How do you convince someone of the truth

[RigaMortus2]

Would not a +100 skill modifier be practically magic? I mean, it's super-heroic already... if an epic fighter can take down a wyrm dragon with a four foot long sharpened piece of steel and an epic rogue is able to play "spiderman" without a stitch of climbing equipment, why can't the epic bard convince a merchant to hand him everything he owns.

Because combat is different than skill checks. That is why the Epic Fighter can take down a wyrm...

The way I view it, the Rogue isn't "spiderman" like. I would describe it as him finding the most optimal spot to place his hands and feat if he were pouncing from wall to wall. I would probably also require a Jump check and even a Balance check. And even if those are also 100+, it's still not magical. He's just really good.

And I don't think you can compare that accurately to a social skill. A person with a +100 Diplomacy check is talking with an NPC, who has their own free will. They can take what the character has to say, and make their own reasonable decissions. A social skill check would never trump story or "realism" in a game I run or play in w/ my friends.

 

[ZuulMoG]

To convince someone of which is not true, you make a bluff check opposed by the opponent's sense motive, right?

But what if you telling the truth? Presumably, the 'target' still makes a sense motive check, but what is the DC, and can the truth teller do anything to help?


glass.

Bluff at 0 DC.

 

[Snowy]

Bluff at 0 DC.

But that leads to no chance of a misunderstanding ever (bar wisdom penalties and no ranks), you can't always convince some people of the truth no matter how hard you try.

 

[Saeviomagy]

And I don't think you can compare that accurately to a social skill. A person with a +100 Diplomacy check is talking with an NPC, who has their own free will. They can take what the character has to say, and make their own reasonable decissions. A social skill check would never trump story or "realism" in a game I run or play in w/ my friends.

Have you just never ever been bamboozled by a smooth talker or something? Never? Never walked away from a purchase and gone "Dang, I don't need this. And it costs too much!"

I guess if you never have, then I can see why you don't get it.

However it probably also disqualifies you from being able to judge social situations in a D&D game featuring a con artist.

 

[focallength]

The truth is subjective, its all really about an individuals point of view...I usually keep a trucheon (BoED d8 martial weapon subdual damage) that I use to enforce my point of view, usually when you see my point of view you agree to my version of the truth.

So in response to the question...with a big frickin stick
Also commonly refeered to as a "be good stick" carried by paladins, it comes in handy when you dont want to kill someone but they really need a good thrashin'.

 

[focallength]

And I don't think you can compare that accurately to a social skill. A person with a +100 Diplomacy check is talking with an NPC, who has their own free will. They can take what the character has to say, and make their own reasonable decissions. A social skill check would never trump story or "realism" in a game I run or play in w/ my friends.

Ever voted for someone because they sounded good, ran good smear campaigns, had good PR agents etc...and when they got elected they completely changed their agendas and views? I know millions of us do every four years. Social skills trump realism everyday, have you ever convinced a woman you were more than you really were? Ever lied to get a job?
Those are social skills trumping realism everyday, ever had a NPC convince a character he was buying a +3 sword of pnultimate everything slaying only to find out it is a wooden sword with tinfoil a magic aura and some minor illusion?

 

[RigaMortus2]

Have you just never ever been bamboozled by a smooth talker or something? Never? Never walked away from a purchase and gone "Dang, I don't need this. And it costs too much!"

I guess if you never have, then I can see why you don't get it.

However it probably also disqualifies you from being able to judge social situations in a D&D game featuring a con artist.

Sure I've been bamboozled... I remember this one time in particular when I was younger (and not as experienced, no pun intended). But what is your point? There have been times where I've been duped and didn't realize until afterwards, and there are times where I just would not beleive someone or give in (to say, a salesman's pitch for example). But again, what does that have to do with what we are discussing here? And what do you mean it "disqualifies me from judging social situations in D&D"? That statement makes no sense, just because I rule differently than you do? Unless you just said that to be subtly offensive and try to get some kind of rise out of me?

