| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Glibness and bluff aren't dominate spells.
The lie is far-fetched –10
The lie is impossible –20
"This person is evil."
"How do you know?""I just do. Here's a lie."
"Oh. Alright."
"You should attack him."
"I will make my own decisions."
"Your gold is cursed."
"How do you know?"
"I just do. Here's a lie. Give it to me."
"No."
"It's best for everyone if you kill yourself."
"I suppose so."
"Why aren't you killing yourself?"
"Because I don't want to."
Just so people don't have to reference it:
Glibness
School transmutation; Level bard 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components S
Range personal
Target you
Duration 10 min./level (D)
Your speech becomes fluent and more believable, causing those who hear you to believe every word you say. You gain a +20 bonus on Bluff checks made to convince another of the truth of your words. This bonus doesn't apply to other uses of the Bluff skill, such as feinting in combat, creating a diversion to hide, or communicating a hidden message via innuendo.
If a magical effect is used against you that would detect your lies or force you to speak the truth, the user of the effect must succeed on a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against a DC of 15 + your caster level to succeed. Failure means the effect does not detect your lies or force you to speak only the truth.
Hm.. The spell only gives a bonus to bluff, so the normal rules of bluff still apply. That means he can't convince someone to kill him/herself - there are even spells that actually control people and can't do that.
As far as convincing the party that someone is evil or making someone think their gold is cursed, that's sadly within the limits.
If you have a character who is skeptical (or maybe who is just intelligent), then you can always roleplay out questioning. Try to catch him in a paradox, which would give you huge bonuses against his bluff.
Also, I can believe that my gold is cursed, but that doesn't mean I -have- to give it to him - indeed, dirty characters might go spend it real quick, righteous characters might take the burden onto themselves, divine characters might cleanse it.
Bluff can change attitude but cannot force action.
And then there's always out-of-character changes. Tell him he either plays puppeteer with NPCs or he stops coming to the sessions.
We have a party member who repeatedly uses Glibness to undermine the other players experience. Essentially, he uses an unbeatable lie against the other characters in the party whenever he sees fit, to rob the other characters of their choices. (This person is Evil, your gold is cursed and you should give it to me, it's best for everyone if you kill yourself). The use of this spell is so frequent and prevalent, that in-character the party doesn't know it's being used, the effect it's having is making the other PCs the Bards slaves. I've spoken to the GM about it, as have the rest of the players, but we've yet to sort out a solution to this dilemma. The explanations for Bluff and the Glibness spell are unclear to us, and we're unsure how to proceed. Could an experienced GM lay down how they would handle this? Do the lies effected by glibness end with the 70 minute spell duration? Would our characters be able to tell it was being used and counteract it with a counterspell?
Glibness is a Transmutation effect that provides an untyped bonus to the target's Bluff skill.
Do the lies effected by glibness end with the 70 minute spell duration?
No, no more than regular lies ever "expire" - the magic provides a bonus to the liar, it doesn't make the lies themselves innately magical.
Would our characters be able to tell it was being used and counteract it with a counterspell?
Identifying a spell as it is being cast is a Spellcraft check; identifying the effect(s) of a spell in place is a (usually) harder Knowledge (Arcana) check. If an action is readied by another caster to counterspell the against the character casting Glibness, and the character with the readied action properly observes Glibness being cast *and* makes a Spellcraft check to identify it, then the readied action to Counterspell would take place. There is nothing intrinsic to the spell that precludes it being counterspelled. There may be certain character actions that preclude this, of course.
Could an experienced GM lay down how they would handle this?
Personally, in the absence of any overt indication to the party of something being hinky, I would allow any character listening to the Bluff to make a Sense Motive check (rather, I would roll for them all, since Sense Motive is a "GM Secret" roll). The DC to get a hunch that something *is* hinky is 20. Eventually, someone will tumble on to the process, at which point I would alert them that there was something a little off about the Bard's request.
