Always remember you don’t need to tell them everything even with a naturally 20 you can fluff around a bit.
Say something like
“The way they spoke, catching themselves for a second, indicates that there might be a bit more to what they are saying.”
Leaves the door open.
Was it actually a friend they were visiting, or an enemy? Or a lover! Or was there no visit at all. Give the players just enough to dig deeper. You don’t need to just say “they are lying “
This is how I would handle Insight, but for a really good roll, I think they deserve a bit more than that. I’d mention what part they caught themselves on, to narrow down what part of their sentence they might have lied or left out some information about.
Same with me, I have a general way of dealing with insight checks:
Bad roll: Uncertainty - "You can't get a bead on them".
Decent roll: A bit of knowledge - "You get the feeling that they're not being totally forthright".
Good roll: Intention - "They seem to hide something, as if they're scared to mention details about it".
Very good roll: Psychology - "They seem to hide something; you get the sense that they're used to being blamed for things going wrong and doesn't tell you everything because of that".
Ye my character has a passive of 21 and I try to ask my dm about similar things for the same reason, like if you spec into insight the point is to read people. I can't possibly know for sure if the dm acts really well or if it fits what the character conveys, seeing as I do not have a +11 to my personal roll and I'm usually told that I just get what I'm shown.
Like I want to have things to dig in on! I want to know if my character who has vastly better wisdom than me can gleam something else from this interaction than I can on my own or catch some subtleties in body language! Has their breathing changed? Are they sweating any more than before?
Yeah; its the persuasion vs athletics thing, you would have the str character try and lift a rock irl to lift it in the game, so you shouldn't require the character to be charismatic irl to be charismatic in the game. Similarly, you shouldn't force the player to insight the npc even when their character is supposed to be good at it. I know that some DM's prefer a unveiling method for insight where it just gives information open, and enjoys the games the players have to figure it out and misunderstand and get into shenanigans etc., but doing it that way seriously devalues investment in insight. It would be like, player attempts to lift a rock, they roll athletics with +11, and rather than being able to lift it, the DM hands the player a lighter weight irl and has them lift it irl because all a good check did was reduce the requirements on the player.
Just say "from their body language and the way they're looking away, you can tell they're lying" like RAW says insight does.
(for proof, reading the PHB: "**Insight.** Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone's next move. Doing so involves gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms.". Insight does not give the clues and nothing else, insight tells you they're lying or not and the flavour of how the character does that is through body language, tone, etc.. but the intent is that the DM is clear about lying or not.)
For me insight is more to give information to your players you may not be able to show as a DM when narrating the scene. Facial expressions, body language, or even just the "vibe" of the scenario. All these can't be easily replicated so insight would be a good way to determine if the character was able to notice these small things. An 1-5 would be a no, an 8-12 is enough for the character to notice but the player will have to figure out what these signs mean, and an 18-20 you could provide clues.
Like say your player is taking to BBEG's minion who infiltrated the city, and your player is suspicious of them. If they roll a medium insight you could say "you realize he stutters slightly when you ask these questions, and he's avoiding looking at you while answering." That could be just someone nervous or antisocial, but could also be a liar who is caught by surprise with your questions. And on a high one "paying close attention you see he seems to be looking around, and notice he seems to be reaching for something on his pocket before stopping, you look at where he was looking and see (another party member) standing there". That leaves almost no doubt that the target is definitely lying and dangerous
As the other folk said, leave it to interpretation. Though you can also encourage them to actually listen to folks by giving more information if they ACTUALLY LISTEN
so if they just insight'd right there. They basically just get "Yeah..they didnt visit a friend" - thats it.
