Is it just me, or does the skill Intimidate seem to be out of place as a Charisma skill? You would think that a barbarian would be an intimidating character, but most people that I know who have played one, always put their lowest ability score in Charisma. I understand why it was originally connected to this ability, but the ones who can make the best use of it tend to have the lowest Charisma scores.
It seems like it might be more useful if it was dropped as a skill and turned into a feat.
You should probably be able to add your Strength bonus instead of your Charisma bonus (but still take penalties from a Cha penalty) if the target can see you. But, eh.
You should probably be able to add your Strength bonus instead of your Charisma bonus (but still take penalties from a Cha penalty) if the target can see you. But, eh.
Like the Intimidating Prowess feat does?
At my table I just make the following: At the character creation, choose if you want to use Str or Cha for intimidate. This will be it for the rest of your life: Whether you are used to make sudden and terrible shows of force, or manipulate people at the visceral phisical level, or you have smart wits and can play people's fears psichologicaly, like threatening his children...
No that much good, but it solves the problem on a simple way. I really think PF could benefit from this. It is simple, and geez, then you can have a big raging orc barbarian with good intimidate and a small, but with cold-eye-gaze sorcerer too...
You should probably be able to add your Strength bonus instead of your Charisma bonus (but still take penalties from a Cha penalty) if the target can see you. But, eh.Like the Intimidating Prowess feat does?
Yes, but built-in.
This has been discussed in every alpha (I think), with multiple posts each time.
Here's my latest main response to the issue:
Intimidate isn't about looking scary. It's about forcing someone to think or act a certain way.
If all it required was to look imposing, then anything a size larger than you should automatically have, and force an intimidate check on you. This isn't the case.. because this is already assumed to be occurring in some fashion beyond the rules.
The DM describes a 30 foot tall, angry Titan. The Wizard is already scared of being squished into this guy's next pancake breakfast, he's going to act accordingly (keep away, cast defensive or impairment spells, or hide behind others for protection).
Now if the Titan wanted to break their resolve in this fight and make them even more scared, or if he wanted to get information from the wizard while he had him in a one-hand pin (basically holding him up to his face, etc), this would require some kind of mental effort in how to present himself beyond the big tough guy.
The making of the threat and convincing others you will follow through, whether by means of actual conversation, or simply a roar as you point and focus unnervingly on your target, is the difference that Charisma makes.
A typical giant will charge towards his opponents and try to hit them hard until they die.
Stomping harder than normal, swinging his weapon around in big scary flourish (possibly smacking the environment to show off how hard he can hit), shouting a battlecry or describing specifics about a particular target's anatomy he will eat/smash.
These are things a very large and strong creature would do if he had the training (ranks in Intimidate) and mental acuity (Charisma) to make himself even more imposing towards his enemies than he normally would be without it.
A giant with ranks in Intimidate and a decent Charisma would be able to demoralize his opponent using tactics similar to the above. This doesn't require Strength... the actions and verbiage take no added Strength to accomplish. He has to think of it and pull it off properly and timed correctly to get the effect across.
Diego's idea is nice.
Whatever your Ability Modifier, you still need to put RANKS into Intimidate to keep it effective, in any case. To say that Barbarians or "strong" characters need to spend a Feat to take advantage of their STR is silly. The Feat actually lets you STACK CHA & STR, so allowing the character to choose at 1st level which is their Intimidate stat still allows for the Feat to exist (the stacking effect, probably also with an additional +2 to make it worth it)
I saw another post here suggesting adding several degrees of success to Intimidate, i.e. beat by 5, beat by 10, beat by 20...
There could even be a failure penalty, if you fail by more than 5, the target gain a morale advantage AGAINST you for being such a poseur!
I don't like the idea of letting people choose what ability to use for intimidate.
Wait, let me put that better:
I don't like how this is only done to one skill, and only with two choices. It's neither here nore there.
There's so many skills that could be used with so many ability scores, often depending on situation:
Perception could be used with int instead of wis if you're actively searching for something and being smart about it.
I can see Heal with int if you use academic knowledge, or even dex if you try to save someone, and fast.
Acrobatics, especially jumb, I can see with both dex and strength.
Intimidate goes beyond the choice of str and cha. Use int to intimidate with knowledge, or dex if you show him exactly how deft you are with a dagger.
Spellcraft in its use as concentration would make more sense with con or wis than int, but I can see it all.
What makes Strength and Intimidate so special?
Either cleave to the idea of one ability for each Skill or go all out. I don't like half-measures.
I used to rule that fighters and barabarians can choose to either add their STR or CHA bonus to that roll.
I would be more afraid if a "dumb" barabrian with lots of muscled tells me:"Grunatsh is going to hurt you, little man, hurt you hard if you not give me your wife..." ;)
It isn't about being afraid. It is about being controlled.
A slightly nervous person may do what you want because they are convinced it is simply the wisest course of action. A terrified person may still react in exact the opposite way the source of that fear intended.If Gruntash has an 8 Chr and he can still leverage his strength to get what he wants, then he isn't being run as a Chr 8 character. Now, if he spends the feat to add his STR mod, that means he has specifically cultivated a talent for getting the most out of the fear he creates. That makes sense. But as a default it flies in the face of the way people act.
Fear with no technique behind it is a terrible way of driving people to a specific response.
What in your example makes "liitle man" less likely to make a desperate hopeless attack out of sheer terror for his wife? Or less likely to shriek and flee? Or to get outraged and clam up in fear born impotent fury
I used to rule that fighters and barabarians can choose to either add their STR or CHA bonus to that roll.
I would be more afraid if a "dumb" barabrian with lots of muscled tells me:"Grunatsh is going to hurt you, little man, hurt you hard if you not give me your wife..." ;)
But what if he said:
"Grunatsh...uh...my name is Grunatsh. How's it goin', eh? Uh...what was I saying. Grunatsh and your wife...what I mean is. I'm going to purt you. I mean 'hurt' you. 'Purt' isn't even a word. Bleh. So don't give me your wife! No, the other way around, I guess. Duh, I'm really no good before my first cup of coffee. Please?" <-- That's a "low Charisma" way of saying the same thing.
At any rate, I'm a big believer in circumstance bonuses, i.e., if you just killed all of an orc's tribe, that's worth at least a +2 to the check.
At any rate, I'm a big believer in circumstance bonuses, i.e., if you just killed all of an orc's tribe, that's worth at least a +2 to the check.
Yeah, I'm with you there. Every actual case is unique. Or at least can be.
And of course the best case of all is having the 18 Chr Bard explain what his buddy the Barbarian who just killed a whole tribe of orcs is going to do next.
|
I used to rule that fighters and barabarians can choose to either add their STR or CHA bonus to that roll.
I would be more afraid if a "dumb" barabrian with lots of muscled tells me:"Grunatsh is going to hurt you, little man, hurt you hard if you not give me your wife..." ;)But what if he said:
"Grunatsh...uh...my name is Grunatsh. How's it goin', eh? Uh...what was I saying. Grunatsh and your wife...what I mean is. I'm going to purt you. I mean 'hurt' you. 'Purt' isn't even a word. Bleh. So don't give me your wife! No, the other way around, I guess. Duh, I'm really no good before my first cup of coffee. Please?" <-- That's a "low Charisma" way of saying the same thing.
At any rate, I'm a big believer in circumstance bonuses, i.e., if you just killed all of an orc's tribe, that's worth at least a +2 to the check.
err that is low intelligence, not charisma :P
"little man" could do something that surprises the big barbarian... something he doesn't expect... and since he could be more dexterious than him... he only need a touch attack: *little man standing in front of Grush and grabing his nuts HARD and pressing* "now my friend you would apologize to my wife or i will rip what is left of your manhood and give you to eat... NOW!"
that is the little man using wits and charisma
and yes acts like that always give bonuses or penalties to such rolls... for example if the little man is usedto deal with such "barbarians" or he simply knows a dumb brute for a dumb brute :P
|
|
Either cleave to the idea of one ability for each Skill or go all out. I don't like half-measures.
i am with him in this
its eitherthe game more complicated or more simple... not half waywhile its a nice home rule... its true intimidating its part of knowing how to present yourself, an strong person who doesn't know how to scare a person would look dumb or non plussed...
but there are certain looks and smiles coming from certain people that would escare more than a gun.
