I like to roll occasionally just to show my character has the ability I'm trying to portray. I think its a great way of showing others that your not just jo smo with 8 charisma and -1 intimidate trying to push people around.

Am I the only one who does this? Does this irritate you or do you prefer it since it avoids poeple protraying stats they don't have (for example a 6 cha -1 intimidate 20 str half orc would'nt be very good at intimidating people)

Same goes for other "personality" stats. If ind alot of people like to make apposed rolls when its generally not nessisary. Anyway just exlaining my ways of doing things.

Rolls are not essential, in my opinion.

I believe all social skills should be RPed between PCs. I find that it really kills the experience for me if another player lies to my character then rolls a persuade check. It's much more interesting, and better all round if you RP your stats. If you've got low WIS, CHA and persuade, you'd probably want to indicate it by stuttering as you lie, or telling a blatant lie, or by wiping the sweat from your brow.

There are times when skill checks are useful. For example, spot checks when trying to see something someone is concealing on their person. But social skills, I think, should be reserved for interactions with NPCs.

While I don't expect anyone to go "OH MY GOD HE ROLLED A 30 LORE HE KNOWS EVERYTHING!!!!!1!!!" I will occasionally roll a skill just to show people that yes, my character does sound like he's educated, or is intimidating, or is good at tumbling or whatever.

In fact, when Joe Schmoe the warrior tries to push me around, I don't mind him just rolling intimidate to give me an idea of how good his character is at it. If he roll plays along with the roll, I'll probably admit my PC would be more intimidated. This is especially true when you're trying to push or cajole or bluff someone in character.

I've noticed many PCs refuse, absolutely refuse, to let anything bad happen to their character through conversation or roleplay. You just can't trick them into doing anything wrong if the player knows ooc, you can't scare them if they see the CR or just know that a wizard unprepared is no match for their superior Knockdown style, so sometimes its good to just roll a stat to remind someone that there's more to the mechanics than the mechanics so to speak.

Even people who aren't metagaming CRs or stats or buffs, fall prey to the "I know that sheep can't breath fire and you can't convince me otherwise" even when talking to a guy with a forty five bluff--who theoretically could talk a dragon out of its horde of gold. So its nice to see someone has the stat so at least you know, well, I suppose he REALLY is that persuasive so maybe I'll give in a little more than I OOC wanted to give in.

Ladocicea Rolls are not essential, in my opinion.

I believe all social skills should be RPed between PCs. I find that it really kills the experience for me if another player lies to my character then rolls a persuade check. It's much more interesting, and better all round if you RP your stats. If you've got low WIS, CHA and persuade, you'd probably want to indicate it by stuttering as you lie, or telling a blatant lie, or by wiping the sweat from your brow.

There are times when skill checks are useful. For example, spot checks when trying to see something someone is concealing on their person. But social skills, I think, should be reserved for interactions with NPCs.

RPing low social skills is easy... I don't think that is really the issue.

It is the high social skills that are difficult to RP, because they should impact how others behave around you... and that should be a factor in their RP.... skill rolls act as a guideline for others... It should not be used as a club to beat others into line, but it should be a guideline for those around you to use as a basis for their RPed reactions.

If I have a character with 19 charisma,10 persuade, and 10 bluff, but lack the personal communication skills (because of personality or language barrier, for example) to portray that adequately, then making skill checks and hoping that the other Players present will be respectful enough to use those as a guideline is perfectly in line.

At the same time, the other player needs to be respected within the frame of the skill roll. High intelligence characters won't be as susceptible in falling for bluffs as others, and thus, where does it fall to say the 19 bluff you just rolled is good enough to fool one person, and not the other. That courtesy and respect needs to flow both ways.

Tanner At the same time, the other player needs to be respected within the frame of the skill roll. High intelligence characters won't be as susceptible in falling for bluffs as others, and thus, where does it fall to say the 19 bluff you just rolled is good enough to fool one person, and not the other. That courtesy and respect needs to flow both ways.

I agree with that too, and its in those cases where that player should make a corresponding roll to make it clear that they are using the mechanics, and that they have a reason to not be suckered in.