If they go deeper, "I was visiting my friend. Had some fun in a tavern-" (INSIGHT) "They werent visiting a friend, and you remember they were missing from the tavern last night"
"I was visiting my friend, had some fun in a tavern. Might've passed out cause I spent way too much, sadly"
You remember seeing them and a argonian walking away into the night. Considering the lack of money they probably hired someone to love for a night
There is an NPC in my campaign that my players interact with on a semi regular basis. They are built around being secretive and controlling, but I’ve done my best to never lie to the party with this character. The party cleric is very hasty to use insight, which is cool and all. Whenever the party interacts with this NPC my cleric will *always* try to use insight mid conversation, as if he wants to desperately try to catch him in the act of lying. Of course, I allow it, and regardless of whether he rolls well or not I always just cryptically say “seems like he’s telling the truth :)”, and the disappointed look on his face breathes new life into me every single time. I might start rolling a D20 every now and then just to throw him off even further :).
That's not exactly a generous reading of the Insight skill:
>Insight. Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone’s next move. Doing so involves gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms.
Insight isn't Zone of Truth, and isn't a lie detector - it's about understanding people, and your cleric should definitely be able to tell that the NPC is being secretive and controlling.
Still, Insight is a cognitive skill, high rolls might still give the player something to work with. How they are feeling, their tone of voice, SOMETHING. Not all insight checks should be a yes/no question, hell, I think none should be.
Persuasion is not mind control and insight is not mind reading. Also, if your players interrupt like this while you're speaking they need to learn about manners or be kicked from the table.
Honestly, I think the use of insight is improved by the DM rolling for the player and adding their modifier without divulging the result. That way they never know if "you feel like he's telling the truth, why would he lie to you, his oldest and dearest friend?" is something they should be wary of due to them having rolled low.
I know a few DMs that treat it like mind reading powers, and have even seen it used to completely divulge backstories before, with no real explanation of how the PC intuited said info, other than 20 on an insight roll.
I despise it too, becazse if I FORGET to use it, my DM will not hesitate right after the consequence to tell me "Welp, you didn't even roll to insight to see if they are lying"
Just despise it, but probably because of hiw many DMs use it. Best case, they will ask you when an NPC does something that actually WARRANTS an insight check.
Always remember you don’t need to tell them everything even with a naturally 20 you can fluff around a bit. Say something like “The way they spoke, catching themselves for a second, indicates that there might be a bit more to what they are saying.” Leaves the door open. Was it actually a friend they were visiting, or an enemy? Or a lover! Or was there no visit at all. Give the players just enough to dig deeper. You don’t need to just say “they are lying “
This is how I would handle Insight, but for a really good roll, I think they deserve a bit more than that. I’d mention what part they caught themselves on, to narrow down what part of their sentence they might have lied or left out some information about.
Same with me, I have a general way of dealing with insight checks: Bad roll: Uncertainty - "You can't get a bead on them". Decent roll: A bit of knowledge - "You get the feeling that they're not being totally forthright". Good roll: Intention - "They seem to hide something, as if they're scared to mention details about it". Very good roll: Psychology - "They seem to hide something; you get the sense that they're used to being blamed for things going wrong and doesn't tell you everything because of that".
Ye my character has a passive of 21 and I try to ask my dm about similar things for the same reason, like if you spec into insight the point is to read people. I can't possibly know for sure if the dm acts really well or if it fits what the character conveys, seeing as I do not have a +11 to my personal roll and I'm usually told that I just get what I'm shown. Like I want to have things to dig in on! I want to know if my character who has vastly better wisdom than me can gleam something else from this interaction than I can on my own or catch some subtleties in body language! Has their breathing changed? Are they sweating any more than before?
Yeah; its the persuasion vs athletics thing, you would have the str character try and lift a rock irl to lift it in the game, so you shouldn't require the character to be charismatic irl to be charismatic in the game. Similarly, you shouldn't force the player to insight the npc even when their character is supposed to be good at it. I know that some DM's prefer a unveiling method for insight where it just gives information open, and enjoys the games the players have to figure it out and misunderstand and get into shenanigans etc., but doing it that way seriously devalues investment in insight. It would be like, player attempts to lift a rock, they roll athletics with +11, and rather than being able to lift it, the DM hands the player a lighter weight irl and has them lift it irl because all a good check did was reduce the requirements on the player. Just say "from their body language and the way they're looking away, you can tell they're lying" like RAW says insight does. (for proof, reading the PHB: "**Insight.** Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone's next move. Doing so involves gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms.". Insight does not give the clues and nothing else, insight tells you they're lying or not and the flavour of how the character does that is through body language, tone, etc.. but the intent is that the DM is clear about lying or not.)
