Do the Undead Slayer's Frighten Undead Feat nothing if you're intimidation is higher than your religion?

[RobinGoodfellow]

Frighten Undead:

Attempt to Demoralize an undead target using your Religion modifier instead of your Intimidation modifier if it's higher. If you use your Religion modifier, the Demoralize action loses the emotion and mental traits, as your faith connects to the undead on an instinctual level.

so it look like for me if my intimidation is higher I cannot use this feat either with my religion or my intimidation...
this do not seems correct to me but what have I missed?

[breithauptclan]

Under a strict, harsh, and antagonistic reading of the sentence, yes - I guess you could say that you have to have a Religion modifier higher than your Intimidation modifier in order to use any part of the feat.

But that seems overly harsh and antagonistic. If you have equal or lower Religion than you have for Intimidation I would still let you use the Religion Demoralize in order to frighten mindless undead or undead immune to emotion effects. That certainly appears to be the intent of the second sentence of the feat.

[Loreguard]

I think the feat would have been better suited to simply allow the possessor the ability to use their religion modifier instead of intimidation modifier (irrespective if higher or lower) and affect undead, while losing the emotion/mental traits to the action.

If you have a really high intimidation, but poor religion, the feat would let you use what you have in religion against undead, which you probably otherwise would have been unable to do.

I don't think making use of the feat contingent on religion being higher is really needed, or helpful to the game play. I'd be tempted to ignore that limitation. I think they incorporated it thinking they wouldn't want a feat to lower ones modifier for a skill being used. But the purpose is largely opening up the number of valid target you can intimidate by including target that would have been unaffected.

I might have even been willing to allow it to work using the higher of religion or intimidation, but I can see having it limited to religion.

[RobinGoodfellow]

I wholeheartedly agree and the odd thing is that is how Pathfinder normally works I think this reap mostly like a half complete errata but it's hard to know in which direction.

[Sanityfaerie]

Yeah, the "too good to be true" and "too bad to be true" rules are there for a reason. "You can't intimidate this zombie because you're too good at intimidating." seems like a pretty obvious case of "too bad to be true".