Hello everybody,
I would like a couple of clarifications about the Intimidate skill, specifically the "demoralize" action.
- Fight scenario - PC Adam against NPC Bob: Adam goes first, tries to demoralize Bob, beats the DC by 10; Bob is shaken for 3 rounds. Next round: Adam tries again to demoralize Bob, beats the DC by 2.
First question: is Bob shaken for one MORE round (effectively extending the total duration of the shaken condition from 3 to 3+1 rounds) or is the 1 round shaken condition kind of "absorbed" by being already in place due to the first successful demoralizing action (thus keeping the total duration of the shaken condition at 3 rounds)?
Second question: should the -5 penalty from "try again" apply to Adam's second attempt at demoralizing, or does such penalty apply only when the character fails the previous attempt?
Third (related) question: do the answers to the above two questions also apply when using the Dazzling Display feat?
Thank you very much.
First the skill: (Link to PRD)
You can use this skill to frighten an opponent or to get them to act in a way that benefits you. This skill includes verbal threats and displays of prowess.
Check: You can use Intimidate to force an opponent to act friendly toward you for 1d6 × 10 minutes with a successful check. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + the target's Hit Dice + the target's Wisdom modifier. If successful, the target gives you the information you desire, takes actions that do not endanger it, or otherwise offers limited assistance. After the Intimidate expires, the target treats you as unfriendly and may report you to local authorities. If you fail this check by 5 or more, the target attempts to deceive you or otherwise hinder your activities.
Demoralize: You can use this skill to cause an opponent to become shaken for a number of rounds. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + the target's Hit Dice + the target's Wisdom modifier. If you are successful, the target is shaken for 1 round. This duration increases by 1 round for every 5 by which you beat the DC. You can only threaten an opponent in this way if they are within 30 feet and can clearly see and hear you. Using demoralize on the same creature only extends the duration; it does not create a stronger fear condition.
Action: Using Intimidate to change an opponent's attitude requires 1 minute of conversation. Demoralizing an opponent is a standard action.
Try Again: You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5. This increase resets after 1 hour has passed.
Special: You also gain a +4 bonus on Intimidate checks if you are larger than your target and a –4 penalty on Intimidate checks if you are smaller than your target.
If you have the Persuasive feat, you get a bonus on Intimidate checks (see Feats).
A half-orc gets a +2 bonus on Intimidate checks.
Question 1) " Using demoralize on the same creature only extends the duration; it does not create a stronger fear condition." You add one more round, the target is now shaken for 4 rounds (3+1). If you absorbed as you phrased it, you would not be extending.
Question 2) "You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5. This increase resets after 1 hour has passed."
This has no condition based on success or failure of the prior check. It applies to every successive check, regardless of success.
Question 3) Dazzling Display: "Your skill with your favored weapon can frighten enemies.
Prerequisite: Weapon Focus, proficiency with the selected weapon.
Benefit: While wielding the weapon in which you have Weapon Focus, you can perform a bewildering show of prowess as a full-round action. Make an Intimidate check to demoralize all foes within 30 feet who can see your display."
You are making an Intimidate check, so yes, all the Intimidate check rules above would apply.
Thank you for your reply. It certainly seems to fit the RAW and I agree about the first answer; however, I have a few doubts about RAI when it comes to the second one. First of all, I have always thought that the "try again" concept kind of implies a previous failure; otherwise it would not be a "try" again, just a "do" again.
Take for example the Bluff skill: "If you fail to deceive someone, further attempts to deceive them are at a –10 penalty and may be impossible". Granted, it explicitly says "if you fail", while the description of Intimidate does not, but I think the logic is the same. Why would it be harder to intimidate someone after one has already successfully intimidated the same subject(s)? If anything, it should be easier!
I tell you If you don't x, then I will hurt you.
I don't hurt you.
30 seconds later, I tell you, if you don't x, I will hurt you. I am a little less credible.
I don't hurt you.
Rinse and repeat. Eventually, you stop believing me.
I tell you If you don't x, then I will hurt you.
I don't hurt you.
30 seconds later, I tell you, if you don't x, I will hurt you. I am a little less credible.
I don't hurt you.
Rinse and repeat. Eventually, you stop believing me.
The key word being EVENTUALLY, I think it shouldn't apply to the second demoralize action at the very least. Penalty on the subsequent attempts could be at GM's discretion.
(And what if "If you don't do x, my friends and I will hurt you" and then my friends really hurt you? What if I really hurt you on the second round and then demoralize again on the third round?)
|
I have a few doubts about RAI when it comes to the second one. First of all, I have always thought that the "try again" concept kind of implies a previous failure; otherwise it would not be a "try" again, just a "do" again.
