Oghma's priests and bluffing

[The Last Question]

Mechanically, say I wanted a priest of Oghma capable of feinting. That would include loads of skill points spent in Bluff and one of the deity's domains, Trickery.

Lore-wise, though, I couldn't help but notice said god's dogma:

Knowledge, particularly the raw knowledge of ideas, is supreme. An idea has no weight, but it can move mountains. The greatest gift of humankind, an idea outweighs anything made by mortal hands. Knowledge is power and must be used with care, but hiding it away from others is never a good thing. Stifle no new ideas, no matter how false and crazed they seem; rather, let them be heard and considered. Never slay a singer, nor stand by as others do so. Spread knowledge wherever it is prudent to do so. Curb and deny falsehoods, rumor, and deceitful tales whenever you encounter them. Write or copy lore of great value at least once a year and give it away. Sponsor and teach bards, scribes, and record keepers. Spread truth and knowledge so that all folk know more. Never deliver a message falsely or incompletely. Teach reading and writing to those who ask (if your time permits), and charge no fee for the teaching.

Am I going to far by relating that to bluffing and feinting?

[Rhifox]

Being truthful does not mean one is stupid. Feinting is a tactic in battle and does not count as a lie done to intentionally spread mistruth. It might be considered dirty fighting, and maybe lack a bit of honor, but it's a tactic, not a lie. If you started considering feinting wrong, then you'd also have to extend that to stealth (deceiving senses), ambushes, traps, and similar tactics.

There might be some people who go into believing that far, and try to uphold that sort of incredibly strict righteousness, but those are the sorts of people who aren't likely to get very far in life. Even among priests, 120% complete faithfulness to every small rule and piece of dogma at all possible scenarios in life is unlikely.

[The Last Question]

Being truthful does not mean one is stupid. Feinting is a tactic in battle and does not count as a lie done to intentionally spread mistruth. It might be considered dirty fighting, and maybe lack a bit of honor, but it's a tactic, not a lie. If you started considering feinting wrong, then you'd also have to extend that to stealth (deceiving senses), ambushes, traps, and similar tactics.

You have a fair point, it's a tactic.
However, what about bluffing? RP-wise, can I justify my ranks solely with combat tactics?

Please don't take me wrong here. I do not mean to cherry pick - the concept is quite amazing to me, and I just want to make sure it's all going accordingly with the setting.

[Rhifox]

Note that Bluffing is not called "Lying". In addition to outright cons, it also incorporates such things as acting and fast talking. All of these people who put on plays at the theater? They should have Bluff scores as high as their Perform scores if they want to be portraying themselves as believable characters in their plays.

You can have a high Bluff score without being a liar. It means you are good at acting in ways that are counter to your actual self, putting on displays and making them seem believable. It does not have to mean you're a liar.

[The Last Question]

As much as I agree with you on the feinting part, I can't say the same for bluffing.

All of these people who put on plays at the theater? They should have Bluff scores as high as their Perform scores if they want to be portraying themselves as believable characters in their plays.

I have to wholeheartedly disagree with this one.
Amateur theater actor here. First of all, the audience is aware that everything is an act, being (minimally) willing to "believe" in it. Secondly, one of the basics of acting is believing to be believed. In a certain way, a good actor (by all means, not myself) has to visualize their actions within their context and environment. In other words, an actor (ideally) is so immersed in their character they believe - for that moment - they are doing/feeling whatever that character was supposed to in the play.

Bluffing, on the other hand, is all about deceiving people unwilling or unaware or the truth. Bluffers know they are deceiving people, and certainly do not believe in their own lie or distorted version of the truth.

They should have some synergy for having a common purpose (make people believe). However, one is done with consent from the target while the other isn't. One wants to deceive, while the other wishes to thrill. I don't think their scores should be equal in any way.


Well, I ranted! Anyway, I'm genuinely curious about that. As we talk, I found the same discussion somewhere else and the only common conclusion seems to be that ol' classic one: ask the DM.

[PiaMango]

The knowledge of the gods is not perfect even within holy orders, there are many misconceptions about the gods and these faithful are still favoured. Otherwise we wouldnt get things like Bronsheir's Charge in lore where two churches of Ilmater fought one another. Of all the churches you would expect one dedicated to lessening suffering to be least likely to make bloodshed within themselves (Well maybe Eldath might be more surprising).

The way I interpret that segment of the dogma for my Oghmite is that what he reports in historical writings or in his research must be factual as best he knows. However he is still able to lie about his personal life.

[NeOmega]

I never understood why Oghma has trickery as a domain, it simply makes no sense.