Of course, I'm also perfectly willing to invoke the GM's ability to determine that some lies are impossible to get people to believe or go along with.
In the out-of-character context, if everyone else is fed up with the player, I would proceed to have a chat with them about their antics. If people liked the player but disliked the character and the way the game was going, I might introduce some NPCs who call out the lies and rid the party of the character.
Personally I never allow bluff to force a PC to believe anything, so a really high roll simply indicates that the person they are talking to seems to absolutely believe what they are saying, though taht may be a bit in house rules territy. As far as the RAW is concerned the following is an except from the Bluff skill.
Note that some lies are so improbable that it is impossible to convince anyone that they are true (subject to GM discretion)
The spell glibness improves your ability to bluff and is still subject to this rule.
If a party member uses magic of this sort on other party members it's only a matter of time before they either get overconfident and say something that fails to be believed, has someone notice they're using magic of other party members, or has one of their lies discovered as having been utterly false.
When that happens I imagine the party will be less then please and personally, as a PC, I'd be all for stripping them of all their belongings and leaving them out in the middle of nowhere to fend for themselves. The party can distribute his loot and come out ahead.
Side note - Personally when I GM I wouldn't allow a player to do something against the party that would cause this level of inter party conflict. A little bit of conflict can add flavor and be fun as long as everyone's more or less ok with it(in other words as long as it doesn't become a conflict between players rather then their characters), but this is a game and if one person is ruining it for the rest of the group I'd warn them that they were taking things to far.
If they didn't listen and continued causing problem I'd make sure the party found out and let them handle it as they see fit. Then I'd talk to the player and tell them when they make a new character make one that will fit with the rest of the group, or at least not cause that level of problem. Finally, if it still persisted they would no longer be welcome at my table.
Anyway, hopefully this helps, good luck resolving the situation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I have bad news but also good news for you.
The bad news first: Beyond the penalties for far-fetched lies, there's not much the characters can do without metagaming. They will just eat up those lies.
But here's the good news: There is tons of things the players can do: Tell him to cut the crap out. Or a Code Red (watch Full Metal Jacket and A Few Good Men if you need any pointers). Or kick him out of the party. Or murder.
Or, if you tell him to cut the crap out and he tells you some crap like "I'm only playing my character, man!" I suggest e)all of the above. In order. Repeatedly.
We have a party member who repeatedly uses Glibness to undermine the other players experience. Essentially, he uses an unbeatable lie against the other characters in the party whenever he sees fit, to rob the other characters of their choices. (This person is Evil, your gold is cursed and you should give it to me, it's best for everyone if you kill yourself). The use of this spell is so frequent and prevalent, that in-character the party doesn't know it's being used, the effect it's having is making the other PCs the Bards slaves. I've spoken to the GM about it, as have the rest of the players, but we've yet to sort out a solution to this dilemma. The explanations for Bluff and the Glibness spell are unclear to us, and we're unsure how to proceed. Could an experienced GM lay down how they would handle this? Do the lies effected by glibness end with the 70 minute spell duration? Would our characters be able to tell it was being used and counteract it with a counterspell?
I'd say that counterspelling isn't an option, unless the character is stupid enough to actually cast the spell in front of his/her victims. Any con-man worth their salt would cast the spell before approaching their mark.
As far as how long the effect lasts, the effect of the spell is to boost the Bluff skill. When the duration ends, the bluff skill loses it's bonus. It's not a Mind-Affecting Enchantment, it's a Self-Buffing Transmutation spell.
At my table, I'd consider this a form of PvP, and arbitrarily ban it's use against other PCs. If someone wanted to throw a fit about it, they're welcome to leave my table. I don't often put my foot down in that regard, but I don't tolerate PvP in normally cooperative RPGs.
If you're looking for an in-game solution, there are a few possibilities:
- The GM could introduce a grifter capable of getting one over on the Bard, Leverage-style.
- Players could boost their Sense Motive skills, perhaps finding/crafting magical equipment to boost said skill.
