I was having a session the other day with my friends, playing a paranoid character. There were a few situations in dialogues where I didn't make an insight check, even though I probably should have, because it was revealed that one of the NPCs lied to us. Part of the reason for me forgetting to roll insight was that I was so concentrated on the dialogue and invested in the rollplay that I got a bit carried away, calling for an insight mid-dialogue seemed to be a bit disruptive. I have several questions in regards to this.
1. How do I use insight in a good way, without it being disruptive? when is it a good time to do an insight check? When should I not do it? When I think about it, it does not only apply to insight, but rolling in general during conversations makes me feel a bit weird. 2. How do I remember to roll insight if I'm caught up in a conversation with an NPC? Is there any tricks to avoid getting too carried away? Or is it something that will get better as I play more games? This is also something that not only applies to insight but remembering all sorts of things in general, like setting up something to guard the camp, checking a chest for traps before opening it or remembering questions to ask NPCs etc. (the list can be made endless). Ie. How do I get better at avoiding small mistakes like these?
1. The first and most imporant thing is that you make Wisdom (Insight) check when the DM specifically ask for it just like any other checks usually. You can always ask if you can do one after saying you disbelieve or have doubts about the veracity of another creature's speech or intentions for exemple. You can also tell the DM you're trying to glean clues from a creature's body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms.
2. You can remember to be more insightful by remembering that you play a paranoid character who regularly question other people's motives and try to be more sensible to their mannerism, behavior and so on.
The three time when it makes sense to me to roll insight are: when you meet a character for the first time; during dialogue to check the veracity of a statement; after a dialogue scene to see if your character has doubts. The times when it makes sense not to roll insight are when your trope sense is tingling and you feel like there's a narrative in your character missing the obvious lie.
How do you remember to use insight? Well, if you're caught up, then you're in-character. That's probably better than making use of mechanics. But if you're wanting to take advantage of having the skill as a proficiency or expertise, well, you need to find the sense for the character as someone who is insightful. Try coming up with some literary or what-have-you characters who have that quality, and consider their mannerisms. What would it take to embody those mannerisms?
IMO, insight should mostly be used by the DM; rolling against your passive score whenever an NPC is trying to pull something. As such, the primary thing players should do with insight is remind the DM that they should be checking against it.
IMO, insight should mostly be used by the DM; rolling against your passive score whenever an NPC is trying to pull something. As such, the primary thing players should do with insight is remind the DM that they should be checking against it.
Me too, I like to handle it as a Passive check or a GM roll as it help the players keep guessing when not knowing the result of an information check.
If you are asking probing questions or double checking their answers or double checking with other people, this would be a good time for your DM to call for an Insight check.
Thanks, I didn't even consider that I could roleplay it by questioning his statements, rather than just saying "I want to roll an insight check"
So the main takeaway here seems to be to roleplay, describe what I want to do/how my character thinks, and then letting my dm call the rolls, rather than saying "I want to roll x" mid-conversation.
If you are asking probing questions or double checking their answers or double checking with other people, this would be a good time for your DM to call for an Insight check.
I would go further and say that the Wisdom (Insight) check requires probing questions.
Just looking at someone isn't going to tell you anything. You need to watch them as they talk, looking at their body language when they say and hear things, looking for topics they are avoiding, looking at how they try to direct the conversation. You need to see how they behave when they are telling the truth so that you can determine when they might not be telling the truth.
In other words, Insight is not a magical lie detector, just finely honed observation and induction.
IMO, insight should mostly be used by the DM; rolling against your passive score whenever an NPC is trying to pull something. As such, the primary thing players should do with insight is remind the DM that they should be checking against it.
Me too, I like to handle it as a Passive check or a GM roll as it help the players keep guessing when not knowing the result of an information check.
I dislike ever having the DM roll dice for the PCs; both because it feels like that's the reason passive stats exist and because active rolls might have effects that I'm not including. (such as artificer's flash of genius) The few times it would be appropriate, I instead roll for whatever NPC would be relevant versus their passive stat. It's a subtle distinction, but it ensures I think about what the effective stats of the NPC would be instead of setting a DC based on the PCs' stats.
IMO, insight should mostly be used by the DM; rolling against your passive score whenever an NPC is trying to pull something. As such, the primary thing players should do with insight is remind the DM that they should be checking against it.
