Ways to Counter Bluff?

[Gale]

I'm running a campaign as a fairly new DM and my players are all level 3. However, one of my players managed to roll a above a 25 on a Bluff check twice in a roll which I wasn't expecting. He consequently succeeded in convincing an NPC at the end of a dungeon that all the enemies and traps they had gone through to get to him weren't actually there, even when I had him take a -10 penalty for how preposterous the lie was. I'm not saying it was unfair but I'm worried when he starts putting progressively more points into Bluff it'll become essentially unstoppable. He already has a +12 modifier to the stat right now from various things.
Basically, I'm now wondering what options I have to help counter Bluff. I simply don't want the players to get too carried away with lying to every NPC to get out of any situation.

[heavyfuel]

A bluff incredibly preposterous such as saying something he saw (the traps and monsters) don't actually exist isn't worth a -10, it's worth a -20 according to the SRD.

Also, there's this line from the SRD


Two circumstances can weigh against you: The bluff is hard to believe, or the action that the target is asked to take goes against its self-interest, nature, personality, orders, or the like.

So the bluff was way out there, that's a -20 (actually a +20 to Sense Motive). But the bluff probably also put the NPC in some danger, especially if he were to just walk to the start of dungeon without a care in the world because there were no traps and monsters. This is worth yet another bluff penalty, probably another -10 according to the SRD. So now your Rogue has -30 to his bluff check, this probably means he wouldn't have made the DC unless you were incredibly unlucky with your Sense Motive and he was incredibly lucky with his Check.

However, what is probably the most important line from the Bluff spell, is this one:


A successful Bluff check indicates that the target reacts as you wish, at least for a short time (usually 1 round or less) or believes something that you want it to believe. Bluff, however, is not a suggestion spell.

So no matter the fact that he believed his Bluff, as soon as there's some evidence that he was lying, he's not gonna believe it anymore. There's no reason this evidence can't be him remembering the fact that he has a wounded arm from one of the traps or something like that.

[JaminDM]

Either give your NPCs better sense motive scores or put your PCs up against monsters with lower intelligence that you cannot bargain with. :smallamused:

[Extra Anchovies]

Mindless enemies, or enemies with access to lie-detecting magic. "Really? No traps?" *casts zone of truth* "Why don't you explain that again?"

Alternately, talk to the player out-of-character, and ask him nicely to not abuse bluff too often. Don't tell him to not use it, because he clearly wants to, and don't ask him to not use it at specific times, but tell him to not break the game with it. Bluff is up there with Diplomacy in game-breaking ambiguity.

[Jormengand]

See, that's why I always assumed Bluff was about convincing people that you believe something to be true - often this will entail you convincing them that said information is true (“We didn’t start this fight” is hardly something one might be mistaken about), though with certain things it may only convince them that you are insane (No matter how well you roll, convincing someone that the gerbil in your hand is truly an artefact of world-rending power is impossible, but convincing that person that you are so deluded as to believe as much is not).

You can say that there aren't enemies or traps somewhere, but that won't stop someone seeing the enemies or traps and realising that you're either lying or insane.

[The Grue]

So no matter the fact that he believed his Bluff, as soon as there's some evidence that he was lying, he's not gonna believe it anymore. There's no reason this evidence can't be him remembering the fact that he has a wounded arm from one of the traps or something like that.

To expand on this a bit: if your player beat the NPC's opposed Sense Motive even with the -30, that says to me that the NPC believes that the rogue thinks he's telling the truth, even though he knows that what the rogue is saying is not true. Rather than "I believe you!" or "You're lying!" I'd say the NPC's reaction is "What the **** are you smoking, and can I have some?"

Think of it this way: If someone comes up to you on the street and tells you that the sky is purple, no matter how convincing or sincere they sound you aren't likely to believe them and suddenly agree that the sky is purple, because it's right there and you're looking right at it and you can see that it's blue. If anything, you're likely to smile and nod and keep walking right past the crazy person. He didn't convince you that the sky is purple, but you are pretty convinced that he thinks the sky is purple.