Today in bazaar was a little chat between a hardhead and a suspect, which involved little bluff check...It went somewhat like this:
Hardhead: Was it you? Suspect: Not me... Hardhead: \\bluff check plz
Suspect: \\*rolls a bluff check* Hardhead: \\*rolls a spot check to counter* Passerby: \\No! You need to roll a will save for a bluff check! Hardhead:\\ Oh...*rolls a will save* --------------
Bottom line: we need a hard set of rules which roll counters which dialog skill?
I know in PNP there is a sense motive skill, which is rolled against bluff check, but we don't have that in NWN2.
So if it is possible, I'd really like for PW devs to decide which checks are legit against dialog skills
If you wish to use Spot. Then that should be the first roll.
Example:
Suspect: *lieslieslieslieslieslieslies* (no roll) Hardhead: *Tries to spot signs of deceit* (rolls spot, gets high enough to notice nervous tic.) Suspect: *liesticliesticliestic* (Rolls bluff to try and fool hardhead into thinking they have a natural tic.*
Normally, if Bluff is the first roll, then I'd say Will save to see if the character CALLS them on it, whether or not they believe them you can add/minus a DC depending on how believable the lie is? How much more the Bluff skill is, or simply whether the person being bluffed has a reason to disbelieve someone.
Since we do not have the Sense Motive skill, I'd show green light to following skills as viable counter:
Spot, you can spot the lie. Listen, you can hear the lie. Bluff, you know how to lie and thus, notice one. Concentration, you are really, really concentrating on what they are saying and thus able to determine the validity. Search, you are searching for the lies.
I really don't see the appeal in using conversation skill checks in scenarios like these. I was under the impression that even in PnP, they were really only for use against NPCs. Why do you need dice to decide whether or not your character believes another?
And even if one wants to use them between PCs, I don't see why this needs to extend beyond immediate RP. That is, I don't see why "hard rules" must be set. It seems like it'd be fine to just have case-by-case agreements.
But then, I'm just a new berk, don't listen to me. :P
I don't really like convo rolls versus other players... I mean, I'll toss an intimidate out there every so often, but I don't ever ask for opposing rolls. It's just to show that, yes, this guy can be intimidating, but no, I don't expect your char to cower in fear just because you didn't waste points in intimidate or w/e too. The threat might not even be a scary one to them, despite how imposing it was phrased. It's not my call to decide for THEM. This place is full of enough good rp'ers who can make fair calls on their own.
Plus, if someone rolls bluff, and you fail... your character believes them, but in the back of your mind YOU know that it was a lie. And that can effect rp. You might start fishing for more bluff rolls without even really realizing it. It just ruins the fun. I'd rather try and work it out myself. ...Then again, that may be why Raif always comes off as a paranoid crazy guy. >.>
Regardless! I've seen spot/listen/will mostly used. If someone is really into rolling, I just ask the 'initiator' (whoever started with the rolls) to choose. Best to just figure out how the people you're playing with like to play, and work out a compromise.
as a rule of thumb i would never .. Ever Roll a Save stat (ref, will, fortude) vs a skill stat.. on the fact that usually a skill stat will always over shadow a save... as for a roll against lies.. i would say possibly concentrate... your focusing on what their saying.. and such
I personally dislike the use of conversational skills against players for various reasons. First thing that comes to mind is that dnd has too many skills, so when skills become involved, it's usually the case that someone who took a skill for build purposes likes to wave it around all of the time (bluff, concentration, listen, etc.) but that same person would never roll a skill check other than that one, unless they were cornered in to it by OOC from other players. Second thing that comes to mind is that the difference between trained and untrained is huge and to make it worse, some folks even try to compare skill rolls to saving throws, which is, to say the least, ridiculous, because saving throws are either ridiculously low compared to skills, or the character is a divine caster with a few levels in some save boosting class who has +50 in everything. Even with all that, you have 2 d20s floating around that doesn't really give the most balanced effect. With ability scores, that's something like saying a character can have 16 plus or minus 40 strength. With skills, it's a bit better, but still far from fair.
Lastly, some people, myself included, really don't like seeing rolls being thrown around and RP being forced to abide by them, especially when the usual situational modifiers that are such an integral part of DnD aren't even considered (you're trying to go by dnd rules when you roll a skill check, may as well do it right). Either way, I personally choose to RP without making skill rolls, if I have no knowledge OOCly of whether a character was lying or not, that's great, and if my character would have no reason to believe a character is lying, I'll let the other player choose whether or not they want to role play being a good or a bad liar (almost never seen the latter, in all my years of playing). If I happen to see a character telling a lie that I know my PC just wouldn't believe, then that's how it is.
Anyways, I've gotten a lot of flak for not rolling skills on other servers, and for the limited time that I do have to play on Sigil, I'd really like to help keep it a roll-play free zone, especially when it comes to botched interpretations of dnd rules.
Typically, bluff is only used against NPCs, or in cases where a player is trying to "feint" something. For example:
Player 1: *Starts to swing right, then corrects and swings to the left at last minute; surprise!*
The game engine uses Spot to counter "Feints" (which are based on your bluff skill), since they are physical actions that can be counteracted by "watching carefully" so to speak.
In RP with other players, my opinion tends toward letting RP flow naturally. There will be circumstances in which no matter how well your character can bluff, his/her reputation and past deeds will make it impossible for them to pull the wool over the eyes of others.
Just use commonsense, if a dice roll is requested you can decline it like you can PVP no one can force you to do something that your character would not do or believe in with a dice roll......
It's fun when people oblige but it's harassment if the initiator insists, which is what needs to be remembered here.
Also dice rolls are not meant to be player to player is supposed to be a PNP mechanic that is monitored by a DM to arbitrate.