I have seen some obnoxious arguements break out where people are OOC'ing about the relevence of skill checks and their character would not be taken in by that, blah blah blah. I think being respectful at all times is most important... If a Thayan smooth talker is talking a crowd into something foolish, and one of the less educated members of the crowd has a deep seated enmity for all things Thay... there should be zero chance of being suckered, regardless of rolls.

Some people are just not susceptible to the gile of others, inspite of their lack of stats or skills to indicate such. Pronounced cases of such a persona should be consistant though (IMO) and be the ultimate sceptic, suspicious of everything, distrustful of everything, and whole unpleasant to be around unless you happen to be them.

I don't think anyone is saying that a person need drop everything and change to the new directive just because their conversation partner threw a 20 sided die at them. But being that our characters are just poor 3d images, and you can't see the complexities of their expressions, and exact tone and pitch of their voice. You can't hear the inflection of their words.

So if someone is trying to convince you of something your character wouldn't normally believe, and they toss the bluff roll in there. It's just to emphasize that the speaker is throwing all of his guile into it, and is more convincing than the pure words of it can show.

No, that doesn't mean you should go "oh he has bluff of 21, so I have to believe that I need to clean my body with the lava." But in the end, we are here to both influence, and be influenced by other players. To interact with them, and we should do our best to play along IC, and they with us.

Meow-Mix!

I personally do enjoy the occasional skill roll, espically in social situations where someone is trying to bluff, intimidate, ect. simply because to me it shows dedication into PC skill choice to have a high social skill. Its all too easy to make a -8 CHA PC with maxed out non-social skills and just RP like he is skilled at bluffing or that he's rather intimidating, but your skills dont match up now do they? Clearly they have some funny way of talking, or some mole on their nose, or a nagging self-esteem issue that just detracts from their persona. I find this really hard as a rogue, because its all too easy for me to talk slick and not back it up with a roll (and my rogue PC has low CHA too, so hes really not that strong willed and thats no help) but seeing the dedication in making a well-rounded PC really pays off in the end for me, even if that does mean the occasional d20 throw in a conversation. Also, many times I do like a opposed concentration or disipline roll to be thrown just to see how we stack up to my attempts, or a counter-bluff roll. I actually try to react to these IC and change my dialouge when I OOC am made more aware of who I am talking too. I also revere natural 20's, but thats another story.

Rolling the Dice without Rolling the Dice: [blinks rapidly twice, pupils dilating. He licks his lips once] [Bluff] No, I wasn't there, I was at the bar

Rolling the Dice: *roll bluff check* [Bluff] No, I wasn't there, I was at the bar

What we usually see: [Bluff] No, I wasn't there, I was at the bar

Naturally, the first option is the best, but the people I know in 5 years of NWN that actually do that...I can count on one hand.

There's a fourth option Rosethorn *roll bluff check* (rolls badly) *glances to his left and bites the top of his lips as he says* No..I um, wasn't there, I was at the bar

Oroborous Even people who aren't metagaming CRs or stats or buffs, fall prey to the "I know that sheep can't breath fire and you can't convince me otherwise" even when talking to a guy with a forty five bluff--who theoretically could talk a dragon out of its horde of gold. So its nice to see someone has the stat so at least you know, well, I suppose he REALLY is that persuasive so maybe I'll give in a little more than I OOC wanted to give in.

Yes, you've got a point there, but I think many are forgetting one thing. To me, having a high bluff means you're good at making up beliavable lies (of course the body language and the such are included too), and this is why everyone can't even play a character with a high bluff.

For example, it's a known fact that cows don't fly (well, maybe not in the FR, but try to cope with me here). Even if someone had that 45 bluff, he couldn't convince me of this in the real world. But a person with 45 bluff might for example raise (a.k.a. brainwash) his children to belive that flying cows do exist, or become a teacher and tell the children this (Alright, I'm starting to be a bit far fetched here..)

