535
Pretty sure this is happening in my game (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 10 months ago by to c/rpgmemes@ttrpg.network
57 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

The DM isn't controlling the players. The player of the paladin is choosing to use sense motive against my bluff checks.

Again, any circumstancial penalties or bonuses that are not inherent on your sheet are typically given by the DM. Such as you entering a room that has some kind of field or obstacle that imposes a penalty or confers a buff. It does not mean that a player can say "I have a super high iron will and so I get a +40 to any mind affecting spells!"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (1 child)

    Not what I'm saying, and I know you don't understand the problem, because you're talking about spell save DCs which are not skill checks and are specifically under DM purview as a magical mind altering effect.

    Think of it like this:

    You have the right, as a player, to decide your character fucking hates someone so much they will not believe a word they say under any circumstance.

    That would be, in terms of interpreting that to mechanics, setting the Skill DC to "impossible." Which is ALWAYS AN OPTION FOR SKILL CHECKS. You can not jump to heaven with an Athletics check (normally speaking).

    It could be you're metagaming, but that's a separate problem beyond the scope of skill, ability, and spell save checks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (1 child)

    Holy shit. No. I am not talking about spell save DCs; I am talking about circumstances that would provide a bonus or penalty that might not appear on your character sheet, using magical effects as an example.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (1 child)

    Yes, you are, and you don't know enough to know what you just said.

    "I have a super high iron will and so I get a +40 to any mind affecting spells!"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (1 child)

    Let's use a different example then.

    The characters have entered a room where the wind is absolutely howling, affecting their hearing, movement and balance. Anything they do in that room that requires a listen, movement or a balance check, has a -5 penalty. That is a circumstancial penalty.

    The same can be done through magical means.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    Sure.

    And you as the player are the one who decides what the metaphorical wind is like for your character's attitude towards the people and world around them.

    Don't trust the king? Good news, you can tell the DM that, and they can't say "yes you do" unless you are affected by magic. They also can't roll the king's Persuasion to change your character's mind about that without you agreeing to how the DC is set, including potentially a straight contested roll.

    Or, to put it another way:

    Just because they didn't find a trap in the hallway doesn't mean they have to think there isn't one, especially if there's a posted sign saying "This hallway is trapped."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    There is a difference between "you believe what they say" and "you can't tell if they are lying." The sense motive roll's outcome only says whether or not they can tell if another character is lying; not even what the lie is or have anything to affect their personal belief. He might know the cleric is a bad guy; he just can't prove it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (1 child)

    And he can think whatever the fuck he wants about that, which is entirely my point, because he, as a theoretically sentient being, is aware that he is flawed.

    Unless there's a character driven reason not to! Arrogance, naivete, backstory, whatever.

    But, more pressingly, my point is to make you aware that there are more options available to the system for Deception checks than pure statblock measuring! And every table should be aware of that!

    As well as the fact that Persuasion and Deception are not mind control.

    Which I'm still not convinced you are, because this argument is still going.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 10 months ago* (1 child)

    As well as the fact that Persuasion and Deception are not mind control.

    No fucking shit. I agree with that, my argument is that knowing the truth and believing it are two different things. It doesn't affect their beliefs or motivations; it's a god damn lie detector test.

    At this point I can only come to two conclusions: You either don't have a strong grasp of English or you are willfully not reading what I am saying.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

    And

    A

    Player

    Can

    Decide

    They

    Do

    Not

    Care

    What

    The

    Lie

    Detector

    Says

    Or

    How

    It's

    Calibrated

    It's a particularly interesting example you've chosen given that lie detectors are fucking pseudoscience and a specific character might not believe one single fucking thing they say

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent