| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to have a simple answer to this one, preferably from one of the devs, since after parsing the messageboards I've found no clear ruling on it.
What happens when the creature you are using intimidate on--to DEMORALIZE it--does does not understand you language?
Case one: You cannot speak the creature's language (Intimidating a Gnoll)
Case two: You do not share a common body language (Intimidating a will-o'-wisp)
Case three: None of the above (Intimidating a shoggoth, for example, and you do not speak Aklo)
Case four: Animals / creatures with less than INT 3
As I said, could we have a definite ruling on this?
Regards,
Fox
Animals and gnolls should get it. I can see how oozes and plants (or a will-o-the wisp) may not.
The skill description includes the following:
This skill includes verbal threats and displays of prowess.
RAW there is no indication that the user of Intimidate needs to go through any extra hoops here since it would also include non-verbal cues.
That said, what you are suggesting does make a certain amount of sense. Going beyond the scope of your original question and venturing into houserule territory, what it boils down to is do you know enough about your target to be able to intimidate them. For most common humanoids and beasts, typical approaches are likely to be successful even if you don't share a common language.
For other targets, I would suggest that unless something is resistant or immune to fear effects or has no concept of self, it can be targeted via Intimidate. But if you want to add some complexity because it is a form of communication, perhaps the user would need to make an appropriate Knowledge check to know enough about the creature to know how to intimidate it.
In fact, I would probably go a step further. Either a target needs special knowledge to intimidate or it responds to cues similarly to you. If the PC has that knowledge, great, problem solved. If they lack that knowledge, you as the GM would need to determine whether the PC's "normal" intimidation would work and assess penalties to the DC if it turns out they need that extra knowledge to be effective. The PC might, after all, get lucky and run across that one aboleth that is easily intimidate by displays of bright feathers .. or something..
So back to your examples:
- Gnoll - yes, "common" humanoid, understands that when you brandish your sword, you are potentially quite dangerous and may be intimidated
- Will-o'-wisp - yes, but likely requires an appropriate Knowledge check to understand it well enough to properly threaten to snuff it out
- Animals/creates with <3 INT - technically I think the cutoff would be <1 which eliminates self awareness (think an automaton/robot/golem). Even a frog can at least be startled as it recognizes dangers in its environment and can be scared off. A gray ooze has no INT and therefore no self awareness and no sense of danger per se. It might react to damage, retracting from fire or the like, but that's isn't forethought to consider potential threats.
I'd agree with the last couple of posts on how to interpret "displays of prowess". Anything with an int score and the ability to perceive you (not blind and deaf) should be a valid target using body language and lots of screaming, regardless of language.
That would be also my idea, but we have a bit of a disagreement at our game, so I'd love to have a Dev settling the question. Is there some way to get it?
Click the "FAQ" link at the top of the first post in this thread. If enough people request a clarification from the Paizo staff, it sometimes happens. Don't hold your breath, though.
Done!!
Thank you.