rolling the dice

[moonelf]

So a low Cha means someone may be less likely to Lie. With adding bluff and/or persuade you have practiced the skill of lying, and the skill of explaining it enough to possibly get away with it more.

What do you roll to counter bluff and persuade?

I'm sure a ton of people lie all the time but you never see bluff rolls. Or I have never seen bluff rolls other than myself rolling it once with Cala.

The question of the counter roll came up and to be honest a few things kind of make sense. But what is the ruling of options here?

I want to roll bluffs, but i am afraid to do it all the time or even alot in fear of people metagaming knowing i am lying and continually asking questions just to finally catch me or just flat metagame that i AM a lier.

Even me posting this make me scared someone will metagame a character of mine sketchy and lies.

How do you over come this? What is correct? What do the players and the DM's want to see?

[catmage]

For the most part, if I expect my characters to lie and know they're lying, or otherwise chronically deceive, I put ranks in bluff and don't make rolls unless I'm called to by another player or by a DM. Bluff checks are by nature metagamey, and the skill was probably never intended to be used by PCs on PCs.

[mastersenge]

I've had to use bluff quite a bit in the past and it's just like Catmage says that you wait for someone to call for it. I also think that in NWN it's more intended for NPCs but it still works. I think we use to use spot checks against it but I'm not 100% on that because its been a long time. The lie has to also shouldnt be way too outragious or else rolling for it just makes it seem silly but it depends on the situation.

[Grozer]

Agree with what's been said but just wanted to add a couple of points. Whenever I have been called on for bluff checks because someone thinks my PC is lying, I usually ask them to provide an IC reason for the check. If your character has some sort of reputation for misleading others then it can be a knee jerk reaction for another player to ask for a roll. But if there is no logical IC reason to doubt whats been said then really I don't think you should have to roll the check.

Secondly just because a PC losses a bluff check does not mean that the PC is lying. It really just means that the PC is thought to be lying or there is definitely doubt in the mind of the opposing PC. Quite a subtle but important difference in my opinion. Heh I cannot recall all the times people have asked Ranan for a bluff check, which I obliged and lost when he was actually telling the truth. Of course the other PC doubted him and saw he lost the check but that can develop into some interesting situations as well.

[Deleted]

My bards tend to use persuade on a regular basis, but not to lie but rather to indicate that he (or she) is practiced at stating his point in a persuasive way. In real life, it is very difficult to persuade someone against their will. In game their are too many factors to consider in determining the outcome, and I would rather not derail RP to discuss them. So I say, for persuade only, do not do a counter roll. If the argument is something, for whatever IC reason, you would never accept, then you are not persuaded no matter the roll. If your character has less strong feelings, please consider the roll and let it have what ever effect you think it would.

[moonelf]

I like what i have heard so far. Thanks.

As for persuade, i wouldn't think it would be used for lying anyways. But maybe after the initial bluff check if one is called for, then go onto persuade to try and convince them perhaps.

Though you did mention you weren't using it to lie, just saying is all =)

BTW, i heard spot was the counter for bluff also. How about INT? Is that also a counter for bluff or persuading?

[EDM Neo]

Jun 28, 2012 18:34:01 GMT -5 moonelf said:

BTW, i heard spot was the counter for bluff also. How about INT? Is that also a counter for bluff or persuading?

It is rarely a good idea to use attributes (strength, wisdom, etc) to oppose skills (bluff, persuade, etc), because as characters level up, they scale at vastly different rates.

A level 10 character who focused entirely on boosting their intelligence will have at most 22 or so (18 base, +2 from level ups, +2 from gear), for a +6 modifier. A level 10 character who focused on boosting their bluff will have a +13 modifier from skill points alone (max points in a class skill is character level+3), even before accounting for their charisma (lets say +4), a skill focus feat (another +3), and a masterwork disguise mask (+2?), letting them max at, oh, +22 or so. As their modifier, not base value.

+6 vs +22. Not really a fair contest, is it?

I most frequently see bluff vs spot, bluff vs listen, bluff vs bluff, and on one or two occasions persuade vs bluff. Search vs bluff could work if the character is actively looking for disguised people, maybe, but I doubt it'd be much good against just being told a lie.

[antimatter]

Intimidate fits in here, too. In PnP it's basically level + wis to resist, but of course, that's not an option in our die bags, so I think Will is most commonly accepted against it.

I've seen Will suggested as the appropriate counter roll to both bluff and intimidate. Makes far more sense for the latter, though.

Persuade I (as suggested above) let influence my character if they're undecided or open to persuasion. If someone's persuade is amazing but I'm not open to being convinced, then I see it as them skillfully presenting a point of view my character hadn't considered before.

Sure, A 60 persuade won't convince my Paladin that raising Undead is good, but it will make him (grudgingly) admit that he can see where the necromancer is coming from, and respect that they're on their path, just as he's on his. He may still hate them, but he can understand why they do what they do, and probably even have a healthy respect for them sticking to their convictions. Probably regrets having to kill them, but doesn't see it as any less necessary.

