Curse that charisma!

[Spatula]

I just think that force of personality (Charisma) is what makes a person strong-willed (Will save), not insight, intuition, perception (Wisdom).

However, there's no question, that Fortitude should be derived from Constitution, not Strength.

Strength and Constitution both represent physical toughness. Strength is your ability to project your physical presence on the world around you; Constitution is your ability to resist the physical power of others.

Similarly, Charisma is your ability to project you mental will onto others; Wisdom is your ability to resist manipulation. Charisma is an innate knowledge of interaction, how people behave, or how they will react to certain words/actions. Wisdom is knowledge of self, inward-looking rather than outwards, the sense of who you are and what it is that you believe in. From that knowledge comes the ability to resist manipulation, mental control & domination, or other things that try to convince the character that he is something he in fact is not.

I've certainly known people who were very good at manipulating others but had very little willpower themselves. Or big, tough guys who were stayed in the background for the most part, but steadfastedly refused to be used as muscle by guys with a lot more guile.

 

[DarkMaster]

I don't get this. Why should sense motive be charisma based then?

Because it is used as a defense against certain skills?

Anyways, your view of this issue is absolutely viable and well-explained above. It's just a matter of personal taste, where to put the fine nuances of personality, I guess.

The persons you describe in your example, I'd not really see as highly charismatic. Their personalities are shallow at best. But as I said, it's more personal taste how to see this. It's definitely not an issue for me, that is so important as to change the rules, so we still use wisdom for Will saves.

Bye
Thanee

I said if you use charisma to modify will save you need to change the sense motive skill otherwise the system become incoherent. Not saying that's what should be done.

It is well known that teenager don't have a good wisdom, that's why so many crack under peer pressure and with simple comment from perfect stranger about their way of life. But that doesn't prevent them to be excellent at manipulating their parents or having a strong magnetism that attract people(some teenager get more than there share of boy/girlfriend). You say that their personality are shallow, but you might have friend like that.

My sister for example is extremely expressive and will be noticed anywhere she goes. Not because she is the prettiest girl on the planet but because she knows what to say to get noticed. If you talk with her casually you will be under the impression that she is solid as a rock. But when you know her, it is clear that what she project does not translate in strong will, she will never let me know, but I know that my comment have a strong effect on her.

 

[DarkMaster]

Similarly, Charisma is your ability to project you mental will onto others; Wisdom is your ability to resist manipulation. Charisma is an innate knowledge of interaction, how people behave, or how they will react to certain words/actions. Wisdom is knowledge of self, inward-looking rather than outwards, the sense of who you are and what it is that you believe in. From that knowledge comes the ability to resist manipulation, mental control & domination, or other things that try to convince the character that he is something he in fact is not.

Excellent comparison

 

[Scion]

He can't effectively "walk angrily at the guy". He has 6 charisma. It's like a 5 year old trying to be intimidating by throwing a glass on the floor.

Completely wrong But, taking your example, say that 5 year old just took a baseball bat to the head, shrugged it off, knocked the guy down, pulled out his spin, tossed it over his shoulder, and then looked over and you and then growled at you. I think that you would be intimidated pretty much automatically.

With the feat I proposed the character paid his dues and is going to get some benefit from it, just like a guy who got weapon finese. Normally impossible? sure, the feat changes that. Easy.

Let me reiterate what others have said

Let me reiterate, feat changes the rules.

It isnt always a force of personality, there is even a rule in the books saying to change what stat drives the feat given proper circumstances. This can happen, and does on occasion.

Ahh, so he *didn't* have to break anything.... see? Charismatic. Just by standing there, he could intimidate people. It's not like this guy wouldn't scare the bejeezus out of you even if you hadn't seen him break a dozen cinder blocks in half.

Why not? the guy I was talking about did nothing to begin with, people were afraid of him when they attacked him and could do nothing. That intimidated them to the point that they ran away. He did nothing, said nothing, just stood there and took it without flinching. Sounds like this dwarf could pull that off just fine.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The guard says: "None shall pass through this door while I stand here."

