player vs. character knowledge: WHATABOUT DM vs npc knowledge?

[PwrMnky]

I was just thinking about this.

And I have had several gaming sessions where a DM will raise the DC of a bluff check, or give big bonuses to the NPC in a diplomacy check ... based on the DM's logic.

"Well, I'm going to give the cleric a +7 because you're trying to sound like his diety."

... but in essence, isn't that logical conclusion ... the DM's? Not necessarily the NPC? Wouldn't it be a better tool to us just the IQ bonus, since that's what it's for? The IQ /WIS is a measure of the NPC's ability to create that logical arguement in their mind. (expecially "in the moment.")

Jus' thinking ...

 

[mcrow]

I would need to know more about the specific instance you are quoting. However, from what you posted I would say the DM within the rights of NPC knowledge.

I would think that a cleric would be at a huge advantage if you were trying to bluff about something related to his God.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

Not sure what you mean by an IQ bonus, unless you are just meaning the Int modifier.

Relevant ability modifiers are already added into the check bonus. What you are talking about isn't very clear, but seems to be more of a circumstance bonus, in which case it is a matter of DM judgement.

Yes, the DM should try to avoid metagaming the NPCs as much as the players should their PCs, but the DM is the one to make the decision about the DC or any circumstance bonus/penalty, so unless you have a DM who takes the time to explain his or her thinking to you, you won't know for certain whether they are metagaming or not. If you think your DM is being unfair in applying modifiers, talk to them about it.
If you just can't trust your DM, then you have a different problem.

 

[Nifft]

It's the DM's job to play everyone in the world, and also to be the referee between you and the world, and also to be the cruise activity director (tempting the party into fun activities, like killing things and taking stuff).

Sometimes these jobs conflict. Sometimes the ref needs to stand aside while the cruise activity director puts stuff plot hooks in front of you, or keeps an NPC alive so he can do the plot thing later. It's the DM's job to cheat sometimes.

It's easy to fall into the trap of player-vs-DM thinking... but even if he is cheating, it may be for the greater good (well, actually for the greater fun). And if he's just doing it because he didn't like the tactic, consider all the worse things he could have done... like not telling you that there's zero chance for success, letting you roll, and letting you fail without any feedback beforehand.

(I'm not saying he's right or wrong -- just that you may want to give him the benefit of the doubt, because adversarial relationships will make things worse, not better. You can't "win" -- all you can do is destroy the game by making it adversarial. But you can discuss stuff, and you can try your hand at DM'ing. )

Cheers, -- N

 

[Henry]

I'd say the job of a good DM is to keep pesonal and NPC knowledge separate... but in many cases, what the player construes as NPC favoritism may just be because of an unknown circumstance.

In your example, if someone is trying to bluff another person into thinking they are that person's god, then there needs to be something backing it up other than just a convincing voice and sincerity of purpose; otherwise, there will be a huge circumstance bonus on the part of the victim for such a performance. But if the player character takes the time to use knowledge (religion), or use spell effects to add to the show, or other preparations, then they'd get to go at no effective penalty, or even a bonus.

As DM, my monsters will play to their intelligence. 20 INT liches will try to plan several steps ahead, and never engage in foolish actions unless outfoxed. Grey Renders will not avoid Op-attacks, and will rush into a fray. Average Kobolds and Goblins will not engage in melee unless they have good odds, and will use traps and diversions, but can be relatively easily tricked. Old Hob the peasant farmer will not know that the gold the PC just passed to him was fool's gold (he has a -1 in appraise and +1 in sense motive total!) but the city Jeweler will definitely know iron pyrite with a minute's examination. (probably a +10 in appraise and a +12 in craft (jewelry)!)

 

[Imruphel]

I (snip) "Well, I'm going to give the cleric a +7 because you're trying to sound like his deity." (snip)

Perhaps the real error is that the DM is announcing the modifiers/DC. You roll your Bluff, he rolls the NPC's Sense Motive and he announces what appears to be the result.

Of course, impersonating a deity should require a tad more than, "I roll a Bluff check".

 

[Mark Chance]

I'd say the job of a good DM is to keep pesonal and NPC knowledge separate... but in many cases, what the player construes as NPC favoritism may just be because of an unknown circumstance.

Quoted for truth.

Several times while DMing, I've had a player end up whining about something an NPC does or knows, all based on the faulty assumption that the player's knowledge somehow constrains what the NPC can know or do. I remember one particular instance involving high-level, powergaming PCs. One of them was a rogue-type optimized for maximum stealth. The player was utterly convinced that his PC could hide and move silently with impunity because his mods were so high.

When the high-level succubus ranger/champion of Hextor (whose specific mission was to infiltrate the party and kill the PCs) spotted the uber-sneaker and alerted the elder beholder (who then destroyed the uber-sneaker), the player pouted and whined because there was "no way anyone could spot me!"

Everyone else in the group still laughs about the incident to this day. Ah, good times.

 

[moritheil]

This sort of nonsense is why I think a DM should be an accomplished roleplayer as well as a competent rules buff.