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="DamionW" data-source="post: 2697586" data-attributes="member: 18649">(Edited for proper quoting)This, Voadam, is where I will always disagree with you.  <s>Kamikaze</s> ThirdWizard gave you a perfectly concise, valid description of his intimidation attempt.  To hand-waive that a 16 is not successful only encourages your players to do one thing:  Never spend ranks in Intimidate.  Put them in tumble, or jump, or climb, something useful in combat, because those are the only places mechanics have fidelity in the game universe.  If I play in your games and you have the right to arbitrarily decide whether my character is intimidating or persuasive, or knowledgable, or any has other non-combat mechanic working for him, how can I ever make a character that is STRONGER in those qualities than myself?  Maybe I happen to be a bad liar.  You let someone who is a bad martial artist explore the option of slaying orcs to have fun, and you do that without question for the simple reason that the actions can't be done at the table.  Why are you eliminating the possiblity of me playing a lying piece of crap just because I can't do it to meet your satisfaction at the table?  There are only so many pieces of character capital a player has at their disposal: ability rolls or point buys, one to two feats at first level, 1 to 48 skill points at first level, etc.  If intimidate can be resolved without using mechanics by DM fiat, why would I ever invest in the feat persuasive, for example?  There's no return on that investment compared to Power Attack, so all that encourages is one-dimensional combat-designed characters.</blockquote>

Verification