I'd like to adress the subject of IC lying. (Apologies if this has been brought up before).

During my time on EfU I've encountered many characters who've been lying and decieving other characters (including my own).

My point on this is the following: while conducting a conversation on the internet all the players can do is type on one side, and read what has been typed, on the other side, thus making lies impossible to discern. Are all PCs on EfU the perfect liers ? Does noone get nervous when they lie ? Darting eyes ? Sweaty hands and so on... However, should one use these emotes (or any others indicating a lie is being made) while lying, the other *player* would surely notice, and not neccesarily his *character*, which would immediately alert him of a lie taking place and may just cause for metagaming.

Some may say this is possible to counter using Bluff checks, yet those are rarely used (at least from my experience, as most players dont even want to admit OOCly their PC is lying).

I would really like to hear the communities thoughts about this and do feel free to knock me down if I've been talking crap here.

Another new guy, Upperdark.

Some may do it, but if you're showing weakness you will find out it is a very two edged sword because, if you aren't a perfect liar, the other party is in most cases certain to find out or ask about why your eyes darted etc..

Opposing rolls are a good possibility but it isn't required and so.. You won't see it a lot. Same for the other social skills really.

When Cail lies, I roll a bluff check. If I roll low, I make an emote that says something along the lines of "*He's obviously not being truthful, or is holding something back, whatever it is, you're certain he isn't telling the truth*".

If I think someone is either lying or I doubt the truth, I ask them to make a persuade/bluff roll, whichever, and while maybe I've been lucky, no one's ever blatantly refused. I'm certain with the mature playerbase we've got here it's something that can easily be worked out.

Kotenku If I think someone is either lying or I doubt the truth, I ask them to make a persuade/bluff roll, whichever, and while maybe I've been lucky, no one's ever blatantly refused. I'm certain with the mature playerbase we've got here it's something that can easily be worked out.

I agree fully, yet I am referring to the cases in which I, as a Player, have no idea a character is lying to my PC, while my character just might.

First off, bluff/persuade/intimidate checks are meant to be used on NPCs, not really PCs. Second, there are a half-dozen ways to indicate that you're lying. Stuttering, having "tells" (poker-style. *glances at his feet*, *rubs his hands together*)...these are all things that we DMs try to do when an NPC is lying, if the NPC is not good at lying.

They are also things we'd appreciate a character with a mediocre or poor bluff score doing - it's way cooler than rolling dice.

-Cross

If I play a character that is a consumate liar, I often interject clear cues as to when he's telling the truth or lying. IE: He may speak with shorter words, he may drop some of his more elegant phraseology, I may emote differently than his norm--but not *palms sweat* more like *sucks a tooth* or some other nervous habit that is minor, not blatantly obvious but still only occurs when the character lies.

If I play a character that isn't a great liar, I like to put in pauses evidenced by "..." or even *rubs hands* or *examines garbage in the corner* rather than a more obvious *refuses to make eye contact*.

You can be as subtle as you want here, but look at any book where an author manages to show you that a character was lying, but at the time you read it--maybe you didn't catch it if you weren't reading closely enough.

I would agree most with Oroborous, but all these are good guidelines. I prefer long pauses(indicating thought), triple periods (...) , or dashes (--). The words "Uh", "Umm", and the like work well too.

When my characters lie I roll Bluff, mainly to show the person he's talking to his modifier. I'll emote appropriate to the roll afterward, with more emphasis on the modifier than the roll though. After all the modifier shows how many skillpoints are invested into Bluff, and thus how good you are at lying, fast talking, deceptive body language etc.