- The GM could insert a Paladin who falls as a result of the bard... No amount of bluffing is going to divert a fallen Paladin, with proof that he was tricked, looking for revenge.
- Anti-Magic field to suppress the effects of Glibness - perhaps cast on a witness stand the Bard must sit in?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Based on the information provided here (please note this qualifier):
The issue is not the rules for Bluff or the spell glibness.
The issue is a player who is trying to exploit the rules to make other players miserable. Resolving the specific rules issue (appropriate use of Bluff) will not stop this kind of player--a typical player of this sort will throw a tantrum when his exploits are shut down (without addressing the root cause of the problem) and/or find other rules exploits to continue getting his rocks off by "beating" his fellow players "at the game."
The root of the issue has nothing to do with game mechanics and everything to do with a competitive, control-driven player who is not mature enough to handle a cooperative game.
This is a personality conflict and ultimately must be resolved not by rules revision but by sitting down and civilly discussing the problem with the player and talking about why cooperative play is important. If the player responds poorly to talking about the issue or continues in other ways to be belligerent--in or out of character--to fellow players, the player must be asked to leave the group.
Because in the end, a player who has to be explained why you don't use social skills and mind-affecting spells to adversely affect your own party members likely just doesn't get the point. There can be exceptions--players agreeing to playing an all neutral/evil campaign where everyone agrees up front that the PCs are going to be duplicitous to one another. But I get the sense this is not the case.
|
We have a party member who repeatedly uses Glibness to undermine the other players experience. Essentially, he uses an unbeatable lie against the other characters in the party whenever he sees fit, to rob the other characters of their choices. (This person is Evil, your gold is cursed and you should give it to me, it's best for everyone if you kill yourself). The use of this spell is so frequent and prevalent, that in-character the party doesn't know it's being used, the effect it's having is making the other PCs the Bards slaves. I've spoken to the GM about it, as have the rest of the players, but we've yet to sort out a solution to this dilemma. The explanations for Bluff and the Glibness spell are unclear to us, and we're unsure how to proceed. Could an experienced GM lay down how they would handle this? Do the lies effected by glibness end with the 70 minute spell duration? Would our characters be able to tell it was being used and counteract it with a counterspell?
Most games specifically exempt player characters from being controlled by Bluff/Diplomacy. The idea is that you should be able to play your character and not be controlled by dice rolls.
I would talk to the GM and tell him that this behavior is unsuitable and upsetting the other players. If the GM doesn't fix things, I'd get together with the other players and point out that said player is far more wealthy than the rest of us and must be stealing from the group. Then we would do bad things to him. Something must be done because it sounds like your group is on the verge of falling apart.
I have been in similar situations of a player's desire to play a quirky character maliciously. The best thing to do is to first talk to the GM and let him know that his game is about to abruptly end if something doesn't happen, because the game is no longer fun for you due to the odd man out. The second thing to do is to talk to the player, and tell him that the past is the past but you need to not play this way anymore.
If he stays in character, arrange for his character to die, charge him gold to be healed, don't heal him ever again, or just murder his character.
I once played where someone enjoyed waking people for a night watch using a dagger to their throats, because it is a free Coup de Grace. The first time she tried it, everyone was surprised and it was kinda funny. The second time she tried it, the druid turned into a bear and ate her, the DM ruled that the druid ate an evil person who was attacking in the night. No alignment change, and almost everyone among the players was happy.
Kick him out of the group. In the end, that's the only solution that will work.
I don't know about that. The "code red" thing mentioned above would effectively solve the problem. ;-)
This sort of thing is why I personally don't allow evil alignments for PC's (I believe Pathfinder itself recommends against it). I even frown on CN because some people use it as an excuse to commit these same types of act. It is something that certain players will exploit to say 'I'm just playing my alignment!'. The player in this case needs to be talked to, out of the gaming environment in the real world, and be told in no uncertain terms that his actions are causing serious player unrest.
