Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 2325686" data-attributes="member: 19675">Once again, it depends on the situation and the DM.A Master Thief or Epic Bard trying to act like he's sucking it up had better have bluff or no one would believe it.  If Eric Clapton walked onto the stage and butchered "Leila" he'd have everyone there wondering what the hell he was doing.  No one would believe he couldn't play the song- they'd think drugs, drink, distraction or intentional screwup as the reason.  A newbie thief, on the other hand, could probably mess up picking a lock without raising suspicion at all.As for the Cleric...seeing as how Turning is the Cleric's channeling of Divine energy, I would say he would need a MASSIVELY successful Bluff roll to make someone believe his Turn simply fizzled.  While only Undead are adversely affected by the Cleric's attempts to Turn, that direct channeling of his diety's power should be noticeable to everyone in the Cleric's immediate vicinity.  A Cleric trying such a subterfuge would probably get questions like "I didn't feel anything...did you even TRY?"Other DMs could, of course, have different feelings about Turning.  They could rule that like a RL modern day priest presenting a cross, a Turning attempt in game would have no detectible effects to anyone who wouldn't be affected by it.That DM would not be me.  I figure that being in the presense of the Divine, even briefly, would have tangible effects, like a tingle to the skin, a particular scent, a burst of light, whatever...Not something one could bluff.And the zombies surely won't help you trick others.And as for this:Its not quite right- he doesn't have Bluff as a class skill, but he can still take levels in it.When champion atheletes or sports teams lose BIG games to massive underdogs, the question of intentional failure is ALWAYS brought up.  In Game 6 of the 1986 World Series, Bill Buckner let a slow dribbling roller pass between his legs and under his glove...He STILL gets death threats for "throwing the game," even though it was a simple error.  No one could believe that a pro athelete of his caliber could gaffe that badly- yet he maintains his innocence, and no one has proven he missed intentionally.Now, imagine if he HAD!Let's put it this way:- if you're an expert and people know it, a display of a lack of expertise in your chosen field is inherently NOT believable.  If they personally know you to have displayed expertise before, its even LESS believable.</blockquote>

Verification