If I know OOC someone is lying about something important, I might politely ask for a Bluff roll, reminding them its not required if they don't want to. If you don't know OOC then there's absolutely nothing you can do. :wink:

yeha i agree with mad on that one. take my little test bed rogue, Tearn she done Hoar with a group and looted every thing she could. when she got out side i emoted that she seemed more stocky and a little slower than before to let every one know that she was hiding something and that they could potentially gain alot from her. her bluff itself isnt very good at all so she used "um's" and "err's" aswell as pauses and almost slips of the tongue but to keep most of it she droped a few things and managed to concoct a lie that said she liked bones (fortunatly enough she picked up an old skull and produced that as evidence of her statement) end result was that she walked away with quite alot of gear only loosing things that she already had so yeah if some one in the group had of pressed the issue she would have spilt all the stuff she aquired but every one in the party believed she was being untruthfull though could not proove it due to her conveniant cover

Question on that ED

Would you have cried fouled if the party didn't beleive you - beat you unconscious and looted you?

myself personally no my charactor would probably sulk off in the shadows and learn to hide her loot before she goes to collect her reward for the quest i guess its all charactor evolution alternativly seeing as she is a NE charactor she may very well plot the demise of those that harmed her but wouldent know unless it came to it

Bluff is probably one of the skills I find most important when creating evil types of characters. Evil relies on deception to survive, more often than not.

Bluff is awesome, well worth the points, even if it doesn't add any combat prowress.

yeah well the origional idea behind her was for her to be very quiet and very much sticking to the shadows and hence very rarely needing to lie but charactor evolution steped in i think she will slowly turn to good or atleast neutral with dm help

That has to be the downside about gettting caught out cheating on a aprty - you have no way to prove what you actually own and what was found and the aprty will most likely take it all :-)

Bluff is important for an evil character especially if they are relying on guile rather than strength.

There are several problems using bluff though, for one, you CAN'T put ranks in sense motive, it doesn't exsist in NWN, and two, it becomes so easy to abuse, I've seen players come out with truly unbelievable stuff, and expect others to beleive it simply because they rolled a high bluff check. If someone tells me we are really on the surface and that the five miles of rock above us was always there, I won't beleive them even if they roll a 20, why should I? In my opinion, bluff should only ever be used on NPCs, when it comes to lying to PC's, it should be a simple case of they either beleive you or don't. You shouldn't need to emote it (shifty eyes and such) though doing so would be good if your character doesn't lie often. EFU is filled with spies and evil characters who need lying to survive, why should an evil character be hunted down for being found out simply because he got unlucky and rolled a 1 for bluff? This is an RP server, you act how your character would react, if he/she would beleive someone, then they beleive them, otherwise they don't, simple as that.

I disagree.

Characters who lie about important things often and expect others to beleive them should have some Bluff. It doesn't mean you shove the fact down their throats. It doesn't mean you try and convince them you're on the surface standing under the sun when in fact you're standing in a cave 6 miles below the nearest source of sunlight.

I've never seen Bluff 'abused', and as with all cases of abuse, the DMs will in time see it and penalize fittingly. No one is forcing you to emote your lies, but if I knew OOC that a character was lying to mine about something crucial, I'd ask for a Bluff check politely.

You can always oppose with Concentration/Wisdom etc., as well, if an OOC agreement on rolls is concluded.

Skill rolls should never be done without a DM if not agreed upon by both parties. Even then, I do think that Nero has a valid point about there being no Sense Motive, so determining the DC becomes kind of arbitrary.

Moreover, let's keep in mind that there's no need to roll anything if there's no IC reason for the opposing party to suspect what you're telling them. An easy example is lying about your name: the player will OOCly of course know that your character is lying but their PC should have no reason to suspect such. Thus, there is no reason to overcome any suspicions by spectacular, trained lying (rolling a Bluff check).