Director of Game Design
|
Hi there all,
I think this is a really interesting discussion, but it is really about a skill and not an ability score. I am going to move to general for now, but please remember to bring this back up when we get to skills (and possbily feats).
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
The slight woman stared down the overly muscular human without fear, despite being nearly a foot and a half shorter and less than half the weight. Her gaze promised death and pain, her stance unwavering resolve. Despite the fact it was quite apparent the barbarian could snap her in two if he tried, he didn't move.
"If you do not get out of my sight immediately I will scramble your brain like an egg, make you eat your own testicles before your entire tribe and have you calling yourself Bent Betsy for the rest of your days."
Ogg, fearless slayer of hundreds crapped his pants and ran screaming like a little girl.
Guess which one is better at scaring people?
Crusader:
re: your example, I don't know which one is better at scaring people, as the Barbarian never tried to...
Your example DOES show that non-Strong characters CAN be as Intimidating as Strong ones, but it doesn't show that Strong but non-Charismatic characters should be LESS Intimidating... Or was that your point? :-)
Barbarian players who put their lowest score in Charisma are declaring that their characters are oafish-looking, not scary. Players who want to play intimidating characters (of any class) should choose stats that reflect this choice; using Charisma as a dump stat is not the way to do it.
I agree. Put your money where your mouth is.
I always want to point out that there's a difference to threatening people and the high art of intimidation.
You can always tell someone that if he won't do as you say, you'll smash his face in, or rip off his gonads and put them in his eye sockets, and put his eyeballs up his recktum so he can see that he's in deep s@@%. That doesn't take a skill check.
In a situation like that, the threat is there and the threatened character has to decide how to act on it. In many situations, the threatened character will give in because he doesn't want all those unpleasant things done to him. But he can do so with a relatively clear head, and if he knows that he's in the better situation (being threatened with violence while surrounded by burly bodyguards), he'll probably laugh in your face.
But the high art of intimidation means getting into the other guy's head, to make him know that nothing in the world can save him from you.
In my opinion, brawn helps with threatening, but you need an aura, you need krisma, to convince others that you're their Nemesis, that you can be worse than their worst nightmare, that you can redefine for them what nightmares are.
That's why I say that Cha is the most appropriate stat for intimidate (as opposed to make simple threats).
And, as I said before: If we're going to give ability options for Intimidate, so you can use Str instead of Cha, then we should open all possibilities: Don't have a fixed association but instead let players (and GMs) decide on a case-by-case basis.
Or, we don't do anything like that and stick to one key ability score.
Crusader:
re: your example, I don't know which one is better at scaring people, as the Barbarian never tried to...
Your example DOES show that non-Strong characters CAN be as Intimidating as Strong ones, but it doesn't show that Strong but non-Charismatic characters should be LESS Intimidating... Or was that your point? :-)
That was my point.
Ogg can flex and threaten to break you in half. And if you're some random villager or whatever, you'll probably decide he can have your stuff because you don't want to get snapped in two.
But say you're a bit more worldly and jaded than that. Say you've been out in the world, risked your life, whatever. In other words you aren't a level 1 peon, therefore you matter. Well chances are you've seen plenty of guys like Ogg. Hell, the random Orcs you fight at level 2 are like Ogg. Your buddy is like Ogg, except as good or better. Maybe you summon things bigger and stronger than Ogg and make them your servants to amuse yourself. Maybe you've fought 10 Oggs by yourself and won easily. In other words, muscle isn't really going to phase you, and you'll probably tell Ogg to bugger off before someone gets hurt.
