I suck a lot at handling interrogations with my players. It’s a combination of them not asking any meaningful questions and me not wanting to spot all the info an Npc has just because they had a good “intimidation” roll, specially for main villains
So basically.. I want to break the loop
“tell us everything you know”
”I will never tell you anything sucker!!”
”I put my sword next to his eye and tell him I will kill him unless he talks!” (roll for intimidation)
I've had the same problem; one way I've dealt with it is to treat the intimidation roll has a degree of success. So, on a resounding success, the NPC will be very forthcoming and on a weak success they'll share only some things. This can limit the info divulged and simultaneously reward good rolls.
I'd also try to encourage the players to ask more direct questions: "Who do you work for? Where did you put the amulet?" vs. "Tell us everything you know!" which is too open ended to answer well anyway. Force them to specify by answering with questions "what do you want yo know about?"
Or maybe intimidation isn't the right answer at all. Perhaps the NPC is so overcome with fear that they faint, or become incoherent, and the players must pursue a differeny course of action.
Also keep in mind that henchmen usually won't know the whole picture. Think about how little information your main villain could get away with sharing with this NPC, and be sure to only share that with the party. Higher-ups might know more, but they'll also probably be harder to intimidate.
I totally understand the desire to have a better roleplay scenario play out when your group is interrogating an NPC. I've been in your seat, where the players don't know the questions they need to ask, so they don't ask anything really at all. I do the same thing when I'm a player, I can never think of the right questions to ask the DM. Something that I've been doing for a while now that I find really helps is asking myself 'What, When, Where, Why, How?' for every NPC interaction that I have. You could maybe suggest this to your players, and see how they do with it. Reward them with the information they need if they ask any questions, even vague ones at first, and as they get more practice with it, maybe they'll starting asking more poignant questions!
Something else that I think helps is encouraging everyone to talk as their character. Not every group is interested in doing that, but I find it's easier to ask an NPC a question, rather than asking the DM a question, at least when I play. Maybe if you talk as the NPC, it'll encourage your players to talk as their characters, there by helping them get in the mind of their characters a little better, leading to better interrogation!
I've had the same problem; one way I've dealt with it is to treat the intimidation roll has a degree of success. So, on a resounding success, the NPC will be very forthcoming and on a weak success they'll share only some things. This can limit the info divulged and simultaneously reward good rolls.
I do this too. I can sketch out what an NPC may know and set DC's for Interrogation and Persuasion (which may vary depending on which works best for their motives). Then I let the rolls do their work. The rolls can help cover for players who don't ask the "right questions" and I can fill in the appropriate blanks. It's a game mechanic, that's what it's for!
If my players just stated, "Tell me everything you know!" and rolled well... I'm going to just go for melodrama... "Well, it all started with a really bright light and in time I learned the word for Sun, but back then I didn't know what the Sun was but it was really bright. I like my thumb a lot back then..." and just see how far I can go in NPC-land before the players actually ask detailed questions. I'm not opposed to them asking super general questions... but they have learned I give super general answers in reply to those kinds of questions. I had to learn to not cough up details for vague attempts to find information. That doesn't mean I won't throw them a bone now and then. I'll also throw in false information on lower rolls.
"Well, it all started with a really bright light and in time I learned the word for Sun, but back then I didn't know what the Sun was but it was really bright. I like my thumb a lot back then..."
With a sword to the throat, I feel that a response like this means the intimidation roll didn't succeed, or succeeded too well! Either way, it would probably end the interrogation quickly, and so the original problem is avoided!
I think it also works for the opposite. If the Players are in a great position to get information and then roll poorly and it can also rerail things.
I like to treat things like this as extended actions. The PCs have to hit a target of successes or if they succeed well enough degrees of success could count extra. If you're worried about the blowing a particularly bad/good RP give Dis/Adv.
Players could alternate Diplomacy and Intimidation playing Good Cop/Bad Cop. Or go dice-less and see how it plays out. I've always loved how Archer interrogates the Irish Mob in Season 2 Episode 9 "Placebo Effect".
