Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Chris Perkins doesn't use Passive Insight
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Fox Lee" data-source="post: 5730207" data-attributes="member: 4346"><p>I don't think passive and active are mutually exclusive in this context. For example, if I have an NPC who is lyng, I <em>will</em> use passive checks - that's a baseline chance that the PCs have to notice that something is suspicious. If they succeed marginally, I'll throw in reasonably obvious tell that "shows without telling", so they can reach the conclusion that it's a lie themselves - the liar keeps scratching his ear, or slips up when he says a particular word, or avoids making eye contact. If they succeed on a grand scale, I'll usually just show the hand and say something like "yeah, you've heard this one before".</p><p></p><p>However, failing the passive check doesn't force the PCs to trust the liar - it just means that they don't notice the lie automatically. If they find the story, or the liar, to be suspicious, they can call for an insight check any time they like - the degree of success usually shows how sure they are of their current suspicions (anything from "yep, that <em>does</em> sound kind of dodgy" to "he is <em>way</em> too scared to lie to you").</p><p></p><p>My point is, the passive check never removes the right to make the active check. It's just an initial chance to get a hint. I can't see whay that should be removed.</p><p></p><p>However, I am looking at this a bit from an actor/writer perspective. I find it easy to adjust either mannerisms or dialogue to make it more obvious that a lie is taking place. If they party succeeds on passive, I can make it fairly clear that the person is lying without just telling them so. If they don't, I can totally play it straight, and give them no reason to be suspicious unless they have extra knowledge. A GM who found those things more difficult - or took a less "relative" approach to how the NPC communicated - might not find it so easy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fox Lee, post: 5730207, member: 4346"] I don't think passive and active are mutually exclusive in this context. For example, if I have an NPC who is lyng, I [i]will[/i] use passive checks - that's a baseline chance that the PCs have to notice that something is suspicious. If they succeed marginally, I'll throw in reasonably obvious tell that "shows without telling", so they can reach the conclusion that it's a lie themselves - the liar keeps scratching his ear, or slips up when he says a particular word, or avoids making eye contact. If they succeed on a grand scale, I'll usually just show the hand and say something like "yeah, you've heard this one before". However, failing the passive check doesn't force the PCs to trust the liar - it just means that they don't notice the lie automatically. If they find the story, or the liar, to be suspicious, they can call for an insight check any time they like - the degree of success usually shows how sure they are of their current suspicions (anything from "yep, that [i]does[/i] sound kind of dodgy" to "he is [i]way[/i] too scared to lie to you"). My point is, the passive check never removes the right to make the active check. It's just an initial chance to get a hint. I can't see whay that should be removed. However, I am looking at this a bit from an actor/writer perspective. I find it easy to adjust either mannerisms or dialogue to make it more obvious that a lie is taking place. If they party succeeds on passive, I can make it fairly clear that the person is lying without just telling them so. If they don't, I can totally play it straight, and give them no reason to be suspicious unless they have extra knowledge. A GM who found those things more difficult - or took a less "relative" approach to how the NPC communicated - might not find it so easy. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Chris Perkins doesn't use Passive Insight
Top