D&D 5E Is Intimidate the worse skill in the game?

[Undrave]

Also note that the game is littered with ways to inflict the 'Frightened' condition that don't use the Intimidate skill so... isn't that redundant a little?

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Intimidate can't possibly be the worst skill in the game, because Medicine exists. The skill exists, that is, not a use for it, because no such thing as healing exists in the game that is not based on magic, rest, or some special ability, so there is no way you could actually heal someone with "Medicine". Nor is there any such thing as a non-magical disease, so, diagnosis-wise, you're probably better off with Arcana. And, of course, actually making medicine would presumably an herbalism or alchemy tools undertaking.

Yes it is used to make checks to stabilize people (if nobody has a spell, potion, or healer's kit for that), and yes it can creatively be used for, say, determining how fresh a corpse is and such. But it is the skill whose natural purposes the rules and typical settings have mostly eliminated and it seems like it should just be put out of its misery. It just sits there as a trap for the newbies or something you take out of obligation because it fits the character.

 

[Haldrik]

There is a "morale system". The DM evaluates what their morale should be based on the circumstances, and sets a DC to intimidate them into surrendering if someone wishes to try to intimidate them into surrendering.

Do your enemies never surrender, flee, hesitate, or break rank because there is no formal system for enemy morale?

Exactly, in 5e morale is DM discretion. So using the half hit point as a marker for when to check, helps consistent discretion, and helps Intimidation be more useful.

 

[Undrave]

Intimidate can't possibly be the worst skill in the game, because Medicine exists. The skill exists, that is, not a use for it, because no such thing as healing exists in the game that is not based on magic, rest, or some special ability, so there is no way you could actually heal someone with "Medicine". Nor is there any such thing as a non-magical disease, so, diagnosis-wise, you're probably better off with Arcana. And, of course, actually making medicine would presumably an herbalism or alchemy tools undertaking.

Yes it is used to make checks to stabilize people (if nobody has a spell, potion, or healer's kit for that), and yes it can creatively be used for, say, determining how fresh a corpse is and such. But it is the skill whose natural purposes the rules and typical settings have mostly eliminated and it seems like it should just be put out of its misery. It just sits there as a trap for the newbies or something you take out of obligation because it fits the character.

That's a very good point too. I hadn't thought of medicine... because I don't know any one who takes it

 

[Haldrik]

Also note that the game is littered with ways to inflict the 'Frightened' condition that don't use the Intimidate skill so... isn't that redundant a little?

Failing morale check is like Frightened (sometimes defacto identical), except the result is moreso adjudicated narratively rather than mechanically. Intimidation adds some numbers. For example, if a creature is fleeing, Intimidation to command to "stop or else", can persuade the creature to not flee, and to instead surrender.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Intimidate can't possibly be the worst skill in the game, because Medicine exists. The skill exists, that is, not a use for it, because no such thing as healing exists in the game that is not based on magic, rest, or some special ability, so there is no way you could actually heal someone with "Medicine". Nor is there any such thing as a non-magical disease, so, diagnosis-wise, you're probably better off with Arcana. And, of course, actually making medicine would presumably an herbalism or alchemy tools undertaking.

Yes it is used to make checks to stabilize people (if nobody has a spell, potion, or healer's kit for that), and yes it can creatively be used for, say, determining how fresh a corpse is and such. But it is the skill whose natural purposes the rules and typical settings have mostly eliminated and it seems like it should just be put out of its misery. It just sits there as a trap for the newbies or something you take out of obligation because it fits the character.

This is all true, but I would say that medicine is also used to figure poisons, which are a thing.

Additionally, it is relatively easy to add in a system to support medicine checks, because their place in the fiction is easily defined. But the systems are already mostly in place for intimidation (barring moral for scaring enemies into surrendering) and it still gets used less than medicine in my games.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

See, if DnD had a morale system that'd be a good use of Intimidate proficiency, but without it, it might as well be a class feature of Barbarians and Fighters or some kind of maneuver akin to Shove, not one of your few skill proficiency.

