-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
What good is Intimidate?
- Thread starter candidus_cogitens
- Start date
I'd hate to have intimidate off the skill list, as a player.
I am thinking in particular of a point in the book "Vampire$" by John Steakely. One of the characters (a very experienced gunman) walks into a room where some friends of his (drug dealers) have a drug officer tied to a chair, and are about to execute him...basically to "send a message" that they mean business.
Felix (the gunman) walks in, sits down, and asks what's up in a sort of relaxed, friendly fashion.
Then, knowing that there is no way he can (by nature) allow his friends to kill a cop just for doing his job, it describes how he basically shifts his position a little, and all of the sudden the pistol previously hidden by his jacket and unnoticed is positioned so that it is very very obvious, and everyone in the room has their tension levels rise about 50 points as they see how serious and dangerous he is.
I can see this being applied to D&D characters as well. In particular bards and rogues that can come off as your best friend, and then in a split second everything changes...you suddenly become poignantly aware of the outline of a short sword or dagger at their belt, and something in their eye tells you that you were about to mess with the wrong person!
Thats my take. How it does or doesn't overlap with bluff, I'll think about later
-Skaros
I am thinking in particular of a point in the book "Vampire$" by John Steakely. One of the characters (a very experienced gunman) walks into a room where some friends of his (drug dealers) have a drug officer tied to a chair, and are about to execute him...basically to "send a message" that they mean business.
Felix (the gunman) walks in, sits down, and asks what's up in a sort of relaxed, friendly fashion.
Then, knowing that there is no way he can (by nature) allow his friends to kill a cop just for doing his job, it describes how he basically shifts his position a little, and all of the sudden the pistol previously hidden by his jacket and unnoticed is positioned so that it is very very obvious, and everyone in the room has their tension levels rise about 50 points as they see how serious and dangerous he is.
I can see this being applied to D&D characters as well. In particular bards and rogues that can come off as your best friend, and then in a split second everything changes...you suddenly become poignantly aware of the outline of a short sword or dagger at their belt, and something in their eye tells you that you were about to mess with the wrong person!
Thats my take. How it does or doesn't overlap with bluff, I'll think about later
-Skaros
candidus_cogitens
Explorer
Epametheus said:
Note the key words: "probably" and "I figure". I just wanted to clarify that there is nothing specifically in the rules that says to use the Intimidate skill in conjunction with that chart on p. 149 of the DMG.
That said, I think it is not a bad idea. The problem, though, is that it becomes very, very similar to Diplomacy. Which again leads me to the conclusion that you should just eliminate the Intimidate skill and broaden the Diplomacy skill a little bit to include negotiating with adversaries.
The thing is ... if you have Diplomacy and Intimidate as two separate skills, then you have to come up with some kind of line separating them. (Same goes for Bluff!) For example, if a player says to a foe, "Get out or I'll kill you!", is that a bluff check, a diplomacy check, or an intimidate check? A case could be made for all three of them. If the DM allows a character to use any of the three, then it penalizes players who take ranks in both or all three skills because they become redundant.
Henry
Autoexreginated
I can't remember the poster who first posted this (I want to say Col Hardisson?), but one poster last year commented that in their opinion Intimidate is looked at incorrectly. Intimidate is the skill at communicating that you are fully capable of carrying out what you say you will do. In other words, if someone is not afraid to enter combat with you, or has no reason not to, intimidate is useless. Otherwise, heroes could just intimidate their way through entire dungeons full of humanoid nasties who spoke their language. It's not the skill of getting someone to do what you want, but that they face the worst you have to offer should they NOT do what you want.
Will intimidate from a Halfling commoner work on a hill giant? It depends on what he threatens. If the halfling commoner with 18 CHA, 4 ranks and skill focus in initimidate threatens, "do what I want or I'll smash your face in," then unless that halfling also has a high strength, then chances are the hill giant will shrug it off - after all, what's the worst the runt could do?
