ( either Con or Wis or some mix and match). If this save is made then the tortured person can use deception etc to implant a lie.
All the grisly stuff off scene of course.
In time the villains may realise Dantooine was a lie!

 

[jgsugden]

The practical answer is that everyone gives information if tortured but the information is extremely unreliable, so it doesn't do much good...

This is why torture for a confession does not work, but torture to extract information that can then be tested does work. Eventually, they try the truth so as to end the pain. You won't know when it will come, but it will come.

Regardless, when I DM, when non-magical torture is used, I leave it up to the player to decide what happens. It isn't left up to a saving throw or die roll - it is a decision on how much the player/PC will allow before they break. As HP loss is described in my setting as expending the toughness of the individual, I usually have a tortured PC set to low hps as they've been wrecked physically to gather information, etc... However, smart enemies will often resort to other means to induce compliance, such as threatening allies, destroying things the PC cares about, etc... rather than torture.