Talk:Namer College
True Speaking (R-7)
This must be my first time reading this ritual properly and I can see why nobody bothers ranking it and hardly anyone learns it.
- Rank has no benefit except for BC so why bother ranking it which also makes the EM meaningless.
- You don't know if it works because the GM is supposed to roll and you don't know if they resist and are continuing with their lies. These constraints make it useless but are fairly easily solved by a DA which makes the constraints completely pointless.
I suggest a few changes as below for a shorter and simpler writeup that is more useful. Resistance is not needed as it doesn't compel speech or action. It simply creates an area where everyone knows nobody can lie, like having everyone in the conversation wear a Rune of Truth.
Thoughts, playtesting and feedback welcome. - Stephen (talk) 04:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
True Speaking (R-7) v2
Range: 10 feet + 1 per rank
Duration: 10 minutes + 5 per rank
Experience Multiple: 200
Base Chance: 40% + 3 / Rank
Cast Time: 10 minutes
Resist: None
Target: Volume
Effects: An insubstantial sphere of pale light forms with radius equal to the range of the ritual, all entities within are unable to knowingly lie.
Anyone who attempts to lie will know they are being affected and be unable to speak the words.
Intentional deceit through half-truths and ambiguity will catch in your throat, making your attempt at deception quite obvious.
The ritual does not inherently compel anyone to speak.
I feel that resist none is already very tough. While the resistance can certainly be checked on, its existence provides a time gate for someone with high resistances, making it so information extraction takes significant time, which this would remove.
Adding in the inability to tell technical truths that still hide information turn it into outright overkill for intel.
--Bernard (talk) 09:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
I initially had normal resistance on this but when I thought through how it would be used, it just mandates using DA to check if each person in the circle is affected. If they're willing they'll choose not to resist, if unwilling and forced into the circle then you just spend time redoing the ritual until they fail to resist which is tedious time wasting. This lead me to - why not just have it work and keep the game moving along. They still don't have to talk but at least you know they believe what they say is true.
- Getting side tracked - lies in RPGs are problematic. Fine for players as the GM usually knows what's going on, knows the players are deceitful and can decide if the NPCs would pick it up. When the GM lies (as an NPC) the players may miss it entirely, there has to be inherent trust in what the GM says as they define the world and that rubs off on the NPCs. As a GM you need to be intentionally blatant when NPCs lie, then the players can decide if their characters pick it up. If the players are deceived then it can go very badly - sometimes entertainingly (players make nice with the dodgy Greater Summoner who claimed to be a Shaper), but it erodes the trust the players need to have in the GM which usually leads to less fun.
-- Stephen (talk) 20:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
Tend to agree with Bernard, though on the no resist / time aspect it could be an odd case and work like a similar D&D spell where if re-resisting occurs until you fail. Doesn't add much other than time delays but it's an option. I'm still not convinced about the "inability to tell technical truths that still hide information" - direct lying sure, but telling the truth, but not necessarily the whole truth doesn't feel like something this should prevent. I take Stephen's point about GM's lying, but I think if we've reached the point where an NPC is being put in a True Speaking zone there's been a certain breakdown in trust anyway.
