Sense Motive vs Bluff

[Sekhmet]

[MENTION=6669384]Greenfield[/MENTION] There is no inherent falsehood to "I haven't seen him today". He is being completely honest with you, it isn't deception in the slightest. No Bluff check, a Sense Motive check under 100 will not reveal anything.
Lets assume that Bartender knows exactly where Blacksmith is, and Paladin asks Bartender "Where is Blacksmith?"
If Bartender says "I don't know", then he is lying. He rolls his Bluff. Sense Motive will help.
If he says "He is probably at his smithy", then he is lying. He knows that Blacksmith left town and is probably not at his smithy. He rolls his Bluff. Sense Motive helps.
If he says "He isn't here", then he is not lying, deceiving, or misdirecting. He does not roll his Bluff. Sense Motive does nothing (short of rolling 100).
If he says "I haven't seen him today", then he isn't answering the question at all. He does not roll his Bluff. Sense Motive does nothing. The Paladin must ask more questions.

Outside of directly opposing a Bluff check, Sense Motive takes a full minute (10 rounds) to get a sense for a single person. A single question such as "Do you know where Blacksmith is?" will likely last only one round, Paladin doesn't even have a chance to get a feel for trustworthiness.

 

[Greenfield]

Sense Motive isn't Detect Lie. According to the text of the skill, (which I included in an earlier post) it helps you sense when "something's up" and/or assess the trustworthiness of the person.

That's why I made the distinction between saying "I haven't seen him today" as an innocent statement, and saying those exact same words as an attempt to mislead.

The person who tries to mislead you by willfully evading the question isn't trustworthy, and that is one of the things that Sense Motive helps you spot.

Go read the first few lines of the skill description. That is specifically mentioned.

 

[Dozen]

I have to agree with Greenfield. Hunch should be able to detect the presence of a mislead, and that includes the "I haven't seen him today" example. Sense Motive is what it says on the tin. If your motive is to give a dodge answer to avoid a question, it can be sensed with it, since it's esentially still a way of fooling you. You don't get to know WHAT is up exactly with Hunch if you can't figure it out after you noticed, but you can tell that SOMETHING is up, and that still helps. I'm not saying it always requires a check - you may notice he didn't give a proper answer soon or even right after the fact, but that doesn't mean your guts can't warn you beforehand. It also may be quite unnecessary or outright stupid to roll for this most of the time, but not all the time, and the rules allow it.

In your example, this is also applicable. A dumb character might not figure out instantly the Bartender doesn't want to tell him where the Blacksmith is, but his instincts might go telltale.

And bluntly put, no action has a 'short of rolling 100' effect. That's bullpies. And even if it was the equalient of a Bluff check result that high, Hunch would still detect it and make the character being "lied" to at least cautious. Ignoring this fact is the reason many people think Bluff is overpowered at high levels.

 

[anest1s]

I agree with Greenfield too. However I wasn't asking about this


Ok let me give you an example:

Player: Are you the assassin?
Innkeeper: What the are you talking about?!
Player: I sense motive him.
DM: You feel he is hiding something.
Player: Time to step on this zone of truth, old man.

(The player is 100% sure the Innkeeper is lying, because there is no way he could be wrong. )

If there was a rule "If you fail the sense motive check by 5 or more, you get a wrong feeling" then the player wouldn't be so sure about himself, without a solid investment on sense motive skill.

 

[Sekhmet]

Go read the first few lines of the skill description. That is specifically mentioned.

Yes, but that particular usage requires a minute long sense motive check.
If you are not opposing a Bluff check, your Sense Motive is a minute long action.
If you ask one question, to which a Bluff check is not required, you will get no Sense Motive data.
If you do not have one minute or more of interaction, you do not gain a Sense Motive check.
Please read through the entirety of the skill before you assume the first line is all encompassing.

Trying to gain information with Sense Motive generally takes at least 1 minute

[MENTION=94230]anest1s[/MENTION] You do not get a Sense Motive check after one question. You must spend one minute gaining information. He did not Bluff you, you did not get to make a Sense Motive check in response.
You have not played the situation by RAW.

 

[anest1s]

@anest1s You do not get a Sense Motive check after one question. You must spend one minute gaining information. He did not Bluff you, you did not get to make a Sense Motive check in response.
You have not played the situation by RAW.

No, actually the innkeeper is the assassin, so he did use bluff.

 

[Greenfield]

Please note the word "generally". As in "usually, but not always".

And while Bluff has very specific uses, and Sense Motive is specific to those uses, it's also a more general feat.

The argument so far seems to have been "Sense Motive is Detect Untrue Statement". It isn't.

 

[Dozen]

What Sekhmet is claiming in his last post is true. You have to spend time on a Hunch check.

No, actually the innkeeper is the assassin, so he did use bluff.

He did not. Your paladin may have used Hunch, but since what the innkeeper said is not a falsehood (not even a statement, actually), he did not use Bluff, and there was no check to oppose as such.

 

[Greenfield]

What Sekhmet is claiming in his last post is true. You have to spend time in a Hunch check.


He did not. Your paladin may have used Hunch, but since the inkeeper said is not a falsehood (not even a statement, actually), he did not use Bluff, and there was no check to oppose as such.

"I don't know what you're talking about" isn't a statement? Are we speaking the same language?

If he's the Assassin then it's a flat out lie, and would set off alarms all over the place were a Detect Lie in effect. In any case, the "is this guy trustworthy" aspect should come into play.

If he'd said, "I'm a bartender. You want that kind of person, look by the docks.", that would still be a misleading statement (and thus subject to Sense Motive), but wouldn't trigger a Detect Lie. (Presuming, that is, that assassin types can be found by the docks.)

 

[Dozen]

I meant "What the are you talking about?!". And please refrain from unecessary harshness. I'm all in for profanity, but hurling insults just causes flamewars. We're trying to prove the same point, after all. By all means, we should be bud-bud over at least this.