There is a simple test for that: Take the PDF of the CRB or use the PRD and type Try again to see what you get:
Under the general rules about skill you find this that seem to support your opinion:
Try Again: Any conditions that apply to successive attempts to use the skill successfully. If the skill doesn't allow you to attempt the same task more than once, or if failure carries an inherent penalty (such as with the Climb skill), you can't take 20. If this paragraph is omitted, the skill can be retried without any inherent penalty other than the additional time required.
The text surely assume that you are retrying a failed check.
But then:
Appraise
Try Again: Additional attempts to Appraise an item reveal the same result.
Here you are retrying a successful check and have special rules about that.
Diplomacy
Try Again: You cannot use Diplomacy to influence a given creature’s attitude more than once in a 24-hour period. If a request is refused, the result does not change with additional checks, although other requests might be made. You can retry Diplomacy checks made to gather information.
You can't retry the skill independently from your success/failure [oops, bad discovery, we have used it wrong].
Intimidate
Try Again: You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5. This increase resets after 1 hour has passed.
The target of the question.
Knowledge
Try Again: No. The check represents what you know, and thinking about a topic a second time doesn’t let you know something that you never learned in the first place.
I.e., you can't retry a failed or successful check.
Linguistic
Try Again: Yes.
Failed or successful you can try again. Interesting.
Perform
Try Again: Yes. Retries are allowed, but they don’t negate previous failures, and an audience that has been unimpressed in the past is likely to be prejudiced against future performances. (Increase the DC by 2 for each previous failure.)
You check can be extremely low, but I fail to see how you can fail a check that hasn't any DC.
Profession
Try Again: Varies. An attempt to use a Profession skill to earn income cannot be retried. You are stuck with whatever weekly wage your check result brought you. Another check may be made after a week to determine a new income for the next period of time. An attempt to accomplish some specific task can usually be retried.
Perform should work the same way.
Spellcraft
Retry: You cannot retry checks made to identify a spell. If you fail to learn a spell from a spellbook or scroll, you must wait at least 1 week before you can try again. If you fail to prepare a spell from a borrowed spellbook, you cannot try again until the next day. When using detect magic or identify to learn the properties of magic items, you can only attempt to ascertain the properties of an individual item once per day. Additional attempts reveal the same results.
After an attempt to identify a magic item you are struck with that result till the next day. I fail to see where it can be applied as, as far as I know it, there aren't magic items that have different DC for identifying different powers. I suspect it si a carryover from previous editions.
Conclusion there are very few skills that you can retry and have special rules: Appraise and Intimidate essentially.
As I see it, they have both a special rule that apples after every check, regardless of success or failure.
- * -
First question:
I feel that the text could be better, it can mean that the duration stack [and so the duration is added up linearly] or that it overlap and that you extend the duration simply because you restart the effect the next round (similarly to happen when you you cast spells like armor upon a target that has already the spell on it).
The incriminated phrase "Using demoralize on the same creature only extends the duration; it does not create a stronger fear condition." was added in the 5th printing of the rules.
Its goal is remove the possibility to stack intimidate multiple times to get a frightened or panicked condition. Until 5th printing you could stack the intimidate effects, getting worse and worse conditions, so you had to track the effect independently and their duration wouldn't add up as they had different effect. As this now isn't possible I think the duration will add up. Especially in the light of the DC increase.
- * -
Third question:
yes, it apply to Dazzling display and Antagonize too (if you allow it in your game) or any other use of the intimidate skill.
|
|
I tell you If you don't x, then I will hurt you.
I don't hurt you.
30 seconds later, I tell you, if you don't x, I will hurt you. I am a little less credible.
I don't hurt you.
Rinse and repeat. Eventually, you stop believing me.
The key word being EVENTUALLY, I think it shouldn't apply to the second demoralize action at the very least. Penalty on the subsequent attempts could be at GM's discretion.
(And what if "If you don't do x, my friends and I will hurt you" and then my friends really hurt you? What if I really hurt you on the second round and then demoralize again on the third round?)
When you enter the kingdom of situational modifiers it depend on the GM to adjudicate the situation.
Intimidate and "my friends have hurt you" would give a bonus to the intimidate check.
Dazzling display and "my friends have hurt you" wouldn't. You aren't more frightening because your mage friend has fried one of my friends or the ranger has put two arrows in the eyes of another of my friends.
Naturally it work in the opposite way to. I none of your friends has done any damage and you haven't done any damage while your opponent and his friends have done some damage you will get a malus to your check.