I find it helps if interrogation scenes are not about information, but time. It's a foregone conclusion that the party will get the information they need to move the game along one way or another most of the time. The problem becomes how long it takes to extract it. If the party is taking the time to interrogate a captive, then generally there needs to be a need for them to get that information quickly. Maybe orcs are planting explosive runes in secret around a city and a captured orc knows where the targeted buildings are. Maybe a cult has absconded with a local nobles child and a captured kidnapper knows the secret route the party needs to catch up to them in time.
Either way, the framing of the interrogation scene should not be about the interrogation itself, but how quickly the party gets what it needs and moves on. Failed rolls just mean that they get where they need to be behind schedule...maybe after a building has exploded...maybe after the sacrificial ritual has begun, but before the climaxing murder.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
I am about to run an interrogation scene, my first one and I feel very intimidated by it and very unsure of how to run it. I am going to borrow a framework from the Stargate game and have a framework for it. The players will be asked how many hours they will interrogate my NPC and I will determine if that meets the secret hold-out threshold, if it does then I'll do a secret roll. if he succeeds he will clam up and say nothing no matter what, if he fails he will tell them the truth about what he knows. Before that break point he will answer the questions based on whether he beats the ability rolls.
I am about to run an interrogation scene, my first one and I feel very intimidated by it and very unsure of how to run it. I am going to borrow a framework from the Stargate game and have a framework for it. The players will be asked how many hours they will interrogate my NPC and I will determine if that meets the secret hold-out threshold, if it does then I'll do a secret roll. if he succeeds he will clam up and say nothing no matter what, if he fails he will tell them the truth about what he knows. Before that break point he will answer the questions based on whether he beats the ability rolls.
Sounds like a pretty good framework to me. Be sure not to make it feel too one-sided, though; make sure the players' input matters.
Also, this thread is getting close to being five years old. It's best to just let old threads remain dead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
If you want more variety in questions the players have to be given more tools. They need to have enough information to ask specific questions and tools like detect thoughts that effect interrogations in interesting ways. There also can't be a stock solution for some interrogations certain tactics should default fail that might be threats, bribes etc... because the target isn't susceptible to it.
Some tips
Interrogated characters need to have personalities like all npcs to be interesting
Being intimidated into giving an answer doesn't necessarily mean you answer truthfully. People often try to give interrogators what they want when threatened or in pain which may not be true or useful. Heck for some enemies they may just have a mental break down and start sobbing if you threaten them.
Threats don't work unless there is some realistic promise of safety. If more allies have been killed they're less likely to respond they may also want some assurance like releasing friends.
Enemies should lie and players should be able to use a broad range of checks to detect that.
speak with dead needs to be less useful than a live interrogation or they will always be interrogating ghosts
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I suck a lot at handling interrogations with my players. It’s a combination of them not asking any meaningful questions and me not wanting to spot all the info an Npc has just because they had a good “intimidation” roll, specially for main villains
So basically.. I want to break the loop
“tell us everything you know”
”I will never tell you anything sucker!!”
”I put my sword next to his eye and tell him I will kill him unless he talks!” (roll for intimidation)
I've had the same problem; one way I've dealt with it is to treat the intimidation roll has a degree of success. So, on a resounding success, the NPC will be very forthcoming and on a weak success they'll share only some things. This can limit the info divulged and simultaneously reward good rolls.
I'd also try to encourage the players to ask more direct questions: "Who do you work for? Where did you put the amulet?" vs. "Tell us everything you know!" which is too open ended to answer well anyway. Force them to specify by answering with questions "what do you want yo know about?"
Or maybe intimidation isn't the right answer at all. Perhaps the NPC is so overcome with fear that they faint, or become incoherent, and the players must pursue a differeny course of action.
Also keep in mind that henchmen usually won't know the whole picture. Think about how little information your main villain could get away with sharing with this NPC, and be sure to only share that with the party. Higher-ups might know more, but they'll also probably be harder to intimidate.
