|
I think you forgot the 1 rank, I see +17.
I haven't looked at it, but 1, I think the fear from Intimidate only lasts 1 round, and wouldn't stack with itself.
This is my recollection too. Fear effects from the same source do not stack.
Also, given that Dazzling Display explicitly saves you can demoralise mall opponents within 30 ft (the same range as a standard intimidate) it seems that you can only demoralise one foe at a time with an intimidate check normally.
So congratulations, you've made Fred the Orc really fearful. Unfortunately, Dave, Barry and Simon the Orcs are now beating on you with sticks.
Plus, getting a 20 at first level is VERY expensive. It costs you 17 points. That's out of the reach of everyone except High or Epic fantasy point buy. And they leave you with 3 or eight points respectively, enough to get, at most one stat of 13 (High Fantasy) or one of 11 and one of 15. That level of specialisation will mean reduced hp or reduced AC neither or which is good for a low level sorcerer.
I mentioned this in another thread, but yeah, I'm pretty sure you can only demoralize an opponent once. The consequence of them being demoralized is that they are shaken, which if you apply some other fear effect from another source can cause them to become frightened and then panicked, but they can't be further demoralized, because they are already demoralized and can't become "more demoralized," much like someone can't become "more asleep" or "more dehydrated," etc.
I believe the standard usage of the skill only affects one opponent.
Some of the wording is slightly ambiguous but I'll demonstrate here:
The italicized part can be read in a general way, i.e. the phrase "a fighter can use his Greataxe to kill his opponents" does not mean the action to use his Greataxe necessarily affects multiple opponents, but it's saying his enemies (plural) comprise a group which can be so effected (by individually targetted Attack Actions, in this analogy).
Again, the first italicized sentence is nearly identical to the introductory senstence for the entire skill - Reading it as a general description, rather than a specific prescription to affect multiple targets is completely reasonable. The bolded part is a singular term. I won't actually quote the other sections of Intimidate (for it's other usages), but they also contain language assuming singular targets. Pretty much any other effect in the game which targets multiple enemies or all enemies in a given AoE EXPLICITLY SAYS THIS, while Intimidate does not say this.
The wording COULD easily be improved, since the use of the plural in the "you can cause your opponents" sections COULD be interpreted as indicating multiple targets (though the rest of the text doesn't follow thru with that interpretation).
Hopefully we see this updated in the next printing/ PDF/ PRD update...
Mulitple (almost anything) from the same source do not ever stack unless it says so specifically.
While I agree with you that it shouldn't stack...
The official way stacking works is bonuses don't stack but penalties do.
Mulitple (almost anything) from the same source do not ever stack unless it says so specifically.
Becoming Even More Fearful: Fear effects are cumulative. A shaken character who is made shaken again becomes frightened, and a shaken character who is made frightened becomes panicked instead. A frightened character who is made shaken or frightened becomes panicked instead.
So the question is really can an Intimidate check affect the same person twice? Personally, I don't see why not. The "almost anythings" that you're referring to are generally typed bonuses. The demoralize action applies a fear effect, and fear effects are cumulative as per the text above.
Note that for a single character to get a target to the Panicked state he has to beat the DC by at least 10 on the first try (to get it to last at least 3 rounds), and also give up 3 rounds of actions. If your barbarian is that scary, chances are decent he could just kill the poor bloke in that amount of time too.
Edit: Actually, he's got to beat the DC by 10 every time. Subsequent attempts on the same target raise the DC by +5 each time, regardless of success or failure (as discussed in the previous thread).
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Intimidate rules... this pretty much makes everything in a 30' radius of the Sorcerer Shaken...
According to page 563 of the Pathfinder Core Book... "Fear effects are cumulative"
I think you have two errors in your thinking.
1) Doesn't it take 1 minute to Intimidate, not a standard action?
2) While fear effects stack (cumulative), effects from the same source don't stack. So you can Intimidate every minute for a day and they are still only effected by one Intimidate. PRPG p208 (applies to both bonuses and penalties explicitly)
|
According to the SRD it is actually a penalty.
As to Intimidate, it's a great trick, right up until you meet fear-immune enemies.
much like someone can't become "more asleep" or "more dehydrated," etc.
I demand the "comatose" and "dessicated" conditions. Jason should totally have integrated the Glasgow coma scale into d20.
According to the SRD it is actually a penalty.