I have a few doubts about RAI when it comes to the second one. First of all, I have always thought that the "try again" concept kind of implies a previous failure; otherwise it would not be a "try" again, just a "do" again.
Under the general rules about skill you find this that seem to support your opinion:
Try Again: Any conditions that apply to successive attempts to use the skill successfully. If the skill doesn't allow you to attempt the same task more than once, or if failure carries an inherent penalty (such as with the Climb skill), you can't take 20. If this paragraph is omitted, the skill can be retried without any inherent penalty other than the additional time required.
The text surely assume that you are retrying a failed check.
But then:Appraise
Try Again: Additional attempts to Appraise an item reveal the same result.Here you are retrying a successful check and have special rules about that.
I thought that was supposed to mean you don't know whether your attempt was successful or not. Your appraisal could be right on the spot or wrong by a few thousand gp's: you can be confident but not 100% sure.
Diplomacy
Try Again: You cannot use Diplomacy to influence a given creature’s attitude more than once in a 24-hour period. If a request is refused, the result does not change with additional checks, although other requests might be made. You can retry Diplomacy checks made to gather information.You can't retry the skill independently from your success/failure [oops, bad discovery, we have used it wrong].
Oops, indeed.
Intimidate
Try Again: You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5. This increase resets after 1 hour has passed.The target of the question.
(...omissis...)
Conclusion there are very few skills that you can retry and have special rules: Appraise and Intimidate essentially.
As I see it, they have both a special rule that apples after every check, regardless of success or failure.
I follow your reasoning but fail to get to the same conclusion. The general rule surely assume that you are retrying a failed check. The intimidate skill says subsequent attempts carry a -5 penalty. How is the second one overruling the first? Wouldn't it be more logical that they STACK, meaning that retrying a FAILED demoralize check carries a -5 penalty?
When you enter the kingdom of situational modifiers it depend on the GM to adjudicate the situation.
Intimidate and "my friends have hurt you" would give a bonus to the intimidate check.
Dazzling display and "my friends have hurt you" wouldn't. You aren't more frightening because your mage friend has fried one of my friends or the ranger has put two arrows in the eyes of another of my friends.Naturally it work in the opposite way to. I none of your friends has done any damage and you haven't done any damage while your opponent and his friends have done some damage you will get a malus to your check.
I seem to remember my GM saying "should the wizard/witch ready an action to aid your demoralize check by simultaneously firing a lightning bolt in the sky, I would grant a bonus to the demoralize skill check"
|
|
I seem to remember my GM saying "should the wizard/witch ready an action to aid your demoralize check by simultaneously firing a lightning bolt in the sky, I would grant a bonus to the demoralize skill check"When you enter the kingdom of situational modifiers it depend on the GM to adjudicate the situation.
Intimidate and "my friends have hurt you" would give a bonus to the intimidate check.
Dazzling display and "my friends have hurt you" wouldn't. You aren't more frightening because your mage friend has fried one of my friends or the ranger has put two arrows in the eyes of another of my friends.Naturally it work in the opposite way to. I none of your friends has done any damage and you haven't done any damage while your opponent and his friends have done some damage you will get a malus to your check.
Different situation. In that example the wizard is essentially using the aid another action to help your skill use. Not the same thing as asking to get a bonus from unrelated actions.
I follow your reasoning but fail to get to the same conclusion. The general rule surely assume that you are retrying a failed check. The intimidate skill says subsequent attempts carry a -5 penalty. How is the second one overruling the first? Wouldn't it be more logical that they STACK, meaning that retrying a FAILED demoralize check carries a -5 penalty?
Specific rules overrule generic rules. Intimidate has a specific rule.
Without that modifier a NPC could spend 1 hour every day intimidating a person e keep her intimidated and friendly forever.The Battered person syndrome exist but it isn't something I want to reproduce in Pathfinder.
I seem to remember my GM saying "should the wizard/witch ready an action to aid your demoralize check by simultaneously firing a lightning bolt in the sky, I would grant a bonus to the demoralize skill check"Different situation. In that example the wizard is essentially using the aid another action to help your skill use. Not the same thing as asking to get a bonus from unrelated actions.
Agreed. Point is, other PC's action may influence the check. I wasn't asking for a bonus, btw, only debating the feasibility of the penalty after a successful check.
I follow your reasoning but fail to get to the same conclusion. The general rule surely assume that you are retrying a failed check. The intimidate skill says subsequent attempts carry a -5 penalty. How is the second one overruling the first? Wouldn't it be more logical that they STACK, meaning that retrying a FAILED demoralize check carries a -5 penalty?Specific rules overrule generic rules. Intimidate has a specific rule.
