Intimidate, was I wrong?

[Plane Sailing]

I make it an opposed skill check (opposed with defenders choice of intimidate or concentration).

If the intimidater wins the contest, the target becomes shaken for 1+Cha bonus rounds.

Fuller description on my website

This gives a nice simple rules base for it, and differentiates it better from diplomacy.

Cheers

 

[Lurker]

Thanks that works IMHO better!!!

 

[Kyramus]

From the SRD:

Intimidate (CHA)
Check: The character can change others' behavior with a successful check. The DC is typically 10 + the target's Hit Dice. Any bonuses that a target may have on saving throws against fear increase the DC.
Retry: Generally, retries do not work. Even if the initial check succeeds, the other character can only be intimidated so far, and a retry doesn't help. If the initial check fails, the other character has probably become more firmly resolved to resist the intimidator, and a retry is futile.
Special: If the character has 5 or more ranks in Bluff , the character gets a +2 synergy bonus on Intimidate checks.

From the Mirriam- Webster Dictionary:
INTIMIDATE implies inducing fear or a sense of inferiority into another
-------
For the above example, the goblin felt so inferior from the fighter than it ran in fear. Natural reaction.

In my game I would allow Intimidate to go as is. The target may roll a sense motive first, if it beats the DC 20 which is for a hunch, he gets a +2 on an opposed intimidate roll since he suspects that the person is just trying to intimidate him.

 

[maddman75]

I think I'm going to go with Plane Sailing's mechanics change, sort of.

I really like doing an opposed roll versus intimidate or concentration. It needs to oppose something to fit in with all the other social skills. It would also tend to make spellcasters and barbarians the hardest to intimidate, as well as giving monks a reason to put points into concentration.

However, I think I'll keep the modifier with Charisma, though a character intimidating through threat of direct violence may get a circumstance bonus. I'll also use heafty modifiers for size category differences. It should be very difficult to intimidate a creature that outweights you by several tons.

 

[Zaruthustran]

You did the right thing, Lord Vangarel. A successful use of Intimidate changes behavior. You ruled that instead of fighting, the goblin ran. Makes sense to me.

If the player wanted the Goblin to take a specific action, he should have used Diplomacy.

Here's something funny:

Example 1:
PC: "Come here or I'll kill you!" (uses Intimidate, scaring the target into coming over)

Example 2:
PC: "Come here or I'll kill you!" (uses Diplomacy, improving the target's reaction to "friendly"--the target *really* wants to do whatever he can to appease this guy)

Example 3:
PC: "Come here or I'll kill you!" (uses Bluff, duping the target into coming over)

All examples are equally correct, equally legitimate uses of those "different" skills.

Me, I say they should have just rolled 'em all up into a single "Social Engineering" skill. Or replaced the mechanics of "Intimidate" with Plane Sailing's induce fear mechanic, and renamed "Bluff" to "Misdirect".

-z

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Example 2:
PC: "Come here or I'll kill you!" (uses Diplomacy, improving the target's reaction to "friendly"--the target *really* wants to do whatever he can to appease this guy)

Hm... get a job as diplomat and your country will find itself in a war before long. "Come here or I'll kill you!" is never diplomancy!

In the given example, diplomancy would look like "Hey, come over, I won't harm you. And there's a raven in for you!"
"Come here or I'll kill you!" isn't very good intimidate, either: That's what a bully would say, with the reaction that the other would laugh, attack, or flee (depending on the relative power or perceived relative power and the disposition towards the bully).
With a good intimidation you make it clear to that goblin that disobediance will result in a dire fate - far more cruel that anything his peeps or his master could do to him. He would be so scared stiff and go nowhere, or do what you say without thinking.


But the mechanic of intimidate is broken. An opposed roll suits the whole thing better. Against intimidate or concentration is ok, but a will save might be more appropriate. A success will change a NPC's behavior and will give penalties to a PC (and the DM will tell him how he feels now, so he can act accordingly if he wants to cooperate).

 

[Kershek]

I'd be careful making a skill as powerful as a feat (Intimidating Rage, Masters of the Wild).

 

[Thanee]

I'd be careful making a skill as powerful as a feat (Intimidating Rage, Masters of the Wild).

Uhm... Skill Focus?

Bye
Thanee

 

[SirTopaz]

The SRD says the intimidate skill changes behavior. It doesn't say how the behavior changes. It seems to relate to fear in some way. The fear spells (fear, cause fear) explicitly depict the running away scenario.

If the goblin was going to shoot the character, instead he turned tail and ran. That's a behavior change if ever I heard of one.

Cheers

 

[Corlon]

intimidate AGAIN??

The shaken idea is a good idea, thats all Is gots ta say.

well, mabye not .

tell the PCs to tell you exactly how they are intimidating them... and depending on what they say, the NPC will react differently.

But the goblin running was a good idea, ur the DM, make the characters understand.