Why do Orcs get Intimidate?

[Lucas Blackstone]

The player's aren't monsters so intimidate won't work against them for purposes of giving up. It's included on the sheet because not everyone the orc interacts with is going to be the PC's. For instances include any NPC's that are with the PC's, minions of the PC's (bet your ass it's gonna be in a splatbook eventually), or if the PC is being interrogated and fails a Will check, they blurt out a secret, etc.

Where does it say players can't be forced to surrender via the intimidation skill? If you can be mind controlled to attack friends I don't see why you can't be forced to surrender.

 

[GoLu]

Where does it say players can't be forced to surrender via the intimidation skill? If you can be mind controlled to attack friends I don't see why you can't be forced to surrender.

Sure, and the best part is that the DC is "the target's Will defense or a DC set my the DM." Even monsters that don't have the intimidate skill can do okay, just by taking advantage of that last part. This also works with diplomacy, and is infringing on infinite-oregano airspace.

 

[Ahglock]

You're correct, I was typing incorrectly. I was thinking I would have to get a total of 21, -10 to intimidate them. Still, the kobolds get a lot for being my enemy.

I'd like to think it would change as you level. I think the problem you are bumping into is everything has a base defense of at least 10.

 

[Lucas Blackstone]

I didn't think it was a loophole to have a skill function as intended I guess.

 

[am181d]

This really made intimidate suck for me. You basically have to freakin' /own/ at intimidate to even scare off Kobolds! My poor Paladin felt rather disgraced as he charged forward, clad in fullplate, shield and sword on high, crying forth the damnation the Kobolds were fated to should they stand in his way!... moved five squares, failed his intimidation check, and took five damage from the resulting puny thwacks from the Kobolds around him.

Seriously. With a +11 intimidate check at level 4, it would have taken a 10 to intimidate a /kobold minion/.

But I bet you got the last laugh. Presumably, by the end of the fight, all the kobolds were dead, and your paladin was not. You know, 90% of the time it's not COWARDLY to retreat from the PCs. It's common sense.

If a PC wants to let enemies flee, it's probably in their best interest to do so, regardless of how the intimidation roll comes up.

 

[Ahglock]

Sure, and the best part is that the DC is "the target's Will defense or a DC set my the DM." Even monsters that don't have the intimidate skill can do okay, just by taking advantage of that last part. This also works with diplomacy, and is infringing on infinite-oregano airspace.

So did you answer the question?

Oh wait, no you didn't.

I really hate infinite oregano its always trotted out as if that was some how clever. People come up with legitimate rules problems and instead of discussing it, they get snarky if your DM was competent responses via oregano.

 

[Minigiant]

Goblins and kobolds flee when bloodied anyway. When they don't flee it's because something bigger than you will eat them if they found out.

Why do Orcs get Intimidate?

"Human help Grok find Mungo and Grok keep axe clean. You get. Grok get."
"Grok not the one you looking for. GROK SAID GROK NOT LOOKY MAN!"

Because orcs typically stink at bluffing and confuse how diplomacy works.
Grok, you slay me.
"Grok slay many"

 

[BeauNiddle]

So did you answer the question?

Oh wait, no you didn't.

I really hate infinite oregano its always trotted out as if that was some how clever. People come up with legitimate rules problems and instead of discussing it, they get snarky if your DM was competent responses via oregano.

I think he was making a joke about the 'DC set by DM' bit which allows the DM to set the target number at -1 for intimidating a PC and thus auto-win.

In general it's considered bad form to define a course of action for a player (and even dominate / magic has been toned down over the editions) Rather than saying the PCs are forced to surrender just say 'The very intimidating orc calls for your surrender. He looks like he'll rip you to shreds if you refuse' and then let the PCs decide on what they want to do.

 

[erik_the_guy]

Nothing says it can't be used against the players. Basically the orc rolls his intimidate against your will. Since orcs have +10 to intimidate and you get +10 to will for being hostile, he needs to roll your will defense on a d20. If he succeeds you "surrender".
If the rest of your party has been defeated, this would end the combat, and is not that imbalanced.
Some of you seem to think this is imbalanced if the combat has just started and all your allies are up, because then why would you surrender? But if the combat just recently started then after you surrender either:
- The orc will get attacked by an ally, in which case you would try to escape from or help overpower your captor
- Other orcs will start attacking you, in which case you will start to defend yourself and are no longer captured

Essentially this skill will only put you out of the combat for about a round or two if the combat has just started, or might end a combat that was almost over anyways. It doesn't seem too imbalanced to me. Don't think of it as surrendering completely, or as mind control, think of it as being paralyzed with fear.

Note: You can always rule that the targets bonuses against fear effects also count against intimidate. I would give the target a bonus if his party appeared to be winning, a penalty if they appeared to be losing.

 

[GoLu]

So did you answer the question?

Oh wait, no you didn't.

I really hate infinite oregano its always trotted out as if that was some how clever. People come up with legitimate rules problems and instead of discussing it, they get snarky if your DM was competent responses via oregano.

To be fair, it was clever. The first time. When Lore wrote it. Anyway, why do orcs have intimidate? Same reason some 3e monsters have diplomacy.

I actually wrote up a pretty big (although rambling) paragraph talking about this and ended up deleting it because I thought it was off topic. But basically, many players bring to the game the implicit expectation that social skills (diplomacy especially, but also bluff and intimidate) do not work on PCs. This isn't true in every game, and is not required for a game to be fun. But it's not something you want to surprise people with.

Like being able to arbitrary set the DCs of intimidate, the DM can decide whether the orcs use that skill on PCs or if they just scare off the torch-bearers and panic the horses. Sure, being able to houserule it doesn't mean it isn't broken. But the DM has all kinds of crazy powers, and deciding that an orc swings his sword rather than growls menacingly isn't particularly high on the list of possible offenses against RAW. (Besides, it technically isn't a houserule to set DCs impossibly high when the skill is used on PCs, because the DM does specifically have the power to adjust intimidate DCs for any or no reason. It's just the DM being given some arbitrary power, and the trust that it will be used to make the game more fun.)