Without that modifier a NPC could spend 1 hour every day intimidating a person e keep her intimidated and friendly forever.
The Battered person syndrome exist but it isn't something I want to reproduce in Pathfinder.
Maybe it's my legal background, but shouldn't specific rules overrule generic ones only when they explicitly contradict them? Otherwise, what would be the point in having generic rules if one must reinstate them every time a specific rule is expressed? I don't see any explicit contradiction between the generic rule's assumption "try again refers to a failed check" and the specific -5 penalty on subsequent demoralize checks. Do we expect the general rule to be repeated over and over in any skill check where it applies, or do we take it for granted any time it is not explicitly denied?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I tell you If you don't x, then I will hurt you.
I don't hurt you.
30 seconds later, I tell you, if you don't x, I will hurt you. I am a little less credible.
I don't hurt you.
Rinse and repeat. Eventually, you stop believing me.
That seems logical, when reading it like this, but lets put that in game terms, and see if it holds up.
First lets take a look at a failed Intimidate check - which is really what you're describing there:
"If you don't do x, I hurt you" - roll intimidate
You fail to beat the DC so the guy is unimpressed, and doesn't do what you said.
You don't hurt him.
"Seriously dude, do x or I really hurt you this time" - roll intimidate but with a -5 now because you already showed you're not going through with it. So unless you're really scary now, the chance he decides to "call your bluff" are higher.
Now lets look at a successful intimidate:
"If you don't do x, I hurt you" - roll intimidate
You beat the DC, the opononent is intimidated and does as you say.
There is now no need to hurt him.
"Ok, now you do y or I hurt you" - roll intimidate
Does it really make sense to penalize this next roll? I'd say no.
So in other words, failed Intimidate gets the penalty, successful ones don't.
If in the first example, after he doesn't do what you say, you actually hurt him, and proof you're willing to go through with your threat, then that would give you a bonus on your Intimidate check.
Now you can say "ok that bonus just eats up the penalty, so if you go through with it, you don't get the penalty or bonus". Or you could say "ok you don't get the penalty, and you get the bonus".
Both kinda make sense here, and is up to the GM (by RAW you would take both penalty and bonus)
All these examples are of course attempts to Influence Attitude, not demoralize.
Let's look at that for a few seconds.
First a failed check at demoralizing an enemy in combat:
You try to whirl your sword around in a menacing fashion to show off your combat prowess. Unfortunately you slip and nearly cut off your own hand, making you the laughing stock of the entire encounter.
Now for obvious reasons, even if you try this next time again, and this time it works perfectly, that display is tainted by your previous embarrassing performance. So you take a -5 on it.
And now a successful check might look like this:
Once again, you whirl your sword, this time quite perfectly and everyone takes a step back and figures "damn, that guy is badass".
Next turn you repeat that, or show off a different trick. People don't think "Oh, that old trick again... that's just worth a -5..." they think "Oh damn, that guy really knows what he's doing" so the duration gets stacked, and they don't take the -5
(...)
Without that modifier a NPC could spend 1 hour every day intimidating a person e keep her intimidated and friendly forever.
The Battered person syndrome exist but it isn't something I want to reproduce in Pathfinder.
RAW? Doubtful.
"Using demoralize on the same creature only extends the duration"It specifically refers to demoralize, not to the "Intimidate to change an opponent's attitude" action.
|
|
To cite it again:
Try Again: You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5. This increase resets after 1 hour has passed.
1) you see any point in the rule about intimidate where it say "if you fail the check you can try again with a +5 to the DC"?
Or instead it say "You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5."?With your interpretation it is possible to try again without any problem any number of times as long as you are successful.
2) The general text about Try again assume that you are retrying a failed check.
Definition of assume: 1. (may take a clause as object) to take for granted; accept without proof; suppose
And it is exactly what the text of Try again do: the writer did take for granted that there wasn't a reason to retry a successful check and the text show that. But it didn't say anywhere that the Try again section of the single skill description apply only if you fail the check.
The Try again section of Intimidate is part of a skill that can and will be used again after a successful skill check, so when writing the text of the Try again section of the skill the writer was giving the specific rules for the use of intimidate. As he didn't put in a specifier that the +5 to the DC apply only for a failed check the Try again text always apply.
To cite it again:
Try Again: You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5. This increase resets after 1 hour has passed.1) you see any point in the rule about intimidate where it say "if you fail the check you can try again with a +5 to the DC"?
Or instead it say "You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5."?With your interpretation it is possible to try again without any problem any number of times as long as you are successful.
Yes. I don't see any problem with that.
