With the Rogue subclass Inquisitive, would a player be able to use the Ear for Deceit feature with the Insightful Fighting feature?
Ear for Deceit: When you choose this archetype at 3rd level, you develop a talent for picking out lies. Whenever you make a Wisdom (Insight) check to determine whether a creature is lying, treat a roll of 7 or lower on the d20 as an 8.
Insightful Fighting: At 3rd level, you gain the ability to decipher an opponent's tactics and develop a counter to them. As a bonus action, you can make a Wisdom (Insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated, contested by the target's Charisma (Deception) check. If you succeed, you can use your Sneak Attack against that target even if you don't have advantage on the attack roll, but not if you have disadvantage on it. This benefit lasts for 1 minute or until you successfully use this feature against a different target.
No. You're not making a check to determine whether someone is lying, you're making a check to decipher an opponent's tactics and develop a counter to them.
My table has agreed to let it work. We’ve had a difficult time reconciling a deception check somehow not counting as a lie.
mechanically it isn’t anything close to a problem either. There are a great many things in 5e that can drastically effect the efficacy of characters in combat, this feature interaction is definitely not one of those things.
PHB. Pg 178. ”Deception. Your Charisma (Deception) check determines whether you can convincingly hide the truth, either verbally or through your actions. This deception can encompass everything from misleading others through ambiguity to telling outright lies. Typical situations include trying to fast-talk a guard, con a merchant, earn money through gambling, pass yourself off in a disguise, dull someone's suspicions with false assurances, or maintain a straight face while telling a blatant lie.”
lieing can be done non verbally. A person can tell a lie, they can also live a lie. A person can lie by not speaking certain details, this is known as a lie by omission.
Living a lie is just a phrase. "Let's rock" usually doesn't mean "let us sway gentle back and forth". Also, it wouldn't be lying by ommission to fight someone.
That said, I don't think it would unbalance the game to allow the rogue to combine the two. If they go to level 11 it most likely won't make any difference anyway.
Living a lie is just a phrase. "Let's rock" usually doesn't mean "let us sway gentle back and forth". Also, it wouldn't be lying by ommission to fight someone.
That said, I don't think it would unbalance the game to allow the rogue to combine the two. If they go to level 11 it most likely won't make any difference anyway.
Yea it is a phrase, but phrases have meaning. My point is that one can lie in many ways outside of deliberately and vocally telling a lie. It doesn’t seem like you’re wanting to acknowledge that though.
people can even lie to themselves by intentionally or unintentionally failing to acknowledge facts or concepts that don’t support a preconceived notion or outcome.
are there ways to roll deception without lieing? If there are I’d like to hear if those options to broaden my own understanding.
Living a lie is just a phrase. "Let's rock" usually doesn't mean "let us sway gentle back and forth". Also, it wouldn't be lying by ommission to fight someone.
That said, I don't think it would unbalance the game to allow the rogue to combine the two. If they go to level 11 it most likely won't make any difference anyway.
Yea it is a phrase, but phrases have meaning. My point is that one can lie in many ways outside of deliberately and vocally telling a lie.
And "living a lie" is something completely different. Or do you think that when someone says "I'm on the phone" that they are literally standing or sitting on a phone?
It doesn’t seem like you’re wanting to acknowledge that though.
That's just rude of you to strawman me like that.
people can even lie to themselves by intentionally or unintentionally failing to acknowledge facts or concepts that don’t support a preconceived notion or outcome.
Not sure what this has to do with the topic, but sure.
are there ways to roll deception without lieing? If there are I’d like to hear if those options to broaden my own understanding.
Of course. Playing poker and not giving tells would be one example.
Going back to what Bobbybaker mentioned in page 178 of the PHB, ”Deception. Your Charisma (Deception) check determines whether you can convincingly hide the truth, either verbally or through your actions." Convince me how attempting to hide your tactical intentions from your opponent doesn't count on this when it specifically calls out "THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS" as one of the sticking points in the first sentence of that paragraph. Bobby was right, you just don't want to acknowledge that point but the problem here is I'm not willing to let it go. Looking back at what Farling said, if Insight is used to determine someone's next move then it should be exactly that, yes? But to be fair, it probably won't matter in a couple months since the new 2024 versions of the core rule books are coming out then. Besides, if we all played D&D strictly by RAW, there'd be entirely too many flaws in this game.