As to Intimidate, it's a great trick, right up until you meet fear-immune enemies.
What does it say in the PSRD?
|
|
I don't have my PRD bookmark, but my PDF copy of the Core Rulebook says the same thing.
As does the PRD. Still searching for 'penalty' definition in the PRPG.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
doesn't say anything about "not-stackable" since it's from the same source... it says it "IS cumulative"
Things that are cumulative ALWAYS "stack" with the same source.
does it only affect one person or does it affect ALL my allies?
That isn't how the rules work. It doesn't stack and unless the ability says "future Intimidates stack for fear state" your theory that it IS cumulative isn't based on the rules. It doesn't stack with itself, period.
As for the other example, Intimidate says "the target" but Inspire Courage says "your allies." One is an area (Inspire Courage) and the other is a single target (Intimidate.)
No way to interpret it differently without adding words or meanings that are not obvious. Could it be worded differently to eliminate your interpretation? Yes. Should it possibly be working differently? Sure
Something like "is cumulative with other fear effects" would cover your cumulative argument.
The use of "the target" on the other hand is explicitly single target, so there is no need to change the text.
Ray of Enfeeblement isn't a penalty, it's ability damage... you can take ability damage numerous times from Ray of Enfeeblement. Ability damage, like all damage, accrues.
It is a penalty, not damage. It doesn't stack because penalties from the same source don't stack.
That isn't how the rules work. It doesn't stack and unless the ability says "future Intimidates stack for fear state" your theory that it IS cumulative isn't based on the rules. It doesn't stack with itself, period.
As for the other example, Intimidate says "the target" but Inspire Courage says "your allies." One is an area (Inspire Courage) and the other is a single target (Intimidate.)
No way to interpret it differently without adding words or meanings that are not obvious. Could it be worded differently to eliminate your interpretation? Yes. Should it possibly be working differently? Sure
Something like "is cumulative with other fear effects" would cover your cumulative argument.
The use of "the target" on the other hand is explicitly single target, so there is no need to change the text.
Can you quote the rule that states that it doesn't work like this James? The fact that multiple fear effects are cumulative (and specifically stated as such in the Glossary as quoted above), plus the face that you are permitted to attempt Intimidates multiple times (without regard to success or failure, albeit at increased difficulty) seems to support the interpretation being offered.
Is it that broken? I hate it when our enemies all run away. Invariably they go, rouse a rabble and come back in force - this time determined to shoot the crap out of that scary dude at the back. All in all, it seems you've created a really intimidating, one-dimensional character who makes all the party's opponents shaken or alternatively makes them run for help. When they return with reinforcements within the next hour, it's harder to repeat the process. Plus you're a prime target.
I expect I'm going to allow it in my games and nobody is going to do it.
|
|
Pathfinder has updated the definition of penalty as well. See here.
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage, but they cannot cause you to fall unconscious or die. In essence, penalties cannot decrease your ability score to less than 1.
@Tha_Dreaz
You forgot to add the extra bit about the Intimidate skill's demoralize action:
Action: Using Intimidate to change an opponent’s
attitude requires 1 minute of conversation. Demoralizing
an opponent is a standard action.
It is clear that you can only use Demoralize on a single opponent at a time (as a standard action) - but multiple opponents over time with multiple actions.
This is also the only way that the Dazzling Display feat has any meaning at all:
Dazzling Display (Combat)
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.
If you could demoralize all foes within 30 feet as a standard action already from the basic intimidate skill, why would you shoot yourself in the foot by now doing it slower? It is clear that the meaning (and the intention) is that Demoralize works on a single target as a standard action. And there is a feat that allows you to intimidate all enemies in range.
...
What is arguably less obvious is whether or not repeated demoralize actions stack. From my reading of RAW it is that they do stack (see cumulative fear effects) and also that the balance is well maintained by requiring the potential panicker to succeed on 3 consecutive intimidate checks at +10 to the target's fear resistance to panic him or her for 1 round (due to the way intimidation gets harder as shown previously in one of the posts).
This, to me, is also one of the clearest signs that regardless of interpretation of RAW, the intention is to allow demoralize from the same source to stack - otherwise what is the point of making the intimidate DC harder for the same source if the effects would not stack?
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.