Anyway, back to the actual topic. I don't really believe that rolls are necessary in PC vs. PC situations, because I trust people to play their stats accordingly and I'll try to response to the situation by playing my character according to his stats and skills. If you hit me with a intimidating emote along with a convincing line, I'd be more inclined to play my character as intimidated, than if you just say "Obey." and roll that intimidate check, no matter how high it is.

^What they said.

I usually only do rolls when I'm kidding around. A few days ago Jarold and Fabio tried to convince Asgrim that a unicorn was a flying donkey with a goatee. A whole bunch of roles went into that conversation. Then Mylin came and spoiled it all by drawing a unicorn. That was pretty entertaining. >.<

Not everybody is as wise, smart, or charismatic as their character.

Not everybody is as good at bluffing, intimidating, or persuading as their characters.

There should be no restriction on people from playing a character with traits they in reality lack.

Rolling skill checks fills that gap for all of us.

Oddly, I would rather RP it all too, but I appreciate that its not always valid.

Ando Firemane, my main character, was built around being good with social skills. I got some very bad experience from people by rolling my social skills just to /remind/ people that I was a smooth talker, so I never roll them anymore. I have over 10 in every social skill, but only a handful of people really take it into account(the ones who know, but refuse to play along I mean). It is pretty infuriating when someones like *Is not an NPC and so is immune to bluff*....

I actually had someone emote that once.

When I roll skill checks, it's only to represent how good I am at something, or how good I did that bluff/persuade. Not to make you roll an open ended wisdom check against my 13+roll bluff. Because there is no opposed skill for most skill checks.

It's just to show how good someone is at something, mostly. So don't have a hissy fit when someones rolls.

Leurnid Not everybody is as wise, smart, or charismatic as their character.

Not everybody is as good at bluffing, intimidating, or persuading as their characters.

There should be no restriction on people from playing a character with traits they in reality lack.

Also to Vlaid. I don't mind anyone rolling the skills, but I do mind people who assume I'm likely to do anything based on those rolls if they don't play their characters according to the rolls. I also think it's a bit pointless to roll anything when no DC or anything like that has been set.

Dopson I also think it's a bit pointless to roll anything when no DC or anything like that has been set.

If there's no opposing check I always assume a DC of 15 or 20 depending on the kind of action. AFAIK, all social skills (Bluff, Intimidate, etc.) can be counter-rolled.

Its not against a DC is Naga's entire point.

The roll is to demonstrate to a player how skilled the character in question is.

Its so a player, who may be curious what the character's speech, action, etc has accomplished has some way to gauge it beyond what that player merely wrote or emoted.

There is a difference between saying

*describes Jake Black in perfect detail* because if you do that I ignore your description and "describes a dark haired man, heavy set with strangely expressive dark eyes, longish hair, and white skin" *roll spot check* ==29 Now I know you're character got a really good look at him, and I may now ask you just who you're describing because damn--that's a good description. No DC required.

OR

"Buy my grapes. You really like grapes. I can tell you're hungry, and they're mouth watering."

I'm not buying your damned grapes. OOC I know they're useless because there aren't even hunger rules enforced on EfU, and I've got enough RP junk food in my inventory. Plus, frankly, that wasn't persuasive in real life--even though it was the absolute best that Joe the Frank seller's player could muster.

But

"Buy my grapes. You really like grapes. I can tell you're hungry, and they're mouth watering." *roll persuade check* ==3

Confirms that that was indeed the world's worst pitch line and I'm happy to ignore you still.

Meanwhile

"Buy my grapes. You really like grapes. I can tell you're hungry, and they're mouth watering." *roll persuade check* ==22

Tells me that while the player isn't persuasive, the character obviously is. The guy is only asking 1 gp for his grapes, its not a big deal, I'm not forced to buy them, but there's no RP reason to refuse so why not?

OR

Begger: "Give me some coins and watch my juggling act!"

I may leave a coin.

While

Begger: "Give me some coins and watch my juggling act!" *roll perform check* ==16 *roll tumble check* ==19

It was a pretty good performance. I may leave 5 coins.

