>can I roll performance instead deception?
>I'm not lying
>I'm acting as though I'm telling the truth
How would you react?
 |
 Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
|
>can I roll performance instead deception? >I'm not lying
>can I roll performance instead deception?
>I'm not lying
>I'm acting as though I'm telling the truth
How would you react?
|
Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68 |
|
I would not be playing dungeons and dragons to start with.
But then I would tell him that acting though you are telling the truth when you know that you are not would literally make for a dictionary definition of deception.
Man, you really never turn off, do you.
You never waste a chance to be the basic b***h troll that you are.
I like the part where you pretend we know each other.
What's funny is everyone's catching on to the one homosexual who responds to any negativity about D&D by seething about trolls, but he still acts like there's only one troll on /tg/ who hates D&D
You're trying too hard here.
No one said there's only one troll who hates D&D.
But it takes a special kind of troll to always rush in to a thread as fast as they can just to leave a shitpost to explain how much they dislike D&D.
This has been explained to you multiple times, but you continue to just feign ignorance, slink away, and then go right back to shitposting, all whlle pretending you're not the most basic b***h of basic b***h trolls.
Yeah nah you're a delusional israelite. Everyone hates dnd moron, there's a reason why only actors pretend to play it but nobody really does.
So you're saying that if you plan on saying something negative about dungeons and dragons you have to wait for someone else to respond first.
Intriguingly moronic position.
I like D&D, but you're wrong, being the first to shit on D&D is a sport that countless posters enjoy. In fact I'll bet a lot of those posts are made by people who like D&D.
Truly shitting on D&D is, itself, a traditional game.
>No one said there's only one troll who hates D&D.
>This has been explained to you multiple times,
Can't keep your shit straight for one post huh? Have to run straight to "I know who you are for a fact and have lectured you, specifically before!!" like the homosexualy schizo you are.
People are laughing at you on Discord.
You have only played D&D if you think that players wheedling to use the skill they're good at instead of the logical skill that they aren't is unique to D&D.
Have you tried not playing D&D?
Top tier projection anon, but my friends tell me they want to do a thing and I tell them whether to roll and what.
You missed the part where modern DnD's skills are just short of being class specific hardlocks, and also the part where skills in accordance with their names overlap one another in regular play quite often, something that is in fact unique to DnD.
For example, which skill is good for jumping? Athletics? It says so in the book. What's Acrobatics for? Isn't jumping kind of THE acrobat move? DnD used to have a character archetype literally called The Acrobat, who's entire role was to leap gaps.
How about Perception and Investigation? Both are looking-with-my-eyes skills. The distinction comes form circumstance, but because the overlap is so close, one can easily be argued over the other.
Contrary to popular belief, this is not ideal. Skill overlap is a headache, slow the game down, cause decision making ruts, and games that intentionally allow it are usually lacking in many rules departments overall, with the limp skill rules being just another by-product of lazy game design.
Skills should, as a general thumb, not overlap at all. They should be distinct, and each have their purposes, so that there are NO questions as to which action would fall under what skill.
>Isn't jumping kind of THE acrobat move?
Trick jumps are Acrobatic, but if the focus on making a long/high jump then it's absolutely Athletics. You might consider rolling both if the PC is trying a jump that's both physically intensive and requires extreme precision/balance (say bridging the gap between buildings by jumping off a rooftop to a distant clothesline that'll let them swing through a window) with a complication if either fails or maybe taking the average.
Perception and Investigation though yeah, those have an obnoxious overlap. Investigation ideally doesn't need to exist, just have Perception handle all the information acquisition and then optionally have knowledge-related skills determine if you can make the correct deductions.
Perception lets you notice things you aren't specifically looking for and determines how sharp your senses are generally. Investigation determines how good you are at specifically searching for something in particular, and is as much about your knowledge of systematic search methods, effective practices, and inferential reasoning as it is about your raw ability. To put it another way, perception is mostly about your physical capabilities, based on what kind of thing you are. Investigation can be trained.
anon thinks everyone question asked is about him specifically
>guys wwyd if your girlfriend was the one to get on one knee and propose instead of you
"This could not happen because I have no girlfriend"
anon is a genius
>he fell for the other people exist meme
/thread
No.
I allow performance as an alternative for deception when it's about really pretending to be someone or making some wild emotional acting, such as barging in and screaming that there is a fire or someone is getting attacked. I consider Deception to be more about keeping a poker face, bluffing & fast talking
not a perfect solution/interpretation, but imo, it's sensible enough to give some more use to performance
Do whatever's highest I don't give a frick
>rolling deception instead of trying to decieve me
what a lazy player
Depends on the situation but generally I'd just let them try with a penalty since there's justifiable overlap but enough difference that it could be spotted.
>I'd just let them try with a penalty
Same, but said penalty would be greater than the difference between their Deception and Perform skills.
Yeah, that's why men trying to pretend to be women is so fricking repulsive, they're terrible liars and terrible actors and everyone can tell they aren't women based on how they look like men.
??
I'm fine with creative checks like using strength to intimidate but I always want players to explicitly say what their character is doing. So for this guy, I'd ask him what his character is going to perform then probably set the DC skyhigh because "acting as though I'm telling the truth" is weak. That or maybe it's lower because the npc likes plays or something.
Sure, Fast-Talk defaults to Acting at -5
>-5
GURPS defaults are moronic, anything past a -1 or -2 is useless
They seemingly mainly exist so that your classless OCD doesn't get infringed upon by other player's classless characters.
Sounds like a sacred cow of shit-tier gameplay meant to act as a bandaid over what is other-wise a very obvious design flaw.
It's a solution to the issue of keeping PCs somewhat distinct in a classless point-buy system that's trying to gamify a representation of RL, I assume.