Now, the Charismatic intimidator... here's someone who knows exactly what you're afraid of and is playing on it. Their every word carries frightful annotations. You can tell, just by looking at them that not only do they know how to use your mind against you, they will. They can back up their claims. They've taken your betters and made damn fools of them. If you don't do what they say, they will personally ensure you suffer for your error. In other words, they are True Badasses. It's easy to see how the Charismatic intimidator can scare the crap out of you, even if your hand alone is half as big as she is. Now imagine if you will this person makes this a commonly used tactic. So they have Imperious Command, Fearsome armor, and Never Outnumbered. Now, not only can they make you and all your buddies within 10' cower, they can still attack within that 6 second time frame. (this last bit is what you need to make the demoralize an opponent option worthwhile, by the way)
Ogg can flex and threaten to break you in half. And if you're some random villager or whatever, you'll probably decide he can have your stuff because you don't want to get snapped in two.
But say you're a bit more worldly and jaded than that.
Exactly right. In the case of the commoner, you should be talking about a DC of 10 or so. IMO this conversation is pointless if the character has not even bothered to spend a skill point, so I assume he has. Let's assume 1 SP and a CHR of 10. He also gets a +3 Class skill bonus. So he is rolling a +4 against a DC10. That is a 3 in 4 chance even if he doesn't get a circumstance bonus. Which he very well may.
As I see it, it is a near certainty that the commoner will become afraid. And in this case it seems very reasonable that giving up the stuff would be probable. And the mechanics support that. But, for a non-charismatic bruiser trying to impose his will upon a commoner, a 1 in 4 chance that the commoner will flee, yell for help or even maybe attack is not at all unreasonable.
Again, it comes back to a big difference between creating fear and using that fear to achieve control. And if you start talking about something more robust than a commoner, then that control part becomes highly elusive.
The Str 10 Bard with 1 Rank, CHR18, and a +3 has a 95% chance of success because he knows how to focus on the influence part of the deal. Make the commoner believe that doing what the bard wants is simply the best solution. Even if the element of *fear itself* is less. The commoner just thinks the bard might hurt him a little, but believes giving in is the best solution. The commoner thinks the barbarian will smash him into red paste, but may think that running is a better way to avoid the threat. It is all about controlling the targets thinking and behavior. Fear is the easy part.
|
The slight woman stared down the overly muscular human without fear, despite being nearly a foot and a half shorter and less than half the weight. Her gaze promised death and pain, her stance unwavering resolve. Despite the fact it was quite apparent the barbarian could snap her in two if he tried, he didn't move.
"If you do not get out of my sight immediately I will scramble your brain like an egg, make you eat your own testicles before your entire tribe and have you calling yourself Bent Betsy for the rest of your days."
Ogg, fearless slayer of hundreds crapped his pants and ran screaming like a little girl.
Guess which one is better at scaring people?
I fail to see why Ogg would be intimidated at all by this person. If she's slight, she can't realistically hurt him, and there's nothing in the description to suggest that he's afraid of some sort of eldritch force in her, because she's not giving any more indication of being magical than he is.
It's like giving an example of a tough-talking hamster threatening a lion, and the lion running, simply because in some abstract way the hamster is 'intimidating.' There has to be a reason for fear. I agree that intimidation is a specific use of fear, but there has be fear there to begin with.
Getting tough talk from a skinny little girl isn't going to intimidate anyone.
I'm going to have to agree with Mr. Bean on this one. While I would not say that it is impossible for the woman to intimidate Ogg, she should at least have some pretty hefty penalties on her role. It would be kinda like Joxer the Mighty trying to Intimidate Xena. It could be done, but it would be just on this side of impossible. Now if Mini Merideth had just chucked on of Ogg's brothers across the room before she said it, that would be a different story.
Magic trumps muscle. Even being twice as big only gives them a +4 to resist (and lower here I believe).
So what happens is... she scares the piss out of him. It's fairly likely she can't even fail.
Or he laughs, and she kicks his ass with her little finger.
Try Joxer trying to be intimidating after spending several years or more cultivating his personal presence to get people to do whatever he wants them to be it believe a lie, or be scared of him. And oh yeah, he can bend the laws of reality with his mind.