On the other hand, if said halfling says, "It'd be a shame if your wife Mrs. Giant found out you were hiding gold from her - and I know just where she can look if she wants proof," then even IF said Hill Giant wasn't doing anything shady, would Mr.s Hill Giant beleive him anyway? The threat says, "I've got something on you, or I can make someone else believe I do," then that's intimidation on a threat that the shrimp can REALLY carry out.
Intimidation is belittled severly if all you use it for is threat of physical violence. However, cunning PC's with no combat training can use this skill to effectively blackmail anyone, even the staunchest Good Paladin.
Just another way of looking at it.
Will intimidate from a Halfling commoner work on a hill giant? It depends on what he threatens. If the halfling commoner with 18 CHA, 4 ranks and skill focus in initimidate threatens, "do what I want or I'll smash your face in," then unless that halfling also has a high strength, then chances are the hill giant will shrug it off - after all, what's the worst the runt could do?
On the other hand, if said halfling says, "It'd be a shame if your wife Mrs. Giant found out you were hiding gold from her - and I know just where she can look if she wants proof," then even IF said Hill Giant wasn't doing anything shady, would Mr.s Hill Giant beleive him anyway?
The threat says, "I've got something on you, or I can make someone else believe I do," then that's intimidation on a threat that the shrimp can REALLY carry out.Intimidation is belittled severly if all you use it for is threat of physical violence. However, cunning PC's with no combat training can use this skill to effectively blackmail anyone, even the staunchest Good Paladin.
Just another way of looking at it.
Zaruthustran
The tingling means it’s working!
Intimidate = making threats
Diplomacy = making nice
Bluff = making lies
All three skills have the same immediate result (influencing NPC behavior), but they achieve that result in different ways. And I'd say that the lasting effects are different. An intimidated person will fear you, and resent you, and given a chance will try to harm you. A bluffed person who discovers your lie will likewise be displeased. A person convinced with diplomacy, however, has truly had their mind changed.
But sometimes it's not clear which situation calls for which skill check.
From Princess Bride:
"To the Pain!" --Intimidate or bluff? Wesley is definitely scaring Prince Humperdink, but the drained Wesley is also totally bluffing him. I'd go with Intimidate.
Burning Andre the Giant --Intimidate of bluff? Andre is not Death/Apocolypse, so it's a bluff. But he's also trying to scare the guards away, so it's an intimidate check. I'd go with Bluff.
Convincing... uh... the "Inconceivable!" guy to agree to the poison cup challenge --clearly a diplomacy check.
Convincing the gatekeeper to release the key (after burning Andre) --clearly an Intimidate check.
Also, note that some skills are more inappropriate in certain situations. Diplomacy is almost useless once combat has started (you *can* talk while fighting, but only one statement/reply per round), and almost useless if there's a language barrier. Intimidate can be used during combat, and can even be used on animals.
-z
Diplomacy = making nice
Bluff = making lies
All three skills have the same immediate result (influencing NPC behavior), but they achieve that result in different ways. And I'd say that the lasting effects are different. An intimidated person will fear you, and resent you, and given a chance will try to harm you. A bluffed person who discovers your lie will likewise be displeased. A person convinced with diplomacy, however, has truly had their mind changed.
But sometimes it's not clear which situation calls for which skill check.
From Princess Bride:
"To the Pain!" --Intimidate or bluff? Wesley is definitely scaring Prince Humperdink, but the drained Wesley is also totally bluffing him. I'd go with Intimidate.
Burning Andre the Giant --Intimidate of bluff? Andre is not Death/Apocolypse, so it's a bluff. But he's also trying to scare the guards away, so it's an intimidate check. I'd go with Bluff.
Convincing... uh... the "Inconceivable!" guy to agree to the poison cup challenge --clearly a diplomacy check.
Convincing the gatekeeper to release the key (after burning Andre) --clearly an Intimidate check.
Also, note that some skills are more inappropriate in certain situations. Diplomacy is almost useless once combat has started (you *can* talk while fighting, but only one statement/reply per round), and almost useless if there's a language barrier. Intimidate can be used during combat, and can even be used on animals.
-z
the Jester
Legend
About the half-orc...