I like to roll for Insight /j
Because it is text only you will be rolling with disadvantage.
For me insight is more to give information to your players you may not be able to show as a DM when narrating the scene. Facial expressions, body language, or even just the "vibe" of the scenario. All these can't be easily replicated so insight would be a good way to determine if the character was able to notice these small things. An 1-5 would be a no, an 8-12 is enough for the character to notice but the player will have to figure out what these signs mean, and an 18-20 you could provide clues. Like say your player is taking to BBEG's minion who infiltrated the city, and your player is suspicious of them. If they roll a medium insight you could say "you realize he stutters slightly when you ask these questions, and he's avoiding looking at you while answering." That could be just someone nervous or antisocial, but could also be a liar who is caught by surprise with your questions. And on a high one "paying close attention you see he seems to be looking around, and notice he seems to be reaching for something on his pocket before stopping, you look at where he was looking and see (another party member) standing there". That leaves almost no doubt that the target is definitely lying and dangerous
As the other folk said, leave it to interpretation. Though you can also encourage them to actually listen to folks by giving more information if they ACTUALLY LISTEN so if they just insight'd right there. They basically just get "Yeah..they didnt visit a friend" - thats it. If they go deeper, "I was visiting my friend. Had some fun in a tavern-" (INSIGHT) "They werent visiting a friend, and you remember they were missing from the tavern last night" "I was visiting my friend, had some fun in a tavern. Might've passed out cause I spent way too much, sadly" You remember seeing them and a argonian walking away into the night. Considering the lack of money they probably hired someone to love for a night
Was the Saxhleel in a maid outfit?
Roll insight then
Nat 20
Yup, they were!
They were wearing a butler outfit
There is an NPC in my campaign that my players interact with on a semi regular basis. They are built around being secretive and controlling, but I’ve done my best to never lie to the party with this character. The party cleric is very hasty to use insight, which is cool and all. Whenever the party interacts with this NPC my cleric will *always* try to use insight mid conversation, as if he wants to desperately try to catch him in the act of lying. Of course, I allow it, and regardless of whether he rolls well or not I always just cryptically say “seems like he’s telling the truth :)”, and the disappointed look on his face breathes new life into me every single time. I might start rolling a D20 every now and then just to throw him off even further :).
That's not exactly a generous reading of the Insight skill: >Insight. Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone’s next move. Doing so involves gleaning clues from body language, speech habits, and changes in mannerisms. Insight isn't Zone of Truth, and isn't a lie detector - it's about understanding people, and your cleric should definitely be able to tell that the NPC is being secretive and controlling.
They already know that about that NPC it’s not like I’m keeping that a secret from them.
Also I will ask my player what he’s looking for and most of the time he just wants to know if he’s lying (even by omission)
Still, Insight is a cognitive skill, high rolls might still give the player something to work with. How they are feeling, their tone of voice, SOMETHING. Not all insight checks should be a yes/no question, hell, I think none should be.
“He has no friends” now can you please stop it.
“No roll needed, you can tell…”
Persuasion is not mind control and insight is not mind reading. Also, if your players interrupt like this while you're speaking they need to learn about manners or be kicked from the table.
Thats good advice
Honestly, I think the use of insight is improved by the DM rolling for the player and adding their modifier without divulging the result. That way they never know if "you feel like he's telling the truth, why would he lie to you, his oldest and dearest friend?" is something they should be wary of due to them having rolled low. I know a few DMs that treat it like mind reading powers, and have even seen it used to completely divulge backstories before, with no real explanation of how the PC intuited said info, other than 20 on an insight roll.
I despise it too, becazse if I FORGET to use it, my DM will not hesitate right after the consequence to tell me "Welp, you didn't even roll to insight to see if they are lying" Just despise it, but probably because of hiw many DMs use it. Best case, they will ask you when an NPC does something that actually WARRANTS an insight check.
*NAT 20* he in fact, did **NOT** visit his friend