...you get a +4 to bluff for getting bigger?
Ok, enough jokes:
Bluff: ...and that might be why they made it just an opposed skill check when the opponent bothers to have sense motive (and otherwise...it basically IS the 10+BAB+Wis when you are untrained in sense motive; it is just that without ranks, your sense motive is stuck at 0+wis). Because it was TOO hard in Paizo's opinion.
Intimidate... Out of combat...it is a worse version of diplomacy. In combat... it is mostly a minor debuff most of the time. The in combat use of intimidation is often based upon a change of action (such as free action on cornugon smash; great when you can only get one hit in, and just want to set up for wizard) or letting you intimidate multiple people (dazzling display). :
|
The checks are pretty easy to make. The thing is, getting something out of demoralizing or feinting usually requires a bit of investment in feats or picking a particular archetype. There are usually other things you could be doing with that investment instead.
Feinting is a way for a rogue to consistently get their sneak attack damage. There are some disadvantages though, outside how easy the skill check is to make. You get a -4 penalty against non-humanoids, -8 vs animal intelligence creatures, and you can't feint at all against mindless creatures. You will also need to either take that Vigilante talent (and there are other talents that are at least as good as Cunning Feint that you won't be taking instead), or you will have to get Improved Feint, which also requires Combat Expertise. Ick.
Causing your enemy to lose Dex to AC is nice, but this isn't the biggest part of most enemy AC's. Your Rogue will still need to actually hit, and while a bunch of d6s look impressive, they only average 3.5 damage per dice. A Strength based character Power Attacking with a 2H weapon will deal comparable damage, which much less of an investment.
That being said, I don't think Improved Feint is a bad option to go, but I wouldn't say that is overpowered.
Notice that the the DC to beat in 3.5 includes a factor of the target's level/HD twice. That's too much considering the feinting character only gets to apply level once. The 3.5 construction was too frickin' hard (much like tumbling is now in PF, but that's a complaint for another day).
The intimidate check really isn't that different, though. If you check the FAQ, demoralizing the target is supposed to be a fear effect. And that should suggest that any modifier to saves vs fear apply to the DC (though it isn't explicit).
|
|
Bonuses to saves vs. fear don't effect the DC for Demoralize. There are specific ways to boost this DC, but they are fairly uncommon. One thing about the Intimidate check in combat is that it only lasts one round (plus 1 round for every five you beat the check by), its costs a standard action to use, and requires you to be within 30 feet. And every subsequent time you try to demoralize, the check increases by 5.
It is an easy check to make, but considering that it is really not a good use of your action economy unless you have invested in it, I think that it is intentionally easy to make.
I think Rich Burlew from Giant in the Playground game has variant rules.