Sense Motive - passive or active?

[Thanee]

I do treat PC's Spot & Listen skills as passive, though - although the players know when they've been asked to make a check, and will tend to become suspicious even if the roll fails - or there's really nothing there to spot or hear. . I treat that as the "hairs on the back of the neck" feeling where you sense something's wrong, but can't tell what.

Heh.

That's why I tend to do passive rolls (including Sense Motive (see above)) secretly, if they would 'tip off' the player, to avoid metagaming.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Quasqueton]

I'm rather surprised (and saddened) at how many DMs force their Players to be sensitive to subtleties in the DM's acting ability. I find this highly unfair.

Personally, as a Player, I don't normally notice subtlety in any situation. But my 1st-level paladin has +7 in Sense Motive. I also am not all that great with public speaking, but my 1st-level paladin has +11 in Diplomacy. [I took the Skill Focus (Diplomacy) and Negotiator feats.] If I had a DM that handled all my PC's social interactions off my Real Life ability to speak elloquently and note small subtlety, I'd never play a social character -- I'd stick to hack and slash feats.

When I DM, and the PCs are interacting with a bluffing NPC, I roll the NPC's Bluff check vs. the PCs' Take 10 Sense Motive check. If the Players actively call for a Sense Motive, I let them roll vs. the NPC's Take 10 Bluff check. Either way, the in-game results do not rely on our Real Life social abilities.


Now, back to the opening post:

PC: "Do you know where John is?"

NPC: "I haven't seen John today." [NPC knows where John is, but doesn't want to say.]

Does the PC get a SM check versus the NPC's Bluff check? Or does the Player have to specificaly call for a SM check?

What say you to this?

How about when the question and answer are less straight forward, but the meaning is clearly understandable?

PC: "Where is John?"

NPC: "I haven't seen him today."


PC: "Did John make it home OK?"

NPC: "I didn't run into any problems." [NPC left John on the park bench where he fell asleep.]

And this?

Do you consider the above as Bluffs? If so, does the PC get a Sense Motive check automatically (even if secretly made by the DM), or does the PC have to call for a check?

For me, I consider any kind of misdirection or midleading a Bluff. Whether the Bluff was blatant or subtle, or a twist on the full truth, or a half-truth, or a non-answer. And I don't rely on the Players' abilities to catch me being subtle (which I couldn't act out anyway).

Quasqueton

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Do you consider the above as Bluffs? If so, does the PC get a Sense Motive check automatically (even if secretly made by the DM), or does the PC have to call for a check?

For me, I consider any kind of misdirection or midleading a Bluff. Whether the Bluff was blatant or subtle, or a twist on the full truth, or a half-truth, or a non-answer. And I don't rely on the Players' abilities to catch me being subtle (which I couldn't act out anyway).

I would consider it a bluff with a strong bonus. the NPC is being evasive rather than flat out lying for a reason after all, which is to make his answers more convincing. Bluff is a skill with bonuses and penalties for how far you try to stretch the truth, and this one is a tiny stretch. however, a highly skilled pc deserves a chance to catch the ommission mechanicly as well as through the player's attention.

Elder Baskilisk - thank you for that elaboration, I felt that S.B. had missed my real point, but didn't have the mental energy to walk through the full analogy as you did. That is exactly the problem with making spot or sense motive active only skills, and another poster's idea that hiding your rules change from the players makes it better is just disturbing.... oh and s'mon actually it IS your job to keep track of player skills or trust them not to metagame your roll requests, thats why you're the DM.

Kahuna Burger

 

[S'mon]

oh and s'mon actually it IS your job to keep track of player skills or trust them not to metagame your roll requests, thats why you're the DM.

I have better things to do - I already run all the NPCs, I'm not running the PCs too!
I pretty much do trust the players not to metagame roll requests. That said, I'm thinking of adopting secret rolls for Listen & Spot checks (only).

I think if it were up to me (and SB, I suspect) I'd get rid of all the social-interaction skills except maybe for a single 'Interaction' skill that would cover any necessary Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Sense Motive etc rolls. I don't like how 3e de-emphasises in-character roleplay (IMO the most fun part of any RPG) in favour of skills checks. As a player I don't like making a cool speech IC and having it fall flat because I roll '3' on my Diplomacy check.

 

[S'mon]

BTW the game already treats PCs as an exception to the social-interaction skills in that the DM is banned from rolling Diplomacy, Bluff etc checks against them and saying "You like him", or "You believe him" - ie there's a PC-exemption, players can always rely on their own wits. To me that has to work both ways - if PCs can't be automatically fooled by a high Bluff roll, why should they get the advantage of an automatic Sense Motive roll? I don't necessarily give NPCs Sense Motive rolls either, for that matter.