It's a fine mechanic, it's just that the penalties are too harsh most of the time.
That's the point.
>How would you react?
Penalize their performance roll so it's equal to their deception roll -1. Explain that the NPC hates performers of all kinds.
sure, roll performance, but use your deception bonus instead.
? ? ?
What?
How would you feel if you hadn't eaten breakfast this morning?
It's in the middle of the night. Not even time for breakfast yet.
Yeah, but let's say yesterday you didn't eat any breakfast, hypothetically, how would you have felt?
Are we talking first or second breakfast?
Normal. Breakfast is for fat people with no lives.
As expected people in this thread fail The Breakfast Question. True pottery
I've had GMs demand acting rolls instead of bluff when they want you to fail.
For the 6th time Steve, we are playing Konosuba, not dnd.
>How would you react?
Let him roll whatever he think is correct. I will do the math latter, possibly making him fail always untill he realizes what I'm doing and decide to play as the rules intended.
I would react by walking away from whatever… this is, and go play an actual game.
only if you have that one skill feat
Normal result if succesful. Dire consequences if failure due to being a succesful mockery.
sure
oh no you failed! moving on.
With the intention to deceive. Roll deception.
Performance is for entertainment.
Also frick this, lets play a better game.
system issue, they should be the same skill
I let him do it because players who take background skills should get to roll them once in a while.
>Performance. Your Charisma (Performance) check determines how well you can delight an audience with music, dance, acting, storytelling, or some other form of entertainment.
Only if the story you're telling is delightful.
I tell him a rousing tale of the time his grossly overfeed matriarch pleasured all the men and a few goats of the leper colony for just two pence and how he was the result of such a celebrated event.
Joke's on you, I run Digimon Digital Adventures where I could easily see Perform being the lie skill instead of Manipulate. In fact I often use Persuade as persuasion, manipulate as intimidate, and perform as deception. But it'd still be deception.
For sure, I can imagine people are autistic about these sorts of things, but D&D 5e is clear about how you can use whatever tool you have at your disposal in a pinch.
that's fairly clever and also if caught in a lie, it gives the player the means to then follow with a deception check to make others believe he held what he previously said as the truth and knew no better, so you were misinformed rather than lying outright.
this is the kind of shit i'd ask to pull off.
>that's fairly clever
Frick off. We know the only reason that a player would do this is because they have advantage in one skill and not the other.
so what? play smart, not hard
Can I use performance for my attack roll? I'm acting like I know how to use a sword.
ok roll performance
it succeedes you have +1 to your deception roll
it fails you have -1 to the deception roll
If it's not a grand performance, no. If they're trying to do something like fake a slip-and-fall accident for insurance money? Sure, why not. I play with people who enjoy roleplaying a lot, so they'll usually try to set up the situation to use their appropriate skills beforehand.
No.
Deception is deliberately misleading someone without them realising that you are lying to them, acting is deceiving with the consent of the deceived, e.g. no-one thinks you are really Julius Caeser just because you're playing him on stage, no matter how good your performance might be.
Laugh and say sure go ahead
Sure. (The check to tell that you are acting is DC10, the quality of your performance does not affect this)
>I'm not lying I'm lying
that's moronic
I'd allow it, actors are all naturally deceitful and scum.
5 ranks of performance gives you a +2 to deception, and vice versa, but you're still rolling deception.
Yes, but in that case success only makes the NPC conclude that YOU actually believe what you are saying.
Deception is whether they believe it, performance is whether they're entertained by it. Performing a lie would make them entertained by your story but they'd still consider it fiction.
What I have allowed is for the player to roll performance on telling the exact truth, with success meaning the target is entertained by the story and consider it a tall tale that's obviously untrue. Then when they get mad that the story is actually true the player can just say "what, I told you the truth, not my fault you didn't believe me."
Every story I tell contains truth, unless a character in it lies, then it contains lies that describe the truth. But overall it's a lie. But it expresses ultimate truths. So it's a performance deception but to simply express the truth. So then it's true telling but not entertaining or deceiving, but in actuality it's actually trying to do that. So that means that it's a peformance that I need to trick someone with. But once they follow along they understand the truth and therefore realize that it wasn't a lie all along. But in that realization, they come to understand the falseness of certain situations. But that falseness is actually a true description of something unreal. But that unreality is actually true. So you see the true lies I performed express a deeper truth that even someone realizing I'm lying must admit is 100% true.
>So that means that it's a peformance that I need to trick someone with.
Roll deception then.
Social skill checks are a mistake that never got corrected
In case this thread was truly made in good faith,
no, FPBP.
I would, however, allow you to make an aid reaction to another party member lying using Performance if your character is any kind of actor.
Pretending to APPEAR credulous of something happening around you or to you, is not the same as trying to CONVINCE someone of something you know to be false. The former is indirect, and would work as a circumstance bonus to someone else's check, but never as the check itself.
I'd also allow an Arcana or Occultism check for an Aid reaction, if they were trying to distract the person with an irrelevant tangent or overly specific facts of a magical and interesting nature. I'm much more permissive with Aid and Initiative checks than "hey can I do this thing that explicitly uses this skill, but with another one instead?"
Roll performance, if you pass the check you get a advantage on your deception check if you fail you don't or if I want to be a Democrat and frick you over you'd get a disadvantage if you fail
Charm reflects attractiveness, empathy, social skills, and force of personality. You use this Talent whenever you try to bluff, charm, deceive, negotiate with, persuade, or seduce someone. Acting also falls under Charm, even when you aren’t using it to deceive anyone.
All characters effectively have Leaping at half their Might for purposes of determining how far they can jump.