Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 9244254" data-attributes="member: 12731">Sure, but this distinction doesn't mean much in practical play. Lemme explain:If you play a brutish Fighter, and your DM tells you you need to use Charisma if you threaten to leak their secrets, you... simply switch to threatening them with bodily harm if that allows you to use an ability score you're actually good at. You might have wanted to play mind games, but then you realize that's not what you do well, so you instead rip off the arms of the other prisoner to show the target what you're capable off, or something.Of course, then there's the greater question of "what type of character and personality do I want to play?"If you dump Charisma, there you have your answer. You're simply not going to cajole answers out of people. You have to make them so scared of you they tell you what you need to know, which can be an unsavory business.You made that choice, not in the moment, but back when when you put 8 into Charisma and 18 into Strength.But at least now the game offers you a choice. Imagine a game where Charisma is the only possible ability score for Intimidation skill checks. This game becomes a game where the traditional fighter gives up on Intimidation altogether, because who takes a skill you're going to suck at? More importantly, it doesn't feel especially realistic. And it sets a bad precedent that the only people good at Intimidation are also good at entertaining at the local tavern and romancing the ladies.Intimidation just isn't a good fit for a "Charisma-only" solution. It makes plenty of practical sense to allow Fighters to use Strength for Intimidation checks, since that signals to players that Intimidation is one of the skill you might want to pick up for your Fighter, with no need to become "charismatic" in general.</blockquote>

Verification