Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="OnlineDM" data-source="post: 5727968" data-attributes="member: 90804">This touches on a design decision of 4e (and I think 3e, too, though I'm a new-timer and can't be sure) that's different from older editions of D&amp;D; character skill can exceed player skill in social areas as well as in physical/magical areas.As I understand things, an older edition PC would only suspect an NPC of lying if the player thought the DM was having the NPC lie to the party. The player can then decide how the PC will respond to this - challenging the NPC, looking for other signs of deception, keeping quiet, etc.In 4e, it's possible to have a PC with fantastic Insight - a walking lie detector - played by a player who's totally oblivious. The spirit of the 4e rules are such that the PC is going to notice a bad liar, even if the player completely misses it. I handle this by having a PC trained in Insight automatically be given a hint that the NPC is somewhat duplicitous; other DMs handle it by comparing an NPC's Bluff check to the PC's passive Insight.It's completely legitimate to say, &quot;At my table, passive Insight won't help you. It's up to you, the player, to let me know when you think something is fishy, in which case you can make an active Insight check.&quot; It's more of an old-school way of handling things, which is fine if that's what you prefer at your table. It's just different from the 4e mindset, where passive Insight can mean that the character will notice something that the player misses. If you don't like that, then by all means throw it out!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="OnlineDM, post: 5727968, member: 90804"] This touches on a design decision of 4e (and I think 3e, too, though I'm a new-timer and can't be sure) that's different from older editions of D&D; character skill can exceed player skill in social areas as well as in physical/magical areas. As I understand things, an older edition PC would only suspect an NPC of lying if the player thought the DM was having the NPC lie to the party. The player can then decide how the PC will respond to this - challenging the NPC, looking for other signs of deception, keeping quiet, etc. In 4e, it's possible to have a PC with fantastic Insight - a walking lie detector - played by a player who's totally oblivious. The spirit of the 4e rules are such that the PC is going to notice a bad liar, even if the player completely misses it. I handle this by having a PC trained in Insight automatically be given a hint that the NPC is somewhat duplicitous; other DMs handle it by comparing an NPC's Bluff check to the PC's passive Insight. It's completely legitimate to say, "At my table, passive Insight won't help you. It's up to you, the player, to let me know when you think something is fishy, in which case you can make an active Insight check." It's more of an old-school way of handling things, which is fine if that's what you prefer at your table. It's just different from the 4e mindset, where passive Insight can mean that the character will notice something that the player misses. If you don't like that, then by all means throw it out! [/QUOTE]

Verification