"I have taken a vow!, that none shall pass, without my, permission!"

-Hyp.

 

[DarkMaster]

Completely wrong But, taking your example, say that 5 year old just took a baseball bat to the head, shrugged it off, knocked the guy down, pulled out his spin, tossed it over his shoulder, and then looked over and you and then growled at you. I think that you would be intimidated pretty much automatically.

.

Well I would be impressed (five years old doing all that), maybe a bit scared but if the five years doesn't show any personality I would try to outwit my way without being intimidated. Also nowhere in there I see a justification to use STR as a modifier. What is supposed to scare me here is the ability to kill me of the opponent, you could say the same of the sorcerer blasting an opponent with a lightning bolt in front of me(nothing to do with STR).

The only thing here that could affect the roll is the level of the opponent relative to mine. If I am a 20 level sorcerer, the above sorcerer will make me laugh but if I am a 1st level commoner I will be scared to death. Part of it is already involved in the roll, but I would easily see the level part in the resistance to the intimidation roll be the difference between your level and your opponent level.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

The simple fact that someone is dangerous does not automatically intimidate others. A venomous snake, for instance, is incredibly dangerous, but not intimidating. A snake charmer, on the other hand, might be able to intimidate someone with an empty basket.

Intimidate requires more than strength or power. It's a special kind of Bluff, and as such requires the kind of commanding presence represented by Charisma.

That said, I think a feat could work, but upon further consideration I'm not sure the best comparison would be with Weapon Finesse. A closer approximation would be Skill Focus: Intimidate, which would add +3 to the intimidate skill. A feat allowing cha to be replaced with str might add as much as +5 or more (removing the cha penalty and adding the bonus for a high strength.) Such a feat, then, would break the Skill Focus feats entirely.

Is that game-breaking? No. But if I allowed it, I'd defintely feel compelled to look favorably on the wizard who wants to take a feat to replace wis with int for his Spot checks....

 

[Pielorinho]

Honestly, a feat that allows a single skill to replace its primary associated attribute with a different (reasonably justifiable) attribute is in no way broken, IMO. Even for intimidate-monkeys, it's only rarely a good idea to spend a combat round intimidating your foes; this is especially true when you're a strength specialist who could be beating on them instead of giving them the evil eye. I'd certainly allow it, and I'd probably allow a houserule feat to let a character base spot off of intelligence, if a player could explain that rationally to me.

However, I play fast and loose with intimidate: a character that wants to intimidate using strength can do it as long as she describes what actions she's taking. She'll have a lot less control over her opponents than the charisma-intimidater will have, most likely.

Whereas the intimidater might be able to force an unconditional surrender, the strength-intimidater might equally find herself suddenly the targets of all attacks, on the assumption that she's the most dangerous enemy; or she might find the enemy falling back and regrouping; or she might find them surrendering.

Without a high charisma, all she can do is convince the enemy that she's Really Scary; she can't so easily convince them that she's Really Scary, And That They Really Ought To Do What She Says.

Daniel

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Honestly, a feat that allows a single skill to replace its primary associated attribute with a different (reasonably justifiable) attribute is in no way broken, IMO.

Will it break the game? As I said, probably not. But it certainly breaks the Skill Focus feat, IMO. Half the people who take the feat now (IME) are PCs that want to shore up an attribute deficit. Such swap-feats would relegate SF to "only for the super-specialized." Now instead of taking SF: Tumble, the sorcerer can just taken "Flamboyant Acrobatics," replace dex with cha for the Tumble skill, and watch his Tumble bonus go up, up, up!

 

[kpdezend]

Anyone else have a similar situation and/ or any ideas?

-Merlin

To keep Char from becomming a dump stat, I would say that if you want to use a different ability score for intimidate, you should use a feat that switches which Ability score affects the given skill.

Kind of like the weapon finess feat allowing you to use Dex instead of Str modifier for your to hit roll.

- Kent -