Is Intimidate a "fear effect"


Rules Questions

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

So I've found several discussions revolving around if Intimidate can stack, which I already knew it didn't, and one question about if a Paladin's Aura of Courage makes them immune to Intimidate used to demoralize in combat.

My main question though is whether or not Intimidate is a fear effect?

If it is, then would any bonuses you have against fear (such as the feat Focused Discipline or the spell Bless) apply to the DC of your opponent's Intimidate check?

If the answer is yes all around, then shouldn't the Intimidate skill be errata-ed to state that bonus to fear need to be added to the DC?

Liberty's Edge

I always house-rule that bonuses versus fear add to the demoralize DC.

The issue isn't that it's not a fear effect (it obviously is, as it causes a fear condition), it's that it's not a save. Everything that boosts your ability to resist fear effects either grants a save bonus or grants immunity. The former does't help because it boosts saves and not the DC. The latter helps because it makes you immune to the condition. The jump between the two is harsh.


Yes, I'd agree the Intimidate skill should receive errata to add bonuses to fear should add to the DC. It's not really a far stretch since fear saves are usually Will saves and the DC is 10+HD+Wis.

Grand Lodge

I mean, in 3.5e the DC for Intimidate included any bonuses on saves v fear, but Pathfinder specifically removed that clause; I want to understand why they made that call: was Intimidate too hard to achieve? Did they feel it overpowered Paladins? Or the spell Bless?


It does apply the shaken condition so I would say yes.


By Raw, no. By Rai, yes.

Grand Lodge

StabbittyDoom wrote:

I always house-rule that bonuses versus fear add to the demoralize DC.

The issue isn't that it's not a fear effect (it obviously is, as it causes a fear condition), it's that it's not a save. Everything that boosts your ability to resist fear effects either grants a save bonus or grants immunity. The former does't help because it boosts saves and not the DC. The latter helps because it makes you immune to the condition. The jump between the two is harsh.

So far, this is the best answer... although it doesn't resolve the conflict in my mind. By RAW, yes a Paladin is immune to demoralization from Intimidate by being immune to fear effect and not immune to saves v fear, but almost nothing else against fear applies - and that confounds and perturbs me.


Has this been resolved? I have a player that uses the Imperious Command feat from Drow of the Underdark which cowers an opponent for 1 round that you successfully demoralize using Intimidate. In 3.5, you got save bonuses to fear to be added to resisting demoralize. Why did Paizo take it out.

PAIZO is Intimidate a fear mind-affecting effect or no!?


Barachiel Shina wrote:

Has this been resolved? I have a player that uses the Imperious Command feat from Drow of the Underdark which cowers an opponent for 1 round that you successfully demoralize using Intimidate. In 3.5, you got save bonuses to fear to be added to resisting demoralize. Why did Paizo take it out.

PAIZO is Intimidate a fear mind-affecting effect or no!?

for starters, if you allow a feat from 3.5 ed, then you should also allow the defences against it from 3.5.

REGARDLESS OF WHAT PAIZO SAYS

Grand Lodge

It creates a Fear condition, Shaken, but is not a Fear effect, in, and of itself.

So, if you are immune to fear conditions, then you are immune to the Shaken condition created by the use of the Intimidate skill to Demoralize you.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Is Intimidate a "fear effect" All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.