I totally understand the desire to have a better roleplay scenario play out when your group is interrogating an NPC. I've been in your seat, where the players don't know the questions they need to ask, so they don't ask anything really at all. I do the same thing when I'm a player, I can never think of the right questions to ask the DM. Something that I've been doing for a while now that I find really helps is asking myself 'What, When, Where, Why, How?' for every NPC interaction that I have. You could maybe suggest this to your players, and see how they do with it. Reward them with the information they need if they ask any questions, even vague ones at first, and as they get more practice with it, maybe they'll starting asking more poignant questions!
Something else that I think helps is encouraging everyone to talk as their character. Not every group is interested in doing that, but I find it's easier to ask an NPC a question, rather than asking the DM a question, at least when I play. Maybe if you talk as the NPC, it'll encourage your players to talk as their characters, there by helping them get in the mind of their characters a little better, leading to better interrogation!
If my players just stated, "Tell me everything you know!" and rolled well... I'm going to just go for melodrama...
"Well, it all started with a really bright light and in time I learned the word for Sun, but back then I didn't know what the Sun was but it was really bright. I like my thumb a lot back then..." and just see how far I can go in NPC-land before the players actually ask detailed questions. I'm not opposed to them asking super general questions... but they have learned I give super general answers in reply to those kinds of questions. I had to learn to not cough up details for vague attempts to find information. That doesn't mean I won't throw them a bone now and then. I'll also throw in false information on lower rolls.
I think it also works for the opposite. If the Players are in a great position to get information and then roll poorly and it can also rerail things.
I like to treat things like this as extended actions. The PCs have to hit a target of successes or if they succeed well enough degrees of success could count extra.
If you're worried about the blowing a particularly bad/good RP give Dis/Adv.
Players could alternate Diplomacy and Intimidation playing Good Cop/Bad Cop.
Or go dice-less and see how it plays out. I've always loved how Archer interrogates the Irish Mob in Season 2 Episode 9 "Placebo Effect".
I find it helps if interrogation scenes are not about information, but time. It's a foregone conclusion that the party will get the information they need to move the game along one way or another most of the time. The problem becomes how long it takes to extract it. If the party is taking the time to interrogate a captive, then generally there needs to be a need for them to get that information quickly. Maybe orcs are planting explosive runes in secret around a city and a captured orc knows where the targeted buildings are. Maybe a cult has absconded with a local nobles child and a captured kidnapper knows the secret route the party needs to catch up to them in time.
Either way, the framing of the interrogation scene should not be about the interrogation itself, but how quickly the party gets what it needs and moves on. Failed rolls just mean that they get where they need to be behind schedule...maybe after a building has exploded...maybe after the sacrificial ritual has begun, but before the climaxing murder.
Thanks for the tips guys!
Maybe it’s me, that I should prepare those answers upfront. I just feel it is to easy if I spit it out at once just because they had a good roll
I am about to run an interrogation scene, my first one and I feel very intimidated by it and very unsure of how to run it. I am going to borrow a framework from the Stargate game and have a framework for it. The players will be asked how many hours they will interrogate my NPC and I will determine if that meets the secret hold-out threshold, if it does then I'll do a secret roll. if he succeeds he will clam up and say nothing no matter what, if he fails he will tell them the truth about what he knows. Before that break point he will answer the questions based on whether he beats the ability rolls.
Sounds like a pretty good framework to me. Be sure not to make it feel too one-sided, though; make sure the players' input matters.
Also, this thread is getting close to being five years old. It's best to just let old threads remain dead.
Paladin main who spends most of his D&D time worldbuilding or DMing, not Paladin-ing.
If you want more variety in questions the players have to be given more tools. They need to have enough information to ask specific questions and tools like detect thoughts that effect interrogations in interesting ways. There also can't be a stock solution for some interrogations certain tactics should default fail that might be threats, bribes etc... because the target isn't susceptible to it.
Some tips