Me too, I like to handle it as a Passive check or a GM roll as it help the players keep guessing when not knowing the result of an information check.
I dislike ever having the DM roll dice for the PCs; both because it feels like that's the reason passive stats exist and because active rolls might have effects that I'm not including. (such as artificer's flash of genius) The few times it would be appropriate, I instead roll for whatever NPC would be relevant versus their passive stat. It's a subtle distinction, but it ensures I think about what the effective stats of the NPC would be instead of setting a DC based on the PCs' stats.
A Psssive check is still; an ability check and therefore most features that affect one could also been used with Passive one. Either one is more a way to avoid metagame.
Rolling vs Passive is more a matter of wanting to take 10 vs a more random outcome.
Passive v active depends on who is actually doing something. It is often a DM call to decide whether to roll for the character trying to deceive or the character trying to tell if they are lying.
There are so many ways to change a roll I would try to minimise rolls in secret but it can depend on whether players tend to metagame. However if someone rolls low on an insight check the dm can simply say the character is hard to read. If players are good at avoiding metagaming and the insight roll is very low the DM might say the PC is convinced the NPC is lying when they are actually telling the truth (or vice versa)
Another method i often use to do especially when playing previous editions is to ask the player to make a generic d20 roll instead of saying which check is made but this usually tend to instantly make them suspicious. ☺
IMO, insight should mostly be used by the DM; rolling against your passive score whenever an NPC is trying to pull something. As such, the primary thing players should do with insight is remind the DM that they should be checking against it.
Me too, I like to handle it as a Passive check or a GM roll as it help the players keep guessing when not knowing the result of an information check.
I dislike ever having the DM roll dice for the PCs; both because it feels like that's the reason passive stats exist and because active rolls might have effects that I'm not including. (such as artificer's flash of genius) The few times it would be appropriate, I instead roll for whatever NPC would be relevant versus their passive stat. It's a subtle distinction, but it ensures I think about what the effective stats of the NPC would be instead of setting a DC based on the PCs' stats.
A Psssive check is still; an ability check and therefore most features that affect one could also been used with Passive one. Either one is more a way to avoid metagame.
Rolling vs Passive is more a matter of wanting to take 10 vs a more random outcome.
Although character abilities might be applicable to passive skill checks, in practice it doesn't happen since by definition the players don't know a passive skill check is being resolved so they can't use abilities like Guidance, bardic inspiration, or flash of genius since they don't know that they might be needed.
All of those abilities essentially apply to in the moment specific instances of skill checks that involve the player rolling a die. This is one reason I never roll dice for characters because there are a lot of synergistic modifiers that might be applicable if the players were rolling the die.
Also, if I want to add a bit of hidden randomness into it then I might roll the NPC Deception vs the character's passive insight rather than a DC vs a character's insight roll but only if I don't want the characters rolling dice for some reason.
It's worth noting that failing an Insight roll doesn't necessarily mean your character is then going to unconditionally trust whoever you made the roll against. From a player's perspective you can think of it as your character having a "bad feeling" or otherwise being suspicious of the character, even if they don't have any proof or well insight into why they feel that way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hello everyone
I was having a session the other day with my friends, playing a paranoid character. There were a few situations in dialogues where I didn't make an insight check, even though I probably should have, because it was revealed that one of the NPCs lied to us. Part of the reason for me forgetting to roll insight was that I was so concentrated on the dialogue and invested in the rollplay that I got a bit carried away, calling for an insight mid-dialogue seemed to be a bit disruptive. I have several questions in regards to this.
1. How do I use insight in a good way, without it being disruptive? when is it a good time to do an insight check? When should I not do it? When I think about it, it does not only apply to insight, but rolling in general during conversations makes me feel a bit weird.
2. How do I remember to roll insight if I'm caught up in a conversation with an NPC? Is there any tricks to avoid getting too carried away? Or is it something that will get better as I play more games? This is also something that not only applies to insight but remembering all sorts of things in general, like setting up something to guard the camp, checking a chest for traps before opening it or remembering questions to ask NPCs etc. (the list can be made endless). Ie. How do I get better at avoiding small mistakes like these?