There is no mention of any kind of magic, or even reason for Ogg to suspect that the slight woman has magical abilities. Sure magic trumps muscle, but only if you know magic is avalible.
High Intimidate = knowing how to make yourself scare people so they would rather do what you say then cross you.
High Charisma - knowing how to carry yourself in general.
If you look at the actual words I wrote, you will see the sample language made it very clear she was declaring that not only could she make a damn fool out of Ogg, she could make Ogg make a damn fool out of himself. And like it. Also, her tone made it very clear she wasn't BSing around.
Clear enough yet?
Put another way, imagine you threatened someone smaller than you, and without any fear they told you to f*** off or suffer the consequences. Chances are you'd think they were either some sort of martial artist and therefore dangerous, or crazy and therefore dangerous right? And this is in a world where there is nothing supernatural that can easily result in a tiny little Pixie handing an elder dragon his ass. I dunno about you, but I'd think anyone being that bold has a damn good reason for it if I were Ogg. And since Ogg just wants easy stuff anyways...
|
|
There is no mention of any kind of magic, or even reason for Ogg to suspect that the slight woman has magical abilities. Sure magic trumps muscle, but only if you know magic is avalible.High Intimidate = knowing how to make yourself scare people so they would rather do what you say then cross you.
High Charisma - knowing how to carry yourself in general.
If you look at the actual words I wrote, you will see the sample language made it very clear she was declaring that not only could she make a damn fool out of Ogg, she could make Ogg make a damn fool out of himself. And like it. Also, her tone made it very clear she wasn't BSing around.
Clear enough yet?
I am 350 lbs, solidly built, played football in high school, and have been trained in hand to hand combat by the military. I work out three times a week and routinely worked with 500 lb rolls of material for my job until a few monthes ago. I also have been known to break cinderblocks when I get angry. If someone who is 150 lbs comes up to me on the street and tries to convince me that in a fight he would do anything other than soil himself, no matter how much presence and swagger he has, he will have a hard time. The only way things would be different is if I had seen something to demonstrate that he could back up his boasting. So I have a clear understanding of what you are saying, I hope I have made my point clear as well.
Put another way, imagine you threatened someone smaller than you, and without any fear they told you to f*** off or suffer the consequences. Chances are you'd think they were either some sort of martial artist and therefore dangerous, or crazy and therefore dangerous right? And this is in a world where there is nothing supernatural that can easily result in a tiny little Pixie handing an elder dragon his ass. I dunno about you, but I'd think anyone being that bold has a damn good reason for it if I were Ogg. And since Ogg just wants easy stuff anyways...
I think even that is too limiting.
There is nothing at all that remotely limits intimidate to matters of immediate personal violence. That certainly is a valid option. But the limits go far beyond that.If the circumstances are such that one on one combat was the only available path, then the small person may very well have significant circumstance penalties. Though, the DC of the task is probably a more appropriate variable. But if the skill is high enough, it seems fully reasonable to me that the ability need not be "magic" to be superheroic in a D&D-esque world.
And all that is beside the point that CHR is still the right default attribute because fear itself in no way creates an automatic control.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Intimidate is also the method of giving the person an out, and making them believe it's their only way out.
"Get out of my way, big guy, or I'll use your testies for marbles."
"If you give us the information, I won't turn this paper over to the king."
Or the classic, "Give me what I want, and I'll go away," from Storm of the Century.
I guess I'm saying a high strength, low charisma guy saying, "Give me what I want, or I pound you," has to be able to convey that he won't just pound you afterwards anyway.
I know I avoided a few fights by descriping, in graphic detail, how I wasn't going to punch them, I was going to kill them.
|
|
Put another way, imagine you threatened someone smaller than you, and without any fear they told you to f*** off or suffer the consequences. Chances are you'd think they were either some sort of martial artist and therefore dangerous, or crazy and therefore dangerous right? And this is in a world where there is nothing supernatural that can easily result in a tiny little Pixie handing an elder dragon his ass. I dunno about you, but I'd think anyone being that bold has a damn good reason for it if I were Ogg. And since Ogg just wants easy stuff anyways...