2) The general text about Try again assume that you are retrying a failed check.Definition of assume: 1. (may take a clause as object) to take for granted; accept without proof; suppose
And it is exactly what the text of Try again do: the writer did take for granted that there wasn't a reason to retry a successful check and the text show that.
Since we don't have a writer/developer's opinion, this should fall into the "educated guess" category. Other people may interpret this slightly differently, as in: "you *try again* when you have failed the first time; if you have succeeded, you just *do* it again". As in: two separate actions, totally unrelated.
|
|
You can find a "do it again" section of the rules?
What skill has a "Do it again" condition?
Craft - not really. every check is 1 week or 1 day of work. You don't reroll that day of work.
Acrobatics - when tumbling you can make multiple checks, but they are against different targets. Not a "do it again".
Perform - no, different check, I already cited a few post ago how it work.
Profession - different check made another day.
Use magic device - this is the only one with a "do it again" function and it is under Try again.
Try Again: Yes, but if you ever roll a natural 1 while attempting to activate an item and you fail, then you can't try to activate that item again for 24 hours.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can find a "do it again" section of the rules?
What skill has a "Do it again" condition?
Craft - not really. every check is 1 week or 1 day of work. You don't reroll that day of work.
Acrobatics - when tumbling you can make multiple checks, but they are against different targets. Not a "do it again".
Perform - no, different check, I already cited a few post ago how it work.
Profession - different check made another day.
Use magic device - this is the only one with a "do it again" function and it is under Try again.
Try Again: Yes, but if you ever roll a natural 1 while attempting to activate an item and you fail, then you can't try to activate that item again for 24 hours.
There is no "do it again" rule, just as there is no "breath again" rule, just as there is no "walk again" rule. The PC just does... well, the same kind of action it has done before. I honestly find nonsensical to think in terms of "try again" after a successful check. It just doesn't compute, not in my language nor - afaik - in English.
| 11 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Subject: Intimidate skill
"Demoralize: You can use this skill to cause an opponent to become shaken for a number of rounds. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + the target's Hit Dice + the target's Wisdom modifier. If you are successful, the target is shaken for 1 round. This duration increases by 1 round for every 5 by which you beat the DC. You can only threaten an opponent in this way if they are within 30 feet and can clearly see and hear you. Using demoralize on the same creature only extends the duration; it does not create a stronger fear condition."
"Try Again: You can attempt to Intimidate an opponent again, but each additional check increases the DC by +5. This increase resets after 1 hour has passed."
Question:
- Does the +5 increase to the DC from Try Again apply ONLY if the previous demoralize attempt has failed? Or does it apply even if the previous demoralize attempt was successful?
Since we can't seem to find a shared interpretation, and given the various (unresolved) threads on this subject, I'm marking this for a FAQ, hoping for an official answer. Please click FAQ if you're interested.
Thank you.
|
I think you're looking at how demoralize is used in combat wrong. It's not a do this or I'll do this to you... that would be the regular use of Intimidate to change an NPCs attitude towards you.
In combat demoralize is heckling, name calling, and just making yourself look scary. You can shake the target but eventually it stops being as effective as the +5 to the DC raises each round you yell at them.
--Vrock, Paper, Scissors
Again, by RAW... Yes, there is a penalty for every attempt, unless you wait one hour. Other skills call out success or fail conditions. This does not. Therefore every single attempt has a +5 mod. I should not have introduced a hypo to demonstrate. My bad. Real world analogies are useless. There are no real world individuals who can stop time, teleport, shoot fireballs, call lightning. There are no real world dragons, undead, fey, or lycanthropes. Making analogies to the real world is at best a waste of time.
On the bright side, it is rare for combat to last more than 3 rounds, so a good demoralize intimidate will last you just fine.
First a failed check at demoralizing an enemy in combat:You try to whirl your sword around in a menacing fashion to show off your combat prowess. Unfortunately you slip and nearly cut off your own hand, making you the laughing stock of the entire encounter.
Now for obvious reasons, even if you try this next time again, and this time it works perfectly, that display is tainted by your previous embarrassing performance. So you take a -5 on it.
And now a successful check might look like this:
Once again, you whirl your sword, this time quite perfectly and everyone takes a step back and figures "damn, that guy is badass".Next turn you repeat that, or show off a different trick. People don't think "Oh, that old trick again... that's just worth a -5..." they think "Oh damn, that guy really knows what he's doing" so the duration gets stacked, and they don't take the -5
Quatar sums it up brilliantly...(imho). Regardless, I think an official FAQ would be quite helpful since I've seen other threads dealing with the same doubts.