Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Zuractai 04-08-07, 11:01 PM	MY question is even assuming you successfuly bluff someone, does that mean they believe what you are saying is true, or that you sound sincere? Because you can say things that are true, and not have people believe it, and even if a guard thinks you are telling the truth about the dagger in your hand accidentily stabbed the 4 dead people in the room while explaining that you are his brother, he still would probaly bring you in. Basicly, minus magic, how much can you get away with assuming you always win rolling Bluff
bobothechimp 04-08-07, 11:31 PM	I suggest you read the PHB entry for the bluff skill.
Fireclave 04-08-07, 11:45 PM	With bluff, you can get someone to believe almost anything. Bluff covers misdirections. Lies, exaggerations, understatements, and half-truths are all covered by Bluff. However, it's not mind control. You may be able to get someone to believe you, but that doesn't necessary mean you can get them to do whatever you want. For example, you can try and succeed to bluff the merchant into believing that you're a skilled hero with no money and in need a sword now to stop some orcs from raiding the town. But that doesn't obligate the merchant to giving you the sword or even offering a discount. With your guard example, I would argue that your bluff would automatically. The biggest bluff you can make is one that is "...way out there, almost too incredible to consider." This situation, however, is too incredible to consider. It's impossible to accidentally stab four people. Even if your DM allowed a bluff check and you successfully made the guard believed you, considering the evidence and circumstance, the guard may still be suspicious. He may believe you are telling the truth, but he is still free to think that there may be more going on than what he sees. Four dead bodies and one witness, albeit a believable witness, don't happen every day. And if some concrete evidence turns up, your words will matter little, if at all. Even if the guard completely believed you 100%, he is probably still obligated to take you in for questioning and any attempt to resist or escape on your part may quickly changed his mind about believing you. Even if you decided to go with the guard for questionings under the assumption that you'll just bluff your way out, bluff won't save you from a Detect Thoughts, Detect (Alignment), Zone of Truth, and similar divinations without magical protections. And any agency that is capable of employing these magical divinations will also have the forethought of relieving you of all magical equipment and dispelling your prior to investigation. Also, people may not believe your bluffs if you develop a reputation for lying and deceiving. Just like the story of the boy who cried wolf, if your reputation for deception precedes you, people are less likely to accept your bluffs as truths even if they would normally completely believe it. :twocents:
RobbyPants 04-09-07, 10:27 AM	Fireclave made many good points above. One more thing I'd add to elaborate on crazy, hard to believe bluffs is curcimstance modifiers. As the DM, you can always give someone a bonus or penalty to their Sense Motive check. The standard is +/- 2 for each favorable/unfavorable modifier, but that can be changed if you want. For example, lets say an orc was found near a dwarven city, not far from where two dwarves were found dead. He is holding a bloody axe (consistant with the wounds on the dwarves) and is in possession of a trinket from one of the dwarves. I would think that when he tries to lie, I'd give at least a +10 bonus to the dwarve's Sense Motive. The evidence is really stacked against him, and the dwarves probably already hate orcs anyway. This still, could fall into the realm of the-dwarves-already-have-their-minds-made-up anyway, so perhaps no Bluff check could ever succeed (as was mentioned by Fireclave, Bluff isn't mind control). Now, lets pretend that an evil dwarf killed the two dwarves, and planted the trinket on the orc, and then reported the orc to the dwarf guards. They find the orc who denies any knowledge, but the evil dwarf says that he saw the orc kill them. I might impose a penalty to the guard's Sense Motive (perhaps -2 or -4), because they're hearing a story that they probably want to believe.
Ian0311 04-09-07, 10:50 AM	When all the evidence points to you, no lie will fool someone who is aware of the evidence. Thus the orc with the trinket who killed the dwarves would be jailed or killed. Bluff is just being tricky enough to get out of some deep crap, not impossible situations like Scott Peterson bluffing himself out of jail.