Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5559863" data-attributes="member: 4937">I never apply the 'hunch' rule to knowing the truth.&nbsp;&nbsp; I use 'hunch' essentially for epathy checks - being able to tell if an NPC is enduring some sort of emotion - without explaining why the NPC might be experiencing that emotion.&nbsp;&nbsp; So, 'hunch' gets you answers like, &quot;He seems angry.&quot; or &quot;You think that he is flirting with you.&quot;&nbsp; It's mostly used by the player to confirm that what they are experiencing in the role play is what is actually occuring within the game world, or conversely, that some aspect of the game world that isn't coming through in the role play is present in the game world.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's occassionally used as a 'spot' type check in situations where the thing that is hidden isn't visually concealed, but the motive behind it is.&nbsp; For example, I'd use a 'hunch' check to notice that the beggar on the street corner was acting in a suspicious manner (he's actually a lookout for the local theives guild), or that a particular couple at a dance was making discrete efforts to try to keep a conversation private.For lying&nbsp; I always use bluff opposed by sense motive.&nbsp; I generally don't allow retries for the same information.&nbsp; Once a character gets away with a lie, any badgering on the same topic won't earn additional sense motive checks.&nbsp; The biggest problem I have with the bluff/sense motive interaction is that a class with bluff as a class skill pretty much always succeeds at lying when opposed to classes without the sense motive skill, and a class without bluff as a class skill&nbsp; pretty much always fails to successfully lie when opposed by a class with the sense motive skill.I'm not sure I see that as as big of a bug as you do.However, I would suggest that lying to a close friend who believes you to be trust worthy is easier than anything the rules provide for.&nbsp;&nbsp; The rules assume that the easiest lie to get away with is a +0 modifier on your bluff check.&nbsp;&nbsp; I would assume that lying to a close friend (like a spouse or a leige that has reason to trust you) is easier than a +0 modifier to the DC.&nbsp; For example, what about the following case:&quot;The bluff is not only believable but the opposite is improbable, and the character would suffer if the bluff was not true.&quot;This is like the edge case Diplomacy problem of 'its hard for a high level character to get his equally high level spouse to pass the salt'.&nbsp; It's a hole worth plugging, but I'm not sure that it constitutes a huge problem.Keep in mind that Sherlock Holmes is a '7th level expert'.&nbsp; Naturally mid to high level characters will have skills that seem superhuman because they are superhuman.&nbsp; I would expect a 7th level expert to be very hard to lie to successfully.What exactly is the bug you have that you think needs fixing?&nbsp; Do you want PC's to be able to dupe NPO's more often?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5559863, member: 4937"] I never apply the 'hunch' rule to knowing the truth. I use 'hunch' essentially for epathy checks - being able to tell if an NPC is enduring some sort of emotion - without explaining why the NPC might be experiencing that emotion. So, 'hunch' gets you answers like, "He seems angry." or "You think that he is flirting with you." It's mostly used by the player to confirm that what they are experiencing in the role play is what is actually occuring within the game world, or conversely, that some aspect of the game world that isn't coming through in the role play is present in the game world. It's occassionally used as a 'spot' type check in situations where the thing that is hidden isn't visually concealed, but the motive behind it is. For example, I'd use a 'hunch' check to notice that the beggar on the street corner was acting in a suspicious manner (he's actually a lookout for the local theives guild), or that a particular couple at a dance was making discrete efforts to try to keep a conversation private. For lying I always use bluff opposed by sense motive. I generally don't allow retries for the same information. Once a character gets away with a lie, any badgering on the same topic won't earn additional sense motive checks. The biggest problem I have with the bluff/sense motive interaction is that a class with bluff as a class skill pretty much always succeeds at lying when opposed to classes without the sense motive skill, and a class without bluff as a class skill pretty much always fails to successfully lie when opposed by a class with the sense motive skill. I'm not sure I see that as as big of a bug as you do. However, I would suggest that lying to a close friend who believes you to be trust worthy is easier than anything the rules provide for. The rules assume that the easiest lie to get away with is a +0 modifier on your bluff check. I would assume that lying to a close friend (like a spouse or a leige that has reason to trust you) is easier than a +0 modifier to the DC. For example, what about the following case: "The bluff is not only believable but the opposite is improbable, and the character would suffer if the bluff was not true." This is like the edge case Diplomacy problem of 'its hard for a high level character to get his equally high level spouse to pass the salt'. It's a hole worth plugging, but I'm not sure that it constitutes a huge problem. Keep in mind that Sherlock Holmes is a '7th level expert'. Naturally mid to high level characters will have skills that seem superhuman because they are superhuman. I would expect a 7th level expert to be very hard to lie to successfully. What exactly is the bug you have that you think needs fixing? Do you want PC's to be able to dupe NPO's more often? [/QUOTE]

Verification