Sense motive on the truth?

[Kahuna Burger]

In a play by post campaign, the characters are interrogating a prisoner under the assumption that he is part of a gang they are after. He isn't, he was attacking them to get the attention and favor of the gang in hopes of being invited to join. But they keep asking him questions about the gang's location and such.

Now, if he was lying to them, there would be a straightforward bluff/sense motive check to see if they realized that. But he is telling the truth. However, its obviously not what they want the truth to be, and we know we can't always recognize the truth anymore than we can always tell someone is lying. To make things worse, the whole group doesn't have a sense motive rank between them.

I can make some untrained checks, but how should I set the DC? he isn't bluffing them, so it isn't opposed. Theres a dc to get a general sense, but should I go with the bluff rules and add a modifier since they obviously want to believe that he's lying? Once he cracks and starts lying to give them what they want, how heavy should their modifiers be to realize that? (this is how witches got burned, you know... )

has anyone dealt with the mechanics of PCs sensing honesty where they expect dishonesty?

Kahuna Burger

 

[DarkMaster]

In a play by post campaign, the characters are interrogating a prisoner under the assumption that he is part of a gang they are after. He isn't, he was attacking them to get the attention and favor of the gang in hopes of being invited to join. But they keep asking him questions about the gang's location and such.

Now, if he was lying to them, there would be a straightforward bluff/sense motive check to see if they realized that. But he is telling the truth. However, its obviously not what they want the truth to be, and we know we can't always recognize the truth anymore than we can always tell someone is lying. To make things worse, the whole group doesn't have a sense motive rank between them.

I can make some untrained checks, but how should I set the DC? he isn't bluffing them, so it isn't opposed. Theres a dc to get a general sense, but should I go with the bluff rules and add a modifier since they obviously want to believe that he's lying? Once he cracks and starts lying to give them what they want, how heavy should their modifiers be to realize that? (this is how witches got burned, you know... )

has anyone dealt with the mechanics of PCs sensing honesty where they expect dishonesty?

Kahuna Burger

Usually I always play the dice when they request a sense motive and they're are too possible results, You sense a lie or not. In your case I would simply tell them that they feel that this guy is honest. Now it is up to them to decide, if they don't beleive it, as they should (guy is a probably a rogue and none of them has sense motive skills).

Once the guy crack he will try to give them what they want to be left alone, so if he has a high bluff they will be probably fooled again and your PC might end up on a wrong track. He might even bluff them into a trap, since your PC are so guilible.

That is fine, it will teach them a lesson, always have at least one character in the group with good social skills, otherwise outside of the simple dungeon your group will be fooled by every merchant and rogue they encounter and won't survive long in the urban jungle. Charisma and social skill are there for a reason.

 

[Ibram]

I'd tell them to roll a sense motive (which can be used untrained... using wis i believe). regardless of the roll I'd tell them that he seems honest, unless they rolled a natural 1 (then I'd tell them that he seems to be holding something back)

 

[Spatula]

Hmmm. Well, the Bluff skill assigns a -5 penalty to Sense Motive checks if the target wants to believe the lie. So you can use that once he starts telling the players what they want to hear.

Sense Motive assigns a DC 20 to get a feeling that someone is trustworthy. The skill description doesn't really elaborate on what exactly that means, but I would run with that as the DC to figure out the guy is telling the truth. That sort of thing should be a tricky check for unskilled characters.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I have a single generic answer for sense motive attempts on the truth (or that fail): "If he's lying, he's good enough that you can't tell."

For the DC 20 hunch, I'd let people know something like "you have a gut feeling this guy is being honest."

And, as others have pointed out, if the PCs work him over and convince him to lie so that they'll believe him, they'll be at penalties vs. his bluff check. They could still make the sense motive and realize that he's lying. But that's why torture isn't generally a very reliable information gathering method.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

And, as others have pointed out, if the PCs work him over and convince him to lie so that they'll believe him, they'll be at penalties vs. his bluff check. They could still make the sense motive and realize that he's lying. But that's why torture isn't generally a very reliable information gathering method.

that last bit is why I'm not going to give them a super easy DC - theres such a wide history of people trying to 'get the truth' and beating a lie out of someone. If a 'sense motive' to recognize the truth succeeded on anything but a one, almost no innocent people would be in jail and jealous spouses would eventually chill out.

Thanks to all for the input.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Al]

I use a sort of weird system where you add the interrogator's Sense Motive score and the Bluff or Diplomacy score (either is valid, since you're telling the truth) and then roll a combined check against a fixed DC. This means that expert Sense Motivers (?) can tell a truth even if it's unbelievable; an expert Bluffer can convince them of the real truth, and if both the senser and bluffer are well-trained the truth easily outs. DCs are adjustable depending on how 'believable' the story is- in this case, probably a 20. In other words, add the PC's SM, say +4, to the victim's Bluff, say +3. Combining the two means that the check needs to be a 13 or better for the PCs to believe the truth.

 

[jgsugden]

I never use the words 'truth' or 'lie' with sense motive. I find it far better to use words like 'honest' or 'deceptive'.

I also require them to spend a little time before they get anything from sense motive, as the book suggests. I do allow 'instant reads', but they are at a significant penalty - usually about a -20 penalty to the sense motive.

As an example, the PCs ran into an old man reading a book at a fork in the road and asked him, "Can you tell us which of these roads leads to Shimmer Forest?"

The man answered them by pointing towards one of the roads and then went back to his book.

One of my (newer) players asked, "Can I use a sense motive to see if he is lying?"

I responded, "You havn't really seen enough to get a good sense of whether the man was being deceptive. You'll need to talk to him a bit more to get a good idea."

The PCs then began to talk to the man and ask him what he knew about Shimmer Forest. The man, a rather gruff fellow, didn't want to talk to the PCs so he rebuffed their attempts at information gathering by saying, "I don't know anything about that dang forest, other than it is down that road. I think some merchants went down the road just a few minutes ago. Maybe they can help you out if you hurry after them." This was untrue.

I then gave the PCs a sense motive roll and revealed (on a successful roll) that he seemed annoyed and deceptive. My experienced player interpreted this correctly as him just trying to get rid of the PCs. They hurried down the road.

Anyways, that is how I run it. it works well. I find using 'truth' and 'lie' is a bit too exact. It tends to turn the skill into a lie detector instead a sensing of the motives of the being.

 

[SlamZanee]

my DM rolls some of our checks because if i roll a 5 and equal a total of like 8 than a pc may just figure well i didnt roll high enough...same with spot and listen checks...i mean it makes sence....