Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9573529" data-attributes="member: 42582">Why would a PC shout "I'm rolling Insight"? Is the PC playing a game of D&D, in the fiction?If you mean the player, well as I understand how 5e works - and again, as per [USER=6787503]@Hriston[/USER]'s post upthread - the player has to declare an action. If the action they declare is that they're studying the valet to try and understand, from body language, mannerisms, etc what his true intentions and next move might be, then - again, subject to the general rules for the use of ability checks - that GM should set a DC.Because a "Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone’s next move . . . [by] gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms", the check to beat that DC would be made using WIS (Insight).If it succeeds the PC would be able to determine whether the valet dropped the bag accidently or on purpose (say, to distract someone or send a signal to someone), and would also work out (for instance) if the valet is concealing something unusual in the bag, or seems to be anxious because they're taking the bag to someone who shouldn't be receiving it.I don't understand this apparent obsession, among 5e GMs, of house-ruling (or just ignoring) the rules around the Insight skill and WIS (Insight) checks.Agreed. As I just posted, I don't understand what seems to be the widespread practice of not following the actual rules for the skill, and instead applying it to determine whether the PC notices body language, speech habits, changes in mannerisms, etc which the player then has to interpret.On the other hand, this - to me - seems a bit of a departure from "mainstream" D&D-ish techniques (which I think assume the GM has worked out the intentions in advance) to something more "indie-ish". It reminds me of <a href="http://indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=1361.0" target="_blank">the following from Paul Czege</a> (posted decades ago now):I frame the character into the middle of conflicts I think will push and pull in ways that are interesting to me and to the player. I keep NPC personalities somewhat unfixed in my mind, allowing me to retroactively justify their behaviors in support of this.I'm not criticising, by the way - this is a technique that I've used a lot, ever since I read the Czege post. But I've often found accounts of this technique to generate controversy among ENworld posters.</blockquote>

Verification