Just because he has a high Bluff check, doesn't mean you have to listen to him. I mean... any teenager, or anyone who's married knows how easy it is to hear without listening ("uh huh... yeah... whatever..."). Lies are just words coming from someone's mouth. To use social skills on someone, they have to be willing to listen.
Another thing: after a couple of these convincing lies prove themselves out, I wouldn't be surprised if the party ignores him completely, or cuts out his tongue ("We'll fix you when we are high enough level to cast Regenerate. Maybe you'll learn your lesson then. No hard feelings, hey?"), or hits him with a Bestow Curse to make him mute until he smartens up, or a Mark of Justice. This bard is setting himself for a serious fall. If he wants to be malicious toward party members and abuse the game, he needs to learn the difference between smart-evil and dumb-evil. Quite honestly, if you guys kill him in his sleep, or "accidentally" forget to help him in a life or death scenario, nobody can really blame you.
Lastly, as mentioned above, use the DC20 sense motive to get a "hunch", and use that.
IMHO:
Bluff can convince you that the speaker believes what they're saying to be true, but it can't *necessarily* convince you that this isn't because the speaker is an idiot.
"Man, that nutjob thinks my gold is cursed now!"
Probably other people see it a little differently.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
your gold is cursed and you should give it to me,
-This is TWO statements. Not one.
Your gold is cursed is definitely a bluff. The character is lying.
You should give it to me is NOT a bluff. Its a suggested course of action. There's also a huge disconnect as to WHY you would hand cursed gold to a wizard. Priests usually deal with that sort of thing. The character might believe that the gold is cursed, but would take reasonable actions to verify/check/remove said curse.
it's best for everyone if you kill yourself
That's a hit to self esteem, but unless the person is a communal ant the individual drive to live outweighs societies wants.
Player vs. player is never ok in my game, unless everyone wants to play it that way. Glibness is not "I get to jack you any way I like and you'll never, ever figure it out."
The other characters should know he's up to something, call him on it, and either; a)murder him immediately,
or b)tell him to him cut it out, or (proceed to a).
If not, we'll Code Red him. He's used the "I'm playing my character/alignment, man!" defense a couple of times.
The answer to that, btw, is: "The fact that you're roleplaying doesn't grant you immunity to the consequences of that roleplaying."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My reply is usually: "Don't play a character that, when played properly, will spoil the game for the other players at the table. Play a character that will be fun for ALL of us when you play him properly."
|
|
My personal view is as follows:
The players are functionally immune to social skills as far as the base skills go, unless backed up by a feat (Antagonise, for instance) that specifically forces a course of action.
Look at Diplomacy - it adjusts an NPC's attitude. Players are not NPCs. They do not have a starting attitude of Indifferent. Their attitude is whatever they say it is, and Diplomacy cannot change that.
Look at Bluff - it allows the character to tell a lie without being detected. When players fail to detect a Bluff, I tell them something like 'You hear nothing but sincerity in his tone. He genuinely believe that...' This is naturally also what I tell them if they attempt to Sense Motive someone telling the truth.
What the players do with that information is up to them. Bluff doesn't force a course of action even on NPCs - it just has them fail to detect a lie. Their reaction is the GM's business. If a PC fails to detect a lie, their reaction is their player's business.
Feint, of course, works as written, as it applies a specific in-game penalty, whether it's used on PC or NPC.
Look at Intimidate - Players can't be 'made Friendly' - they can either roleplay being intimidated, or they can say 'screw this, that guy doesn't scare me!' It's their prerogative as the PCs.
Demoralise, of course, works as written, as it applies a specific in-game penalty, regardless of the target's PC/NPC status.
The next time the player in question does something like that, refuse to roll the dice and say "No, my gold isn't cursed."
Honestly, when did the rules become a bludgeon to strip everyone of the fun of playing the game?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The next time the player in question does something like that, refuse to roll the dice and say "No, my gold isn't cursed."
