| DuLLSoN |
Today I was trying to demoralize a foe using intimidation skill and the GM said: "I know what you do, I am simply not looking at you so you can't intimidate me." So, aside from him "knowing" my tricks, I looked up intimidate rules and saw this line again:
Quote:
Demoralize Opponent:
...
You can only threaten an opponent this way if it is within 30 feet and can clearly see and hear you.
...
Now, I know where he got that idea. But how do we handle this "clearly see and hear" part? Just not looking at the character is enough to count as not clearly seeing and break the condition? Or shall we say that the target is able to clearly hear and see the offender and choosing not to look at him is simply not enough?
I feel that the former one feels cheesy, there are similar questions about people trying to avoid vision based effects by precisely executed free action blinks and those questions got good clarifications. However, I couldn't find any discussion about this.