On page 54 of Hyboria's Fiercest you will find an expanded rule for the Intimidation skill. You'll also see shorter version of the rule in the Shadizar boxed set. I've got some thoughts on this expanded rule that I'd like to open up for discussion.
My Point of View
I want to keep Intimidate as a CHA based skill because I think CHA best describes a character's ability to present his personality in different ways. If you get in someone's face, smile savagely at them, and thump them in the chest with your finger, that's one way of expressing your force of personality.
If you are looking to intimidate someone by just the way you look, you're not going to slump at the shoulders, drop your axe to the ground with just your finger tips on the end of its haft, pick your nose, and then look at your finger to see what you've discovered there, all the while humming a tune you heard last night in the brothel.
What you're going to do is take a meanacing pose, hold your weapon at the ready, stare into the eyes of your enemy and be deadly silent. This again is a social expression, and in this game, social expressions are covered using the CHA stat.
Intimidation Without High Charisma
OTOH, I do see Vincent's point when he writes in Fiercest that a Barbarian can often be quite intimidating even though he might have a low CHA score.
So...how to rectify the two?
Vincent's rule was to separate the Intimidate skill so that it is really six related skills, each based on a different stat. If you used your skill points to buy Intimidate (Bully), your intimidation is based on your STR, and this type of intimiation is what I described above where you get into someone's face and thump them in the chest.
If someone slaps you as hard as they can with their war club, and you take the blow easily, smiling at them in return, Vincent would have this as a use of the Intimidate (Frighten), based on CON.
I think Vincent has an outstanding point in that the mechanics of the game don't support the reasonable expectation that a Barbarian can be quite intimidating even if his CHA is low.
Skills Should Remain Broad-Use
What I don't like about Vincent's approach, though, is that he has weakend the Intimidate skill, narrowing the use of it accoriding to the type of intimidation, when the original skill included all uses of intimidation. For example, if you've got Intimidate (Bully), and you swing your weapons around in a flashy pattern attempting to intimidate your enemy with your mastery of your weapon, under Vincent's rules you'd be using Intimidate (Overawe), which is based on DEX. And, thus, any skill points you put into Intimidate (Bully) wouldn't be appropriate for the type of intimidation you are trying.
I think skills should be broad-based. Skill points are limited, and too many skills in the game have already set the precedent that skills should remain broad based. Profession (Hunter) covers a lot of different areas. Survival is used for it's logical uses plus tracking, and maybe even hunting or primitive weapon making under certain circumstances. Even a skill that may seem specific, like Craft (Weaponsmith), has a ton of uses from crating weapons, valuing them, repairing them, to making the weapon crafter some silver coins for a weeks work.
Those few skills that are very specific in use seem to be ignored by players. How many of your characters use the Perform skill? Probably not many. Skill points are too rare. And, if it's a skill like Peform (Pict Mating Ritual Dance), chances are that your Pict PC that is on the hunt for a mate doesn't have the skill.
So, that's my argument against Vincent's expansion of the Intimidate rule found in Fiercest (and a similar, shorter version in the Shadizar boxed set). I think it reduces the power of the skill and makes it too focussed.
My Approach To the Intimidate Skill
OK, so what do we do about it? I want to incorporate Vincent's thought, which I think is a good one, that some characters are very intimidating even though they may have lower CHA stats. But, I also want to keep the skill broad and based on CHA since, in the end, the act of being intimidating is measured by how good you are at expressing yourself that way. That's a social expression, and it should be a CHA based skill.
My solution is to use the Intimate skill as it is presented in the core rulebook, but then use circumstance modifiers when appropriate.
Keep it simple.
So, if a players says...
Player: I get right in the barkeep's face, stand over him, almost touching him, cross my arms, and smile.
That's earned the character an Intimidate check. The GM considers the presences, look, height, and STR and CON scores of the PC and compares it to the same attributes of the barkeep NPC. If appropriate, the GM gives the player a +2 circumstance modifier.
Boom. We're done. Barbarians with low CHA can still be intimidating this way. There's no big rule change. STR and CON and other stats are considered. And the Intimidate skill is not weakened by dividing it into six different, specific uses.