If your gold is cursed, trade it in for gems, or platinum pieces.
... or just go into a ten minute, in character, tirade about how all money is cursed, and that true happiness can only be obtained through taking a Vow of Poverty... then thank the bard for leading the way with this, and (with the help of the other players) steamroll the bard's player into taking VoP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's one more thing to consider which I forgot to mention:
Things like "that gold is cursed" and "this guy is evil" and "the world is better off without you; kill yourself" are really just opinions, or things which can be proven or disproven. Further, the bard may just be an idiot; the Bard may be 100% convinced that it's cursed, and his massive Bluff check seems to verify that the bard is 100% sure of his claim. But people can be honestly mistaken...
Detect Magic (a cantrip) can verify or disprove a curse.
Detect Evil can can verify if someone's evil or not.
As for the "validity" suicide, that's purely opinion.
All the genius lying skill in the world can't convince someone contrary to physical evidence. Not enough to give away money or make deadly decisions.
What are some examples a good bluff?
"I'll have you know that I'm the son of a powerful wizard. Mess with me and it'll cost you your life."
"Oh, I don't stand a chance against you. Plus, I'm a lover, not a fighter."
"Did you hear? They're giving away free hotdogs at Melburns' pub. Just say 'hot-diggity-dog'. It's a promo for regulars."
"If you let me live, and let me take my share, I'll show you where our stash is."
"Okay, he wants to fight." ~looks behind foe~ "Invisible Stalker, attack."
Just to reiterate, bluff cannot force an action. I can lie convincing that I put an ability on you that lets you fly, but that does not force you to immediately throw yourself off the a cliff. In that situation, I would likely try something safe to see if I get off the ground.
All bluff does it convince you that they are not lying, which is not the same as telling the truth. I have had people come up to me and tell me that if you swallow chewing gum, it will get stuck in your lungs. They believed it, no bluff check needed. That doesn't change the fact that they were wrong. If you tell lots of lies badly, you becomes known as a liar. If you tell lots of outrageous lies often, you become know as an idiot. "Wow, that guy actually believes our gold is cursed, what an idiot."
Making someone believe a lie is bluff. Convincing someone to take a certain course of action is diplomacy.
When he tells you your gold is cursed, cast detect magic if someone else is a spellcaster... Wow, the gold doesn't have any magic, but the bard does. Then you hopefully identify the spell on the bard and find out its Glibness and figure out where to go from there.
Not an unbeatable spell if a simple detect magic can identify whats going on...
I have a houserule on this:
Work with the party or die.
The most important part is that everybody has fun. This is more important than roleplaying or game mechanics.
I would let that bard get away with it against an NPC, but you don't lie to your party. There are one-shot games where that's okay, but else it's bad for everyone.
I ended up fragging him.
He tried to Glibness us into going along with some half-baked plan of his, and I used the above argument about a suggested course of action. He got militant about it and started crying to the GM, so then my character questioned his and caught him in a paradox, and used Detect Magic to indicate the buff. This is when I initiated a surprise round, and got him with Evil Eye. Won initiative roll, and hit him with Phantasmal Killer. Dead. The players cheered, and the GM has refused to let him reroll anything with a spell-casting capability.
Nice.
The cheering indicates that the party has spoken.Win!
I have a houserule on this:
Work with the party or die.
The most important part is that everybody has fun. This is more important than roleplaying or game mechanics.
I would let that bard get away with it against an NPC, but you don't lie to your party. There are one-shot games where that's okay, but else it's bad for everyone.
We file this under "No stupid alignments allowed"
"Stupid" is when someone plays their alignments in a stupid manner just to mess with the rest of the party.
A paladin who pushes everyone else around because of their alignment restrictions is Lawful Stupid.
The rogue who use their Chaotic Neutral alignment to be a dick and mess with the rest of the party is known as Chaotic Stupid.
Basically, don't use your character's alignment as an excuse to be a dick.
I ended up fragging him.