I see your point, but I still support mine. PCs who lie alot and expect not to be ever caught or even suspected in the least should have Bluff. Its like someone who is played as overwhelmingly intimidating having -1 in the skill from his 8 CHA.

yeah i see the point from both sides though i think bluff should be used if your charactor uses lies as a core part of their charactor even if its only about important stuff. for a charactor that only lies on very rare occassions shouldent need it because they will generally seem to be acting strange compared to usual and for the most part those sorts of lies are about information hence there isnt really any way to get it out of them if their suspected to be lieing

but yeah if ICly there is no reason to suspect the other wise than the lie is solid. if your charactor is a bad lier than a bluff check should be used IMO and can be compared to inteligance i guess simply because an inteligant person is more likely to pick up on a lie than a wise person would IMO

but i guess it all comes down to the individual lie as to weither or not its needed

I did not know about the notice even if madcaddies did post it, he never told me ICly therefore I did not know ICly (In character) that he had posted it, because as I said he never told me.

So in that matter I was not lying -_-

otherwise yeah I would rolled some sort of check, it just helps the rp along I reckon

This has nothing to do with you, MexicanGunslinger, or anyone else in specific, forgive me as I don't even know who do you play. If I have offended someone by posting this thread, then I am deeply sorry.

Back on topic tho, I thank all of you for the replies and comments, lots of great points there and lots of stuff I will use from now on.

As for the Bluff checks, what is to counter Bluff ? An opposed Bluff Check ? Wisdom ? Intelligence ? I would think rolling an ability roll (wis,int) vs a skill roll (bluff. etc) is quite unfair, to be honest. Could a DM perhaps give a ruling on this ?

Upperdark

Bluff is opposed by Sense Motive (which is based on Wisdom, by the way), and Diplomacy (closest to NWN's Persuade) is opposed by Diplomacy itself.

That is true, Snoteye, but since Sense Motive does not exist in EfU are we to use Wisdom to counter Bluff checks, or Bluff itself ?

Upperdark

Thats why I don't think we should use bluff, its all well and good to say "use Wis" but our wisdom modifer is not somthing we can increase at every lvl, characters can end up with bluffs of +10 while the best wisdom modifeir I have seen on this server was +3, this means that a random thug can quite easily trick someone with expericece of dealing with liers. Using bluff to conter it again doesn't work, after all, who is more likly to see though a lie, a paladin who constantly searchs for truth (cross-class skill) or some random rogue thug (class skill) Being a good lier yourself doesn't make you good at detecting lies. I still stand by my veiw that it should only be used on NPCs

This is just like what you do in real life people. Yes some people lie and some of them are just really good at it (lawyers, that bloke wearing new shoe's asking you for spare change at the bus stop) and its a personal decision as to if you would fall for it or not. Based on class / background and your characters own motives concerning the lies/half truths or what ever it is. A paladin isnt going to believe anything i person he/she knows is evil normally unless it makes some kind of sence. And using bluff and just assuming that is enough is daft as above states. If we had sence motive yes it would be fine but we dont. I've played characters on here that lied about everything and one's who would have believed you if you told them the sun was actually a giant slow roast pig. Its down to personal prefernace and besides after all it's an RP server.

Just completely abandon the notion of checks and opposing will checks please.

As stated by Nero, how high can your will save go, compared to any character's bluff? Seriously now, bards could easily get 30 persuade or whatever skill and everyone would have to be rolling will saves against their 30+1d20? They could command all of Sanctuary.

yes I don't think you can base it on an opposed roll.

But that said... I think rolling a check is fine purely to assist the other PCs in seeing how good you are. I don't think they should have to make an opposed check, but just RP their response according to their stats/concept/background etc.

This is what I tend to do with perform for nicki. she rolls a perform check purely to represent how well she did in that particular number. PCs choose to respond to the music/check as they see fit depending on their character.

If you think someone is lying IC, Bluff roll or not, just call them on it or let it be. There have been a few times a character has lied to me about how much gold we got for a mission, but I didn't really care. If I did, I would have rolled my Intimidate and tried to scare the truth outta him! lol!