Meanwhile

Begger: "Give me some coins and watch my juggling act!" *roll perform check* ==16 *roll tumble check* ==19 Begger: *tosses multicoloured balls in the air, catching them while dancing on one foot, the balls whirl quickly in a fanciful dance around his head and his curly white mustaches as he spins and laughs his heavily patched cloak spinning around him like papers in a wind*

Damn that performance rocked, I'll leave 10 coins now.

Of course you might go:

Begger: "Give me some coins and watch my juggling act!" Begger: *tosses multicoloured balls in the air, catching them while dancing on one foot, the balls whirl quickly in a fanciful dance around his head and his curly white mustaches as he spins and laughs his heavily patched cloak spinning around him like papers in a wind*

I'll now go, wow, he emoted that really well. I'm curious if he's even got any perform or tumble skills--I mean he's a dwarf with an 8 DEX....hmmmm...guess I'll just leave a coin.

The rolls can simply enhance for you what the rp of the character is saying.

It is, truly, no different than the following.

Thief: "Give my your GP or your HP!"

Random Guy: "No. I'm not intimidated by you!"

Thief; Rolls Initiative 20+15=35 Thief: Rolls Attack 20+5=25 HIT Thief: Damages Random Guy 64 Points Random Guy Dies

There was a roll. You were forced this time to abide by its decisions. You now roleplay a dead character.

In my mind, its far freer to admit that maybe that guy who rolled a 66 on his persuade talked me into spending a single gold piece to buy his grapes--if I really don't want grapes I can still freely ignore him, but I will also realize he's very persuasive and roleplay my response accordingly instead of "No grapes, fuck off!" now I'll just say "I really wish I could, they look delicious and mouth watering, but I simply haven't the gold to buy them. I'll come back when I can afford them."

Of course, maybe he'll respond--"Well bitch, I just rolled a 66 on my persuade and you blew me off. Now I'm rolling my 35 init and my 25 attack roll and my 64 damage. When you're dead, I'll just take a gold coin and leave a grape in your inventory."

Tanner At the same time, the other player needs to be respected within the frame of the skill roll. High intelligence characters won't be as susceptible in falling for bluffs as others, and thus, where does it fall to say the 19 bluff you just rolled is good enough to fool one person, and not the other. That courtesy and respect needs to flow both ways.

Actually I disagree you can be a complete genious with 30 int. But if you don't have enough bluff, which determines how good you lie aswell as how hard it is to lie to you (the same with intimidate vs intimidate, persuade vs persuade unless the skill itself indicates otherwise,such as in the case of taunt is vs concentration) you won't be able to tell if the person is lying or not.

I mean if you can't lie, how could you tell if somebody else is lying.

Edit:

Oh and Oro pretty much summed up my entire point in an o so educated way that I'm incapable of *rolls intelegence check 5+0=5*

While I realise some of the skills like Sense Motive do not exist in NWN, I thought it would be nice to list the things that determine the DC. Taken from: http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/v35/SkillsI.rtf and http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/v35/SkillsII.rtf

BLUFF (Cha) A Bluff check is opposed by the target’s Sense Motive check

Bluff Examples Example Circumstances Sense Motive Modifier The target wants to believe you. –5 The bluff is believable and doesn’t affect the target much. +0 The bluff is a little hard to believe or puts the target at some risk. +5 The bluff is hard to believe or puts the target at significant risk. +10 The bluff is way out there, almost too incredible to consider. +20

Alright there is no sense motive skill in NWN but if you wish you could look at your wisdom and decide whether you would believe it or not. If your wisdom is very low (8 or so (Stupid automatic smiley things)) then you would most likely believe whatever someone says, unless it is utterly ridiculous.

INTIMIDATE (CHA) Check: You can change another’s behavior with a successful check. Your Intimidate check is opposed by the target’s modified level check (1d20 + character level or Hit Dice + target’s Wisdom bonus [if any] + target’s modifiers on saves against fear)

Persuade has been changed around and called Diplomacy and I really am not to sure about that one

You can do an opposing roll here, but it does seem rather pointless, again interpretation of your stats is far better then rolling. I think that a player should determine their DC however they want and bluff, persuade and intimidate are cumbersome tools left to the player's discretion as many others have said.

