Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TaranTheWanderer" data-source="post: 8063732" data-attributes="member: 15882">Sorry, if you are 4th level and are trying to use persuasion to get an alliance with a lich, you're probably going to need more than one persuasion roll.  Especially without any prep ahead of time.  At least in my games.  Liches have lots of powerful allies and don't need to rely on scrubs.  I feel that is putting too much weight on persuasion.none?  like, that's not the point I was trying to make?  I was saying you need leverage to use intimidate.  Just the same as you need a logical argument to use persuasion.You aren't going to persuade the bandit king to make you the new bandit king without some kind of reasoning or background prep.  Once again, if you allow bandit ambushes to be resolved in a single persuasion check, you're making it too powerful.Use persuasion to get a deal instead of intimidate.   Intimidate isn't perfect for every situation the same way as persuasion isn't the best for every situation.  The crooked Vendor isn't going to budge on his prices, regardless of your persuasion roll.  Unless the Dm makes persuasion the catch-all solution for every social conflict.I mean, if your definition of Intimidate is just beating people up, then, I guess so.  But Who cares about good or evil?  There are in-game consequences.  Some people will think you are evil and some will think you are good.  I have friends who are bouncers - they use intimidate all the time to break up fights without actually getting into fights.  I don't think they're evil.  In any case, Your characters do things and NPCs act according to their personal morality.  I'm just the referee.  It's not my job to pass moral judgement.  My job is to do the best to play the NPCs the way they would act according to their personalities.  The consequences of actions will be natural.I can see a 'good' character using intimidate as a solution instead of killing.  It may be a flawed solution to a conflict but the PC may feel justified.  Only his peers and by-standards will  judge him.  He will have to live with the consequences and try to parse them.  I feel It's totally irrelevant to the conversation.</blockquote>

Verification