He tried to Glibness us into going along with some half-baked plan of his, and I used the above argument about a suggested course of action. He got militant about it and started crying to the GM, so then my character questioned his and caught him in a paradox, and used Detect Magic to indicate the buff. This is when I initiated a surprise round, and got him with Evil Eye. Won initiative roll, and hit him with Phantasmal Killer. Dead. The players cheered, and the GM has refused to let him reroll anything with a spell-casting capability.
I ended up fragging him.
He tried to Glibness us into going along with some half-baked plan of his, and I used the above argument about a suggested course of action. He got militant about it and started crying to the GM, so then my character questioned his and caught him in a paradox, and used Detect Magic to indicate the buff. This is when I initiated a surprise round, and got him with Evil Eye. Won initiative roll, and hit him with Phantasmal Killer. Dead. The players cheered, and the GM has refused to let him reroll anything with a spell-casting capability.
It also sounds like he was guilty of abusing the bluff/diplomacy divide. Bluff can make you believe a lie is the truth, but it takes diplomacy to convince people to act on it.
|
Looks like it was dealt with, but I was going to suggest you split up. It works better as the GM, but go for a walk. When you get back, ask the other player what happened to their gold. When they say it is cursed you say 'what ever gave you that idea?'
Your speech becomes fluent and more believable, causing those who hear you to believe every word you say.
You didn't hear it when the spell was cast, so no Bluff bonus against you...
Sure, that solution is metagaming, but so is using your abilities against other PCs.
Now, were I running this game, I'd politely ask them to stop. I'd apologize for allowing them to create an evil character in the first place, and for not explaining that this kind of a game gets un-fun very fast. If they didn't stop, I'd get firm about it, and probably kick them from the table.
This sort of thing is why I personally don't allow evil alignments for PC's (I believe Pathfinder itself recommends against it). I even frown on CN because some people use it as an excuse to commit these same types of act. It is something that certain players will exploit to say 'I'm just playing my alignment!'. The player in this case needs to be talked to, out of the gaming environment in the real world, and be told in no uncertain terms that his actions are causing serious player unrest.
They provide evil Prestige classes and a base class called anti paladin.
I am playing a bard (now lvl 10) and have a pretty good bluffscore.
19 + the D20.If i use Glibness i get a minimum of 40 at my roll, and if i use a blatant lie it still is a hard roll for a PC or NPC.
What i am thinking (i have not tried this in a game just yet, but it will come) is to feks trick the storeowner to rather give me the magical item than get payed for it.
Out of this conversation i belive that the clue is to frase the lie in a way that does not force the person to do what you will but makes him want to do so.
"I know this sounds insane, but i am your grandson from the future. I need all the gold/magical items i can get my hands on so ensure the future for me and my familie!"
To make the lie more plausible i have altered my looks to seem similar to the shopkeeper, made sure he has a wife".
And then the shopkeeper says "Well, I could. But if I did that, I'd be destitute, my wife would leave me, and you'd never be born. I couldn't do that to you! Why are you asking me to kill you?"
And then the DM hits you with a hammer. Stop trying to break the WBL guidelines. It only messes up the game.
|
"I know this sounds insane, but i am your grandson from the future. I need all the gold/magical items i can get my hands on so ensure the future for me and my familie!"
Note that some lies are so improbable that it is impossible to convince anyone that they are true (subject to GM discretion).
Did you miss that part?
|
|
Here's the problem with any "I tell lies!" build: if you screw up one time, there will probably be consequences.
I.e., if you the rogue or bard or other panty-waisted twerp type, are ever caught with the dwarf barbarian's gold, the very best thing that will happen is you're bounced out of the party.
-- Which is effectively the same as being killed, because you're still making a new character.
|
GOOD END
But this likely won't be the end of problems with that player until you guys sit down and talk with him. Or boot him.
A player should never build their fun upon taking the other players' characters away from them, and that's exactly what the "diplomance/dominate the party for the lulz" crowd does.
