An NPC is telling the truth to a PC. The PC has reason to suspect that the NPC is lying. The PC then calls for a Sense Motive roll. What do you do now? You can't roll the PC's Bluff, because he's not trying to lie. But you can't have the PC just know that the NPC is telling the truth, because she has good reason to think he might be lying.
The only thing I could think of is having the NPC roll Diplomacy as an Aid Another check to help the PC tell that he's telling the truth, but then that leaves the question open: how do you set a DC for the Sense Motive check?
Any ideas?
I simply let the PC roll his sense motive and I rolled a d20 (just for show). After the PC added all his bonuses and told me the result, I said:
"well you can't be sure, but he seems to be telling the truth".
simple as that.
does that come with an option for a Jedi Hand Wav
He seems to be telling the truth, and these are not the droids you're looking for
The PC rolls a Seense Motive, tells the GM the number
GM rolls behind the screen for the Thug's Bluff
GM compares results and says either
. . Oh yeah, this guy is making it up as he goes
. . You cant be sure, but you think he's lieing
. . You cant be sure, but you think he's telling the truth
. . You can see it in the way he told you, its the truth
Case 2) Thug is telling the truth
The PC rolls a Seense Motive, tells the GM the number
GM rolls behind the screen, as decoy roll the Thug's Bluff roll
GM ignores the rolls and says
. . You cant be sure, but you think he's telling the truth < with optional jedi handwave
>Also, for story plots and preserving mystery,
dont forget to have the boss Lie To His Mooks, so the captured mooks at the airstrip will truthfully be saying the boss went to his warehouse on the warf... when actually the boss never goes to that tripwire & landmine deathtrap, and is at the penthouse suite dountown.
Depending on how believable the truth seems to come out you might want to make a Sense Motive check against a DC of anywhere from 5-30 (depending on how smooth a talker the person is) to determine if they may be withholding some sort of information without actually lying.
But if its mystery you want then make so that unless they have a reason to really inquire about the motives of the speaker, just tell them the truth...but not the whole truth.
The problem with that suggestion is that it destroys any mystery that you might want to preserve. Sometimes you really can't tell when someone's telling the truth, and it could be an interesting story point. That's why I'd like to have a mechanic that I can fall back on in cases where I don't just want to use it as an opportunity to control the narrative.
Did you read my post?
...
I simply let the PC roll his sense motive and I rolled a d20 (just for show). After the PC added all his bonuses and told me the result, I said:
"well you can't be sure, but he seems to be telling the truth".
...
The PCs don't know what I rolled for a bluff check... they don't know if they failed their sense motive or if the guy is actually telling the truth...
Isn't that what you are going for? Or did I not read YOUR post correctly?
Waylan
does that come with an option for a Jedi Hand Wav
He seems to be telling the truth, and these are not the droids you're looking for
funny you should say that... the event I described happened during an RCR starwars game.
Did you read my post?
Yes, I read your post. It did not answer the question I was asking and I think I explained why. That's a solution that works you. Mozel tov. It doesn't work for me. I'm looking a way to figure a DC for sensing if someone's telling the truth. Anyone have any ideas about that?
Yes, I read your post. It did not answer the question I was asking and I think I explained why. That's a solution that works you. Mozel tov. It doesn't work for me. I'm looking a way to figure a DC for sensing if someone's telling the truth. Anyone have any ideas about that?
Hmmm...
Well I'm sorry my idea didn't help.
If you are looking for a way for a PC to be SURE that someone is telling the truth then I DEFINITELY misread your original post.
I have no idea how you would do that without telling the player out of game.
The Sense Motive check is to see if an NPC is bluffing, but it doesn't tell you if the NPC is telling the truth. The cool thing about being a GM is that you get to roll dice and you don't have to tell anyone why. Go ahead and roll a d20 to maintain the illusion that the player's check is being opposed. Since they technically can't get a result from the check, tell them the NPC seems to be telling the truth, or that it can't be determined either way. This way, the player thinks they're getting a valid result from the Sense Motive check, and you don't have to reveal outright that the NPC is telling the truth.
Thats exactly what I did in my game and what I told The Real Orionn to do, but he says that's not what he's asking for...
DC of Sense Motive check for PC to tell if NPC is speaking honestly
It's not the accuracy of the statement I'm after. It's whether or not the speaker believes it. It's just like a Sense Motive vs. Bluff, except without the Bluff. I don't want a GM hand-wave (I can do those if I see fit). I want a set DC. I could just arbitrarily make it 15, I guess, but I was hoping someone might have a more thought-out way to determine it.
That is why people have told you, have the player make a skill check, and then no matter what they roll, tell the players, "well you can't be sure, but he seems to be telling the truth." After that, let the players decide for themselves whether they believe you. If they happen to have rolled high on the skill check they will probably believe you. If they happen to have rolled low, they probably will not believe that they succeeded, and will probably treat the character like he is lying. In either case, while the response does not directly answer your question, it does tell you how to achieve the effect you are looking for.
If you simply want a direct response to your question, what is the DC of Sense Motive check for PC to tell if NPC is speaking honestly, the answer is 1. The DC of a Sense Motive check to tell if an NPC is speaking honestly is 1. No matter what the PCs roll on the Sense Motive check, they will get the impression that the NPC is being honest. Since he is, nothing they can roll on the Sense Motive check will cause their skill to tell them "the NPC seems to be acting dishonestly." This response only occurs when a character rolls over an NPCs bluff check. However, if the players have already been given "hints" that he is acting dishonestly, then if they roll low on the Sense Motive check they will probably believe that he is lying (and that they failed their check) on their own, even though they have actually succeeded at learning that he seems to be acting honestly.
