| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Enforcer (Combat)
You are skilled at causing fear in those you brutalize.
Prerequisite: Intimidate 1 rank.
Benefit: Whenever you deal nonlethal damage with a melee weapon, you can make an Intimidate check to demoralize your target as a free action. If you are successful, the target is shaken for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt. If your attack was a critical hit, your target is frightened for 1 round with a successful Intimidate check, as well as being shaken for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt.
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.
Friends, if I am doing a full-round action and hit two non-lethal attacks with melee weapons, I could leave the target frightened if successful in the two tests to intimidate?
|
Enforcer (Combat)
You are skilled at causing fear in those you brutalize.
Prerequisite: Intimidate 1 rank.
Benefit: Whenever you deal nonlethal damage with a melee weapon, you can make an Intimidate check to demoralize your target as a free action. If you are successful, the target is shaken for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt. If your attack was a critical hit, your target is frightened for 1 round with a successful Intimidate check, as well as being shaken for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt.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.Friends, if I am doing a full-round action and hit two non-lethal attacks with melee weapons, I could leave the target frightened if successful in the two tests to intimidate?
No.
There is an exception to the stacking fear rules when it comes to the Intimidate:Demoralize effect. Intimidate does not stack with itself in regards to fear effects. The only thing you'd get with this is a higher DC on the second attempt and at best it will increase the duration of the shaken effect.HOWEVER if you take the Rogue Archetype (Thug) it's first level benefit will allow you to convert 4+ rounds of shaken into a round of Frightened.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Mathwei, can you indicate your source? I was almost certain I'd seen something similar but I can't find it anywhere.
I'm curious too. It's not in the description of Intimidate, or in the fear entries in the Glossary (unless I just overlooked it). I'm not sure where else to check.
I'm not sure where else to check.
Old versions of errata, of course.
Page 99-In the Intimidate skill, add the following sentence after the first sentence of the Demoralize paragraph:This shaken condition doesn’t stack with other shaken conditions to make an affected creature frightened.
This is also in Second Printing update 2.1
But not in Third Printing update 3.0
And also not in the PRD.
So which one is correct? James Jacobs suggests that the DM should be choosing which rules to follow. "If the GM isn't comfortable making that decision without advice from others or from errata/FAQ files, though, my suggestion is that the difference between shaken and frightened is VAST, and that frightened should not be something that can be achieved by simply doubling up on effects that cause folks to become shaken."
This is also in Second Printing update 2.1
But not in Third Printing update 3.0
And also not in the PRD.
That probably means the PRD doesn't yet have the errata. Assuming you're talking about the Paizo PRD and not d20pfsrd, though the same would apply to d20pfsrd.
In any case, what you've said makes perfect sense. It was an error in the first printing, therefore it's in the First Printing errata (i.e. the errata to apply to the first printing). It was still in the second printing, so it's also in the second printing errata. On the other hand, as of the third printing, it was included in the book and thus no longer necessary in the errata.
The errata gets smaller for each printing, not bigger.
In any case, what you've said makes perfect sense. It was an error in the first printing, therefore it's in the First Printing errata (i.e. the errata to apply to the first printing). It was still in the second printing, so it's also in the second printing errata. On the other hand, as of the third printing, it was included in the book and thus no longer necessary in the errata.
It would make sense, if it actually was included in the third printing of the book, and/or the PRD, which is directly created from the PDF versions of the rulebooks.
I don't have a copy of the third printing core rulebook, but according to the thread linked earlier, this piece of errata just vanished.
In any case, what you've said makes perfect sense. It was an error in the first printing, therefore it's in the First Printing errata (i.e. the errata to apply to the first printing). It was still in the second printing, so it's also in the second printing errata. On the other hand, as of the third printing, it was included in the book and thus no longer necessary in the errata.It would make sense, if it actually was included in the third printing of the book, and/or the PRD, which is directly created from the PDF versions of the rulebooks.
I don't have a copy of the third printing core rulebook, but according to the thread linked earlier, this piece of errata just vanished.
Well (now that I've downloaded v4). Ain't that a pickle. I agree, sure seems to make Intimidate pretty powerful.
10 + HD + Wis isn't really that hard of a DC when your modifier is essentially HD + 3 + Cha + bonuses (Skill Focus, etc.)
Personally, I think I'll be using the version from, say, Grave Touch that only can boost it to frightened for creatures with less than your HD. That makes a lot more sense.
This is actually in the FAQ and supported by Jason B. here.
The posts linked in that d20srd page are all from before the errata was released.
1st: Board postings saying they will fix it in errata
2nd: Errata published fixing it
3rd: Errata published without mentioning it
Thus, it's a logical question: Did they simply miss it in the latest batch of errata and the latest printing? Or did they change the rule back to the original?
The answer to that question was "the GM should make the decision" and if the GM isn't comfortable making that decision, Jason gave his opinion on the rule.
Jason B's reply was 2009... but there wasn't the follow-up he said there'd be.
Actually, there was.
After those posts, Errata update 1.2 included the changes. So they did follow up. The problem is they missed it in the last printing/errata.