 

[StalkingBlue]

I have better things to do - I already run all the NPCs, I'm not running the PCs too!

Glad to hear that. Much as I trust you, letting you run my PC would be taking things a bit far ...

I pretty much do trust the players not to metagame roll requests. That said, I'm thinking of adopting secret rolls for Listen & Spot checks (only).

I think if it were up to me (and SB, I suspect) I'd get rid of all the social-interaction skills except maybe for a single 'Interaction' skill that would cover any necessary Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Sense Motive etc rolls. I don't like how 3e de-emphasises in-character roleplay (IMO the most fun part of any RPG) in favour of skills checks. As a player I don't like making a cool speech IC and having it fall flat because I roll '3' on my Diplomacy check.

Yup, I agree of course. That whole system is strange and unsatisfying IMO.

Rules-wise, there are far too many different social-interacion skills, with too few accessible to most classes (and too few skill points overall to make it worthwhile investing in many of them!), so it's almost impossible for a DnD PC to use a wide range of interaction tactics successfully if you go by the die rolls. I've sat at a few negotiation tables in the four years I practiced law, and I've _never_ seen anyone use pure Bluff, Diplomacy or Intimidate tactics. It just doesn't work that way.
I'm currently letting players apply part of their bonuses in one interaction skill even when their PCs are sorta using another. It's still not enough ...

RP-wise, I don't like letting dice have the last word when I've got players perfectly capable of making a strong point - cool speech, cunning manipulation, salesman's confidence-exuding aura, I don't care.
I prob use player's social-interaction skill checks mostly to give them a _bonus_ only, not a penalty - or putting it the other way round, clever RPing interaction can give huge bonuses to the roll.

 

[StalkingBlue]

BTW the game already treats PCs as an exception to the social-interaction skills in that the DM is banned from rolling Diplomacy, Bluff etc checks against them and saying "You like him", or "You believe him" - ie there's a PC-exemption, players can always rely on their own wits. To me that has to work both ways - if PCs can't be automatically fooled by a high Bluff roll, why should they get the advantage of an automatic Sense Motive roll?

Yup, I agree. I suspect we may be in the minority ...

I don't necessarily give NPCs Sense Motive rolls either, for that matter.

Neither do I, of course.

How do you other people handle this?

Do you make a secret Sense Motive check for a PC and if that fails, tell the player that their PC 'likes' or 'trusts' the NPC - even if the player is suspicious?

Conversely, do you always give NPCs Sense Motive rolls?

 

[pensiv]

so how do Sense Motive and Bluff work for the PCs if the DM is banned from rolling the opposing checks for the NPCs?

 

[DarkMaster]

BTW the game already treats PCs as an exception to the social-interaction skills in that the DM is banned from rolling Diplomacy, Bluff etc checks against them and saying "You like him", or "You believe him" - ie there's a PC-exemption, players can always rely on their own wits. To me that has to work both ways - if PCs can't be automatically fooled by a high Bluff roll, why should they get the advantage of an automatic Sense Motive roll? I don't necessarily give NPCs Sense Motive rolls either, for that matter.

Well if I say: There is a bird on top of the tower that has x-ray vision.
How do your PC know if I tell the truth or not. By looking at the DM expression and relying on your personal knowledge and instinct to assess wether the DM is lying or not is not role playing. Your character doesn't see the DM and doesn't have access to your brain. So secret bluff roll for the NPC followed by secret sense motive roll for the player. After that DM explain how your character perceives the assesment of the NPC. Then the PC can do whatever he wants with the info.

Even if the car dealer seems extremely honest do you beleive him?

Things that happen around the table should not have any impact on what is happening to the PC.

 

[DarkMaster]

Yup, I agree. I suspect we may be in the minority ...



Neither do I, of course.

How do you other people handle this?

Do you make a secret Sense Motive check for a PC and if that fails, tell the player that their PC 'likes' or 'trusts' the NPC - even if the player is suspicious?

Conversely, do you always give NPCs Sense Motive rolls?

Well I even roll Diplomacy check against the PC. According to the roll I adjust my description of what is happening and more often than not I am able to achieve the result of the die. I don't want to influence my NPC I want them to influence me as it should be. Otherwise I will make every magic item seller a 10 level fighter with 8 charisma and 0 diplomacy because I can "role play" them. What applies to my PC applies to my NPC.