One thing that always, always gets overlooked when this topic comes up in regards to a half-orc is that, yes, he may be big and scary looking; but that has NO INFLUENCE on how well he can get you to do what he wants. Yeah, he might scare the breeches off the bartender when he roars for free room and board, but the bartender's just as likely to run off and get his friends as he is to give in. And if he gives in, once the half-orc's asleep he may wake up with a roomful of mercenaries surrounding him with crossbows. On the other hand, someone who's good at initimidation might get that free room and board and leave the barkeep shaking and too afraid of the consequences to run for help.
One thing that always, always gets overlooked when this topic comes up in regards to a half-orc is that, yes, he may be big and scary looking; but that has NO INFLUENCE on how well he can get you to do what he wants. Yeah, he might scare the breeches off the bartender when he roars for free room and board, but the bartender's just as likely to run off and get his friends as he is to give in. And if he gives in, once the half-orc's asleep he may wake up with a roomful of mercenaries surrounding him with crossbows. On the other hand, someone who's good at initimidation might get that free room and board and leave the barkeep shaking and too afraid of the consequences to run for help.
I think another example is, if anyone's seen Snatch, where the guy is talking to the three black fellas. He doesn't pull the gun on them, but he scares them.
Intimidate could neutralize a threat. Two seasoned fighters look at one another from across the room. They both roll intimidation checks. If one fails, the other guy thinks he can take the first. IF both fail, then they're not sure about the other. If both succeed, then they're likely sure that each other can be their equal, likely nod to eachother in respect, and go on.
When Dirty Hairy pulled the 'Well, Do you feel lucky, Punk', that was Intimidate.
Intimidate is the presence which you hold. Imagine a sorceror walking into a bar, sitting down with the people who are hunting him, and say "Back off."
"No."
And he proceeds to call up a little bit of black flame into his fingers. He raises an eyebrow.
Now, you roll an Intimidate check. An 'I will Mess You Up', without even saying anything.
I imagine the Mafia (There is no halfling mafia!) would use a lot of Intimidate.
Intimidate could neutralize a threat. Two seasoned fighters look at one another from across the room. They both roll intimidation checks. If one fails, the other guy thinks he can take the first. IF both fail, then they're not sure about the other. If both succeed, then they're likely sure that each other can be their equal, likely nod to eachother in respect, and go on.
When Dirty Hairy pulled the 'Well, Do you feel lucky, Punk', that was Intimidate.
Intimidate is the presence which you hold. Imagine a sorceror walking into a bar, sitting down with the people who are hunting him, and say "Back off."
"No."
And he proceeds to call up a little bit of black flame into his fingers. He raises an eyebrow.
Now, you roll an Intimidate check. An 'I will Mess You Up', without even saying anything.
I imagine the Mafia (There is no halfling mafia!) would use a lot of Intimidate.
Kae'Yoss
First Post
Xarlen said:
That's what they want you to believe.
The stuff 'bout Half-Orks and STR Intimidate are right, though: it's one thing to shout "Gimme a beer or me will smash yo face!" and another to say (calmly) "You're now going to serve me the best wine you have, will you? How's your wife holding up? She's well I hope? Couldn't stand her being harmed in any way, really".
Has anyone read Elfshadow by Elaine Cunningham? Craulnober sat in that tavern, drinking an awfully expensive elven wine. He tells her that he'll pay. When she's gone, he looks at the barkeep, takes the whole bottle of the stuff, and calmly walks out of the tavern. The guy sees a bottle of wine worth more than he'll make in the next week (and there was a big festival in waterdeep, so he'll make steep profits) go out the door, but he doesn't say anything. Because he knows that it would be his undoing. Simple as that. The half-orc might attack him and give him a vicious beating, but surely others in the tavern would help (especially because everyone hates half-orcs, what is reflected neatly in that -2 CHA) and the pigsnout would get it. But The Serpent would probably just kill him with one stroke, and noone would interfere (or he would just wait until the landlord is stupid enough to enter a dark alley alone....)
Similar Threads
