Curse that charisma!

[Plane Sailing]

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. .

I can't even begin to imagine why you might think this. If Wisdom remains perception and intuition etc, it is still the perfect attribute to affect Sense Motive. No change required.

 

[danzig138]

To put in in D&D terms, force of personality often flies in the face of burly looks. A guy can look burly (18 STR and 16 CON) but have a voice like Mike Tyson and the personality of the meek little woman from Police Academy.

Very true. On a only slightly related note: Mike Tyson doesn't seem to have an overwhelming personality, but my knowledge of his physical prowess would probably allow him to intimidate me. Of course, I have an aversion to pain in my old age. . .When I was younger, not as much. Maybe an example of Strength-based Intimidation? With circumstance modifier if you don't like pain?

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Very true. On a only slightly related note: Mike Tyson doesn't seem to have an overwhelming personality, but my knowledge of his physical prowess would probably allow him to intimidate me. Of course, I have an aversion to pain in my old age. . .When I was younger, not as much. Maybe an example of Strength-based Intimidation? With circumstance modifier if you don't like pain?

No, I wouldn't consider Tyson strength-based intimidation. Being afraid of someone, or knowing how strong he is, isn't intimidation. It's still charisma-based, and the fact that Tyson talks like a 12-year-old girl would lower the effect considerably.

But I'd definitely give him a +2 circumstance bonus after he took that bite out of Holyfield's ear. The unpredictability it lent to his character would certainly add to his intimidation bonus.

 

[Darklone]

One point most people here don't take into account: You see many big brutish hulks running around in the docks quarter. Many of them have high Intimidate skills. But hey, most people in fantasy worlds seem to be heros (or have a good city watch).

Just imagine: Your PC sees a small but broad dwarf in spiked armour and a shivering lower lip who stammers some intelligible threats. Do you know whether he's your typical level 1 warrior dwarf with low charisma (and in this case probably low Int as well)? Or how will you guess whether he's a bbn2/ftr6/battlerager with Charisma 3? In D&D, a metagaming PC might probably use a detect magic to check the equipment of the guy to find out how strong he is... but barring this: How will you know? You won't. John Doe, the shopkeeper next door won't know as well. So he relies on the other guys Intimidate check.

One more point: Knowing that the other one might use violence does not necessarily help his Intimidate check if you think he's a wimp. Showing martial prowess might help a bit (circumstance mod see above), but if you didn't take him serious at first look... not many people will change their mind that fast.

Sure, the battlerager dwarf will still get his will, probably by force. But Intimidate would be to get his will WITHOUT using force.

 

[DarkMaster]

I can't even begin to imagine why you might think this. If Wisdom remains perception and intuition etc, it is still the perfect attribute to affect Sense Motive. No change required.

Then I don't understand your ruling, if you use wisdom to discern that someone is bluffing, but you use charisma to see if someone is bluffing you with its gaze that you must obey their command. What is the difference between the two in both case you use your perception and intuition that you must not beleive, doesn't matter if the lie is backed by magic or not?

I am very puzzled

 

[DarkMaster]

I can't even begin to imagine why you might think this. If Wisdom remains perception and intuition etc, it is still the perfect attribute to affect Sense Motive. No change required.

The other thing I don't like about that ruling is, if you take the two character of my previous example, that if both the sorcerer and the Cleric were facing a Succubus, the Cleric would be the one falling first, which in my mind doesn't make sense, Cleric are by nature much more strong willed, as are priest in the real world, compared to politician for example (which rely on high charisma).

This is one of the reason why I don't like the switch between charisma and wisdom for will save.

 

[0-hr]

The majority of the time, a low cha character should be dismissed or ignored in my opinion.

I agree completely. This guy isn't tough or scary - he's pathetic, insecure, and forgettable. His threats are inaudible mumbling and he probably thinks people fear him when they are actually laughing behind his back. A 6 CHA is a social misfit completely lacking in social skills - and probably smells bad to boot.

I played a 6 CHA half orc once. He was horribly difigured and had been raised as a temple slave. He had had all defiance, force of will, and initiative beaten out of him at an early age. He was a subservient ox who stood silent while others made plans, and who unthinkingly went along with what people told him to do (his wisdom wasn't all that hot either).

I think that players are free to use CHA as a dump stat, but then they should think of their adventuring parties as a bunch of geeky gamers dressed up in Ren Fair outfits mis-using old enlishg and thinking that they sound cool. That's how the NPCs will see them at least.

Don't give yourself a charisma penalty and pretend that you're heroic.

 

[Darklone]

Don't give yourself a charisma penalty and pretend that you're heroic.

Right. PCs with low charisma can still get their way by force (depending on alignment), but not by impressing others (without many skill ranks at least).

 

[ThoughtBubble]

So, here's a pair of hypothetical situations, let's look at one way of seeing the issue with characters with good ranks in intimidate. One will have high cha, another low cha.

1. An assassin has infeltrated a castle and is looking for Master Chen, lord of the mannor. He dispatches a guard, but is stumbled upon by a serving maid. The assassin pulls the sword from the guard, and gestures at the maid. "Take me to master Chen's quarters," he says, "or die."

The difference between the low cha and the high cha characters are fairly negligable (assuming decent ranks in intimidate). The circumstance modifiers and skill ranks will more than make up for a roll high enough to scare the poor girl. In the circumsatnce where someone failed their intimidate roll, the girl would probally scream, rather than being hypnotised by the assassin's actions. She'd be scared by anyone with a sword, but not necessarrally crushed.​

2. An assassin has infeltrated a castle and is looking for Master Chen, lord of the mannor. He dispatches a guard, but is stumbled upon by the captian of the guards. The assassin pulls the sword from the guard, and gestures at the maid. "Take me to master Chen's quarters," he says, "or die."

The guard captian's obviously a hardened fellow, and isn't so easily scared. He might feel a little fear at the sight of a tough guy with a big weapon, but he's lived with that sort of thing, and trained to deal with it. The added cha might tip the balance here. Let's say it does. In this case, each person's threat rings true, but the guy with higher cha just has a little more poise, a little more confidence, and it might just be enough to push it over the edge.

Anyway, as far as the tough guy being more intimidating, I disagree. I also disagree that the guy with the higher charisma is more intimidating. It's the guy with the high intimidate skill who is more intimidating. Charisma can just help a little with that.

 

[Gumby]

Then I don't understand your ruling, if you use wisdom to discern that someone is bluffing, but you use charisma to see if someone is bluffing you with its gaze that you must obey their command. What is the difference between the two in both case you use your perception and intuition that you must not beleive, doesn't matter if the lie is backed by magic or not?

I am very puzzled

A dominating gaze is not an attempt to bluff you into doing something. To bluff is to trick somebody. Dominating is to crush one's soul and leave them as a mindless puppet. A wise person can figure out when somebody is lying, but is not necessarily good at fending off soul-crushing stuff.