Thoughts?
My Point of View
I want to keep Intimidate as a CHA based skill because I think CHA best describes a character's ability to present his personality in different ways. If you get in someone's face, smile savagely at them, and thump them in the chest with your finger, that's one way of expressing your force of personality.
If you are looking to intimidate someone by just the way you look, you're not going to slump at the shoulders, drop your axe to the ground with just your finger tips on the end of its haft, pick your nose, and then look at your finger to see what you've discovered there, all the while humming a tune you heard last night in the brothel.
What you're going to do is take a meanacing pose, hold your weapon at the ready, stare into the eyes of your enemy and be deadly silent. This again is a social expression, and in this game, social expressions are covered using the CHA stat.
Intimidation Without High Charisma
OTOH, I do see Vincent's point when he writes in Fiercest that a Barbarian can often be quite intimidating even though he might have a low CHA score.
So...how to rectify the two?
Vincent's rule was to separate the Intimidate skill so that it is really six related skills, each based on a different stat. If you used your skill points to buy Intimidate (Bully), your intimidation is based on your STR, and this type of intimiation is what I described above where you get into someone's face and thump them in the chest.
If someone slaps you as hard as they can with their war club, and you take the blow easily, smiling at them in return, Vincent would have this as a use of the Intimidate (Frighten), based on CON.
I think Vincent has an outstanding point in that the mechanics of the game don't support the reasonable expectation that a Barbarian can be quite intimidating even if his CHA is low.
Skills Should Remain Broad-Use
What I don't like about Vincent's approach, though, is that he has weakend the Intimidate skill, narrowing the use of it accoriding to the type of intimidation, when the original skill included all uses of intimidation. For example, if you've got Intimidate (Bully), and you swing your weapons around in a flashy pattern attempting to intimidate your enemy with your mastery of your weapon, under Vincent's rules you'd be using Intimidate (Overawe), which is based on DEX. And, thus, any skill points you put into Intimidate (Bully) wouldn't be appropriate for the type of intimidation you are trying.
I think skills should be broad-based. Skill points are limited, and too many skills in the game have already set the precedent that skills should remain broad based. Profession (Hunter) covers a lot of different areas. Survival is used for it's logical uses plus tracking, and maybe even hunting or primitive weapon making under certain circumstances. Even a skill that may seem specific, like Craft (Weaponsmith), has a ton of uses from crating weapons, valuing them, repairing them, to making the weapon crafter some silver coins for a weeks work.
Those few skills that are very specific in use seem to be ignored by players. How many of your characters use the Perform skill? Probably not many. Skill points are too rare. And, if it's a skill like Peform (Pict Mating Ritual Dance), chances are that your Pict PC that is on the hunt for a mate doesn't have the skill.
So, that's my argument against Vincent's expansion of the Intimidate rule found in Fiercest (and a similar, shorter version in the Shadizar boxed set). I think it reduces the power of the skill and makes it too focussed.
My Approach To the Intimidate Skill
OK, so what do we do about it? I want to incorporate Vincent's thought, which I think is a good one, that some characters are very intimidating even though they may have lower CHA stats. But, I also want to keep the skill broad and based on CHA since, in the end, the act of being intimidating is measured by how good you are at expressing yourself that way. That's a social expression, and it should be a CHA based skill.
My solution is to use the Intimate skill as it is presented in the core rulebook, but then use circumstance modifiers when appropriate.
Keep it simple.
So, if a players says...
Player: I get right in the barkeep's face, stand over him, almost touching him, cross my arms, and smile.
That's earned the character an Intimidate check. The GM considers the presences, look, height, and STR and CON scores of the PC and compares it to the same attributes of the barkeep NPC. If appropriate, the GM gives the player a +2 circumstance modifier.
Boom. We're done. Barbarians with low CHA can still be intimidating this way. There's no big rule change. STR and CON and other stats are considered. And the Intimidate skill is not weakened by dividing it into six different, specific uses.
Thoughts?
