Some clarity on Skill Rolls vs. Opposing Skill roles

[Gorri]

Howdy folks,

The more different people I RP interact with, the more I am finding people are treating Skill roles differently. I am hoping for some clarity in this regard because frankly, I don't feel like doing three different things when I come up against 3 different people who try to bluff my character.

Case in point... bluff. Now I thought it pretty straight forward... right click the target so their portrait appears in the top center screen... choose bluff from the skill menu and roll.... POOF! you either succeed or fail.

I've had people who try to bluff my character ask me to do everything from roll my own bluff roll to beat there's, to roll sense motive, to roll will saves, to roll intelligence AND/OR wisdom... all this crazy stuff and honestly, I am pretty sure it is much more cut and dry and there isn't much room for interpretation of how the system works.

In fact, I am betting that if the skill can actually be targeted upon a character (some skills can't I forget which ones)... that's the way to go. Point, choose skill, roll, RP the results....

This does however bring up the question of what if you are trying to bluff (intimidate, spot, sleight of hand, etc. etc. etc) a room full of people? Do you target and roll for each one? Do you roll once in the "general area" and hope for the best? The best being all the people in the room roll their opposing roll the same way... not will, vs. spot, vs dexterity, vs. whatever.

Am I even making any sense.

Rock on,

G

[OnyxTigress]

Typically, what I will tend to do if I am trying to bluff multiple people is that I just roll a general bluff. And then I will let the others roll sense motive and such and apply it to the one bluff score I got.

[roguethree]

Bluff doesn't oppose bluff. Sometimes people try to get around weaknesses in their characters by suggesting that skills be used that shouldn't be used.

Here's my take on bluff:

If you're lying, keep lying without a roll until someone rolls sense motive. Then, if you are lying (or you're not but you don't want to give anything away), roll bluff. For multiple opponents, do just as O. Tigress said: one public roll, and let everyone else roll opposed rolls.

[Lothoir]

Just keep this handy table in mind; not all lies are equally believable.

[OnyxTigress]

Yup! That is the thing, in order for bluff to really work, the lie has to be plausible.

Even if you tell a person that they are a man if they are in fact a woman and succeed in the bluff roll, it's not gonna fly.

[Gorri]

OK, maybe bluff was a complicated example. How about intimidate or diplomacy?

Do you point and click on the character and roll to see if it's successful, or do you pull up PnP D&D rules and figure out how it works. My understanding is this is NWN2 and not PnP but I get schooled all the freakin time so.... yeah.

[Shedboy]

as lothoir demonstrates in the bluff table - its all situational. Different DC's etc.

i had a character use the intimidate skill on my character - sort of like a running flash of the fanny. further people react in a variety of ways - the direct results are not always apparent.

its a very grey area but good for discussion all the same.

[Urithrand]

Yup! That is the thing, in order for bluff to really work, the lie has to be plausible.

Actually this isn't true. The PHB specifically states that they're used to "Make the implausible or impossible seem true"

[Mournas]

Intimidate is a will save plain and simple. You try to fear the person by being scary ... Thus its kinda like casting scare which requires a Will save etc. If someone taunts you and it is like your character to not lose his cool then just stay chill. Example : Trying to taunt a wise monk is probably as viable as a vampire who enjoys eating silver.

And Diplomacy well I think its just a set DC for encounters ... Like talk your way past some dumb street thugs might be a general DC of 20. On the other hand convincing a Dragon to loan you a magical weapon of some power in exhange for favors would probably be around a 30-40DC Depending on a few things such as age of the dragon and nature of the dragon...

[roguethree]

Wrong on a couple accounts. First:

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). If you beat your target’s check result, you may treat the target as friendly, but only for the purpose of actions taken while it remains intimidated. (That is, the target retains its normal attitude, but will chat, advise, offer limited help, or advocate on your behalf while intimidated. See the Diplomacy skill, above, for additional details.) The effect lasts as long as the target remains in your presence, and for 1d6×10 minutes afterward. After this time, the target’s default attitude toward you shifts to unfriendly (or, if normally unfriendly, to hostile).

So it's not a Will save, plain and simple.

Example : Trying to taunt a wise monk is probably as viable as a vampire who enjoys eating silver.

This isn't how skills work. It might be difficult to taunt a monk, but if the skill's successful, then the monk will respond in some way to the taunting. It could be a change in facial expression. It could be that he or she leaves the area, but the Monk shouldn't just ignore the taunt.

[Twisted-Indoctrine]

You try to fear the person by being scary

Just going to mention this isn't always true. It's probably more accurate to say you try to impact a person by being imposing. It's not always fear but shame you might be attempting to induce which isn't really rooted in fear. An example would be for anyone who's endured military life looking back on basic training. Training staff are pretty observant and careful in dealing with candidates and while the initial phase of it may involve wailing and gnashing their teeth at you and scaring the crap out of you with unexpected intensity you usually end up laughing at those times later on.

What you really remember are those times when they're not yelling at you, the times when they really worry you. Case in point I'll probably never forget one of my master corporal's line on "simple mistakes":

"There are no simple mistakes in combat. We're hard on you because you need to understand mistakes hurt. Because, believe me, when they happen in real life it's going to hurt a hell of a lot more living with the realization that God doesn't kill you for your mistakes, God kills your friends."

I don't even remember what little thing brought it up, but I remember the mood was decidedly more sober for a good long while afterwards. It's a lesser seen form of intimidation. More darkly it can be used for psychological bullying as well. The point is intimidation has far more reaching effects then people realize and fear immunity won't protect you from them all, realistically speaking anyway.

[Gorri]

I'll make my question simpler... I like the discussion going on here, but I don't feel like I am any closer to an answer in my mind.

When I point and click on a character, choose intimidate from the menu, and roll (regardless of the outcome), does it take into account of the the opposition skill, synergy, ability or save bonus, weather conditions etc?

I have been using it cause I thought it was basically taking everything it needs to, into account (to within reason). I like it simple... point, click, roll. Does this work or not? I'm trying to RP here, I don't have time to dig up d20 rules every time I use a skill. Which is multiple times per gaming session.

Thanks

[roguethree]

Yes, when you target a PC with a skill, that PC's opposed roll is accurately represented.

[Shedboy]

3rd level paladins are "immune" to fear - does that mean they are immune to intimidate

Aura of Courage: Beginning at 3rd level, a paladin is immune to fear (magical or otherwise). Each ally within 10 feet of him gains a +4 morale bonus on saving throws against fear effects.

[Lothoir]

Yes.*