Some people are not good at telling the truth. They might be citing facts (as they know them anyway), but their shifty eyes and closed body-language still screams "liar." They might have a crappy reputation for making stuff up, but this one time, they're telling the truth and doing their best to convey that through things like eye contact and body language. If Sense Motive can detect when someone's deliberately lying, it only stands to reason that it would equally apply to someone deliberately telling the truth. So that's what I'm looking for.
If the only answer you can think of to that question is "the PC automatically succeeds," then you are not answering the question I've asked. I mean seriously, thank you for taking the time to craft a response at all, I really to appreciate that, but I'm asking a very straight-forward question and I'd love to get an answer to that question.
That is not an accurate interpretation of what we have been saying.
If the gM tells the PC
"Dont bother rolling the die, your Sense Motive automaticly knows he is telling the truth"
then the GM is doing it all wrong.
Example:
"This mook says the boss went to the warehouse on the wharf,
I use SenseMotive to see if he is lieing. Crud, 13 total."
Right, 13 eh?
You cant be sure, but you think he is telling the truth.
Now, reading that example, who here knows if the boss is really going to the wharf?
Was the mook telling a lie with an <11>+6Bluff, a successful lie, the Boss is really downtown?
Was the mook telling the truth, the PC's 13Sense wins, the boss is at the wharf.
What if the player rolled a 19 for Sense?
Same thing, but the player is more confident in his outcome
What if he rolled a 6 for Sense?
Same thing, but the player will be thinking he actually failed vs the mooks Bluff, and the player will second guess his outcome of "You cant be sure, but you think he is telling the truth."..... to think the boss is NOT at the wharf.
"You cant be sure, but you think he is telling the truth."
is absolutely not the same as just telling the player that its an automatic success Truthful.
The player will look at his roll and interpret the same text results with confidence or disbelief based on how the player believes he did against a Bluff... even if the other guy wasnt bluffing.
If you roll a 6 for Sense motive,
and the gM tells you "You think he is telling the truth",
you will obviously consider the guy to be lieing, that you are getting a false result from your crappy Sense roll.
And that is the fun part.
Watching the players convince themselves that the truth must be a lie,
cause a 6 rolled Sense Motive said he was telling the truth,
but that 6 probably was a skillcheck failure, so dont believe him
I think we have a failure to communicate, here.
I've asked a straight-forward question. I've made that question very clear. The response that you've all typed out, several times now, does not actually answer the question I asked, and I've made that clear, too. So please, I'm asking politely. Stop repeating the same thing over and over again. It's not helping me. If that's the only response you can muster, then just don't post a response. Either answer the question, or leave well enough alone. I'm asking for a wrench, and you all keep offering me a hammer.
I'm not too good with house rules, so I'd keep it simple. I might not get used a great deal beyond this predicament, but it's an interesting use of the skill that I like
, keeps your players on their toes!To start with I would just rule the base DC to tell if this guy is trustworthy as 10, or 15 if that sounds to easy. You could modify that up and down according to different factors, like whether he's lied to the PCs before (and they know it), and his relationship and attitude to the PCs. And because he really wants them to believe him, maybe he can make a DC 10 or 15 Diplomacy check to Aid the PC's Sense Motive check.
If the Sense Motive check is successful, then the guy appears to be trustworthy and truthful, but if it fails, the PCs find some reason to doubt him.
Hope this helps a bit!
Fletch X
The NPC is telling the truth.
He's trying to "persuade" the PC of his truthfulness.
Persuasion is an aspect of the Diplomacy Skill.
What about using the Diplomacy rules to change the PCs attitude towards the NPC.
For example:
The NPC is telling the truth, but the PC doesn't believe him.
The PC's attitude is probably hostile, or at least unfriendly.
To believe the NPC, the PC's attitude must shift to indifferent.
According to the rules, changing someone's attitude from hostile to indifferent is a DC25 Diplomacy check, while changing it from unfriendly to indifferent is only DC15.
So...
If we use that as a basis, Have the PC roll a sense motive against DC 1 like we've been saying. If the PC STILL doesn't belive the NPC, the NPC needs to make a diplomacy check to convince the PC that he's telling the truth.
If the NPC succeeds, you can tell the PC that he's telling the truth.
If the NPC fails, then the PC thinks the NPC is lying.
Is that more along the lines of what you are looking for?
OK lets try this approach:
So...If the PC STILL doesn't belive the NPC, the NPC needs to make a diplomacy check to convince the PC that he's telling the truth.
If the NPC succeeds, you can tell the PC that he's telling the truth.
If the NPC fails, then the PC thinks the NPC is lying.
I like the sense motive/diplomacy check resolution combo. I'm copy/pasting it for use in my games.
I like the sense motive/diplomacy check resolution combo. I'm copy/pasting it for use in my games.
Thanks!
I hope this is helpful to TheRealOrion. If not, I'm at a loss.
Come to think of it, this is an even better solution for when PCs are lying to NPCs. NPCs usually don't have as much personality and freedom of thought, so having a set mechanic would be very helpful.
Woah. Weird synchronicity moment. After I turned off my computer last night, I started thinking of exactly that solution! Basically, use Diplomacy to "aid" the Sense Motive test. It's great! Thank you so much. It took a while to get there, but I like where we arrived.
Come to think of it, this is an even better solution for when PCs are lying to NPCs. NPCs usually don't have as much personality and freedom of thought, so having a set mechanic would be very helpful.
I'm glad I could (eventually;) ) help out!