Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Charlaquin" data-source="post: 7793014" data-attributes="member: 6779196">No, you and I just have different interpretations of the rules. As I understand them, the rules indicate that an ability check is used to determine whether an action with an uncertain outcome succeeds or fails, and the DM can say that a skill proficiency can be added to an ability check, or the player can ask the DM if a skill proficiency can be added to an ability check. A successful Wisdom (Insight) check doesn’t allow you to determine if a character is being deceitful. Your character’s action does, and if that action has a chance of succeeding, a chance of failing, and consequences for failing, then a Wisdom (Insight) check is used to determine if it fails and you suffer the consequences.Having a high Wisdom modifier and proficiency or expertise in the Insight skill will make it less likely for NPCs that try to deceive you to succeed, which in turn will mean I will more frequently telegraph unsuccessful attempts at deceiving&nbsp; you. Additionally, proficiency or expertise in the Insight skill will make you more likely to succeed at actions that involve gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms to determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone’s next move. This will in turn will mean fewer consequences suffered as results of failed Wisdom (Insight) checks. I mean, magic is useful. If you want to use magic to insure you can detect when NPCs lie, that’s a valid decision. I establish with my players before we begin play the way I handle action resolution so they know what to expect, and if that expectation pushes you more towards playing a spellcaster, that’s your choice to make.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Charlaquin, post: 7793014, member: 6779196"] No, you and I just have different interpretations of the rules. As I understand them, the rules indicate that an ability check is used to determine whether an action with an uncertain outcome succeeds or fails, and the DM can say that a skill proficiency can be added to an ability check, or the player can ask the DM if a skill proficiency can be added to an ability check. A successful Wisdom (Insight) check doesn’t allow you to determine if a character is being deceitful. Your character’s action does, and if that action has a chance of succeeding, a chance of failing, and consequences for failing, then a Wisdom (Insight) check is used to determine if it fails and you suffer the consequences. Having a high Wisdom modifier and proficiency or expertise in the Insight skill will make it less likely for NPCs that try to deceive you to succeed, which in turn will mean I will more frequently telegraph unsuccessful attempts at deceiving you. Additionally, proficiency or expertise in the Insight skill will make you more likely to succeed at actions that involve gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms to determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone’s next move. This will in turn will mean fewer consequences suffered as results of failed Wisdom (Insight) checks. I mean, magic is useful. If you want to use magic to insure you can detect when NPCs lie, that’s a valid decision. I establish with my players before we begin play the way I handle action resolution so they know what to expect, and if that expectation pushes you more towards playing a spellcaster, that’s your choice to make. [/QUOTE]

Verification