Is Intimidate broken?

[Tsyr]

You answered that question yourself. It's magical. If there was a magical version of intimidate, PCs would be effected by that too, mostly likely. Magic trancends mundane things like "courage". Magical fear is pure fear pumped into the brain.

Personaly, I see it as much a courtesy to the player as anything, not having intimidate effect them. No, by the rules , you could have it effect them. But, as a player, if I was playing a really brave conan-esq fighter, or a "Bring it on!" dwarf or something, and the DM rolled to intimidate me with a charismatic-but-dinky halfing rogue, and said "Ok, your scared out of your wits by this guy, you pee your pants and start shaking", I would probably have some choice words for that DM.

 

[alsih2o]

tsyr, i think we arguing different things here i don't think it should be usable on p.c.'s....i just think the rules as stated should be applicable to all N.P.C.'s...reread to spot confusion?

 

[Tsyr]

tsyr, i think the part of the point you are missing is the one about set d.c.'s for intimidate...if you ignore these d.c.'s you have to realize that you are offsetting the balance of power.

a 1st lvl char with 18 cha (imho) CAN intimidate a huge ogre...thats the point of the skill. an 18 cha is an awesome power, near hypnotic!(exclamation point for emphasis, not anger )

that kind of awesome force of personality is hard to ignore.

if you are d.ming it is your call to say that rule is out the door, but i would be sure to tell players before they roll up a character.

as cwd pointed out- Besides, the Intimidate skill has a clearly defined DC of 10 + target HD. If I'm a 1st-level character, have an 18 Cha and 4 ranks in Intimidate, and I try to scare the 3rd-level main villain of the adventure, and roll a 15 on my skill check for a total of 15+4+4 = 22, then he darn well better be intimidated!

i think that is very important...if a person has a high enuf cha to manipulate the forces of magic, i think they deserve the opportunity to the rules translation of a shot.

When did I say a first level character wouldn't be allowed to try to intimidate a 3rd leval villan? To my knowledge, never. If I did, I spoke in error, and against my own style as a DM.

However, I don't care how magical your charisma is, you aren't going to scare that elder red wyrm into cowering before you if your a lone low-level character, or scare the guy that has the backing of the army. In DC terms, this would basicly amount to a mad circumstance bonus.

If you play without the "20 is success" rule, that's fine, and would suit my needs perfectly. However, if you play with it (as many of my players prefer), you are left with the the choice of either allowing blatently rediculous uses of it from time to time, through sheer luck, or just out and out saying "You don't have a chance in hell of doing this". I choose the later, and thus far, none of my players have complained. Generaly there is a lot of groaning at my table when our "new" player trys something blatently rediculous because he thinks he has a lucky streak with the dice, no because his character would actualy think he has a shot of doing it. In other words, my ruling works for both me and my players.

You may ask, why do we even play with the "20= success" rule then, if we don't use it. Well we do use it. On things that we consider "long shots", but still possible. 20 is dumb luck, in otherwords... but dumb luck only carries so far

 

[Tsyr]

tsyr, i think we arguing different things here i don't think it should be usable on p.c.'s....i just think the rules as stated should be applicable to all N.P.C.'s...reread to spot confusion?

Naw, I'm just carrying on two different arguments at once
My "pc/npc" argument is aimed at Hikaru's message, not yours.

 

[Staffan]

What's the difference between making a check so high that a player has no chance, even on his best roll, of making it... and just telling him that its an impossible task for him?

The difference is that the DC should be set in an objective fashion - the DC to break open that door is *always* 28, the DC to intimidate an old red dragon is *always* 38, and the DC to climb an inverted ice face in a blizzard is *always* 60 (or something like that, I don't have the ELH). If the character's good enough to perform that task, good for him. If he's not, too bad. It's not a matter of "You're just a halfling rogue, there's no way you can scare that dragon", it's a matter of "Your intimidate bonus is just +9, so there's no way you can beat DC 38."

 

[Tsyr]

The difference is that the DC should be set in an objective fashion - the DC to break open that door is *always* 28, the DC to intimidate an old red dragon is *always* 38, and the DC to climb an inverted ice face in a blizzard is *always* 60 (or something like that, I don't have the ELH). If the character's good enough to perform that task, good for him. If he's not, too bad. It's not a matter of "You're just a halfling rogue, there's no way you can scare that dragon", it's a matter of "Your intimidate bonus is just +9, so there's no way you can beat DC 38."

