Terrifying Howl + Intimidating Glare interaction

[J0MK3R]

So recently my players have come into an interesting predicament with the feats intimidating Glare and Terrifying howl. One insists there has to be some sort of interaction beteween these feats, while the other two insist there isnt.

In my opinion I see it either way with the wording, so I was wondering if anyone here could point out for me if these feats truly do/don't interact with eachother and why.

thanks for taking the time to read, Ciao.

[Kelseus]

J0MK3R wrote:

So recently my players have come into an interesting predicament with the feats intimidating Glare and Terrifying howl. One insists there has to be some sort of interaction beteween these feats, while the other two insist there isnt.

In my opinion I see it either way with the wording, so I was wondering if anyone here could point out for me if these feats truly do/don't interact with eachother and why.

thanks for taking the time to read, Ciao.

Intimating Glare is a prerequisite for Terrifying Howl. Generally speaking in 2e something is only a pre-req if the new feat directly modifies or builds off the existing feat.

The clear intent is that you can Demoralize all creatures within 30 feet with a howl, as opposed to a language based comment. By RAW do they necessarily interact? Ambiguous at best. RAI, Terrifying Howl should not take the "-4 if don't share a language" penalty in Demoralize.

What I would not allow is for Intimidating Glare to make Terrifying Howl into a visual instead of auditor check. IG only modifies the "vanilla" Demoralize action. TH is a specific action that allows you to break the rules of Demoralize to hit everyone w/in 30 feet.

[breithauptclan]

RAW the two feats would not interact. Terrifying Howl would be subject to the -4 circumstance penalty for not using a language. Though a case could be made that you could howl something in a language in order to avoid that penalty.

I don't think that is RAI though. Especially since Intimidating Glare is a prerequisite. I would go along with Kelseus and say that Terrifying Howl would let you make the Demoralize check against all enemies within 30 ft and with no penalty for not using a language.

[Exton Land]

breithauptclan wrote:

RAW the two feats would not interact. Terrifying Howl would be subject to the -4 circumstance penalty for not using a language. Though a case could be made that you could howl something in a language in order to avoid that penalty.

I don't think that is RAI though. Especially since Intimidating Glare is a prerequisite. I would go along with Kelseus and say that Terrifying Howl would let you make the Demoralize check against all enemies within 30 ft and with no penalty for not using a language.

RAW they do interact. Terrifying Howl calls on the demoralize action, which can be modified by intimidating glare. If something calls on making a Make an Impression check it's possible to do so with Performance using Impressive Performance. If you also had say, Group Impression you could not however use Impressive Performance as written since it specifies the Diplomacy check result that doesn't exist.

Terrifying Howl when using Auditory is subject to the -4 since you are not using a language to demoralize. If you apply Intimidating Glare then it does not take the -4, but gains the Visual trait. Why does this matter? Well some creatures are actually blind and cannot be intimidated with intimidating glare due to the Visual trait.

[Gortle]

Exton Land wrote:

RAW they do interact. Terrifying Howl calls on the demoralize action, which can be modified by intimidating glare. If something calls on making a Make an Impression check it's possible to do so with Performance using Impressive Performance. If you also had say, Group Impression you could not however use Impressive Performance as written since it specifies the Diplomacy check result that doesn't exist.

Terrifying Howl when using Auditory is subject to the -4 since you are not using a language to demoralize. If you apply Intimidating Glare then it does not take the -4, but gains the Visual trait. Why does this matter? Well some creatures are actually blind and cannot be intimidated with intimidating glare due to the Visual trait.

I agree. Use of Intimidating Glare is optional though.

But you will want to implement your Terrifying Howl with Intimidating Glares if language is going to be a factor.

I guess then the Terrifying Howl is some sort of visual display, if its actually a glare, and not a sound.

It also makes clearer the role of Intimidating Prowess. Which is another way of avoiding the language penalty.

[SH3R4TA5]

In the world of logic i would say that Terrifying howl make sense that there is some interaction with intimidating glare: fear is a natural response to dangerous situations, and even before a language was established it worked for some animals, but you need to associate it to someone or something scary,or you would be demoralized from a chihuahua?

If they see you as a hulking murder machine or a master unbeatable fencer is more easy to break someone's confidence.

Both feats work together because they interact with the demoralize action, and tbh, even if a hound or a hyena could sound scarry, they couldn't be as frightening as the silent image of the chupacabras IRL.

At least that is how I see this working.

[egindar]

Since Demoralize is a subordinate action, I think the interaction is that you can choose to have Intimidating Glare active, removing the auditory trait and adding the visual trait, but then Terrifying Howl adds the auditory trait back in.

So if you activate Terrifying Howl, you can choose not to use Intimidating Glare, in which case it's auditory-only, but you take the penalty for not speaking a language, or you can choose to use Intimidating Glare, in which case it's both visual and auditory, but you do not take the penalty for not speaking a language.

It is, however, dependent on the GM ruling the flavor aspects (using Demoralize with a "mere glare" and Terrifying Howl having you "unleash a terrifying howl") are compatible - although at that point you could probably make a good case for Terrifying Howl being both auditory-only and not imposing a penalty if you don't share/speak a language, which is what I assume the RAI is.