Sense Motive: Walking Polygraph Machines?

[Green Knight]

As a DM one of the skills I truly hate is Sense Motive. IMO, it's pretty unrealistic for someone to be able to determine for sure if someone is lying just by looking at their gestures and facial expressions.

Funny, because that describes a scene in one of my favorite movies, 'The Negotiator'. While it played a little bit loose with real neurophysiology, the underlying idea is the same. You question somebody and you study their tells and you can soon figure out if they're lying or not. Point is, Sense Motive is completely realistic. Just because you and I aren't astute enough to notice the small details that indicate a person's lying doesn't mean others can't. Anyway, if your players are using it to their benefit more then you'd like, then you might want to start writing up NPC's with ranks in Bluff. Opposed rolls, after all. It isn't a set DC one has to meet for Sense Motive to work, which means that the difficulty for Sense Motive should scale up as the bad guys do. Not to mention that, as others have mentioned, there're modifiers that can be applied to the DC. Plenty of options there without having to houserule it or fudge the rolls.

 

[LostSoul]

I think Sense Motive is great, for both DMs and Players.

Players get to figure out which NPCs are trying to lead them astray.

DMs can use it for all sorts of reasons.

I like to call for Sense Motive checks all the time. Let's say the NPC has some backstory where they lost a child or something. If the PCs bring up anything about children, I'll ask for a Sense Motive roll. "You notice that he's sad about something." It's a neat way to add character to NPCs and it gets rid of the "DM is asking for a roll, this guy must be hiding something" problem.

I haven't had any problems with sense motive (no one has any ranks in it!) but my general advice is to never let the dice get in the way of the story.

I don't agree with this at all - unless the group has decided that it is the DM's story and not everyone's.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Another thing you might want to consider: alcohol, the great equalizer. When the liar meets you in the bar after you've had a few, your Sense Motive is impaired. Have the liar buy a few rounds before the pitch, and use Sleight of Hand to avoid drinking himself. It is certain to give a circumstance penalty to the PCs.


RC

 

[Stalker0]

I agree though, in general its way too easy to pick up on lies in DND. I mean, if I went up to somebody and asked directions, and they purposefully told me right when they should have said left, I don't think I'd have a 20% chance of detecting that lie, and nowhere close to 50%.

As far as the -5 goes, that's if the PC wants to believe you. But comeon, most NPCs (especially ones that have ties to the villians) are not going to be innately trusted by the PCs. They will be indifferent at best.

And why should the PCs have to ask for a sense motive? The main purpose of sense motive is to oppose bluff. If the NPC is lying he should make a bluff check, the PCs should get a sense motive. Do you require PCs to say their keeping their eyes open or ears peeled in order to make listen checks?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Do you ever go up to someone you innately distrust and ask for directions? Clearly, when you ask for directions, you wish to believe the answer.

And don't forget what Frank Herbert said in Dune: "Beer is the mind-killer."


RC

 

[BiggusGeekus]

Well, why lie?

In a setting with Zone of Truth as a 2nd level clerical spell, wouldn't people catch on and learn to tell the literal truth and still conceal the actual truth? Sort of like the Aes Sedi in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series.

Actually this entire discussion reminds me of an ex-girlfiend's somewhat shaky relationship with the truth. She never spoke a lie, not once. But dang you had to constantly check up and make sure she wasn't omitting huge and highly relevant facts.

 

[Hammerforge]

I haven't had any problems with sense motive (no one has any ranks in it!) but my general advice is to never let the dice get in the way of the story.

Agreed! I've even thought about faking rolling dice behind my screen and simply saying, "As far as you can tell, he appears to be telling the truth," unless, of course, the PC roll is remarkably high.

However, if at all possible I don't have my NPCs tell an outright lie. Instead they exaggerate, shade the truth, put forward opinions as facts and withhold vital information.

Interesting...I'll have to see how I can incorporate this.

A successful sense motive check then reveals "You get the impression he knows more than he's saying", to which my players are likely to respond in a suitably sarcastic manner, since all my NPCs know more than they are saying.

But isn't telling them that "he knows more than he's saying" basically demonstrate to the players that the NPC is being shifty and therefore not to be trusted? Score one point for Sense Motive. Even if there is some suspicion on the players' part, that's enough to ruin the ploy because now the PCs will not go along with the NPC. I know I wouldn't.

Quite often, the PCs are not interracting with the real villain anyway. They are being briefed by his pawn, who has been duped into believing what he says is true.

This is an excellent point. An NPC can't lie if he doesn't know what to lie about; hence in such cases Sense Motive is useless. In fact, I used this in my game this weekend.

I'm exaggerating somewhat - if a player has a good result I do try and give some useful information, but I'm certainly not going to derail the plot if I can help it.

Again, I agree. I will simply override die rolls if I need to in order to avoid derailing the plot.

 

[Hammerforge]

I agree though, in general its way too easy to pick up on lies in DND. I mean, if I went up to somebody and asked directions, and they purposefully told me right when they should have said left, I don't think I'd have a 20% chance of detecting that lie, and nowhere close to 50%.

That's exactly my bone of contention with Sense Motive. You hit the nail on the head.

As far as the -5 goes, that's if the PC wants to believe you. But comeon, most NPCs (especially ones that have ties to the villians) are not going to be innately trusted by the PCs. They will be indifferent at best.

I've actually had NPCs fool PCs in the past by deliberately making them look and act like naive simpletons. And believe it or not -- my players bought it! So if you catch PCs off guard like that, they could very well trust an NPC.

And why should the PCs have to ask for a sense motive? The main purpose of sense motive is to oppose bluff. If the NPC is lying he should make a bluff check, the PCs should get a sense motive. Do you require PCs to say their keeping their eyes open or ears peeled in order to make listen checks?

They don't have to ask for a Sense Motive check -- they simply do voluntarily when confronting an NPC sometimes, especially if said NPC is trying to persuade them of something.

 

[Hammerforge]

I find the climb skill sometiomees gets in the way off a story, because PCs take alternate routes and avoid some of the things I plan ... or maybe not.

Look, I'd rather have the skill removed them secretly nerfed. It's something characters spend precious skill points on, don't take that away from them.

Agreed, that's why I was thinking of removing it and allowing my players to reallocate their ranks in other skills.

Think about books and movies - telling someone is lying often happens. These are the heroes, if all the time they are lead around by their nose because people lie to them with no way to ever figure out the truth, that's not very heroic, nor satisfying to a player.

I disagree with your logic here. You seem to be arguing that not having the ability to Sense Motive equates to being "led around by the nose," but there are other possibilities. The PCs can use their common sense as well as try to piece together what the NPC has said and try to find clear evidence of lying, such as obvious contradictions, changing one's story multiple times, and the like.

 

[Nebulous]

I surely wouldn't get rid of the Sense Motive/Bluff skillset. Remember, it can also be used for Feinting (which is highly underused in my campaigns). I never let PC's explicitly know someone is lying, just give them vague hints, depending really on the difference between the rolls. A twenty-point spread in the PC's favor, i might tell them that the NPC is sweating profusely. On the other hand, if their discerning a lie (without using magic) would negate a valuable plot device/encounter, etc. i still wouldn't let them do it.

Heck, it's not a bad as Diplomacy altering the entire moods of people on a whim.