D&D 5E Is Intimidate the worse skill in the game?

[Paul Farquhar]

So Roll20 should just stop existing?

I use Roll20. But only to play with my RL friends. I would never play with a random stranger.

Myth-Weavers? The "looking for group" forum of this very website?

This website gives people an oportunity to get to know each other and become friends before joining a game.

Your claimed logic doesn't work. There are plenty of reasons why an experienced DM might go looking for new players.

Name one? DMs are in short supply. If you are any good you find yourself beating players off with a stick. Or you charge people.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I use Roll20. But only to play with my RL friends. I would never play with a random stranger.

Yet plenty of people put up ads offering to run games.

This website gives people an oportunity to get to know each other and become friends before joining a game.

As much as I have appreciated conversations with various people on here, I would not consider anyone on this website a friend. Then again, I have somewhat high standards for what I would consider "a friend." Speaking to someone on a forum simply does not tell you enough about them for them to become a friend. It may make it easier for them to become a friend once you develop some other form of contact.

Name one? DMs are in short supply. If you are any good you find yourself beating players off with a stick. Or you charge people.

Example that might literally apply to me personally at some point: Previous game group stopped meeting because RL issues affected too many members, so the game had to fold due to insufficient players.

Other examples:
1. They have a regular group, but that group doesn't want to play a system this person wants to run, so they're starting a second game and looking for new players.
2. They just feel like running a second game, but everyone in their usual play group is already playing one and can't attend another game.
3. Recent move when their previous group only wants to do in-person games, so the DM in question has not yet built up a group.
4. DM is hoping to meet new people to bring into a larger group, and thus runs an intentional short campaign looking for copacetic players.
5. DM decides to run a system they've never run before, and looks for players who have experience with it to help make that process easier. (This is how I met my favorite 4e DM; and the game ended because the DM had a family health crisis to deal with.)
6. DM is new to DMing, they tried to build a group with friends, but (for reasons completely unrelated to their DMing skill), it turns out their friends just don't really enjoy TTRPGing as much as they do. They have to look elsewhere to build a group.

So, you asked for one. I've given you six more. Is that adequate?

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I guess you are going to make me quote it again.

"Example: Shiera the 8th-level rogue wants to try the classic swashbuckling move of swinging on a chandelier and kicking an ogre in the chest on her way down to the ground, hoping to push the ogre into the brazier of burning coals behind it. An Acrobatics check seems reasonable.
This sort of action is exactly the kind of thinking you want to encourage, so you pick a moderate DC: The table says DC 14. If she makes that check, she gets a hold on the chandelier and swings to the ogre."

There is no other interpretation of that example other than picking the moderate 14 off of that table purely because Shiera is 8th level. If a 1st level PC made the exact same attempt 1 round later, the DC would be 10. The DC scales by level. I have provided the table for your reference.

View attachment 390008

If that example, combined with the table, is not meant to communicate that the DC scales by the PC's level, then it is utterly terrible writing! Because it does communicate that, despite of what the intent of the writer might have been.

 

[Minigiant]

So what. The PCs get scaling DCs. Doesn't matter about the monster.

The point is the DC is based of the level of the task.

The level of the PC doesn't have to match the level of the task.

It's easy to do so but 4e wasn't designed that way.

There were heroic tier uses of skills.
There were Paragon tier uses of skills.
There were epic tier uses of skills.

It was up to the DM to determine what tier the action or obstacle was, where in the tier it is, then determine DCs, damage, and effects.

It's the same as making up an effect in 5e. You figure out which spell that effect is like, look at the level, then determine the costs and DCs to make it happen.

 

[Bae'zel]

the vast majority of DMs see it as "the Persuasion skill that makes targets hate you forever and, if they get the chance, actively try to hurt you later."

Weird to me that this is the common interpretation. Deception, sure. Intimidation? I always describe the effects as fear. Successfully intimidating a NPC will make them afraid of you; down the road potentially antagonistic if the situation is right (eg, the tables have turned or they have a new friend or ally who is bigger and more intimidating than the PC).

