Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9869080" data-attributes="member: 7025508">And that's how this usually works and the the PC insight vs NPC deception example you opposed is such. The successful roll  on the PC's part gives the player information which can help them to make the decision whether to believe the NPC, whereas failed roll doesn't give them that information. But in either case they still get to make that decision. The mechanic serves a purpose, it matters and it will inform the player decision making, it just doesn't force it. Meanwhile when a PC tries to make an argument to influence the NPC, the player has to make the argument. They need to say what they try to convince the NPC about and give reasons why the NPC should comply. Then based oh how outrageous the demand is and how well the reasons match the NPCs beliefs and values* the GM sets a DC. Then the player makes a persuasion roll with their PCs skill. * which may have been learned earlier in the conversation with combination of players skills and insight checks.The PCs skills matter, but the player still has to use their own brains and make their own decisions. And if they wouldn't then the players would not be needed. And this is not unique to social situations. In D&D style combat the numbers and features on the character sheet certainly matter a lot, but the player still has to use their own brains to decide how to position, what spell or manoeuvre to use and on whom etc.</blockquote>

Verification