Right. I agree totaly. To an extent.

Note, however, that I've said a number of times that I'm often with people who use the "nat 20 = success" rule.

Hence why I have to sometimes just say "not a chance in hell", if it's too far outside "beliveable".

In addition, I do believe in circumstance modifiers for intimidate... Even if the hit dice are about equal, for example, IMHO intimidating a wizard in his tower, a place he has spent years of his life enchanting and preparing defences in, is going to be harder than intimidating him if you just happen to encounter him in the middle of a public plaza, which is likewise going to be more difficult that intimidating him if he is out of spells and wounded. the fixed DC is great for a baseline, but I don't think it fits all the time.

 

[Junkheap]

It actually amazed me when i read this thread about how easy the life of PC's in some campaigns must be. I bet you guys adjust creature skills to counteract what the PC's have. I am seriously amazed this debate is actually happening. I have to easily side with Tsyr on this one.

 

[333 Dave]

If the PC is a "Bring it on!" dwarf and a halfling successfully intimidsates him it doesn't mean you gain immidiate controll of the PC's bladder. You just say "The halfling, though small, is intimidating and looks like he could cut you to itty bitty pieces".
Remeber, different people react differently to being intimidated. One person who's intimidated might throw down their weapons and throw their hands in the air, another might kick you in the junk and run like hell. Thats for the Player to decide, but they're still intimidated.

 

[CWD]

Tsyr,

I'll happily back down here...

If you are using '20' equals success, then yes you need to make certain things impossible otherwise 1st-level commoners with a 3 Strength could jump 100-foot chasms.

Interestingly, the Epic Level Handbook suggests changing the d20 roll to prevent automatic success and failure wierdness. Here's what they recommend:

If you roll a '1', roll again and subtract 20 from the result. If you get a second one, repeat until you stop rolling '1's.

If you roll a '20', roll again and add 20 to the result. If you get a second one, repeat until you stop rolling '20's.

They suggest this system for attack rolls and possibly saving throws (don't have the book). You could consider something like this if 20 = success produces some wierdness. If you are happy just saying "no" to some things, then more power to you.


Junkheap,
The lives of PCs in my campaign is easy because I let them actually use the skills in the rulebook??

The skill description of intimidate just says it influences behavior, it doesn't say the bad guy does exactly what the PC wants. If the bad guy is intimidated, maybe he just picks another target, or goes after the PC with ranged weapons instead of melee, or tries to kill the PC before he can carry out the threat.

I would also like to point out that it SHOULD be possible for a lower-level halfling to intimidate a powerful dragon if he somehow has enough bonuses (say from a magic item) to make the DC. The dragon doesn't KNOW how powerful the halfling is after all, the little guy could be a 40th-level barbarian or something.

As to people who think I'm a whacko for letting PCs be on the recieving end of social skills. I'll repeat, I don't FORCE them to do anything, I just dangle an XP carrot in front of them and they usually go along with it.

Then again, my favorite alignment system is the one from Pendragon, where it really DOES dictate the player's actions....

 

[Tsyr]

Hmmm... another michigan gamer, there seem to be a lot of us...

Anyhow.

IMHO, the root of some of the problem is adherance to the book vrs "reality", if you will. For example, according to the book, the DC is fixed. Thats great. For even encounters. IE, assuming neither side has a tactical advantage via terrain, both sides are rested and all, etc etc. Then it's great. It breaks down quickly, IMHO, when you factor in things like preperation, terrain, health, supplies, etc etc. For example, a wizard who is wounded and out of spells might be able to bluff a party into thinking hes still readily able to take them down... but he also would, IMHO, be more vulnerable to intimidate... because he knows, mentaly, that if it comes to blows he is probably NOT going to be the victor.

would also like to point out that it SHOULD be possible for a lower-level halfling to intimidate a powerful dragon if he somehow has enough bonuses (say from a magic item) to make the DC. The dragon doesn't KNOW how powerful the halfling is after all, the little guy could be a 40th-level barbarian or something.

Don't let the folks of BADD hear you... Dragons are all powerful, remember *nudge nudge*. Really!