Oh and if you play a wizard, sometimes it's hard to play a person with 160 or 170 IQ, I see intelligence as memory and problem solving (booksmarts) and wisdom as perception and common sense (streetsmarts). You may want to continiously take notes in your IG journal so as to effectively play a person with a near perfect memory.

In a way, I do understand Oro's point there. What I've been trying to say though is that at least with me, no one needs rolls, they just need to play their characters convincingly enough. We're roleplaying here, right? Playing a role, as in, acting it.

If we need rolls to show how good we're at something, we're not acting well enough. Actors don't get to say "Well, I rolled a 19 and I've been practicing acting for years, so I've got to have at least 10+ points in it. You better think I'm a good actor" either when they've done a bad job with a movie.

Not everyone is able to play all kinds of characters and that's only understandable. There's some characters I'd never even think of playing because I know I can't get inside their heads well enough.

The fact that you rolled a high roll and that you've invested some points in the skill doesn't change the fact that you didn't say anything convincing. Sure, it affects your general demeanor, but it's still the same line as for the guy who said it with no points in the skill. The difference comes when you play your character, everyone should think whether their character would realize to say something like that or not. The bottom line is, a roll doesn't change the words you just said.

Borderline cases I do understand though, but even then it's totally up to the player to decide how his character would react to the roll, unless there's a DM who knows your character as a judge.

Well, you can call me a fool, but I do trust players to play their characters according to their stats and skills. I'm also hoping I'm not coming off as too agressive here, English is not my native language after all. Just my thoughts of the topic, feel free to prove me ignorant.

Dopson the roll helps to show your not abusing your own acting skill. For example if somebodies playing a 6 cha half orc with -2 intimidate and yet playing them like a huge hulking intimidate o-matic, without aroll you can't see that he actually has -2 intimidate. Its just nice to display that you have it so people know your not doing as such. (practicularly if you play one of those races or classes which either don't need them or have a negative in them naturally)

Edit: Also on a side note if somebody said something tha would scare the shit out of me in real life and I knew they had low intimidate despite cr I'd likely tell them where to go or in some cases attack them.

Actually I disagree you can be a complete genious with 30 int. But if you don't have enough bluff, which determines how good you lie aswell as how hard it is to lie to you (the same with intimidate vs intimidate, persuade vs persuade unless the skill itself indicates otherwise,such as in the case of taunt is vs concentration) you won't be able to tell if the person is lying or not.

I mean if you can't lie, how could you tell if somebody else is lying.

"Here, buy my grapes. While off colored and slightly pock-marked, I assure you they are delicious and will fill your every hungry desire."

*holds out a handful of what are obviously rocks, painted with a bad shade of purple* *rolls bluff = 30*

*Anybody with common sense and no bluff* "Ah, I think not."

You don't have to be a good liar to have enough intellect to smell a lie.

Now, if you're saying what Oro says, and that the roll is just a reinforcment of the rp itself, by all means, I agree with you. My point is that you should also take into account what the other player's stats could be when determining what kind of effect your 30 bluff roll should have on someone.

Somebody with 30 bluff would be able to make the rocks look like solid gold if he spent time on i. Somebody with 30 bluff would NEVER do anything obvious. Infact when was the last time somebody rolled a bluff check on something obvious. If I were to roll a bluff I would'nt be so obvious with my emote.

Bluff does'nt just make you a good liar it makes you good at percieving lies. I'm sure there are many examples of great minds in history who were guliable (in other words high int low bluff.) I'm sure oro would be able to name some :). History is'nt my forte. I do know however intelect has nothing to do with whether you can spot a lie or not.

Same way an intelegent person with no intimidate can't THINK of a way in which to make himself look more intimidating to others (without the use of magic specifically for that purpose)

I thought the whole point with the roll was to reinforce how awesome the bluff was?

In any case, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying the the consideration that you're asking from other players, by asking them to acknowledge stats that you've obviously put points into and are taking the time and effort to rp, needs to flow both ways.

Bluff does'nt just make you a good liar it makes you good at percieving lies. I'm sure there are many examples of great minds in history who were guliable (in other words high int low bluff.) I'm sure oro would be able to name some :). History is'nt my forte. I do know however intelect has nothing to do with whether you can spot a lie or not.