This has actually happened to me. It was about five years ago and my neighbor came over and started yelling at me for asking his kids to get out of my driveway so I could park in it. When I asked him to stop yelling or there would be repercussion he told me he was going to kick my ass. I told him that I would let him have the first punch because it would be the only one he got and that is when the fear entered his eye. He had failed his Intimidate check, because I had no reason to believe that he would carry through. He told me he would let me walk that time because we were in my yard, but if he ever caught me outside of my yard he would kick my ass. Everytime he saw me walking down the street after that he ran in his house or turned and headed the other way. This went on for six monthes until he went to jail for beating on his wife and kids. If you are going to use the scenario as you outlined it, you should at least make it an opposed check, Intimidate vs. a Will save.
I am 350 lbs, solidly built, played football in high school, and have been trained in hand to hand combat by the military. I work out three times a week and routinely worked with 500 lb rolls of material for my job until a few monthes ago. I also have been known to break cinderblocks when I get angry. If someone who is 150 lbs comes up to me on the street and tries to convince me that in a fight he would do anything other than soil himself, no matter how much presence and swagger he has, he will have a hard time. The only way things would be different is if I had seen something to demonstrate that he could back up his boasting. So I have a clear understanding of what you are saying, I hope I have made my point clear as well.
By RAW, is it possible for a STR 8 halfling bard to use successfully intimidate against a Large Red Dragon?
|
|
I am 350 lbs, solidly built, played football in high school, and have been trained in hand to hand combat by the military. I work out three times a week and routinely worked with 500 lb rolls of material for my job until a few monthes ago. I also have been known to break cinderblocks when I get angry. If someone who is 150 lbs comes up to me on the street and tries to convince me that in a fight he would do anything other than soil himself, no matter how much presence and swagger he has, he will have a hard time. The only way things would be different is if I had seen something to demonstrate that he could back up his boasting. So I have a clear understanding of what you are saying, I hope I have made my point clear as well.By RAW, is it possible for a STR 8 halfling bard to use successfully intimidate against a Large Red Dragon?
Yes, but again, if I was the DM there would either be a serious penalty to his intimidate check, or else the dragon would get a will roll against the bard's attempt. If you are a halfling trying to intimidate a dragon, you must not only have low Str, but low Int and Wis as well. Diplomacy works much better in that situation.
Edit: What does RAW mean?
In a game I ran the party had captured a prisoner, but were quickly called away on some other task. The *halfling* wizard sat the guy down in a chair, drew about a 6 ft diameter circle in chalk around him, and told him that he had developed the spell "Kithril's Circle of Immolation" and that if he so much as set one finger outside the line, his whole body would burst into flame, giving him just enough time to feel his skin turn to ash before he died.
The little halfling of course had developed no such spell.... nevertheless, the guy stayed. That's intimidate. I'm pretty sure that strength was not involved there. As for giving someone a choice... why do so when there are so many other skills out there that do not allow you the choice of what ability mod to use? Making it a feat? I guess you could. But why wouldn't you just take Skill Focus: Intimidate instead? That would probably represent the concept better, and may well give you a higher bonus anyway.
I feel that the only reason this is even on the table for discussion is so that barbarians and fighters can min/max. The skill is clearly charisma.
|
|
I feel that the only reason this is even on the table for discussion is so that barbarians and fighters can min/max. The skill is clearly charisma.
You mean that this is a gamist/character optimization thread in disguise? I'm stunned. I had no idea. ;p I think that Intimidation should stay Charisma based, I just think that there should be some penalties for people who want to try and intimidate people without them having any reason to be intimidated otherwise.
