Are paladins immune to intimidation?

[Roland Delacroix]

"If you fireball that orphanage it will be your last conscious act in this life. On the other hand, if you surrender and come with me, I can guarentee your safety under the law. It is your decision, knave."

Hundreds of charred, dead, orphaned babies are in awe of your courage

 

[MerakSpielman]

Hundreds of charred, dead, orphaned babies are in awe of your courage

"What? You dare refuse my generous offer? Take THAT (whack!) and THAT (slash!) and then I shall take the bits and STOMP on them and we'll see how you like THAT, won't we?"

 

[RigaMortus]

Hundreds of charred, dead, orphaned babies are in awe of your courage

But since the cretin is now dead, think of all the lives that will be saved from this point forward

 

[Chacal]

But since the cretin is now dead, think of all the lives that will be saved from this point forward

If the villain was just asking for leaving, and hasn't an history of killing bunch of people every single day, I, as a DM, might consider
penalties for the paladin, especially if he has contacts that can help him chase the bad guy afterwards.

Chacal

 

[Zhure]

I think a paladin of mine would slay the villain, then see all the orphans are raised. Better yet, inform the villain.

"While you may kill those innocents, I will see them returned to life and their home rebuilt. No one will return your corpse to life."

 

[Chacal]

Well, that works if rais dead is very easily available and affordable (which it isn't IMC, YMMV).
it's still very traumatic for the orphans.

Chacal

 

[MerakSpielman]

I was envisioning the situation being the villian, cornered and desparate to save his own pathetic hide, tries to hold the nearby orphanage hostage.

I was also envisioning the paladin thinking, "well, if he's truely evil and bad, he's going to fireball the orphanage anyway if I back off, then flee laughing. I'll offer him a "surrender or die" deal..."

 

[Victim]

If any evildoer can escape from a paladin with no problems simply by threatening any bystanders with death, then paladins won't be terribly effective.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Hear hear. It never ceases to amaze me how many people seem to think that good characters--especially paladins--ought to be at the beck and call of every villain who threatens to do something wicked if the paladin (or good character) doesn't obey them.

(Of course, in D&D paladins tend to work with rogues (party balance is a strange thing), so the paladin probably stalls the villain while the rogue sneaks around behind him for the sneak attack (which would disrupt the fireball spell)).

If any evildoer can escape from a paladin with no problems simply by threatening any bystanders with death, then paladins won't be terribly effective.

 

[Quasqueton]

"One more step and I fireball the orphanage!"

Is this really using the intimidation skill? I always imagined intimidation (the skill) to be convincing your target that you are more than you seem, are more dangerous than you initially look, are more vicious than you normally act, etc. I thought intimidate worked on the target's personal fear (hence why bonuses against fear count for overcoming the intimidation) rather then his compassion or concern for others.

Couldn't the above threat be considered a bluff (if the villain can't actually fireball right then) or a factual warning (if the villain can and will)? The hero's response would be the intimidation attempt to make the villain change his course of action. Make the villain think the hero has the means to stop the act, and the means to punish the villain if he tries.

Quasqueton