Edit: I would like to make a video for DMs to analyze how Baldur’s Gate 3 handled Intimidation (and Deception). I found the experience very useful. Sometimes Persuasion is simply not an option .

 

[soviet]

It's mostly a failure of writing. Intimidation is a CHA skill but is commonly understood in the context of a STR skill as though the PC is making direct threats. Strangely enough your ability to actually carry out those threats isn't a relevant factor. I've several times seen characters who are death incarnate, absolutely steeped in the blood of ten thousand victims, fail to get a fellow bar user to back down from a confrontation. 'I guess I'll just have to kill you then'.

Real intimidation isn't about direct threats it's about what's unsaid. Someone has an aura of power, or authority, or known connections to powerful forces, and so you feel compelled to placate them without the veneer of social niceties ever needing to be broken. You don't hate that person afterwards; you're just grateful they didn't squash you like a bug.

'Thank you Mr Mouth of Sauron sir, please would you like another drink while you are eating my daughter? On the house, of course'

 

[Crimson Longinus]

In any case, people have have used intimidation quite a bit in my game, and even though I combined deception into persuasion, intimidation has not been useless at all.

Main advantages it has over persuasion are:

• You can use it on people who were already super negatively disposed towards you and were not going to listen reason.
• You can get people to do things they could never be persuaded to do.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It's mostly a failure of writing. Intimidation is a CHA skill but is commonly understood in the context of a STR skill as though the PC is making direct threats. Strangely enough your ability to actually carry out those threats isn't a relevant factor. I've several times seen characters who are death incarnate, absolutely steeped in the blood of ten thousand victims, fail to get a fellow bar user to back down from a confrontation. 'I guess I'll just have to kill you then'.

Real intimidation isn't about direct threats it's about what's unsaid. Someone has an aura of power, or authority, or known connections to powerful forces, and so you feel compelled to placate them without the veneer of social niceties ever needing to be broken. You don't hate that person afterwards; you're just grateful they didn't squash you like a bug.

'Thank you Mr Mouth of Sauron sir, please would you like another drink while you are eating my daughter? On the house, of course'

Then again, the context should affect the DC. If the PCs have demonstrated the capability and willingness to harm people like the target, then it should be far easier to intimidate them.

 

[Blue]

I honestly don't know what you are talking about. Intimidate usage is about median in how often a social skill is used. Your listed use case on it assumes that you will never use social skills on someone hostile, like a captured bandit or a corrupt guard. I could see murderhobos who kill everything not getting much use for it, but as part of an interrogation, part of getting a potential encounter to stand down and not turn it into a combat, part of getting a low-level criminal to tell who hired him -- all useful.

(Anyway, Medicine is the worst skill.)

 

[Maxperson]

The point is the DC is based of the level of the task.

The quote I showed was of the DC of the task scaling by level. The example is exceptionally direct. It tells you to look at level and the chart and pick the DC on it of the appropriate PC level.

You can continue to talk about monsters and the DC being the level of the task, but that's not what the example shows. There's nothing in that entire section that says it is about encounter level and not PC level, and the one example given shows it being based on the PC's level.

Where do you get the idea that it's encounter level for page 42?

Terrain also scales by level(or tier in this case).

"Tier and Skill Checks and Ability Checks:
Throughout these examples, the term “per tier” is used to show how an effect should scale. Multiply the per tier value by one for heroic tier, two for paragon, and three for epic. If a terrain feature grants a +1 bonus to attack rolls per tier, the bonus is +1 at heroic tier, +2 at paragon tier, and +3 at epic tier.
Terrain scales in order to keep it relevant as PCs and monsters gain higher attack bonuses and hit points. It is an element of game balance and a reflection of the greater magical power present in paragon or epic locations."

Same terrain, different bonus depending on tier.