Why? It's as often or not the artificer who points a smoking wand and says "do you feel lucky, punk?". As one of the most used skills after perception, I see no reason for any of our players begrudge the skill slot.

 

[Oofta]

I don't think there is a "worst" skill that applies across the board.

Medicine for example, can be quite handy when diagnosing diseases or investigating how someone died.

Intimidate is often more useful when dealing with someone that is already aggressive or fearful. Just because the Fear spell is available, doesn't mean it replaces intimidate in any way.

As far as using other ability scores with proficiencies that's already part of the game. I would allow that strong half-orc or intimidate with strength by picking up someone by their neck and letting the target know every bone in their body is going to be broken if they don't cooperate. An intelligent character might be able to intimidate a fellow scholar with logic and reasoning by deconstructing the target's theories or plans.

It will always be up to the DM to make skills useful. I keep a list of skills handy - with a list of who's proficient - to try to remember to set up scenarios where they will be useful. But part of the fun of the game is to try to find ways to mimic fictional characters. If I want to play a forensic detective, medicine is right up my alley. If I want to play the strong and gruff type who uses threats of bodily harm to get their way I'll allow intimidate using strength.

It's true that there are no hard and fast rules for a lot of this. I personally prefer the freedom that gives me to do what makes sense based on the situation at hand.

 

[Undrave]

I don't think there is a "worst" skill that applies across the board.

Medicine for example, can be quite handy when diagnosing diseases or investigating how someone died.

Intimidate is often more useful when dealing with someone that is already aggressive or fearful. Just because the Fear spell is available, doesn't mean it replaces intimidate in any way.

As far as using other ability scores with proficiencies that's already part of the game. I would allow that strong half-orc or intimidate with strength by picking up someone by their neck and letting the target know every bone in their body is going to be broken if they don't cooperate. An intelligent character might be able to intimidate a fellow scholar with logic and reasoning by deconstructing the target's theories or plans.

It will always be up to the DM to make skills useful. I keep a list of skills handy - with a list of who's proficient - to try to remember to set up scenarios where they will be useful. But part of the fun of the game is to try to find ways to mimic fictional characters. If I want to play a forensic detective, medicine is right up my alley. If I want to play the strong and gruff type who uses threats of bodily harm to get their way I'll allow intimidate using strength.

It's true that there are no hard and fast rules for a lot of this. I personally prefer the freedom that gives me to do what makes sense based on the situation at hand.

I think in general you're right. All sorts of skills can be made valuable. I don't think forensic is specifically called out as a use of Medicine, but it makes sense and is a flavourful way to use it for sure.

I think the problem might be that some skills are more situational than others, and might even be more campaign specific. You're probably not gonna get much use out of Animal Handling if your campaign is mostly a dungeon crawl or lacks a lot of transport by animals. For exemple.

Maybe the problem isn't that some skills are 'bad', but rather that a few of them are just WAY too universally good. Perception and Investigation can be useful pretty much all the time. Insight is good every time you encounter another sentient being. Stealth on the right character is useful everywhere but a conversation.

 

[Oofta]

I think in general you're right. All sorts of skills can be made valuable. I don't think forensic is specifically called out as a use of Medicine, but it makes sense and is a flavourful way to use it for sure.

I think the problem might be that some skills are more situational than others, and might even be more campaign specific. You're probably not gonna get much use out of Animal Handling if your campaign is mostly a dungeon crawl or lacks a lot of transport by animals. For exemple.

Maybe the problem isn't that some skills are 'bad', but rather that a few of them are just WAY too universally good. Perception and Investigation can be useful pretty much all the time. Insight is good every time you encounter another sentient being. Stealth on the right character is useful everywhere but a conversation.

Yeah, the reason I keep a list of skills is because I find myself use the top 2-4 skills all the time if I don't. I also try to encourage people to suggest skills they could use, but that depends a lot on the group.