Intimidate in combat: viable?

[Flipguarder]

Just as a complete side-note and thread jacker....

What do you think about a houserule allowing a defender to use a Bluff check to make himself look like the weakest of the bunch?

And come to hell think of it.

Why is insight not targeted instead of will? That would fix most of my problems with this skill option.

 

[keterys]

Honestly, monsters aren't designed to really interact with the skill system at all so it's generally a bad idea to encourage or require it.

 

[KarinsDad]

Why is insight not targeted instead of will? That would fix most of my problems with this skill option.

There are ~90 monsters in the MM with Insight. There are ~400 monsters in the MM with Will Defense.

If they used Insight, then everyone would be Intimidating foes, not just those who tricked out the skill.

 

[Thanlis]

That right there is what I think some folks are missing. You don't get to just change the DC to 40 for a group of level 4 adventurers because you learned my character has a really high roll.

"Oh, you have +23? Well uh..the DC's 40, sorry. Oh, you don't like that, eh? Well, then, instead of them surrendering, I'll just choose their action...let's see...how about "doesn't attack you for 1 round, even though he's marked by the fighter"?

That's true; that would be bad DMing.

What I would do is this: I would say "hey, I don't think your preferred play style fits with my DMing style, so if this is a deal-breaker for you I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to leave the table." I can't imagine this would be objectionable -- why would you want to play with a DM who refused to accept your interpretation of a rule you feel so strongly about?

This is not even that hypothetical. I've said that to players in the past, under similar conditions, and followed through.

 

[Eridanis]

We do still use dictionaries where you're from, correct?

And give us a break with your wild, purposeful misinterpretations of the rules.

Snarky posts like this are a sure-fire way to get a vacation from these boards. Please keep discussion civil and on topic.

 

[eriktheguy]

Since this issue has been bugging me too, your thread inspired me to re-work this intimidation as an attack.
-Making it an attack balances it against the opponents defenses, and causes it to scale with level better
-You can use Str or Cha
-Items that give a bonus to intimidate add an enhancement bonus to the attack based on their level
-Skill training adds +2 to the attack and skill focus +1
-The attack effects minions and bloodied enemies, Solos and Elites get a bonus to defense
-It is a fear power so oozes and zombies etc would be immune
-I explicitly defined 'surrendered' and 'demoralized' as conditions ('surrendering' foes only works on bloodied/minions and is harder)
-Surrendered foes will usually run, unless you spend actions telling them what to do and do not attack them

The thread is here, check it out and comment please!

 

[Old Gumphrey]

That's true; that would be bad DMing.

What I would do is this: I would say "hey, I don't think your preferred play style fits with my DMing style, so if this is a deal-breaker for you I'm afraid I'm going to have to ask you to leave the table." I can't imagine this would be objectionable -- why would you want to play with a DM who refused to accept your interpretation of a rule you feel so strongly about?

This is not even that hypothetical. I've said that to players in the past, under similar conditions, and followed through.

Ehhh...asking someone to "leave your table" over a skill bonus is easily one of the top 5 lamest things I've heard regarding gaming in a long time. "My way or the highway" isn't a good way to keep friends, either. I'll admit that while +23 intimidate at level 4 is hard to swallow, trying it out is another matter entirely.

Speaking of which, I played this character tonight. I forced surrender on a total of 4 creatures across 3 combats out of approximately 12 monsters. Due to the fact that I replaced 6 standard actions with Intimidate checks, and also due to the fact that I replaced feats like Dual Implement Mastery and Expertise with Skill Focus and Arcane Familiar, it was WIDELY accepted that I was by far the lowest damage-dealing striker in the party. That said, I only pulled my weight due to the fact that I made enemies think twice and take off running, lay down their weapons and give up, or mozey away suddenly uninterested (in the case of an animal).

Nobody at the table found it as ungodly stupidly powerful as most of this thread would have them believe, since, while I was attempting to Intimidate things and failing a couple of times, the rogue was just GINSU SLICING everything in his path. Seriously. When creatures have like 70 HP, and you deal 35 damage in one hit, what the hell is the difference if you Intimidate them, or just deal the 35 damage (other than, of course, the obvious fact that you avoid committing murder)!?

Snarky posts like this are a sure-fire way to get a vacation from these boards. Please keep discussion civil and on topic.

I'll acquiesce to that--but only because you're right.

 

[Regicide]

Mugger walks up and sticks a dagger in your gut leaving a bloody wound that needs medical attention. He then says, "you better run or the next time it'll be your throat."

You:
a) Think you're a DnD monster who should have +50 to DC checks and shout "RARRRRR!!!!" and try to blind him with the blood you've collected in your hands from your gut wound before bull rushing him.

b) Decide that if you don't run away, you'll be dead very, very soon, so you flee.

c) Have learned everything you know from playing Monkey Island at 3AM and say "First you better stop waving it like a feather-duster."

 

[Thanlis]

Ehhh...asking someone to "leave your table" over a skill bonus is easily one of the top 5 lamest things I've heard regarding gaming in a long time. "My way or the highway" isn't a good way to keep friends, either. I'll admit that while +23 intimidate at level 4 is hard to swallow, trying it out is another matter entirely.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Nonetheless, you wouldn't be welcome at my table. In my experience, removing players who prioritize being right over cooperative gameplay is a big win for the health of the gaming group.

 

[Nail]

It clearly states that a check equal to or greater than Will + 10 forces a target to surrender.

It clearly states a least three other things about Intimidate checks as well, and then places all of these options in the DMs hands....as has been said a number of times now.

The only wild, purposeful misinterpretation of the rules is that there's only a Will +10 DC = surrender to worry about.

Still, it's neat to see your group is making it all work out. Game on, man.