Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="D1Tremere" data-source="post: 7593558" data-attributes="member: 61148"><p>The player always determines what the character thinks, does, and says, EXCEPT when those things are determined by the rules or the DM. They are always bound by the results of checks (or do players in your game simply disbelieve damage and hits away?). A DM can choose to disregard the outcome of the rules/roles, and a player can choose to roleplay a scenario without invoking roles in many cases, but ultimately a player roles dice to try and succeed at a task or suffer the outcomes of failure. Why else are the dice there?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The skill actually says “Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature.” Note that it says the check decides what your character determines (which is telling them what they think). What exactly would your character’s thoughts be based on in such a scenario if not what they observed in their environment?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A DM can’t FORCE a player to make a roll. A player can choose to make a role in pursuit of a mechanical task, which is why the rules exist in the first place. You can choose for your character that they believe someone is lying or telling the truth just as anyone can eschew engaging with reality when conjuring their beliefs and opinions. If you want to pretend your character knows what is what that is fine, but once you engage with reality is has a nasty way of conflicting with such beliefs.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>To clarify my position, a DM certainly CAN choose what actions succeed or fail, but that involves disregarding the rules. That is something they are free to do (and should do in many cases), but it is not the default of each action generally. To make success and failure an arbitrary extension of the DM would create a lot of problems, not the least of which would be invalidating every mechanical choice that players made for their characters. To disregard a check here or there or ignore a rule when it suits a scene is fine. To reduce every character to an avatar of the player with no mechanical strengths or weaknesses would be playing a game other than 5e.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="D1Tremere, post: 7593558, member: 61148"] The player always determines what the character thinks, does, and says, EXCEPT when those things are determined by the rules or the DM. They are always bound by the results of checks (or do players in your game simply disbelieve damage and hits away?). A DM can choose to disregard the outcome of the rules/roles, and a player can choose to roleplay a scenario without invoking roles in many cases, but ultimately a player roles dice to try and succeed at a task or suffer the outcomes of failure. Why else are the dice there? The skill actually says “Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature.” Note that it says the check decides what your character determines (which is telling them what they think). What exactly would your character’s thoughts be based on in such a scenario if not what they observed in their environment? A DM can’t FORCE a player to make a roll. A player can choose to make a role in pursuit of a mechanical task, which is why the rules exist in the first place. You can choose for your character that they believe someone is lying or telling the truth just as anyone can eschew engaging with reality when conjuring their beliefs and opinions. If you want to pretend your character knows what is what that is fine, but once you engage with reality is has a nasty way of conflicting with such beliefs. To clarify my position, a DM certainly CAN choose what actions succeed or fail, but that involves disregarding the rules. That is something they are free to do (and should do in many cases), but it is not the default of each action generally. To make success and failure an arbitrary extension of the DM would create a lot of problems, not the least of which would be invalidating every mechanical choice that players made for their characters. To disregard a check here or there or ignore a rule when it suits a scene is fine. To reduce every character to an avatar of the player with no mechanical strengths or weaknesses would be playing a game other than 5e. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Should Insight be able to determine if an NPC is lying?
Top