[mastersenge]

I just want to add that you should lie alot. Everyone should. Every lie makes Cyric smile. ;D

[Munroe]

What Neoseanster said. As for what core Ability normally opposes Bluff? It would be Wisdom. (As per the PHB, "Wisdom describes a character's willpower, common sense, perception, and intuition.") An untrained check to oppose Bluff, Persuade or Intimidate would be Wisdom, unless the lie could be overcome with general knowledge of a particular field, aka a Knowledge skill. In which case it might be possible to overcome Bluff with a Lore check or INT check.

In general opposing with Spot, Listen, or Bluff are recommended though. Using INT/Lore is significantly more specialized. (Bluff under the logic of "It takes a liar to catch a liar.")

Because of the mechanical change to True Seeing on FRC, this actually means True Seeing can potentially help with catching someone in a lie.

Jun 28, 2012 18:45:05 GMT -5 EDM Neo said:

Jun 28, 2012 18:34:01 GMT -5 moonelf said:

BTW, i heard spot was the counter for bluff also. How about INT? Is that also a counter for bluff or persuading?

It is rarely a good idea to use attributes (strength, wisdom, etc) to oppose skills (bluff, persuade, etc), because as characters level up, they scale at vastly different rates.

A level 10 character who focused entirely on boosting their intelligence will have at most 22 or so (18 base, +2 from level ups, +2 from gear), for a +6 modifier. A level 10 character who focused on boosting their bluff will have a +13 modifier from skill points alone (max points in a class skill is character level+3), even before accounting for their charisma (lets say +4), a skill focus feat (another +3), and a masterwork disguise mask (+2?), letting them max at, oh, +22 or so. As their modifier, not base value.

+6 vs +22. Not really a fair contest, is it?

I most frequently see bluff vs spot, bluff vs listen, bluff vs bluff, and on one or two occasions persuade vs bluff. Search vs bluff could work if the character is actively looking for disguised people, maybe, but I doubt it'd be much good against just being told a lie.

[probablyamage]

If you want Bluff to be viable and cut down on some of the metagaming associated with it, roll bluff when you're telling the truth. Bluff doesn't necessarily have to be used for falsehoods. It's about using body language, tone of voice, etc. to show that you are utterly convinced that you are speaking truth. A high bluff roll doesn't mean you can convince someone that the sky is pink, but you can make them think you believe it wholeheartedly, and that you can make your point convincingly. It's also a good idea to demonstrate your rp skills such as persuade, bluff and intimidate every now and then so that even when you aren't rolling it, people can take it into account. For example, my wizard has been a little wary about Silverstring ever since he displayed his intimidate in a very convincing fashion. It was, I believe the only time Silverstring has used that roll "against" my wizard, but since then it's always in the back of his mind that he really shouldn't push the Bardknight too far.

[boatmurdered]

Persuade is countered by persuade ( dungeons.wikia.com/wiki/SRD%3ADiplomacy_Skill ). You basically counter-argue someones point.

Bluff is a lot harder because it's direct counter isn't in NWN (Sense Motive), and using wisdom kind of sucks. It would probably be like people suggest in here and be spot/listen/bluff depending on whichever counter skill is higher.

But I have an issue with this, largely because one of the best anti-bluff classes in the pnp is t he Paladin, who gets Sense Motive and Gather Information as one of their major class skills (Specifically to see through lies) and don't get this in NWN, nor do they get spot/listen/bluff. So a class that in the PNP does something well can't do it at all in NWN.

So if someone is bluffing me and I have a spot skill of 10, listen of 5, and bluff of 2, I'd roll spot because I'd be more likely to be looking at their body-language then I would be listening to their voice or figuring out how much it sounds like a BS story.

Intimidate is the hardest one to counter because even in pen and paper the DC it's up against is 1d20 + char level or HD + wis mod + fear saves (Which for everyone is 0, I think, since it's just your wis mod, could be wrong there), and it doesn't exactly scale.

[Lady Frost]

As PaM and Grozer both said: Bluff is used as a "convincing" roll. Whether you are lying or not, a player may ask you to roll to see if your PC convinced his PC.

Example: A dwarf comes back and says he killed a dragon when he really didn't. You could ask the player to roll bluff to see if the dwarf is convincing enough to make your PC believe him.

Opposite example: A dwarf comes back and says he killed a dragon when in fact he did. You could ask him to roll bluff to see if the dwarf is convincing enough to make your PC believe him. If he rolls poorly then you may not believe the dwarf, even if the claims are true. Sometimes even as a player you don't know whats true or not.

I don't use it if there isn't a chance to convince my PC. There are just some things that she simply will not believe (at least without a lot more evidence than some words).

I roll persuade all the time and rarely do I intend for it to be countered. I just want players to realize in what persuasiveness my PC is able to communicate.

I typically roll bluff against bluff and persuade against persuade.

[highknight]

I've seen will used against persuade and bluff to great effect.

Just to throw another line of thought out there.

[tarus]

If the counter for intimidation is wisdom + level, then when wisdom drained, people should actually NOT attack every creature regardless of power, but instead, RUN from goblins!