Simply put, go on your gut instinct and then decide whether or not to call them on it. Crap, even if you know OOC that they are lying, RP it IC. The only good liar is a dead liar.

i think a pc that is lying need to roll for bluff, only if the pc expects a lie, he should tell the player, "i check if you try to lie, please roll for it", then the lier will roll ( if lied) and the "victim" will roll for wisdom (last time i've seen, though intelligence might do so as well)

[ohh, and my line of thought was broken, im sure i had another thing to say :P, this will do for now]

I think you have to remember...the dms only use bluff for NPCs. To use rolls to dictate reactions between PCs would dramatically change the dynamics of the server. Whether you realize it or not, you are getting lied to A LOT. If this weren't possible, most of the most interesting side plots would be revealed almost immediately. My char right now is actively involved in 3 different secret plots, none of his associates know his true allegiance, but through RP they try. I doubt any of them would like a simple roll of the dice to expose their or any other of these plots to be revealed. The fun is in investigating and coroborating what you know in order to decipher what is really going on. In conclusion...dice rolls are for game mechanics and nothing else.

Dice rolls, are yes. Though I still believe certain skill ranks and ability scores should be representative, otherwise we can all run around as well-spoken, endearing and believable low INT and CHA characters.

I cooperate whenever a DM or a NPC asks for a bluff roll but to be honest... I really don't like it. An utterly unpersuasive argument because persuasive because of a magical roll, or crap becomes gold because of a 18 or 19 roll?

I've been foiled many a time by what was a very persuasive argument or an awsome lie because of a poor roll.

It is not as if anyone can train bluff or persuade, it is a class skill which is a bit ridiculous, if you practice at it ANYONE can become a better liar, becoming a better liar or more persuasive has nothing to do with learning how to do sneak attacks.

Could we use rolls to oppose bluff? such as : Listen ( the char hears the nervousness of the liar or other tones of voice that might give away the lie) Detection ( the char notices the glancing/sweating) possibly Bluff/Persuade or Lore ( the character knows how to lie himself and can tell if the liar is good at it ) or even possibly Wisdom check/charisma checks agaisnt the Bluff check from the liar. Otherwise I propose we set DD's for bluff, like in the DnD manual ( 15-16 something not too plausible such as : ''Honestly, do you think I stole this jewel? I am a friend of the local lord and he gave me thise to pay off his debts to me'' or 30 for '' actually I am an angel in disguise'' ) . The PC's involved will have to decide OOCly if the lie is plausible or not and it's difficulty. Also we have to keep in mind the state of min, intelligence and wisdom of those who are being lied to. That may change the difficulty of the DD ( for example a good argument told to some stupid half-orc might go from 5 to automatic success, or tosomeone who is angry and refuses to listen to anything will go from 5 to 15 for example ) This is something I think PC's will have to be reasonable about, otherwise we aren't getting anywhere.

As a matter of fact, Vesa, I believe for instance rogues have it as a class skill because lying is generally speaking part of a rogue's job. They are exceptionally competent liars because their income or their life often depends on it.

That's of course a generalization, as it is a generalization to say of class X that doesn't have Bluff as a class skill that members of the class don't need to lie particularly much -- there are so many other factors that affect the situation -- but it would be unfair to say that the game designers were totally random about which classes got Bluff and which did not. It's one of the things represented rather poorly and problematically by the game engine, more suitable for PC-NPC than PC-PC interaction as has been said already.

If you want to be an excellent liar (in terms of things like facial expression, tonal expression, etc.) then your character should have a substantial investment in bluff. Likewise with persuade and intimidate. There is no reason you can't cross-class skills.

yeah well im all for rolls not so much for the roll itself but so everyone can see the charactors modifier so that they can make a decision based not on the roll but the modifier that way its not luck its the amount invested in that skill so for instance 0 in bluff would be unable to lie about anything big to strangers to friends a 0 may meen that they can over exagerate effectivly and them be unsure of weither or not they believe them (unless it was totaly over the top like im an angel in half orc form" or something like that) a 10 would be more likely to be able to lie their way into a strangers gold stash or beable to convince the grey dwarves in the bank that a palidin is stealing their gold im not sure what the scale could be but perhaps that could be taken into account rather than the roll itself thats what i would prefer others to look at when my charactors lie rather than the luck of the dice