This hardening of the DC ensures all the balance the creatures really need to resist a panicker well. If a build really goes all out to intimidate well, then it deserves to reap benefits - if those benefits only really happen after 3 rounds of hard work (not doing much else), then that is fair. Simple level 1 spells can achieve similar results faster.
This, to me, is also one of the clearest signs that regardless of interpretation of RAW, the intention is to allow demoralize from the same source to stack - otherwise what is the point of making the intimidate DC harder for the same source if the effects would not stack?
Maybe you failed the first time - that's what it usually means when you try a skill a second time isnt it?
True - except that the DC also goes up if you succeed. Many real-life examples suggest that it should be easier to scare someone that is already scared. That it goes up on a successful attempt (for Demoralize purposes) suggests that it is done so to balance cumulative fear effects.
|
|
So, after spending one round to cast EP, then another three rounds (at increasing DCs each round), you can automatically succeed at making ONE creature run away. Is that really the most effective use of your time?
As for where the rule that it's only one cresture, look at Dazzling Display, If Intimidate usually affected multiple creatures, the wording wouldn't be needed and DD would be a worse option than a straight intimidate check.
|
@Tha_Dreaz
You forgot to add the extra bit about the Intimidate skill's demoralize action:
Action: Using Intimidate to change an opponent’s
attitude requires 1 minute of conversation. Demoralizing
an opponent is a standard action.It is clear that you can only use Demoralize on a single opponent at a time (as a standard action) - but multiple opponents over time with multiple actions.
This is also the only way that the Dazzling Display feat has any meaning at all:
Dazzling Display (Combat)
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.If you could demoralize all foes within 30 feet as a standard action already from the basic intimidate skill, why would you shoot yourself in the foot by now doing it slower? It is clear that the meaning (and the intention) is that Demoralize works on a single target as a standard action. And there is a feat that allows you to intimidate all enemies in range.
I had issues with intimidate over the weekend being used to affect multiple people and decided to let it slide until I had time to research it more and think about the way it was written. As pointed out, I'd have to agree it only affects one target as it would make Dazzling Display pointless.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Can you quote the rule that states that it doesn't work like this James?
I already did, see above. Page 208 stacking rules are not negated by the "is cumulative" statement. It would need to say "is cumulative including previous Intimidates" to vacate the general rule that nothing stacks with itself.
This, to me, is also one of the clearest signs that regardless of interpretation of RAW, the intention is to allow demoralize from the same source to stack - otherwise what is the point of making the intimidate DC harder for the same source if the effects would not stack?
No, that is for "crap I failed to Intimidate. DM, I want to try again."
Since, by RAW, you can't gain anything from doing Intimidate on a successfully Intimidated foe it doesn't matter that the DC increases on success. You will never need to meet that DC anyway.
From page 208:
Stacking Effects: Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don’t stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects
other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).
It is quite clear that spells generally don't have stacking bonuses and penalties. And that bonuses of the same type don't stack.
The case for the penalty from Intimidate (the skill) stands as strong as before, if not stronger (since they explicitly excluded penalties from stacking in general in the quoted text above, in spite of including it explicitly for spells).
|
|
The Demoralising aspect of Intimidate imposes a Condition on a foe. It does not directly impose penalties, or bonuses. Unless there is something that says explicitly that Conditions are not cumulative (and in the case of Fear Conditions, the exact opposite is stated) then multiple uses of Intimidate by RAW seem to be cumulative.
Can you quote the rule that states that it doesn't work like this James?I already did, see above. Page 208 stacking rules are not negated by the "is cumulative" statement. It would need to say "is cumulative including previous Intimidates" to vacate the general rule that nothing stacks with itself.
James, it specifically says that fear conditions stack. And the skill specifically says that you can try to Intimidate a target more than once. Are you saying that the general rule overrides those two specific rules?
|
staking shakens aside, the enemy is only shaken for one round due to a demoralize, so you yourself cant increase its fear state before it reverts to normal. if, for instance, the target was receiving a fear effect from another source (such as a dragon), and you intimidated him, his state may go from frightened to panicked, but only for one round, since that is the duration of demoralize's effect. the subject sorcerer could not stack on the shakens unless he could act more than one time in the 1 round that demoralize is functioning.
Do you realize this can be used for any Charisma-based skill? Diplomacy, Bluff, Use Magic Device, etc.
