Timeline for How to deal with the differences in perception between group characters?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2017 at 5:51 | vote | accept | Poutrathor | ||
| Sep 10, 2015 at 19:47 | comment | added | dsollen | I would also make a few situations where the high wis guy is wrong. Everyone makes mistakes, even smart and wise folks, sometimes. Is he overly optimistic or pessimistic, have him view a character in the wrong light based off of that bias. Maybe he has a bias for people of a given profession or trait or even race that skewes his perceptions. This would mess with player expectations by telling them that they can't just trust the druid's response. | |
| Sep 10, 2015 at 19:44 | comment | added | dsollen | I like this, but mix it up sometimes. Sometimes you give a general explination that is accurate, and then tell one or two charcters what they perceive because they failed their wis check. Othertimes you give an inaccurate description and tell those that pass their wis check what they see. This makes it harder for the players to know which is 'right' just by how you describe it, and forces them to focus more on playing the characters impressions and debating between themselves. | |
| Sep 10, 2015 at 8:28 | comment | added | mike32 | +1. "Neither perception has to be 100% correct" is fantastic. It solves the expected problem of "always defer to Paladin/Druid" but still allows the characters to follow the trust in that that they'd naturally build up. Combines well with 'grey and grey morality', which is personally something I would love to throw into a plot with a Paladin PC. Moral choices! One man's villain is another man's hero! Love it. | |
| Sep 9, 2015 at 17:42 | history | answered | mbocek | CC BY-SA 3.0 |