We have a party member who repeatedly uses Glibness to undermine the other players experience. Essentially, he uses an unbeatable lie against the other characters in the party whenever he sees fit, to rob the other characters of their choices. (This person is Evil, your gold is cursed and you should give it to me, it's best for everyone if you kill yourself). The use of this spell is so frequent and prevalent, that in-character the party doesn't know it's being used, the effect it's having is making the other PCs the Bards slaves. I've spoken to the GM about it, as have the rest of the players, but we've yet to sort out a solution to this dilemma. The explanations for Bluff and the Glibness spell are unclear to us, and we're unsure how to proceed. Could an experienced GM lay down how they would handle this? Do the lies effected by glibness end with the 70 minute spell duration? Would our characters be able to tell it was being used and counteract it with a counterspell?
Character: You know Mr. Bard, I've noticed that sometimes you are a *lot* more smooth and believable than you normally are. And based on that one time at the tavern, I'm pretty much certain that has to do with a spell. So from now on, I'm just going to go disbelieve everything you say to me. Not only that, but from now on if I think you are using magic against me, I'll run you through with my blade.
Problem solved, let the player have the character run his mouth all he wants. On a side note, it is situations like this that I make mind influencing spells such as charm person and the like fairly rare, highly frowned upon, and all but off limits to players.
Well, if he uses (and abuses) the spell it could effect him in some way.
For example if they are in a very "holy" city and casts the spell or has it on himself, make the Inquisitors of said city notice it and give him a hefty fine (because I am pretty sure something that allows you to lie perfectly is forbidden somehwere).
One the punishments could be a Geas preventing him from lying at all ^^
Also if he ever gets interrupted during casting and gets a spell failure, change the effect into the negative or something.
(Wild Magic Zone also helps in this regard).
And then he has to go and try to convince his friends cause he things it works normally. ^^
Gnome who cried wolf...
I DMed for a PC who (thankfully for humor) would constantly lie to the other PCs.
That led the other PCs/players (who would eventually deduce the usually harmless lie/trick/prank) into declaring a permanent -10 (or -20 in one case) to anything that PC said.
Essentially, it became hard for him to convince them of anything, true or false. If I recall, he had to use Diplomacy (with those same minuses) just to get them to believe true statements. (It was maxed, so it wasn't so bad.)
Once, an invisible, huge dragon saved his life (for very complicated reasons) in a major city, but with no other witnesses. Of course, nobody believed him and the excited player didn't even bother trying to convince anybody (but in character, he had the PC going frantic in his attempts to share the strange experience). The good dragon's existence was a clue to a larger puzzle, but oh well...
Fun stuff.
If I recall, he made a vow not to lie about anything lethal, or maybe not while in dungeons, not sure, but he certainly was afraid he'd be wolf-chow one day so set known boundaries on his bluffs.
He's used the "I'm playing my character/alignment, man!" defense a couple of times.
This may be true but he (the player) chose to play a character that is a jerk, and it is the player you are talking to. If he says "I'm playing my character/alignment, man!" again say - "that's fine but you can continue to do it on your own or with another group".
If you are in a malicious mood, roll up new evil characters that all hate bards, have high sense motives (including all the feats to imrove the skill), once one of teh characters sees through his lies, roast the bard slowly over an open fire while telling the player "We're playing our characters/alignments, man!" He might get the idea after that.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He's used the "I'm playing my character/alignment, man!" defense a couple of times.
It never ceases to amaze me that some players think this is an automatic 'get out of all consequences for your actions' card.
"Sure, you're 'just playing your chaaaaaracter, maaaaaan'; we get it."
"So am I."
"Now roll for initiative."
When he wakes from unconsciousness, before a kangaroo court, with a noose round his neck, just in time to hear you read the charges and kick away the stool, the last words his PC will hear will be all the rest of you, in chorus...
all together now...
"I'm just playing my chaaaaaaracter, maaaaan!"