Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7587952" data-attributes="member: 6801845">Well let's talk about three possibilities with my jewel heist scenario.&nbsp; 1) The shopkeeper is really telling the truth and is not particularly nervous or agitated.&nbsp; 2) The shopkeeper is the thief but is not any good at deception.&nbsp; 3) The shopkeeper is the jewel thief but he's really good at deception.&nbsp; Good enough that a passive insight isn't going to catch the deception (which I would handle as an automatic success and let the player know).For #1 there is no deception, but an insight check doesn't hurt in most cases.&nbsp; It could even be a setback if low enough because the PC believes they see something that's not there.&nbsp; For #2 I want the encounter to be one where the PCs will know the shopkeeper is lying (possibly blackmail, etc).&nbsp; I'll act nervous or give obvious clues. If people really want to make an insight check they can I suppose but I've never had players not pick up on this.For #3 There's nothing obvious, but everyone has a &quot;tell&quot;.&nbsp; Think poker players.&nbsp; A good poker player is not going to say &quot;Woo-hoo!&nbsp; What an amazing hand!&quot;&nbsp; I'm not going to broadcast anything because success isn't automatic even for someone with proficiency in insight.In my games the players not be able to distinguish between scenarios 1 and 3 without using a skill.&nbsp; Neither shopkeeper is obviously lying.&nbsp; The PCs?&nbsp; Well the PCs might be really good at noticing the &quot;tell&quot;.&nbsp; I want to reward the players for the decisions they've made about their PCs.To me, insight is what let's the PC notice the NPC's tell.&nbsp; How I describe that &quot;tell&quot; is going to vary. If their passive insight is good enough, I'll just tell the player about it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 7587952, member: 6801845"] Well let's talk about three possibilities with my jewel heist scenario. 1) The shopkeeper is really telling the truth and is not particularly nervous or agitated. 2) The shopkeeper is the thief but is not any good at deception. 3) The shopkeeper is the jewel thief but he's really good at deception. Good enough that a passive insight isn't going to catch the deception (which I would handle as an automatic success and let the player know). For #1 there is no deception, but an insight check doesn't hurt in most cases. It could even be a setback if low enough because the PC believes they see something that's not there. For #2 I want the encounter to be one where the PCs will know the shopkeeper is lying (possibly blackmail, etc). I'll act nervous or give obvious clues. If people really want to make an insight check they can I suppose but I've never had players not pick up on this. For #3 There's nothing obvious, but everyone has a "tell". Think poker players. A good poker player is not going to say "Woo-hoo! What an amazing hand!" I'm not going to broadcast anything because success isn't automatic even for someone with proficiency in insight. In my games the players not be able to distinguish between scenarios 1 and 3 without using a skill. Neither shopkeeper is obviously lying. The PCs? Well the PCs might be really good at noticing the "tell". I want to reward the players for the decisions they've made about their PCs. To me, insight is what let's the PC notice the NPC's tell. How I describe that "tell" is going to vary. If their passive insight is good enough, I'll just tell the player about it. [/QUOTE]

Verification