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