Intimidate Re-think: tied to Assess?

[taliesin15]

I've been mulling over this whole Intimidate issue since that Low Charisma=Scared Awe thread thing--somehow I've been thinking there's something missing here--several people pointed out that part of what's so ridiculous about certain High Charisma characters being able to Intimidate better is that they frankly don't seem very scary (like let's say a very "beautiful" young hafling paladin, or an Elf Druid strewn with flowers and butterflies following her everywhere)--seems to me the essence of Intimidate is wrapped up with being impressively buff, strong, willful, tough, and hungry for blood--think Ray Lewis or Mike Tyson--seems to me a low charisma would be better--but part of it is the "tough guy aura"--which brings up a whole different issue I see entirely missing from a game that is largely about combat: the ability to be able to Assess the Strengths of one's opponent...sure, to some degree that's built into combat, being able to hit is a matter of finding the weaknesses in one's opponent...but what I'm wondering here is shouldn't there be something built into the system that allows shrewder characters to be able to Assess their opponents before battle...maybe along the lines of the Spellcraft skill, except it seems like such a common "sense" that everyone would have the ability albeit in different degrees

 

[Geoff Watson]

Charisma is NOT BEAUTY!!!!
Look at some of the undead. Ghasts have Cha 16, and aren't pretty at all.

Charisma is impressiveness, personal 'power', etc.

A high CHA strong guy would have the 'tough guy aura' you mention.

Geoff.

 

[Nifft]

Yeah. Charisma isn't beauty, or attractiveness, or body part size. It's your ability to impose your will upon others, by subtle means (Diplomacy) or less subtle means (Intimidate). It's also a measure of your "coolness" under pressure, your visible self-assurance (Bluff, Perform).

-- N

PS: Most super-models have high "beauty" and high Charisma, but there are plenty of attractive folks who fold under pressure. They don't get to be well known models, or singers, or whatever. They're just pretty faces in the crowd. The moral is: it's not your face, it's your ability scores.

 

[taliesin15]

Then why do the Elder Gods of the Cthulhu mythos have -7 Charisma?

Or did all that change with 3.0/3.5--that very low charisma scores indicate Repulsion?

Sure, I'm going to "house rule" this, but this thread really is one about how the stated rules don't really work, and that there's no real way that a warrior's ability to Assess another's prowess is represented in the rules as stated--unless there's something I don't know about.

 

[Nifft]

Then why do the Elder Gods of the Cthulhu mythos have -7 Charisma?

Those aren't in any of my D&D books, so I can't comment. Other d20 game products may have made errors, or d20-like systems may have made changes -- that's really not D&D's problem.

-- N

 

[DreamChaser]

Then why do the Elder Gods of the Cthulhu mythos have -7 Charisma?

Or did all that change with 3.0/3.5--that very low charisma scores indicate Repulsion?

Yes it changed. Because it is absurd that charisma would be the single ability score that it is possible to gain a benefit out of when it is low. Very low charisma in 3.x indicates that you are ininspiring, unmemorable, and unconvincing. A creature with a very low charisma (1 being the lowest possible for a creature--there are no negative ability scores in 3.x--and all creatures must have a charisma score) attempting to be repulsive would produce no reaction at all, or worse, people would get the wrong reaction and think they were "just adorible."

Sure, I'm going to "house rule" this, but this thread really is one about how the stated rules don't really work, and that there's no real way that a warrior's ability to Assess another's prowess is represented in the rules as stated--unless there's something I don't know about.

Yes there is.

Anything that is not covered by a skill is an ability check. A warrior should be allowed to make an Intelligence check to assess the skill of his opponent.

A Sense Motive check would also work to discern if the opposing fighter is bluffing about his prowess.

Either of these can be used untrained and are thus "common senses"

DC

 

[taliesin15]

A warrior should be allowed to make an Intelligence check to assess the skill of his opponent.

A Sense Motive check would also work to discern if the opposing fighter is bluffing about his prowess.
****
right, OK, so it IS in the rules, I should have thought about that...

but back to the low charisma issue, I understand the argument about force of personality, and naturally I never thought of charisma=beauty...however, it still doesn't add up, that there's something missing here in terms of being able to intimidate

 

[Quickleaf]

Taliesin, you bring up a good point. When 2 fighters meet, do they know which of the two of them is the "better" fighter? Or more precisely, *what* do they know about each other?

There are three ways to answer this:
1) Role-play it
2) Include a reputation system (like d20 modern) or some other mechanic that determines whether people have heard about the character, and also *what* they've heard. This deals with what they know about each other prior to meeting. This could also entail new uses for Gather Information (learning about another character), and Disguise/Hide/Bluff (concealing one's presence or identity from inquirers)
3) A new rule mechanic for assessing a person while observing them. There are many ways to do this, but first you must decide who can assess who. Can a druid assess a wizard? Or can druids only assess other druids? Must you have at least alignment, race, or class in common in order to asses someone or can anybody assess anybody? For example, a thief spies on a cleric during a long ritual and determines the cleric is high level (10th-15th), has access to the Darkness and Poison domains, has access to a feat which allows him to command limited power outside his deity's profile, and is very skilled at intimidating others.

This mechanic won't be able to tell what a character is thinking, their alignment or motives. It will be able to gain information on rough level of ability, class abilities, feats, fighting stylesand skills, possibly even a bit about a spellcaster's repetoire if another spellcaster observes them.

 

[DreamChaser]

but back to the low charisma issue, I understand the argument about force of personality, and naturally I never thought of charisma=beauty...however, it still doesn't add up, that there's something missing here in terms of being able to intimidate

this has been debated numerous times. There are those who feel that strength can be just as intimidating as charisma. Others feel that intimidation is the ability strike fear into another whether you have the strength to back it up or not (most in this camp think a feat of strength might modify an intimidate check but shouldn't be the basis for it).

I tend to fall into the second camp. I think that any of the ability scores can assist an intimidate check but only a charismatic person can pull it off no matter what. A feat of strength (crushing a table), a feat of skill (a well performed combat maneuver), a feat of dexterity (stapling a guy to the wall with a dagger), a feat of learning (recounting the prophetic details of the fall of the king), or a feat of faith (walking through a wall of fire to reach the target) could all make a person seem scarier but ultimately it is the look/words/gestures/presence of the person after said feat that determines if the person is amused, unimpressed, intimidated, or terrified.

A person might be impressed by an action but that doesn't mean they are afraid. Thus, intimidated = charisma. Everything else is just gravy.

DC

 

[taliesin15]

quickleaf writes:
There are three ways to answer this:
1) Role-play it
*right, maybe using Sense Motive and Intelligence as previously suggested too

QL:
2) Include a reputation system (like d20 modern) or some other mechanic that determines whether people have heard about the character, and also *what* they've heard. This deals with what they know about each other prior to meeting. This could also entail new uses for Gather Information (learning about another character), and Disguise/Hide/Bluff (concealing one's presence or identity from inquirers)

*sure, you could bring Legend Lore to bear (or less drastic means) to fget the 411 on the "Street Cred" of the Dread Pirate Robert, or whatever...but this next one's more what I was thinking:

QL:
3) A new rule mechanic for assessing a person while observing them. There are many ways to do this, but first you must decide who can assess who. Can a druid assess a wizard? Or can druids only assess other druids?
*seems like you'd want to have it open for anyone to try to assess anyone--mainly I'm talking about for combat purpose, but why not argue a skill or ability or feat that might give one some sort of 6th sense to sense an opponent's magic aura, i.e. how much force behind them