 

[RigaMortus2]

I'll answer these, because they are fun...

Ever voted for someone because they sounded good, ran good smear campaigns, had good PR agents etc...and when they got elected they completely changed their agendas and views?

Nope. I've voted, sure. I've never regretted my vote. I never felt "fooled" by a politician (maybe I just have a low wisdom).

Have you ever convinced a woman you were more than you really were?

Not sure what you mean here, but I am pretty sure the answer is no...

Ever lied to get a job?

Certainly not!

Those are social skills trumping realism everyday,

Yes they are social skills, but they are in no way trumping "realism". Since we live in "the real world" I don't see how these social skills cause any dillusions to the contrary.

ever had a NPC convince a character he was buying a +3 sword of pnultimate everything slaying only to find out it is a wooden sword with tinfoil a magic aura and some minor illusion?

Nope... But I get what you are saying. And I think (in game terms) this situation is a lot different from using Bluff to "trick" a Paladin into going against his beliefs. I'm sorry, but no matter how "convincingly" you tell me the innocent peasant is really the lich lord of death, the Paladin is not going to kill him willy nilly, no matter what the roll.

 

[ZuulMoG]

But that leads to no chance of a misunderstanding ever (bar wisdom penalties and no ranks), you can't always convince some people of the truth no matter how hard you try.

People can still roll 1s...seems like someone rolling a 1 on Sense Motive is the cause of most misunderstandings. Circumstance penalties for hostile or suspicious listeners could easily render a Sense Motive total in the negatives too.

I'll elaborate.

If you are being honest, but you need to convince your audience of the truth, then you take zero on a Bluff roll (the lowest you can take for this purpose, representing being as sincere as possible, looking them in the eye, etc...) or take 10 on a Diplomacy check. The audience generates a Sense Motive total, with situational modifiers applied...

Audience is under effects of Antipathy or similar magic: -20
Audience is Hostile: -10
Audience is Suspicious:-5
Audience is Indifferent: 0
Audience is Favorable: +5
Audience is Friendly: +10
Audience is under effects of Charm, Sympathy, or similar magic: +20
Speaker has lied to audience in the past: -2 per lie (maximum -10)
Speaker has reputation for honesty: +1 to +5, DMs discretion
Speaker is Chaotic and has reputation for it: -3
Speaker is Lawful and has reputation for it: +3
Speaker is unknown to audience: (Audience's best possible attitude is automatically Suspicious, unless they are idealist simpletons.)
Speaker is known to be a member of a Lawful police, religious, or military organization, or is wearing the uniform of same and has made a successful Disguise check vs. Audience: +3
Speaker is known to be a member of a Chaotic police, religious, or military organization, or is wearing the uniform of same and has made a successful Disguise check vs. Audience: -3

(I'm sure you can think of others that would apply.)

Since the desired outcome is the audience believing you, failure of their Sense Motive check results in disbelief. You still keep your Bluff rating because no matter how sincere you're trying to be (taking zero), your tongue is still as silvered as you've trained it to be. It might seem strange to insist on taking a zero to be honest, but Bluff is all about being dishonest, so there should be a penalty. Diplomacy is far more effective, hence, 10 may be taken.

The numbers for magical effects and for Friendly/Hostile might seem high, but remember that strong emotions can play a large part in affecting someone's willingness to take you at face value. Someone under a Charm effect might believe their charmer if they told them the moon was made of green cheese, while someone that hates your guts (Hostile) might not believe they were on fire if you told them even if they could smell their own charred flesh and it was making them jones for bar-b-q.

(Sorry to get all pedantic there.)

 

[S'mon]

The PCs IMC last night were trying to covince sceptical NPCs of the truth, I used a whole bunch of Sense Motive rolls for the NPCs with the difficulty based on the unlikelihood of the claim - the more outrageous (though true) the statement, the higher the DC.