Recent content by Maxperson

And they should have described it differently. 5e: "Intimidation. When you attempt to influence someone through overt threats, hostile actions, and physical violence, the DM might ask you to make a Charisma (Intimidation) check." 5.5e: "Intimidation. Awe or threaten someone into doing what you...

I posted a long example of how intimidate works. That's more or less how every DM I've played with since 2020(when 3e gave us intimidation as a skill) has run it. You seem to have had a different experience, but your experience is not universal or even proven to be anywhere close to the 50%+...

Remember, Superman has super hearing and hears people being mugged in the moment. He hears the struggle or cries for help and can be there in a fraction of a second. He'd be present to stop a whole lot.

That's why you wear a costume.

2 and 3 are different skills, though. If they fail, intimidation can still work. (In the local lord's manor with the Tarrasque coming) PC: (knowing the Tarrasque is mythical to the point that almost all believe it not real) "My lord. An army of demons similar to the ones we defeated in Garoka...

And 112% will just invent percentages out of thin air to try and prove a point that isn't correct. There's no consistency in a TON of 5e rules and rulings. What you guys are asking for is a return of 3e and codified rules for everything under the sun, and a lot that isn't under the sun.

We tried codifying everything that "needed" it and got 3e, which is my favorite edition, but did make a lot of DMs and players feel stifled by the rules. I have no problem with DMs running things like intimidation a bit differently. And what intimidation is FAR from being, is something that...

We already have that in intimidation. Then great news! False. 1) And this is the big one. Lots of time it doesn't cause you harm. Someone not liking you and/or what you just did =/= harm. 2) Deception can fail and then what? 3) Persuasion can fail and then what? 4) There will be times that...

Yeah. We don't alter it into a wildly different thing for the sake of convenience. What you want isn't intimidate. You want persuasion 2.0. Intimidate does in fact have good uses. I've seen it, and I've done it. It's just not as useful generally as persuasion, because it's a DIFFERENT...

I bought the two new Forgotten Realms books with the alternate covers.

I think it's more than that here, though. Allowing free travel through Gondor virtually guarantees(from Faramir's point of view) that the hobbits will be killed and perhaps tortured before hand when they reach Mordor. In that sense free travel is a Doom.

Elves sort of dwell partially in the spirit world and that connection fuels their creations as well. It's where their "magic" comes from. Those elves who aren't "dark" elves have creations that fall on the "holy" side of things. Swords that glow blue in the presence of orcs, etc. I think the...

When I read this my initial thought was that it wasn't the Nazgul, but Sauron himself that he was in contact with via the Palantir, but wanted to be sure, I read Saruman's history. It was Sauron. The most interesting part of that history, though, wasn't the confirmation about who he was in...

I have yet to meet a DM who didn't treat it like some sort of morale check against enemies. I've intimidated many groups to stand down instead of fighting us, and had players in my game do the same.