I couldn't disagree with this statement more. If you're the greatest liar in the world, and you told me that cars run on water, I'm smart enough to know you're lying.

And a smart gnome could figure out that if they stood at the right angle in front of a light, so that it projected a shadow of themselves on the wall that's 4 times the size you are, so that a group of kobolds around the corner see it and think a giant waits around the corner, well, that seems like he's just intellected a way for himself to appear more intimidating.

Heh, now whether or not he needs to roll a bluff check in order for that to work, well, that's another argument, and beside the point I'm trying to make anyway. :D :D

What if I told you the car was a newly discovered masterful design, showed you some design schematics tht look pretty decent and plausable though ever so fractionally off the mark to a point where only an expert who specilizes in that field can know whats what.

Are you saying you've never beleived a lie somebody told you? Or if you've fallen for a lie do you think your just an idiot if you fell for it?

Again I say it doe'snt matter how smart you are you can still be fooled you do not know eevrything and thats what bluff is all about praying on things the person does not know in order to trick them. Even the GODS in fr have been tricked from time to time.

Naga What if I told you the car was a newly discovered masterful design, showed you some design schematics tht look pretty decent and plausable though ever so fractionally off the mark to a point where only an expert who specilizes in that field can know whats what.

My point exactly. An expert that specilizes in that field would know. He's not an expert because he's maxed out his bluff.

Naga Are you saying you've never beleived a lie somebody told you?

Naga Or if you've fallen for a lie do you think your just an idiot if you fell for it?

Naga Again I say it doe'snt matter how smart you are you can still be fooled you do not know eevrything and thats what bluff is all about praying on things the person does not know in order to trick them. Even the GODS in fr have been tricked from time to time.

If you think that's what I'm saying, you've totally missed my point. I couldn't agree with you more, you can still be fooled and no one knows everything. But, you just made my argument for me, bluffing is all about exploiting things that people don't know. If I'm going to judge if I know something or not, it's going to be by my intellect, not my skills at lieing.

And I'm going to guess that the gods of FR have pretty high bluff scores too, but then again, I'm not smart enough to have their stats memorized nor do I own a source guide, currently.

-------

Tanner At the same time, the other player needs to be respected within the frame of the skill roll. High intelligence characters won't be as susceptible in falling for bluffs as others, and thus, where does it fall to say the 19 bluff you just rolled is good enough to fool one person, and not the other. That courtesy and respect needs to flow both ways.

Perhaps my point would be more clear to you if I'd said "High bluff characters won't be as susceptible in falling for bluffs as others ..."

If so, feel free to read it that way. While I don't totally agree with it, it still illustrates the essential point of my original post, in that when hoping for success in your bluffs, or whatever skills you're going to use, the courtesy should be extended to consider the other person's numbers.

Tanner "Here, buy my grapes. While off colored and slightly pock-marked, I assure you they are delicious and will fill your every hungry desire."

*holds out a handful of what are obviously rocks, painted with a bad shade of purple* *rolls bluff = 30*

*Anybody with common sense and no bluff* "Ah, I think not."

You don't have to be a good liar to have enough intellect to smell a lie.

I read in one of my DnD books somewhere about how intelligent things are and gave some basics, like how a dog's intelligence is 3 or something like that. I'd have to say that if someone gave a drunk half-orc the same deal as Tanner said above, then buy all means the half-orc would gobble them up without a hesitation. Intelligence does have a roll in lies, telling them and preceiving them. I'd just say that intelligence affects lies both ways.

If you think your character preceives better than telling, then skill focus the skill. Every piece of your character's build affects how your character interacts with other characters, starting from the characters personal past to the character's wisdom or intelligence.

Of course rolling is not needed unless you think the player is not playing to his characters' skills, which happens quite often. And if you do play with rolling would it matter how big the difference the roll and the counter roll was apart for how big the reaction is?

