Pathfinder 1E Can a Paladin be Intimidated?

[Dozen]

In practice, I would place a penalty on those trying to extract information from a paladin, a huge penalty if revealing the information would obviously result in evil being done. The opposition mechanic to Intimidate is pretty broken to begin with... should level 10 inquisitors really have a chance to Intimidate a demon lord?

It should. Intimidate doesn't assume you can take on whoever you're scaring. You just have to be convincing enough. Still, it's one thing to have bravado, and another to have something behind it. The inquisitor can bark all he wants, he'll get bit in the ass at the end. The effect doesn't last forever, and when it ends, all he has to show for himself is a pissed demon twice as powerful that commands an army. Behavior change via intimidate against a stronger opponent can work(both in reality and in the game), but quite often it's a stupid idea. Also, you could argue a demon lord's friendly attitude means no more than ' doesn't kill you for fun', or 'makes sure you die painlessly if you cross him', and could arise from the fact that he is amused by your remarkable effort to shake or impress him.

 

[Squire James]

I guess I should rephrase my question to "should a level 10 inquisitor really be able to intimidate a demon lord even on a natural 1" from my experience of what of what certain builds can do. I've seen some awfully high skill totals in those cases with pretty minimal build effort. I'm not even talking about raging Alchemist/Barbarians with Intimidating Prowess here!

 

[Starfox]

By RAW, Intimidate cannot affect a paladin. Intimidation-based interrogation simply won't work.

Of course, if you make a threat and make compliance an option to avoid the threat, the paladin *might* decide to go trough with it, but he can still make an informed decision - does he think you will go trough with the treat, and does he think you will go through with NOT carrying out the treat if he obliges you? And he may still decide that the lesser evil is to stop you, even if you do one more crime he prevents all potential future evil. Then again, a paladin ought to take any chance to talk to you, as redeeming you should always be high on his agenda. But all these choices are decisions the paladin makes irrespective of your Intimidate roll. Bluff (to make him believe your treat is genuine) and Diplomacy (to bargain) are better options.

The paladin code precludes the paladin from ever doing evil acts. It does not force him to take responsibility for others' evil acts. In that way, it is less restrictive that the code Superman imposes on himself, for example - a paladin is not obliged to protect the innocent at any cost. Of course, most paladins should strive to act above the "minimum" imposed by the code, but the details would depend on both the paladin and the patron.

 

[Quickleaf]

I've got two thoughts on this:

First, it seems to be implied by the rules that intimidation doesn't work on PCs at all. This is supported in the 3.5e DMG which states on page 149 that "NPCs can never use a Charisma check to influence PC attitudes. The players always decide their characters' attitudes."
It is also hinted at under the PFSRD entry for Diplomacy (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/diplomacy.html#_diplomacy) which states: "You can change the initial attitudes of non-player characters with a successful check."

That said, it really is one of those areas where the DM gets to make a judgment call on how the rules are supposed to work. Perhaps talk it over with your players to see what they prefer?

It sounds like the paladin has been captured and is being interrogated/tortured for info? One way of side-stepping the issue is to run a rescue mission session where the paladin player takes on an NPC. If they rescue the paladin PC before the end of the session he didn't crack under the bugbear torturer, but if thy don't reach him in time then the paladin cracks.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

My take on it is this: due to their connection to the divine, paladins are immune to "fear" and its effects, but not concern for others. Yes, it is "inhuman", but there is an underlying reason for it.

So you cannot make a paladin scared of what you might do to him. Should you try to indtimidate him or use a magical fear effect, he will remain as calm and rational as it is in his nature to be. But he may still be coerced into action via the intimidate skill if you make him concerned for the well-being of others.

 

[ObjectivePerspective]

I've got two thoughts on this:

First, it seems to be implied by the rules that intimidation doesn't work on PCs at all. This is supported in the 3.5e DMG which states on page 149 that "NPCs can never use a Charisma check to influence PC attitudes. The players always decide their characters' attitudes."

I never said the PC was the Paladin. The PC is the Bugbear. The Paladin is NPC. The party is evil. Yes the Paladin is basically captured and is being milked for info.