Kes Wrote:This could be construed as godmode under certain circumstances. Perhaps UnfortunateGuy goes to painful lengths with his personal hygiene to the point where he would be offended at such an accusation. In the spirit of RP this can easily be played off as discovering another source of the offending odor, but it crosses that same line as assuming another character's thoughts/response.
I vehemently disagree. I constantly go around and make non sequitor claims, and most people are too stupid to put A and B together, and then some guy gets blamed for something he didn't do - etc. If APM points at UG's feet and says they stink, and they don't, the characters around have to make a point to react and go "Eww!" or react and go "Really? I don't smell anything. You, sir, are in violation of Logic!" And then everyone begins to point and laugh at AbsurdlyPowerfulMan's bad attempt at using logical fallacy to insinuate that UnfortunateGuy has smelly feet. APM is then cast aside by Socratic method as his ethos is utterly shattered.
In short, if the character doesn't inquire into the fact that UnfortunateGuy is actually very clean and his feet don't stink, it's not godmode. That's just someone making a false claim and getting away with it. And I cite the past two Presidents and their policy claims. If they don't get away with it, it's their credibility that suffers. I cite the past two Presidents and their policy claims.
---
EDIT: I should add -- Godmode in my opinion is just a test of logic. If something defies logic then it shouldn't happen. Example: I kill Bob, and he can't fight back. Nanner Nanner Nanner!
In reality, Bob would have a chance to fight back. Even if he's got all the facts against him - Bob has no legs or arms and is blind in one eye, and I have a gun - there's still a chance that Bob could get lucky or I could miss. There's thousands of factors. So, the golden rule that I play by is that if it fails a basic logic test, it's probably god-mode.