Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="reanjr" data-source="post: 1969808" data-attributes="member: 20740">I think most of the opposition to Sense Motive/Bluff being used PCvPC is based around this fallacious assumption that it tells you someone is lying and that your character believes/disbelieves this.  That's simply not the case.  It is not a yes/no sort of skill, but rather one that indicates your gut assumption.  Take the following example:Someone steals my wallet.  I saw him do it.  He picked it up off the table when he thought I wasn't looking.  I ask him about it and he says he didn't do it.  He's a very convincing person.  I can't tell that he is lying due to vocal anomolies, body language, or any other such thing.  I failed my Sense Motive vs. his Bluff.  On the other hand, I KNOW that he is lying anyway because I have contradictory evidence.Now, it doesn't always have to be that cut and dry.  Basically a failed Sense Motive check reveals nothing.  It does not tell you something is wrong, nor does it tell you nothing is wrong.  A successful one, on the other hand, only MAY tell you something is wrong.  It may even give you a false positive.  You may detect him being dishonest while he is telling the truth, because his motivations may be what is really being disguised even though the facts are not.In addition, there is the table for Sense Motive modifiers (to oppose Bluff).  As a player, you are in full control of which modifier you think is appropriate.  So, if desired, all players have a +20 to sense motive whenever they want it.And even if the check results in you being duped, as a player, you do not have to act in any particular way.  As a DM controlling an NPC, I play it the same way.  The NPC has motivations above and beyond those related to the PCs.  The PCs are not the be all and end all of important happenings in the universe (whatever they may think).Going back to the uses of Bluff listed in the SRD:Feint - I think it would be very unfair and strange not to allow a PC to use feitn on another PC.  I think this one is fairly self-evident, but if someone disagrees, I will try to make a more analytical assessment.Creating a Diversion to Hide - again, this seems like something that should definitely be possible to use on a PC.  I don't see why a PC should be immune to this affect just because they want to be.Delivering a Secret Message - since this is something that you are trying to accomplish on both ends (Bluffer and Motive-Senser), it is pretty obvious that this should be allowed.So all three hard examples of the things to use bluff for should be allowed.  Why shouldn't the implied usage be allowed as well?</blockquote>

Verification