I agree with Elytherin here, but the 0 means that their ability to lie is so ineffective that very oftenly they will end up telling the truth. It does not mean however that they are just as bad for telling half truths though, which is slightly easier I think. However as I said earlier, the state of mind and intelligence/wisdom of the listener is just as important. A stupid half-orc will probably belive most of the lies you tell him, but a clever politician can easily sort out the lies from the truth.

Yeah and at the same time the stupid half orc may be that dull he may not be able to understand the lie and there fore not believe it which is always a risk.

The roll is suppose to reflect your character's ability to lie, not yours. Playing a good liar when you really statistically suck is like metagaming when you play a smart character with a low intellegence. You may not be able to come up with a good lie, but your character might, aescetically. Like your character's lore check might fail when you really know what the item is OOC.

And also, in the rule book it says your rolls really shouldn't be used on player characters. Its up to the other party to decide if his character is gullible or is untrusting along with other factors as stated. As a DM I only ever allowed it when player A was bluffing to player B, but player B knew OOC that he was lying. And unfortunately NWN doesn't have the "sense motive" ability check. I think you're suppose to substitute "taunt" because it also means "diplomacy" which is pretty stupid really. And then some use "will save" which is even more unbalanced.

But this should be left up to the DM's of EfU to decide. Its their game and they're neutral ground.

I'd personally rather see the point of a skill used to judge how well spoken the character is before the roll of a dice. (IE: A decent argument and a character with 8 Persuade versus a decent arguement and a roll of 1+8 and the character failing.)

I think most people who are arguing for a dice roll in this kind of a situation are mainly wanting it to demonstrate their modifier as opposed to the actual die roll.

I really do think it helps in RP-ing your response to another PC's lie if you know how skilled they are at it.

Yeah what Chez said. So in summary:

ingore the the actual roll because thats random instead the "Roll" itself is just used so that others can see your modifier and then make a decision depending on your charactors gulability.

Ofcourse this is heavily relying on an honour system and it will probably be taken advantage of weither willngly or involuntarily, but when you know OOCly know their lieing than try and keep in the back of your mind that your charactor isnt you and that you have to make decisions based upon your charactors ideals thoughts and beliefs.

I think that makes it alot easier perhaps a variable table for different types of lies and different charactors general thought patterns or attitudes would make it a little more solid though that would over complicate it and take away from the game.

I think the skill has to get involved somehow. The system generally using those to modell the world, the same way as attack rolls represent martial skills of the character, which can be very high even when the player can't even hold a sword straight IRL. Social skills (Bluff, Intimidate, Perform, etc.) are not exceptions from this. If I want to play a bard, but I am a lousy performer as player, I use the skill (of course adding some RP is neccessary). Because if it is not allowed, it would be the same thing as saying I can only play a monk if I (as player) have black belt in a martial art.

If the character thinks the other lies to him, he should notify the lier character's player OOCly, and they have to OOCly agree on the spot how to resolve this with rolls. Please notice the words 'character thinks'. Some idea to this:

It can even be agreed, that he character has no reason to suspect the lie, it is just a player's knowledge which makes it obvious, in this case a bluff roll vs. the character wisdom score as DC could be enough, really just checking that the liar makes a mistake, which the other part could notice (sweating palms, twitching eyes, etc). "Honest" liar players can volunterily making this roll in cases the player doesn't know about the possible lie, but his character should. (Example: newbie player plays a native Sanctuarian, lieing to his character about the city is hard, even if the player has no info on this.)