Going back to what Bobbybaker mentioned in page 178 of the PHB, ”Deception. Your Charisma (Deception) check determines whether you can convincingly hide the truth, either verbally or through your actions." Convince me how attempting to hide your tactical intentions from your opponent doesn't count on this when it specifically calls out "THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS" as one of the sticking points in the first sentence of that paragraph. Bobby was right, you just don't want to acknowledge that point but the problem here is I'm not willing to let it go. Looking back at what Farling said, if Insight is used to determine someone's next move then it should be exactly that, yes? But to be fair, it probably won't matter in a couple months since the new 2024 versions of the core rule books are coming out then. Besides, if we all played D&D strictly by RAW, there'd be entirely too many flaws in this game.
The reason you can't use Ear for Deceit with Insightful Fighting is because opponent's tactics you attempt to decipher aren't lies you can pick up on, but undisclosed tactics..
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
With the Rogue subclass Inquisitive, would a player be able to use the Ear for Deceit feature with the Insightful Fighting feature?
Ear for Deceit: When you choose this archetype at 3rd level, you develop a talent for picking out lies. Whenever you make a Wisdom (Insight) check to determine whether a creature is lying, treat a roll of 7 or lower on the d20 as an 8.
Insightful Fighting: At 3rd level, you gain the ability to decipher an opponent's tactics and develop a counter to them. As a bonus action, you can make a Wisdom (Insight) check against a creature you can see that isn't incapacitated, contested by the target's Charisma (Deception) check. If you succeed, you can use your Sneak Attack against that target even if you don't have advantage on the attack roll, but not if you have disadvantage on it. This benefit lasts for 1 minute or until you successfully use this feature against a different target.
No. You're not making a check to determine whether someone is lying, you're making a check to decipher an opponent's tactics and develop a counter to them.
My table has agreed to let it work. We’ve had a difficult time reconciling a deception check somehow not counting as a lie.
mechanically it isn’t anything close to a problem either. There are a great many things in 5e that can drastically effect the efficacy of characters in combat, this feature interaction is definitely not one of those things.
PHB. Pg 178.
”Deception. Your Charisma (Deception) check determines whether you can convincingly hide the truth, either verbally or through your actions. This deception can encompass everything from misleading others through ambiguity to telling outright lies. Typical situations include trying to fast-talk a guard, con a merchant, earn money through gambling, pass yourself off in a disguise, dull someone's suspicions with false assurances, or maintain a straight face while telling a blatant lie.”
lieing can be done non verbally. A person can tell a lie, they can also live a lie. A person can lie by not speaking certain details, this is known as a lie by omission.
Living a lie is just a phrase. "Let's rock" usually doesn't mean "let us sway gentle back and forth". Also, it wouldn't be lying by ommission to fight someone.
That said, I don't think it would unbalance the game to allow the rogue to combine the two. If they go to level 11 it most likely won't make any difference anyway.
Yea it is a phrase, but phrases have meaning. My point is that one can lie in many ways outside of deliberately and vocally telling a lie. It doesn’t seem like you’re wanting to acknowledge that though.
people can even lie to themselves by intentionally or unintentionally failing to acknowledge facts or concepts that don’t support a preconceived notion or outcome.
are there ways to roll deception without lieing? If there are I’d like to hear if those options to broaden my own understanding.
Insight allows you to determine several things, as given in the Basic Rules, specifically it calls out two different things:
- searching out a lie
- predicting someone's next move.
"Ear for Deceit" would seem to only apply to the first of these two published examples.
And "living a lie" is something completely different. Or do you think that when someone says "I'm on the phone" that they are literally standing or sitting on a phone?
That's just rude of you to strawman me like that.
Not sure what this has to do with the topic, but sure.
Of course. Playing poker and not giving tells would be one example.
You have my apologies. I made an inaccurate assumption.
Going back to what Bobbybaker mentioned in page 178 of the PHB, ”Deception. Your Charisma (Deception) check determines whether you can convincingly hide the truth, either verbally or through your actions." Convince me how attempting to hide your tactical intentions from your opponent doesn't count on this when it specifically calls out "THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS" as one of the sticking points in the first sentence of that paragraph. Bobby was right, you just don't want to acknowledge that point but the problem here is I'm not willing to let it go. Looking back at what Farling said, if Insight is used to determine someone's next move then it should be exactly that, yes? But to be fair, it probably won't matter in a couple months since the new 2024 versions of the core rule books are coming out then. Besides, if we all played D&D strictly by RAW, there'd be entirely too many flaws in this game.
The reason you can't use Ear for Deceit with Insightful Fighting is because opponent's tactics you attempt to decipher aren't lies you can pick up on, but undisclosed tactics..