I am 350 lbs, solidly built, played football in high school, and have been trained in hand to hand combat by the military. I work out three times a week and routinely worked with 500 lb rolls of material for my job until a few monthes ago. I also have been known to break cinderblocks when I get angry. If someone who is 150 lbs comes up to me on the street and tries to convince me that in a fight he would do anything other than soil himself, no matter how much presence and swagger he has, he will have a hard time. The only way things would be different is if I had seen something to demonstrate that he could back up his boasting. So I have a clear understanding of what you are saying, I hope I have made my point clear as well.There is no mention of any kind of magic, or even reason for Ogg to suspect that the slight woman has magical abilities. Sure magic trumps muscle, but only if you know magic is avalible.High Intimidate = knowing how to make yourself scare people so they would rather do what you say then cross you.
High Charisma - knowing how to carry yourself in general.
If you look at the actual words I wrote, you will see the sample language made it very clear she was declaring that not only could she make a damn fool out of Ogg, she could make Ogg make a damn fool out of himself. And like it. Also, her tone made it very clear she wasn't BSing around.
Clear enough yet?
The stupid thing glitched on me for some reason. Again. Let's try this again. For the third time. Where it actually works. Anyways.
Real world, no supernatural stuff where most people are random peons: Most people, if you walked up and threatened them would just let you have your way assuming of course you are telling the truth about being a tough guy on the internets. But this hypothetical guy just stares back at you and says f*** off or there will be consequences. He has to be unafraid for a reason, right?
After all, he could be some sort of martial arts master, especially of the sort trained to use their enemies' strength against them. Not so assured.
He could have a gun. Strength doesn't stop bullet to the eye.
He could have a knife. Provided he is at least half decent with the thing he's probably at least as dangerous as if he had a gun.
He could just be crazy. Crazy people are perhaps the most dangerous of all, because they don't have limits.
Now, to put this actually on the right topic how about that D&D world?
Here you can find Halflings with knives no bigger than your finger who regularly kill giants and worse in a few well placed hits.
Here, magic exists. That little guy can make you his pet with his mind.
Here, there is no guarantee you aren't facing something deadly disguised as something innocuous.
Here, there is no guarantee it isn't shapeshifted into something innocuous. This gets its separate point because 'random commoner is actually a Monk 20' and 'random commoner is actually an annoyed Great Wyrm' deserves separate mentions.
Here, even if you do kill them, there is no assurance they will stay dead.
So you see, size isn't that meaningful a depictor of threat level. Which is why being 8 times the size such as Medium to Large only gives at most a + or - 4. Except Charisma guy is 10 points ahead or so, so making Huge and bigger creatures whimper and cower isn't that hard. Which makes a lot more sense than trying to outmuscle something that uses your species for sport eh? What's a big human compared to that?
I agree with CoL in this instance; Intimidate needs to stay Cha-based. What I don't understand is why it didn't get rolled in with Bluff. I mean, one has a potential use allowing you to fool someone into thinking you can kill them, and the other is specialized to allow you to convince someone that... well, that you can kill them.
Yes, but again, if I was the DM there would either be a serious penalty to his intimidate check, or else the dragon would get a will roll against the bard's attempt. If you are a halfling trying to intimidate a dragon, you must not only have low Str, but low Int and Wis as well. Diplomacy works much better in that situation.
Edit: What does RAW mean?
RAW means Rules As Written. In other words, not what rules would you change, but how does it work straight out of the book. Neither arbitrary predestined penalties nor instant Will Saves count.
The answer to the question is "yes". And there is no automatic circumstance penalty. By RAW the creatures stats determine the DC.Diplomacy does not work one lick better or worse.
You are imposing a false constraint of direct one on one physical battle appearance on the intimidate skill.
Besides,a large red dragon has a CR of 10 or less. The bard may very well be 18th level. Nothing remotely foolish on his part. But that is completely outside the parameters of my question. It could just as easily be a very foolish 6th level bard who by dumb luck said just the right thing (the player rolled a 20). The dragon does not know this bard. So if he is 18th level and rolled a 4 or 6th level and rolled a 20, he said the same thing and got the same result from the dragon. The dragon's lack of knowledge regarding the bard's martial capability is immaterial.
Size and brutal appearance may play a major role in intimidate. But it is a completely 100% optional element.