If the lie is about something specific, a roll vs roll solution could work. Like lieing about some geographical or historical info is bluff vs lore (lore is highly abusable in this term, so try to find an other skill if possible first). Lieing about a magical topic is bluff vs spellcraft. Lieing about a trap is bluff vs. disarm trap. If nothing else could be find a bluff roll against DC the character's INT score can be the solution. If only the lier could blow the thing, as the character has no info on te topic, a bluff vs bluff roll can do the trick. Whatever way it can be decided, that the lie went through, or not.

If it does, than time to go back in IC, and playing out the results accordingly. If not than the cheated party can decide to react on the lie, and confronts the liar on the spot, in this case again back to IC mode and play it out. However the cheated person can decide, that he hides the fact he discovered the lie. In this case a bluff vs. bluff check could be the solution, and the winner of it gets the good assess of the another. If the cheated person wins, he hid the fact that he is aware fo the lie. If the liar wins he knows that the other person saw through him, but tried to keep it hidden. No further rolls are neccessary. Time to go back in IC mode, and play it out accordingly.

I know it involves a lot of IC-OOC knowledge separation, as well mature players. But maybe this could simulate the whole situ acceptably and quickly with one or two rolls. It is easier done than described.

It is my 0.2 cent only, I hope at least some can use it and play great scheming liars. :)

Even with rolls, there's no good opposed roll on NwN. There's no "sense motive" skill. There's not really anything well balanced for it. If you think it makes the skill useless, then don't take it. I just take it so I have the right to say my character is a good liar, not just me. And if someone challenges that, they can see my modifier.

The table idea is nice, but I think the honest ones will still be just as fair, and the dishonest will still probably ignore it. I think in the end that's really how it will end anyway, no matter what system you decide on. Its really all up to the DMs to stop those who are dishonest from metagaming. Just be courteous and respectful to everyone. The liars and the recepients. If someone's griefing and using lies then no one's going to trust them, and rightfully so. If you lie to someoen and are successful, then don't take advantage of everything you can. Make it fun for the other person, same as PvP. If people don't use the bluff skill to powergame, lying their way out of everything, and whining when they do get caught if someone ignores their rolls, it shouldn't be a problem. Most of those I see who abuse it won't roll anyway. "Your character has no clue I stole from you because I'm wearing a mask now even though I'm the only halfling in this area and I'm sustaining wounds that you gave to me and other people have caught me stealing before," is what I usually get, and then the player runs to the DM's or hides behind his high level friend OOC or the ultimate, logging, because he powergamed and didn't put any ranks in bluff so he could put them elsewhere.

Nagypapi I think the skill has to get involved somehow. The system generally using those to modell the world, the same way as attack rolls represent martial skills of the character, which can be very high even when the player can't even hold a sword straight IRL. Social skills (Bluff, Intimidate, Perform, etc.) are not exceptions from this. If I want to play a bard, but I am a lousy performer as player, I use the skill (of course adding some RP is neccessary). Because if it is not allowed, it would be the same thing as saying I can only play a monk if I (as player) have black belt in a martial art.

If the character thinks the other lies to him, he should notify the lier character's player OOCly, and they have to OOCly agree on the spot how to resolve this with rolls. Please notice the words 'character thinks'. Some idea to this:

It can even be agreed, that he character has no reason to suspect the lie, it is just a player's knowledge which makes it obvious, in this case a bluff roll vs. the character wisdom score as DC could be enough, really just checking that the liar makes a mistake, which the other part could notice (sweating palms, twitching eyes, etc). "Honest" liar players can volunterily making this roll in cases the player doesn't know about the possible lie, but his character should. (Example: newbie player plays a native Sanctuarian, lieing to his character about the city is hard, even if the player has no info on this.)

If the lie is about something specific, a roll vs roll solution could work. Like lieing about some geographical or historical info is bluff vs lore (lore is highly abusable in this term, so try to find an other skill if possible first). Lieing about a magical topic is bluff vs spellcraft. Lieing about a trap is bluff vs. disarm trap. If nothing else could be find a bluff roll against DC the character's INT score can be the solution. If only the lier could blow the thing, as the character has no info on te topic, a bluff vs bluff roll can do the trick. Whatever way it can be decided, that the lie went through, or not.

