Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7788980" data-attributes="member: 6801845">The player is declaring an action, just not an action that has any physical effect in the game world.&nbsp; They are actively trying to determine if the NPC is lying.&nbsp; I guess I could have the players state &quot;Can I tell if they're telling the truth?&quot; or&nbsp; &quot;I study them closely looking for signs of nervousness&quot; but it's just unnecessarily clumsy and requiring specific phrasing that communicates exactly the same thing IMHO.As far as &quot;punishing&quot; players for asking for a check ... I don't.&nbsp; In the case of insight and a few other skills I use the better of passive or the roll.Having a PC in the party who is naive and gullible is quite common in my experience.&nbsp; If a PC's flaw is to be gullible and they're they only one questioning an NPC, the NPC can lie their ass off.&nbsp; As a DM I need some indication and reminder that they aren't going to be suspicious.So maybe a different question:&nbsp; a PC has the flaw &quot;I put too much trust in those who wield power within my temple's hierarchy. &quot;&nbsp; They're questioning someone superior in the hierarchy that is lying but is proficient at deception. To me this is a scenario where I would like to call for an insight check, but I don't know my player's characters to that level of detail.&nbsp; Any other PC would have a decent chance to detect the deception but it's not guaranteed.For me it's simpler and more fair to the player's vision of their PC to let them ask for an insight check now and then.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 7788980, member: 6801845"] The player is declaring an action, just not an action that has any physical effect in the game world. They are actively trying to determine if the NPC is lying. I guess I could have the players state "Can I tell if they're telling the truth?" or "I study them closely looking for signs of nervousness" but it's just unnecessarily clumsy and requiring specific phrasing that communicates exactly the same thing IMHO. As far as "punishing" players for asking for a check ... I don't. In the case of insight and a few other skills I use the better of passive or the roll. Having a PC in the party who is naive and gullible is quite common in my experience. If a PC's flaw is to be gullible and they're they only one questioning an NPC, the NPC can lie their ass off. As a DM I need some indication and reminder that they aren't going to be suspicious. So maybe a different question: a PC has the flaw "I put too much trust in those who wield power within my temple's hierarchy. " They're questioning someone superior in the hierarchy that is lying but is proficient at deception. To me this is a scenario where I would like to call for an insight check, but I don't know my player's characters to that level of detail. Any other PC would have a decent chance to detect the deception but it's not guaranteed. For me it's simpler and more fair to the player's vision of their PC to let them ask for an insight check now and then. [/QUOTE]

Verification