1. The first and most imporant thing is that you make Wisdom (Insight) check when the DM specifically ask for it just like any other checks usually. You can always ask if you can do one after saying you disbelieve or have doubts about the veracity of another creature's speech or intentions for exemple. You can also tell the DM you're trying to glean clues from a creature's body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms.
2. You can remember to be more insightful by remembering that you play a paranoid character who regularly question other people's motives and try to be more sensible to their mannerism, behavior and so on.
"I feel like this person's lying. Can I tell if they're lying?" Said out of character, of course.
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
The three time when it makes sense to me to roll insight are: when you meet a character for the first time; during dialogue to check the veracity of a statement; after a dialogue scene to see if your character has doubts. The times when it makes sense not to roll insight are when your trope sense is tingling and you feel like there's a narrative in your character missing the obvious lie.
How do you remember to use insight? Well, if you're caught up, then you're in-character. That's probably better than making use of mechanics. But if you're wanting to take advantage of having the skill as a proficiency or expertise, well, you need to find the sense for the character as someone who is insightful. Try coming up with some literary or what-have-you characters who have that quality, and consider their mannerisms. What would it take to embody those mannerisms?
IMO, insight should mostly be used by the DM; rolling against your passive score whenever an NPC is trying to pull something. As such, the primary thing players should do with insight is remind the DM that they should be checking against it.
Me too, I like to handle it as a Passive check or a GM roll as it help the players keep guessing when not knowing the result of an information check.
Thanks, I didn't even consider that I could roleplay it by questioning his statements, rather than just saying "I want to roll an insight check"
So the main takeaway here seems to be to roleplay, describe what I want to do/how my character thinks, and then letting my dm call the rolls, rather than saying "I want to roll x" mid-conversation.
I would go further and say that the Wisdom (Insight) check requires probing questions.
Just looking at someone isn't going to tell you anything. You need to watch them as they talk, looking at their body language when they say and hear things, looking for topics they are avoiding, looking at how they try to direct the conversation. You need to see how they behave when they are telling the truth so that you can determine when they might not be telling the truth.
In other words, Insight is not a magical lie detector, just finely honed observation and induction.
I dislike ever having the DM roll dice for the PCs; both because it feels like that's the reason passive stats exist and because active rolls might have effects that I'm not including. (such as artificer's flash of genius) The few times it would be appropriate, I instead roll for whatever NPC would be relevant versus their passive stat. It's a subtle distinction, but it ensures I think about what the effective stats of the NPC would be instead of setting a DC based on the PCs' stats.
A Psssive check is still; an ability check and therefore most features that affect one could also been used with Passive one. Either one is more a way to avoid metagame.
Rolling vs Passive is more a matter of wanting to take 10 vs a more random outcome.
Passive v active depends on who is actually doing something. It is often a DM call to decide whether to roll for the character trying to deceive or the character trying to tell if they are lying.
There are so many ways to change a roll I would try to minimise rolls in secret but it can depend on whether players tend to metagame. However if someone rolls low on an insight check the dm can simply say the character is hard to read. If players are good at avoiding metagaming and the insight roll is very low the DM might say the PC is convinced the NPC is lying when they are actually telling the truth (or vice versa)
Another method i often use to do especially when playing previous editions is to ask the player to make a generic d20 roll instead of saying which check is made but this usually tend to instantly make them suspicious. ☺
Although character abilities might be applicable to passive skill checks, in practice it doesn't happen since by definition the players don't know a passive skill check is being resolved so they can't use abilities like Guidance, bardic inspiration, or flash of genius since they don't know that they might be needed.
All of those abilities essentially apply to in the moment specific instances of skill checks that involve the player rolling a die. This is one reason I never roll dice for characters because there are a lot of synergistic modifiers that might be applicable if the players were rolling the die.
Also, if I want to add a bit of hidden randomness into it then I might roll the NPC Deception vs the character's passive insight rather than a DC vs a character's insight roll but only if I don't want the characters rolling dice for some reason.
Of course features applying to ability checks after player choice is unlikely to happen when unaware of passive or active check.
It's worth noting that failing an Insight roll doesn't necessarily mean your character is then going to unconditionally trust whoever you made the roll against. From a player's perspective you can think of it as your character having a "bad feeling" or otherwise being suspicious of the character, even if they don't have any proof or well insight into why they feel that way.