Sense Motive - passive or active?

StalkingBlue · May 7, 2004

IceBear said:
Wow - in that case if I was in your campaign everytime I entered a room with NPCs I'd be asking to make Spot, Listen, and Sense Motive checks.

No no, that's not it. You wouldn't be asking to make those checks in S'mon's game - you likely wouldn't be playing in it! Nor in my game. Our styles just wouldn't mesh. And that's not a bad thing. Styles differ, people just have to find a group where they can play/GM their own favourite style or styles. No need to get exasperated.

StalkingBlue · May 7, 2004

After all that getting shouted at,

I still think it is interesting to see people's various approaches to social handling interaction in DnD.

I might not be convinced by the approach of you people who disagree with me, nor do I expect to convert you. But hearing what you do helps me define more clearly what I want, and don't want, in the games I play in and run. So whatever our differences, to me it's all good.

What is a bit strange to me is how highly emotional people tend to react to this whole topic. To me that looks pretty much like evidence of either of two things, possibly related:
- the DnD rules set for social interaction isn't all that well or clearly designed and tends to lead to frustration and bad experience for players; and/or
- social interaction in DnD is one field where DMs screwing players over are especially prevalent, and/or especially hated.

Dunno whether you'd agree with me there, I'd sure like to hear further opinions.

DarkMaster · May 7, 2004

StalkingBlue said:
Dunno whether you'd agree with me there, I'd sure like to hear further opinions.

The only way I guess to convert you is to have play one of my game. I am pretty sure you would not see a difference. I also just started my first Pbp campaign and there are already a few excellent example of how I use skill check. The only problem is that I don't let any trace of them on these board. In the first two pages there is at least 10 skill check roll and the players are more or less aware of them and I don't think they feel restraint at all (maybe perhaps by the way I introduced them to the story, but I wanted to quickly start)

IceBear · May 7, 2004

StalkingBlue said:
No no, that's not it. You wouldn't be asking to make those checks in S'mon's game - you likely wouldn't be playing in it! Nor in my game. Our styles just wouldn't mesh. And that's not a bad thing. Styles differ, people just have to find a group where they can play/GM their own favourite style or styles. No need to get exasperated.

Well, whatever. I tend to always work with my DM or players to reach a happy medium, but if you're saying you're too stuck in your ways to do that, then I guess you're right. I wouldn't actually ask to make those rolls ALL the time, I was just pointing out what COULD happen.

I just believe that character != players. I don't have INT20 or WIS20 so I wouldn't be able to act like one, but my character could.

As long as your players understand and agree with your methods that's fine. I wouldn't put many skillpoints in social skills in your games as it seems like the players' knowledge is more important than the characters. Again, I've played in games like that (and even DMed some) so I can handle it.

I guess why this is a little sore spot for me is because recently one of my players started DMing and he hates AoO. I was making a swashbuckler character and I had just sunk a lot of skillpoints in tumble. Then I had to stop and ask him if he was going to enforce AoO in his game. He said he would and I kept my skills the way they were. However, if he didn't enforce AoO and I didn't know that I would have been upset if the tank just ran past everyone without an AoO and had his skillpoints in something else.

Same here, as long as your players agree with how you're going to handle social skills then they won't feel like they're been short changed.

Remember, no one's playing style is as black and white as a few short posts would have them seem. If my group wanted to do away with social skills I would let them just roleplay everything. If, however, the worst RL speaker in my group wanted to play a diplomat, then I owe it to him, as his DM, to enforce the rules in such a way that the half-orc barbarian with 3 Charisma isn't the one who gets to smooth talk their way out of everything because his player in RL is the most charismatic.

I see my role as DM as one to make sure all the players are having fun and happy with the choices they made.

two · May 7, 2004

StalkingBlue said:
No no, that's not it. You wouldn't be asking to make those checks in S'mon's game - you likely wouldn't be playing in it! Nor in my game. Our styles just wouldn't mesh. And that's not a bad thing. Styles differ, people just have to find a group where they can play/GM their own favourite style or styles. No need to get exasperated.

Well help me out. I honestly don't understand what you would do in the simple situation I presented. The "he went thattaway" situation.

Would you only allow sense motive if a played asked? And then allow one? Isn't this just forcing players to ask for rolls left and right, interfering in good role-playing flow?

Would you, as a GM, attempt to "half-lie" a little, making it clear that the guy might not be telling the truth, giving hints to the players that they should question the NPC more closely?

I'm confused. Seriously. If you don't have Sense Motive to be passive what do you do?

StalkingBlue · May 7, 2004

IceBear said:
...As long as your players understand and agree with your methods that's fine. I wouldn't put many skillpoints in social skills in your games as it seems like the players' knowledge is more important than the characters. Again, I've played in games like that (and even DMed some) so I can handle it.

My style appears to work for my players ok, and - surprise! - they do invest skill points in social interaction skills. So do I when I play. My Nature Witch in S'mon's Borderlands game has ranks not only in Diplomacy but also in Intimidate, a cross-class skill for her. And I get to use both. A lot.

IceBear said:
I guess why this is a little sore spot for me is because recently one of my players started DMing and he hates AoO. I was making a swashbuckler character and I had just sunk a lot of skillpoints in tumble. Then I had to stop and ask him if he was going to enforce AoO in his game. He said he would and I kept my skills the way they were. However, if he didn't enforce AoO and I didn't know that I would have been upset if the tank just ran past everyone without an AoO and had his skillpoints in something else...

Yes - as so often in a roleplaying game, it really comes down to how far you feel you as a player can trust the DM, and how far you as DM can trust your players.

IceBear said:
...I see my role as DM as one to make sure all the players are having fun and happy with the choices they made.

IceBear · May 7, 2004

Why confused? A RPG is a shared experience. It's not the DM vs the players.

You seemed to have ignored not judging anyone's style by a few posts on these forums. I bet you actually use passive rolls from time to time (but rarely) just like I use active from time to time too. No one method will cover all the situations, I just prefer one to the other.

Also, answer me this. How does your group handle a poorly skilled speaker attempting to be the charismatic leader? I'm just curious. It's easy to roleplay a bad speaker when you're a good one, but I don't know how someone can do the opposite. I suspect you have a remarkable bunch of players who are all social, intelligent and charismatic so the highly social characters are played naturally whereas the low characters are roleplayed that way. You do know that not every group has that luxury of being blessed with incredibly wellrounded people?

DarkMaster · May 7, 2004

IceBear said:
Why confused? A RPG is a shared experience. It's not the DM vs the players.

You seemed to have ignored not judging anyone's style by a few posts on these forums. I bet you actually use passive rolls from time to time (but rarely) just like I use active from time to time too. No one method will cover all the situations, I just prefer one to the other.

Also, answer me this. How does your group handle a poorly skilled speaker attempting to be the charismatic leader? I'm just curious. It's easy to roleplay a bad speaker when you're a good one, but I don't know how someone can do the opposite. I suspect you have a remarkable bunch of players who are all social, intelligent and charismatic so the highly social characters are played naturally whereas the low characters are roleplayed that way. You do know that not every group has that luxury of being blessed with incredibly wellrounded people?

I find that way of playing boring, it is hard to play socially someone else, some people in my group are shy and one of them is playing the highly social rogue, and she is as effective as if the more charismatic player of the group was playing it. And I am very happy that DnD changed their rules to allow that.