You mean that this is a gamist/character optimization thread in disguise? I'm stunned. I had no idea. ;p I think that Intimidation should stay Charisma based, I just think that there should be some penalties for people who want to try and intimidate people without them having any reason to be intimidated otherwise.
I feel that the only reason this is even on the table for discussion is so that barbarians and fighters can min/max. The skill is clearly charisma.
DC is HD + Wis Mod. So tougher creatures already have that built in. A circumstance penalty is double counting. Now, there may be *other* circumstance penalties. But the toughness of the target is already there.
I agree with CoL in this instance; Intimidate needs to stay Cha-based. What I don't understand is why it didn't get rolled in with Bluff. I mean, one has a potential use allowing you to fool someone into thinking you can kill them, and the other is specialized to allow you to convince someone that... well, that you can kill them.
Bluff assumes you are lying. Fine for the level 2 Expert trying to not get OHKOed by the angry Barbarian. How about the guy who actually can turn you inside out and use you to carpet his tower with his mind? I like saying that by the way.
And to cut off that guy who says he can break cinderblocks before he can even react... CR 0.5 Orc Warriors have about the same strength, along with weapon training and viciousness atop of that. That means even level 1 adventuring groups can face two guys like that and not break a sweat. Routine encounter. Why would one unarmed guy just like the ones they cleared out today in numbers despite their big curved blades phase them?
Bluff assumes you are lying.
Why does it have to? After all, they rolled Listen, Search, and Spot together into Perception (aka AMO, for "everyone maxed out"), which is 10x better than any of the other remaining skills. Why not roll Bluff and Intimidate together, inasfar as there's at least a passing similarity, if it would mean putting them on more even footing with Perception?
|
Bluff assumes you are lying.Why does it have to? After all, they rolled Listen, Search, and Spot together into Perception (aka AMO, for "everyone maxed out"), which is 10x better than any of the other remaining skills. Why not roll Bluff and Intimidate together, inasfar as there's at least a passing similarity, if it would mean putting them on more even footing with Perception?
I think the problem here is that Perception is too useful with Search in the mix. It gives rogues a bigger advantage than rangers. Now the thief is just as good as the hunter, but can also disarm magic traps.
Bluff assumes you are lying.Why does it have to? After all, they rolled Listen, Search, and Spot together into Perception (aka AMO, for "everyone maxed out"), which is 10x better than any of the other remaining skills. Why not roll Bluff and Intimidate together, inasfar as there's at least a passing similarity, if it would mean putting them on more even footing with Perception?
Bluff + Intimidate don't fit into any group together as they are. Throw Diplomacy in and you can call it Persuasion. Then it works as you are taking different ways of doing the same thing and putting them together instead of calling two things exactly the same. Subtle difference, but there you go.
Also, Listen and Spot > Search by far on the grounds they do not become completely irrelevant in the second half of the game.
Well, I agree it would work pretty decently to roll at least Bluff/Intimidate together (no way, Diplomacy is for nice guys!), although that would definetely work against allowing Intimidate to be EITHER Strength OR Charisma.
I think all the examples here show that Charisma IS a good stat for Intimidate, but Strength is just as valid, especially as you need to put skill points on top to keep it effective in any case. Although a slight 'complication' to allow a choice of Stats, it's pretty intuitive in my view.
INDEPENDENT OF THE CONTROVERSY OF THE AGES, it would be nice to see more variant effect (beat DC, beat by 5, beat by 10, etc), and even FAIL by 5, FAIL by 10, etc... Developing this sort of specificity would synergize with correlating more Skills with Spells, i.e. Fear<->Intimidate, Charm<->Bluff/Diplomacy, etc... The space saved in removing two separate sub-systems more than covers the extra space needed in fleshing out a robust 'universal' system, as others have pointed out.
Anyhow,
resume the controversy...
Putting all three together means manipulation is one skill and the difference is a matter of context and method.
My posts illustrate how Charisma gives you the edge because it's harder to be scared of muscle when the encounter system pretty much jades you against it, ergo the strong, low Charisma guy loses compared to the physically weak, but otherwise dangerous high Charisma guy.