Sense Motive: Walking Polygraph Machines?

[Airwolf]

I have to agree with Nebulous, keep Sense Motive. I think Neb is also right in that it should be vague. When I have had PCs use SM I have responded with things like “personal gain”. This worked great when they were working with a black market merchant that was working to gain their trust to rip them off.

I’m sure I could have said “he’s trying to rip you off” but it would cause the game to bog down into lots of SM and bluff rolls.

It takes some thinking but I’m sure you’ll be able to come up with responses when the NPC fails his/her bluff check that won’t ruin the game.

Good Luck

 

[lukelightning]

I always love it when one player is suspicious and says "I sense motive on the dude" and then all of a sudden all the players say "me too!"

Personally I try not to abuse that when I'm playing, but since sense motive is, in many ways, reflexive and not done actively by the character, I normally allow it when I'm DMing. After all, if someone has maxxed out sense motive their character should be able to do it even if the player is slow in jumping on the sense motive bandwagon.

 

[StupidSmurf]

Hilarity ensues when a players says his PC will Sense Motive, so you make the roll behind the screen, the PC fails, the NPC is actually on the up and up, and the PC thinks the NPC is hiding something!

What makes it funnier is if TWO PCs do a Sense Motive, you make the rolls secretly, one fails, one succeeds, so now you have TWO opinions! Who's right? Who's wrong? Who can tell?

BWAHAHA

 

[Crothian]

I always love it when one player is suspicious and says "I sense motive on the dude" and then all of a sudden all the players say "me too!"

That's when as DM you make all the rolls, and tell certain people the think he's lying and other they think he's telling the truth.

 

[WayneLigon]

Of course, the other idea I've had is simply to eliminate the skill from the game altogether.

Any other ideas? Does anyone else feel the same way that I do about this skill?

I don't have any problem with it. So few classes get it as a class skill that it's hardly even used save by maybe one or two characters.

I don't think it's unrealistic at all. Most people who deal with lies on a daily basis are indeed that good at discerning them. Most people are really bad liars (ie, they have no Bluff skill, or a good enough Charisma to carry it off), so that helps, but it's just all part of being a very perceptive individual.

 

[fiddlerjones]

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.


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

First off, I ::LOVE:: the sense motive skill, particularly for reasons like the fact that it generates plot hooks... the "he seems sad" scenario for example.

For your first point, as a DM you should NEVER assume that the PCs will go along with any given NPC. This is merely an example of poor planning. A good DM should account for the possibility that maybe the players won't believe the lying NPC.

Please do not override die rolls for the sake of story. It is not fair to your PCs. If you want to do that, just don't allow a die roll in the first place, or, if they succeed, give them more vague information than usual.

The skill needs to be in the game, though, just as hide/spot needs to be there. I mean, poker players live and die off of bluff/sense motive. It is a legitimate skill that can be learned just as performance or knowledge can be learned.

 

[Saeviomagy]

"wah wah wah, my players are effective occasionally and it reduces my ability to tell them exactly what they should be doing".

Is that basically the argument?

 

[Brother MacLaren]

You question somebody and you study their tells and you can soon figure out if they're lying or not.

But those are very important steps -- studying the subject and questioning them. Sense Motive should not be nearly as useful when you don't have the opportunity to do that.

 

[Wraith Form]

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.

YOU went out with her TOO?!?!

 

[Peter Gibbons]

As others have said, remember that Sense Motive isn't an automatic thing. The PC has to ask for it.

For the record, I do not agree with this statement. Players should not (and by the rules, do not) have to ask for the vast majority of Sense Motive checks. They are frequently opposed checks, and opposed checks are (almost always) automatic.

Still, I don't see the problem. The DM makes the Sense Motive check secretly, which means the player never really knows if he's correctly sensing the other character's motives. Unless, of course, the DM only bothers to "roll" when the character is Bluffing...which is symptomatic of a lousy DM rather than a problem with the rules.