PCs using bluff on PCs

[Moff_Tarkin]

I have a friend who says PCs cant use the bluff skill on other PCs. Like if the rogue steals the fighters sword, and the fighter asks him if he knows what happened to it, the rouge could not use his bluff check. The guy playing the rogue would just have to lie and the guy playing the fighter would decide wether he believes him or not. No bluff or sense motive roll at all.

He isn't right is he? It just seems stupid that you cant use the bluff skill on another player. A rogue with max ranks in bluff can do it a heck of a lot better than the player can.

 

[LazarusLong42]

I'd tend to disagree... but then I'm not your DM.

In my game, PCs can use Bluff checks on each other... and in fact there's one case where I make it mandatory. Since the Innuendo skill was folded into Bluff, if a PC wants to communicate to other PCs without talking, I have him roll a Bluff check. The Sense Motive DC for the others to understand him is then 40-(Bluff check).

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

Well, what I was wondering is why he is thinks PCs cant use bluff on other PCs. I read the skill and saw nothing about that. Maybe it was in the 3.0 rules. Is there a section in any 3.0 or 3.5 book that states PCs cant bluff PCs? I have to know what logic he used to arrive at this conclusion.

 

[calypso15]

I know I've read that you can't use Bluff and/or Diplomacy on PCs, but I can't remember for the life of me where. I didn't see it in the 3.0 or 3.5 PHB or DMG.

Calypso

 

[FireLance]

The general rule is that the player controls the PC's actions, so the DM cannot require a PC to like, believe, or fear an NPC simply by making a high Diplomacy, Bluff or Intimidate check. However, "good roleplayers" (or insert whatever term you prefer ) may choose to react appropriately when cued by the DM. You see, players whose characters have Wisdom 5 and no ranks in Sense Motive who respond to high-Charisma bard NPCs with double-digit ranks in Bluff and the glibness spell with, "I don't believe him. I attack!" also claim to be "good roleplayers" because "the character is naturally suspicious" and "that's what he would do."

In some instances, the results of a Bluff or Intimidate check are more mechanically defined, and there is no reason why the PC should be unaffected. The use of Bluff to feint in combat, or Intimidate to demoralize an opponent should be allowed to affect PCs.

A PC trying to affect another PC with Diplomacy, Bluff or Intimidate is another issue entirely. It can be fine if both players take it in the right spirit. However, it is often a sign of player vs player conflict that can ruin a game. :\ Proceed with caution.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Well, what I was wondering is why he is thinks PCs cant use bluff on other PCs. I read the skill and saw nothing about that. Maybe it was in the 3.0 rules. Is there a section in any 3.0 or 3.5 book that states PCs cant bluff PCs? I have to know what logic he used to arrive at this conclusion.

There is a section, I believe in the DMG under "Influencing NPC Attitude" that speaks to this. It's in regards to diplomacy and notes that one doesn't roll Diplomacy to determine a PC's attitude, the player always decides how his PC responds. This quote can, and I believe should, be extrapolated to include all "influence skills" such as Bluff, Sense Motive, etc.

Why? Because Player A's PC should not be subservient to the whims of Player B's character, simply because Player B decided to play a bard or sorcerer.

Seriously. I have a 12th-level bard in a game these days that, if he could use his influencing skills on other PCs, would rule the party.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Hey Fighter Bob, that's a mighty fine looking sword there, mind if I have it?"

"What?! This sword is worth 50k! I'm going to keep it for myself, sucker!"

"Actually, make an opposed Diplomacy roll. I'd like to pursuade you to give the sword to me, to better benefit the party as a whole."

"Uh...okay. I rolled a 14."

"Oh. Too bad about that. I rolled a 51. Thanks for the sword, sucker."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bluff is the same way. Barring magic, a player should always get to decide how his player reacts to a proposition, period. Anything else is going to be unfun for the player who isn't a bard, sorcerer, or paladin.

 

[EvilGM]

As Lord Pendragon said...

DMG (3.5) pg 128, under NPC Attitudes

"NPCs can never influence PC attitudes. The players always make their characters' decisons."

The Diplomacy skill states: "You can change the attitudes of others (nonplayer characters)..."

The Bluff skill only indicates "target"

 

[Hypersmurf]

"NPCs can never influence PC attitudes."

Of course, it isn't an NPC who's trying...

-Hyp.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Of course, it isn't an NPC who's trying...

The very next quote EvilGM provided specifies Diplomacy as influencing NPC attitudes, not PC ones. It's a precedent I'm happy to accept as applying to all influence-skills.

 

[EvilGM]

It is a sticky situation, but by the rules it looks like only Diplomacy (and other abilities that reference Diplomacy, such as Wild Empathy) are not usable on PCs.

That's the beautiful thing about DMing... you can change the rules to work as you see fit.

In most games I've played in there has been little use of PC vs. PC Bluff/Intimidate/etc. The DMs (including me) usually allow it to a point - as long as it doesn't adversely affect the players' enjoyment of the game.