Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FendenKrell" data-source="post: 4410913" data-attributes="member: 74936">hi youse guys!  i just joined the forums and this is my first post.  the other night something happened that didnt make sense to me.  it was my first 4e game so its possible i dont have all the facts and my ignorance could be why i have this dispute to begin with.so i understand the rule of how "passive" insight works and im totally fine with that, in fact i like it much.  but this is where things break down.i am playing a dragonborne that is a cautious/suspicious character by nature.  i was having a conversation with an NPC and i decided i wanted to make a regular insight(not passive of course) check to see if he might be lying to me.  my DM said no i cant make that roll because i already failed my "passive" insight check. see that didnt make sense to me.  i understand that passive insight is for the purpose of noticing something out of the corner of your eye, something that you are not necessarily "looking" for at the time.  but i think that given my character's naturally distrusting personality, that i shoulda been given the chance to roll an active perception check.  my DM said that because i did not notice anything suspicious about him "passively" then it would give me no cause to even think for one moment that i should "actively" use my insight skill on the NPC.what do you guys think?</blockquote>