No they both just have sinister laughing face. This is actually in response to a clown doing a hijink

Yes, but what about elevensieth times?

It's certainly *one* way to get the table to listen to you when you tell them for the last goddamn time, you're *not* DMing the next campaign...

... Because it's you, isn't it.

The Good Place is unspoilable, I enjoyed it much more when I knew some of the plot points beforehand.

Of course literal time years. It would be about a decade before an actual ingame year has passed.

I will say it like this: That is a frame from the show. At some point, Michael and Eleanor stand next to each other and laugh. When you get to this moment, you will not think this meme is a spoiler. Now go watch it.

Do y'all not handwave down/travel time?

What's funnier is when everyone already knows you're playing an evil character, but all their attempts to prove it in-game, even through meta-gaming, fail because the dice are on my side (evil).

No. At best we get something like 3-4 days of ingame downtime. Travel time is part of the dungeon.

Skill issue. PvP dialogue checks only work on other players if they allow them to, because every player can effectively set the difficulty of the check to "impossible" This is just how the mechanics are supposed to work, btw. Persuasion checks are rarely supposed to be simple +0 contested rolls.

Uh... What? Your skills are still just a d20+bonuses. Their sense motive check has to beat my bluff check to catch my lie.

Wrong. For one thing, players don't have to agree to contested persuasion at all, feel free to look that up. Even if they do it's not just a simple dice contest, otherwise every face character would have free mind control over their entire party. For example: Player Elon Musk throws a Nazi salute. He uses his Deception +6, rolls a 5 for a total of 11. Player Not A Moron rolls a 1. This does not matter, because they know what they saw. They have effectly set their own Deception/Persuasion check DC to 30+, or roll+bonus+30 circumstance bonus. Player Stupid Fucking Simp rolls a 20. This also does not matter because, as a stupid fucking simp, they already believe everything Elon says and take a -30 circumstantial negative. Tl;Dr you're forgetting that circumstance, including character emotions and affection, affects difficulty of all skill checks. If a player agrees to ignore that that's on them.

This depends on the table and their own rules honestly. In my DM's table we go for a contested roll of deception/insight between our players or between NPCs. Now this might not be RAW, but we do it that way and we like it since it creates funny and interesting scenarios. And for the RPG horror stories bit, I don't think that if the DM is trying to force something that they'll just obey the dice blindly if they aren't in their favour. They're just gonna turn around and say "oh no, you didn't pass the DC / my NPC also has +30 to his persuasion, you lose."

Sure, you can agree to anything. If you didn't think it through and thus suffer from skill issues. And there are of course good stories to tell with it, like in this secret traitor situation, and good players will apply circumstantial bonuses fairly. Doesn't mean you shouldn't be aware that another player can't force you into simple contested rolls on the nature of reality.

I mean, that's why in any such contested roll between PCs you should have both parties agree to the roll and just see how the dice land? And if they don't agree to it, they're free to roleplay it how they wish to. That's how we do it at least. I don't see why you have to call someone's preference on how to play a "skill issue" though.

In what edition of the rules, for what system, and what page number of that rulebook would I find your version of these rules in?

Wouldn't that be metagaming? I know general game mechanics pretty well to perceive many things a character would not know. I am pretty sure that in the spirit of roleplay i have to adjust to my characters Stats. In the example it would be Elon rolling their deception against my intelligence/perception, which whatever skill the Dm decides is most relevant. Also because the game Master is always right and has the final say as an actual dictator. The player abuse and sex stuff just seems like a consent issue. There are probably groups that are into that just like there are many that don’t. A good Dm and play group should communicate beforehand if they allow such things and also respect peoples wish to stop playing if they are uncomfortable. They can also use the [x-card](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SB0jsx34bWHZWbnNIVVuMjhDkrdFGo1_hSC2BWPlI3A/mobilebasic) system

Perhaps I'm wrong, but from their response and seeing this situation happen so often it sure doesn't seem like the players are aware that all skill checks have inherently circumstantial difficulties. Simple roll vs roll contests just tend to be the default of players that haven't read the rules for these circumstances, something about the way the game is set up just doesn't clue players into that fact. Maybe it's just that players simply aren't primed to accept that they can set their own DC bonus and it's not even metagaming? It's basically the only circumstance that they can. It's probably a good DM habit to get into, come to think. "What's your character's willingness to believe this" type prompting.

Those circumstancial bonuses or penalties are given by the DM. If the DM doesn't inform the players what they are for the current situation, thats the fault of the DM, not the players.