Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7586970" data-attributes="member: 6801845">A key difference to our approaches is that what you know determines whether or not the players do an insight check.&nbsp; As far as the players are concerned the letter could have been a forgery.&nbsp; Or maybe she did write the letter but ensured it would never be delivered and she's just covering her tracks.To be clear - I have back-and-forth conversations with NPCs all the time.&nbsp; But in this scenario you aren't resolving a contest so the players now know she's telling the truth, at least about the direct answers she's given.So to me, the specific scenario doesn't matter.&nbsp; If the players think the PCs would suspect the NPC is lying, then the PCs suspect the NPC is lying.&nbsp; The logical result of that would be to try to determine if the NPC is lying: an insight check.I could see doing that. I may even call for an insight check or use passive values. What you find boring I find expedient.&nbsp; Same as a fighter describing every single swing of the sword.&nbsp; Sometimes it's as simple as a roll of the dice, sometimes it's not.So a specific scenario?&nbsp; Like the one I gave earlier.&nbsp; The PCs are searching the house of Baron Von Uppity-Up who they suspect is really The Black Snake.&nbsp; Mr Snake has a reputation of being paranoid, and is someone likely to booby-trap their house.The group has no idea what specifically is trapped or how.&nbsp; If anything is trapped.&nbsp; What does that session look like in your game?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 7586970, member: 6801845"] A key difference to our approaches is that what [I]you[/I] know determines whether or not the players do an insight check. As far as the players are concerned the letter could have been a forgery. Or maybe she did write the letter but ensured it would never be delivered and she's just covering her tracks. To be clear - I have back-and-forth conversations with NPCs all the time. But in this scenario you aren't resolving a contest so the players now know she's telling the truth, at least about the direct answers she's given. So to me, the specific scenario doesn't matter. If the players think the PCs would suspect the NPC is lying, then the PCs suspect the NPC is lying. The logical result of that would be to try to determine if the NPC is lying: an insight check. I could see doing that. I may even call for an insight check or use passive values. What you find boring I find expedient. Same as a fighter describing every single swing of the sword. Sometimes it's as simple as a roll of the dice, sometimes it's not. So a specific scenario? Like the one I gave earlier. The PCs are searching the house of Baron Von Uppity-Up who they suspect is really The Black Snake. Mr Snake has a reputation of being paranoid, and is someone likely to booby-trap their house. The group has no idea what specifically is trapped or how. If anything is trapped. What does that session look like in your game? [/QUOTE]

Verification