So I've got a player who wish to play as a small character (a gnome specifically) AND focus on intimidation as he's got a backstory as an enforcer with plausible deniability (who would believe a gnome to be a legbreaker, right?)
But of course, that pesky -4 size penalty to intimidate is a bit hard to build upon without "wasting" your feats, abilities etc. so we've been looking for options that makes this concept viable without skill focus and traits just to get him to a baseline medium creature's level of intimidation.
Thus far, we've only come across two abilities that cater to this sort of play: Taunt and Nightmare Scars. However, the former uses bluff, and only to demoralize, which kind of defeats the purpose, even with reflavoring, and the latter might be really good, but it's restricted to followers of Lamashtu. I also believe that those feats ignore ALL size penalties to intimidate, rather than just treating them as a medium creature (I believe that the penalties are based on the actual difference in size rather than a static value for each size category)? Am I correct in this, and does anyone have any other feats/abilities that accomplishes the same?
Anyhow, the campaign is mostly urban, and most foes will be medium sized humanoids. Thus far I'm thinking of either making Nightmare Scars a general feat rather than one associated with Lamashtu, or to allow my player some access to the race builder for alternate racial traits (he's imagining a character based around the more unsettling features of evil fey and such), but I thought that I may as well see what other players and GM's thinks of the issue.
|
A home rule we use in some of my games is that if you're intimidating via threat of physical harm, you use Strength, and the size penalties apply; but if you're using a more psychological threat (e.g., god's vengeance, social ruin, blackmail, etc.) you use Charisma and size doesn't matter. That way, the hulking bruiser with low charisma and the scheming gnome with low strength can both be quite intimidating.
From a reading of Nightmare Scars, it says you "take no penalty on Intimidate checks based on your size." Seems pretty clear to me that it wouldn't matter even if they were colossal and you were tiny.
Otherwise, maybe just try Enlarge Person? A medium-sized gnome would be pretty f-ing unsettling, even without other boosts to intimidate.
Thanks for the input! I especially like your home rule, which seems perfectly reasonable, though not exactly what my player's looking for as he's considering a barbarian with the titan mauler archetype.
After some thought we simply decided that his physique (described as unusually bulky and stout even when compared to a typical dwarf) means that he's treated as medium size for the sake of intimidate AND stealth as an alternate racial feature (replacing the standard modifiers to these skills, but not other size modifiers).
|
There are two traits in ultimate campaign which might be of interest:
"Larger Than Life" - You are counted as one size larger for making intimidate checks as long as you wield a firearm.
"Twinned Presence" - If your eidolon is within 30 feet, use its size instead of yours for intimidate checks.
These are somewhat class-specific, but as you didn't mention a class in the OP, I thought I would mention them.
I think Taunt works well for a Small creature.
Otherwise, you take the penalty. It makes no sense that someone would fear a small enemy who makes a threat more than a larger enemy making the same threat. It could be the same if the small enemy is mocking you, or it is supernaturally scary like Nightmare Scars (more like Nightmare SCARES).
I don't like Reynard's baseline Str-instead-of-Cha. Intimidation is an art, even if it means crushing a nutshell with your pecs.
Yes.
Seems like it could be interpreted either way; I think the intent is pretty clearly Bluff only, but the wording makes it a bit more vague and you could argue that the "take no skill check penalty" part of the description is a separate benefit of the feat (since it's separated by an "and" without further associating it with the previous part of the description). Not that likely to fly at most tables though, I'd imagine.