Not exactly -- there are more things that add to Intimidate specifically (size bonuses, Intimidating Prowess, half-orc racial bonus, Intimidating Glare, Enforcer feat from the campaign setting) than there are things that add to Cha-based skills in general.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
If you don't know about a core feat in Pathfinder, I advise you to read the feat in the game system you're talking about.
As to the Ugly guy with a high Cha Arguement... Wolverine is a short hairy guy with 6 knives. Illyana is a slender teenaged girl with a glowing sword. When written correctly they're scary as heck.
Now, your hypothetical super-orc has spent his feat, 1/3-1/2 of his skill points, his only feat, and the majority of his stat points to do this trick. So our scary half-orc has 20(18+2) 10, 10, 10, 10, 8.
So lets put him in a dungeon.
He has between 5-7 hit points and 1-3 skill points. One of those skill points was spent on intimidate, so we'll put one in spellcraft.
Now let's pull out the commoner's bane, the housecat. (all rolls are assumed to be 10)
Housecat is likely to go first. Fortunately the fact that the 1/2 orc didn't see him coming (+14 steath vs 0 perception) since his 10 dex means he's not at a disadvantage for being flat footed.
1/2 orc loses hhis AoA and would likely miss (bab 0, str 10. needs a 14 or higher) Cat hits with all three attacks (bab +4 vs AC 10 means a 6 or higher) does 3 points of damage.
Normal round starts, cat wins initative mauls again for 3 points. half-orc is likely at 0 or less, but we'll say he's at 0.
1/2 orc goes to intimidate/cast/do something, makes the roll, so now the cat is -2 to hit. But wait, the cat gets an AoA if the half orc tried to intimidate, hits for 1 point. even if he has 7 HP he's down to 0 HP.
Round three the cat finished him off.
That's a CR 1/4 housecat.
2 Goblins should kill him almost as dead (+6 init vs +0 init) If they charge, they just need a 7 to hit, and do 2.5 points of damage on average. Even if he demoralizes them both (flawed reading of intimidate) the half orc draws AoA unless he 5' steps and the goblins still need an 11 after the demoralizing.
one Skeleton will eviscerate him. He'll likely miss with disrupt undead (+0 BAB, remember?) and it can't be demoralized.
Is the build very good for what it does? Yes. Is it breaking? Hardly.
|
Do you realize this can be used for any Charisma-based skill? Diplomacy, Bluff, Use Magic Device, etc.Not exactly -- there are more things that add to Intimidate specifically (size bonuses, Intimidating Prowess, half-orc racial bonus) than there are things that add to Cha-based skills in general.
True, though a first level character being able to use almost any magic items(wands/staffs) most of the time is still impressive.
Intimidate, it's the new Diplomacy!
|
|
If you don't know about a core feat in Pathfinder, I advise you to read the feat in the game system you're talking about.
As to the Ugly guy with a high Cha Arguement... Wolverine is a short hairy guy with 6 knives. Illyana is a slender teenaged girl with a glowing sword. When written correctly they're scary as heck.
Now, your hypothetical super-orc has spent his feat, 1/3-1/2 of his skill points, his only feat, and the majority of his stat points to do this trick. So our scary half-orc has 20(18+2) 10, 10, 10, 10, 8.
So lets put him in a dungeon.
He has between 5-7 hit points and 1-3 skill points. One of those skill points was spent on intimidate, so we'll put one in spellcraft.
Now let's pull out the commoner's bane, the housecat. (all rolls are assumed to be 10)
Housecat is likely to go first. Fortunately the fact that the 1/2 orc didn't see him coming (+14 steath vs 0 perception) since his 10 dex means he's not at a disadvantage for being flat footed.
1/2 orc loses hhis AoA and would likely miss (bab 0, str 10. needs a 14 or higher) Cat hits with all three attacks (bab +4 vs AC 10 means a 6 or higher) does 3 points of damage.
Normal round starts, cat wins initative mauls again for 3 points. half-orc is likely at 0 or less, but we'll say he's at 0.
1/2 orc goes to intimidate/cast/do something, makes the roll, so now the cat is -2 to hit. But wait, the cat gets an AoA if the half orc tried to intimidate, hits for 1 point. even if he has 7 HP he's down to 0 HP.
Round three the cat finished him off.
That's a CR 1/4 housecat.
1) I have never believed CHA determines what you looked like unless you wanted it to.
2) Go housecat! Show those casters who's boss!