Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A quick look at Intimidate: the D&D wunderskill
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Felix" data-source="post: 3137067" data-attributes="member: 3929"><p>Because as the DM I can't think of one good reason why on earth I would allow a PC to do something so ridiculous as this. However, I would, being a reasonable fellow, allow you to suggest an argument as to why such a circumstance might come to pass. I feel that because my imagination has not supplied anything, I would do well by enlisting your help.</p><p></p><p>Not that I think anything you come up with will hold water better than a collander... but I'm willing to listen.</p><p></p><p>Because your PCs action is not to give the NPCs crown to you. The PC's action is to try to convince the NPC that this is a good idea. In this case, the PC attempts to use intimidation tactics to influence the King.</p><p></p><p>The king's reaction is out of the PC's hands, much as LostSoul's ability to control Felix's response to his posts. The DM takes the effects of the intimidation into account when the king responds, of course, and this is the extent of the PCs influence, RAW. Assuming a successful check, the King will now act towards the PCs in a friendly manner. Abdicating a throne is not something a king will do for a friend because he asks him to. Period. The king might be scared of you, and he might try to buy you off with something else like a patent of nobility. He might even give you an heirloom. But he won't do anything for you that he wouldn't also do for a real friend.</p><p></p><p>Ask yourself what you would do for a friend if he were to ask. Would you sell him your house for a dollar? Would you divorce your wife so he could marry her? Would you give him all of your personal belongings and live out your life on the street? No? Then neither will an NPC who has been intimidated by a PC.</p><p></p><p>You do use the mechanics to determine the results. Your total check determines exactly what the NPC must roll to not be intimidated.</p><p></p><p>Congratulations, you've determined the results.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Likely the good has something to do with NPCs treating you as a friend rather than being hostile or unfriendly or indifferent to you.</p><p></p><p>Do you not think being able to pump an enemy for information is good for you?</p><p>Do you not think a patent of nobility is good?</p><p>Do you not think a merchant reducing his prices is good?</p><p>Do you not think a rogue telling you where the secret entrances are is good?</p><p></p><p></p><p>I would say, "This is where we part ways, you and I" were it not for the obvious fact that we parted ways before we met. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p>Verisimilitude being to me very important, if there is no reason for the PCs (or the players) to know a fact, then the players (or the PCs) won't know it either.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah. Fair enough. I mistook your exclamation of success as you, the player, knowing what you've rolled was a success, instead of a prompt for me, the DM, to fill in the blanks of what the outcome a successful Intimidate check would be.</p><p></p><p>In either case, you'd not be getting the Kingdom. Either because I would roll the Intimidate check normally and have the king give you help based on friendship or because I would seriously cripple you with a circumstance modifier on the opposed roll (and such a modifier is not unreasonable). Either way, no crown; which would you rather: a failed check or a patent of nobility?</p><p></p><p></p><p>Ok, a player of yours says, "I wanna win. Gimmie."</p><p></p><p>Or, more graphically, "I want to Intimidate this loving father of four into slowly sacrificing his wife, children and neighbors to my dark god of Evil while he <<em>insert disgusting acts of disgust here</em>>. I have maxed ranks and he's a commoner so there's no possible way I can fail, even on a one."</p><p></p><p>Do you dismiss these requests as absurd, or does he now "win"? Are the youngsters now slowly roasing? At what point is an absurd request not catered to?</p><p></p><p>EDIT:</p><p></p><p>The penny drops. So it's not that you're unwilling to restrict what players want to do, you just believe you have a better measue of what you think they should be able to do. Is that it? What happened to the "dice determining the results"?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Felix, post: 3137067, member: 3929"] Because as the DM I can't think of one good reason why on earth I would allow a PC to do something so ridiculous as this. However, I would, being a reasonable fellow, allow you to suggest an argument as to why such a circumstance might come to pass. I feel that because my imagination has not supplied anything, I would do well by enlisting your help. Not that I think anything you come up with will hold water better than a collander... but I'm willing to listen. Because your PCs action is not to give the NPCs crown to you. The PC's action is to try to convince the NPC that this is a good idea. In this case, the PC attempts to use intimidation tactics to influence the King. The king's reaction is out of the PC's hands, much as LostSoul's ability to control Felix's response to his posts. The DM takes the effects of the intimidation into account when the king responds, of course, and this is the extent of the PCs influence, RAW. Assuming a successful check, the King will now act towards the PCs in a friendly manner. Abdicating a throne is not something a king will do for a friend because he asks him to. Period. The king might be scared of you, and he might try to buy you off with something else like a patent of nobility. He might even give you an heirloom. But he won't do anything for you that he wouldn't also do for a real friend. Ask yourself what you would do for a friend if he were to ask. Would you sell him your house for a dollar? Would you divorce your wife so he could marry her? Would you give him all of your personal belongings and live out your life on the street? No? Then neither will an NPC who has been intimidated by a PC. You do use the mechanics to determine the results. Your total check determines exactly what the NPC must roll to not be intimidated. Congratulations, you've determined the results. Likely the good has something to do with NPCs treating you as a friend rather than being hostile or unfriendly or indifferent to you. Do you not think being able to pump an enemy for information is good for you? Do you not think a patent of nobility is good? Do you not think a merchant reducing his prices is good? Do you not think a rogue telling you where the secret entrances are is good? I would say, "This is where we part ways, you and I" were it not for the obvious fact that we parted ways before we met. ;) Verisimilitude being to me very important, if there is no reason for the PCs (or the players) to know a fact, then the players (or the PCs) won't know it either. Ah. Fair enough. I mistook your exclamation of success as you, the player, knowing what you've rolled was a success, instead of a prompt for me, the DM, to fill in the blanks of what the outcome a successful Intimidate check would be. In either case, you'd not be getting the Kingdom. Either because I would roll the Intimidate check normally and have the king give you help based on friendship or because I would seriously cripple you with a circumstance modifier on the opposed roll (and such a modifier is not unreasonable). Either way, no crown; which would you rather: a failed check or a patent of nobility? Ok, a player of yours says, "I wanna win. Gimmie." Or, more graphically, "I want to Intimidate this loving father of four into slowly sacrificing his wife, children and neighbors to my dark god of Evil while he <[i]insert disgusting acts of disgust here[/i]>. I have maxed ranks and he's a commoner so there's no possible way I can fail, even on a one." Do you dismiss these requests as absurd, or does he now "win"? Are the youngsters now slowly roasing? At what point is an absurd request not catered to? EDIT: The penny drops. So it's not that you're unwilling to restrict what players want to do, you just believe you have a better measue of what you think they should be able to do. Is that it? What happened to the "dice determining the results"? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A quick look at Intimidate: the D&D wunderskill
Top