I remember one time when Ando rolled an Intimidate check on Gerdan and I rolled a counter roll with a bluff check (becuase it didnt matter what social skill I rolled) I had like 8, he had like 30. I didnt play it all that well, just refused to look at Ando for awhile, keeping Gerdan's back to him. In retrospect I should have turned around and sivered violently. But if I had rolled a 19 and him a 20 (in total roll)it would have been something like *shivers slightly*.

In the end, if you have the intelligence of a dog, rp it like you had the intelligence of a dog, eat some grass and roll in poop.

You never said anything about being an expert in grapes. If you have high int AND are an expert in the field of plant life etcetera you may be able to tell if its a bluff. But people can only have expertise in so many things and I'm pretty sure 99% of wizards have it in some arcane form. Something which a person using bluff would be aware of and not try to lie about anything arcane

Okay, you lost me there, but, no matter, I can't think of any other way to say everything I've already said.

By all means, roll skills when you want to emphasize something.

I didnt mention if the person was an expert in grapes or not, but I did mention about past experiences which the whole grape expert thing would tie into. Also if even you were an expert in grapes but your intelligence is impaired you might get mixed with the dealings. If a specialised sciencetist got drunk he would probably wouldn't be able to carry out the more complex experiments correctly if at all.

*shrugs* If you are an expext in something I would believe that you would be more open to new things in your field and in fact me more gullable believe that your field is endless.

Ex: I love math and learn about it daily. If my math teacher tought me that sin(x + 2) = cos(x) I would believe him. It is because I dont know everything to that certain field that I would be bluffed. This is only true if the field of grapes has an extended frontier.

Tanner Okay, you lost me there, but, no matter, I can't think of any other way to say everything I've already said.

By all means, roll skills when you want to emphasize something.

Is that what you thought I meant? I did'nt

What myself and oro were trying to say that it shows you actually have the skill your using. It actually more intended to show what your doing is how you emote it.

For example if somebody made a spectacular emote and then rolled and I noticed there modifier was very low I'd think less of the feat.

If somebody told a lie to me that seemed pretty believable ic and I knew ooc it was a lie and I saw here modifier was decent. I'd be fairly happy to walk away from it.But no matter how spectacularly ubertheir lie was if they have a very low modifier and roll low. I'm not going to believe it.

I consider emotes what it would be like if I rolled an automatic 20

I don't mean it as a crutch for poor emoting or acting on something.

You seem to make examples where the person makes an utterly retarded comment and then rolls on it. Which is not the case. Oro did say it that way but I'm not to keen on that specific part.

It was more a verbal show of me giving up trying to get my point across. For the record, I was never arguing against your original point. I was merely asking for consideration for the skills of the target of whatever bluff/intimidate/other skill you're attempting to use, but that seems totally lost on you.

I think I'm in agreement with you, except for the double standard of being able to emote fantastically and then have a crappy roll, so it's disregarded, but, also disregarding someone who doesn't emote as well as somone else despite them having a good roll.

If I gather what you say correctly, and by my own admission, maybe I'm missing something, what you're saying is the person must have a quality emote/dialogue to go along with a quality skill roll for you to take it into consideration?

If so, by all means, that's your right. I totally agree with disregarding someone's bluff/intimidate/whatever attempt if the skill roll doesn't back it up.

However, I don't quite jive on disregarding someone's attempt at the same thing if the roll is there, but there rp is a little off. Not everyone is at the emote level of Kiaring or Oro.

Also, are you judging on the roll, or the modifier? Someone can be an adequate liar (modifer of 8 or 9) then roll a 1, in which case, maybe that particular lie just didn't come off right. Just want to clarify for my sake.

Depends on the circumstance. If I had no bluff and they have 9-10+ I'd most likely go on the modifier but if I had a reasonable score I may decide to base it on the score itself.

I can't emote on their level either. But if they ahve the skill to emote spectacularly they should have the skill points to back it up. Infact on average people can tell alot of lies, intimidate people and emote pretty well. Its rare to see crappy emotes or lies followed by a roll because generally they just seem like lies and/or crappy feats.

I would never however base my decision upon my abilities (int etc) since thats already taken into account since you get points in skills if they are approprietly linked to that ability.