If it does, than time to go back in IC, and playing out the results accordingly. If not than the cheated party can decide to react on the lie, and confronts the liar on the spot, in this case again back to IC mode and play it out. However the cheated person can decide, that he hides the fact he discovered the lie. In this case a bluff vs. bluff check could be the solution, and the winner of it gets the good assess of the another. If the cheated person wins, he hid the fact that he is aware fo the lie. If the liar wins he knows that the other person saw through him, but tried to keep it hidden. No further rolls are neccessary. Time to go back in IC mode, and play it out accordingly.

I know it involves a lot of IC-OOC knowledge separation, as well mature players. But maybe this could simulate the whole situ acceptably and quickly with one or two rolls. It is easier done than described.

It is my 0.2 cent only, I hope at least some can use it and play great scheming liars. :)

I dont think we have a problem with swapping from IC to OOC and back again aswell as keeping the information seperate from what i have read the main problem is in what fights up against the Bluff skill.

All of what was said in that post does help but the second part of the argument is:

Half Orc Barbarian with -3 charisma modifier score and no ranks in bluff makes a roll which comes out like this:

Bluff Roll= 19 Modifier= -3 Score= 16

then you get a Half Elf Scorcerer with a charisma modifier score of 4 and 5 ranks in bluff and the roll comes out like this:

Bluff Roll= 3 Modifier= 9 Score= 12

As you can see the half elf has worked on being able to lie convincingly and the half orc knows nothing of how to lie in any sence of the word and yet he manages to prety successfully to establish a lie that could very well be huge. Now you could repackage that as many times as you would like with as many different skills and classes and the end result comes out that when this happens there is no possible way that the poor lier could establish a lie that is ment to convince the world.

If you were to use just the modifier and a little more brain work you get something like this:

A Halfling Rogue that is street wise and very loquatious and convincing (Charisma modifier= 3 Bluff= 10) lies about a stash of loot he tucked into his pocket on an adventure to a Half Elf that has a hate for Halflings because he has had many of his possessions stolen by them as such his always suspicious when around them (Search= 9 Intimidate= 6) spots a larger than origional bulge in one of the halflings pouches and looking at it notices that it looks distinctly like gems so he stands over the halfling forcing him to empty the pouch.

end result Halfling score 13 half elf score 15

you see with a little more brain power and using the modifiers rather than the roll it makes it less random and still requires the IC and OOC knowlage.

thats roughly what i was getting at probably bad example but im rushed lol well yeah throw your ideas around

That can work as well. I just tried to show some idea what skills can be rolled/used, and how. It is also a valid thought, that use the modifier only. The main thing that the skill somehow has to be used (rolled, checked, whatever) to make social interactions correctly done.

same wave length just viewing through different view points ;) so yeah i think thats a good way to run it just got to make sure that OOC people agree to what skills are being showed and then use it IC

a problem with just using the skill roll is it dosent let another person know what the negatives or positives that are added to it are. I know that in pen and paper D&D there are modifiers added depending on the lie and type of person so it all well and good having a basic bluff of 25 when youre got to apply a negative 40 to the rolll for the lie your telling. Basically im just saying that even the basic check can be misleading so dont bother rolling it.

Modifiers can also be agreed upon. Or just simply setting a DC. A simple startpoint can be, that the basic bluff DC is the INT or WIS score of the victim of the lie, than it can be topped by +5, +10, +15 or even a +20 modifier for lies form small to outrageous. Than make the check and that's it.

yeah i agree on that one Naggi a DC can be agreed on which i think is a better way to do it but it will all involve OOC truth and honesty which shouldent be a problem.

Skill rolls are best used with NPC interaction.

Players are expected to play their skills properly during RP events, including, but not limited to, lying.