Intimidation?

[jrizz]

Im good with this. How do we push this up to the team?

[Gulnyr]

They see it.

[Krell Himmler]

I thought about that.  If we use level in place of Sense Motive, how do we compensate for those characters who would have taken ranks in Sense Motive and those who wouldn't have?  Take half the level for everyone.  It makes sense, but it breaks pretty early and gets worse at higher levels.  

Mechanically, I like adding full level for everyone because it maintains the challenge for the Bluffers.  Nothing ever becomes an "I win" button.  There isn't an upper limit of ranks that becomes enough to fool everyone; more ranks will always make a character more effective, and there will always be targets worthy of the effort and the skill points spent.

Roleplay-wise, I think a lot of the social skill rolls should be used sparingly between PCs.  In other words, players should actually roleplay bluffs and persuasion rather than constantly resorting to dice.  Sure, pull out a roll now and then, but try to actually get in there and persuade Biff Buyer that 15000 True is a good price, or Lisa Lowlands that climbing the cliff is the best plan.  Save most of the rolling for interactions with NPCs.  This isn't a great example for the general reader, but there have been good examples of this on the What Is and What Should Never Be series.  Jennara was ready to jump overboard and swim to Audira, but she was persuaded to stay with the group and sail on to North Point.  No rolls were necessary, and I don't think whipping out dice bags would have been as fun and rewarding.  Intimidate is the social skill that should be rolled most often between PCs, if only to get an indication of just exactly how intimidating (or intimidated) a character is.

I like skill points, too, and I know not rolling a skill against PCs seems to make the skill points spent on a skill less valuable, so I can understand if my opinion doesn't sound so great to everyone.

I agree, generally in pen and paper DnD you had to roleplay a bluff or intimidate. Someone stays step aside to me, I don't quake in fear. But if a big fat giant reeking of enchanted weapons and dripping acid from its double axe comes up to me then it's a different story.

G'ork did excellent in this respect, intimidating me without using a roll and that was played out. But I'm against people who say "you don't want to do that" *intimidate check*. I think it should always be roleplayed out, not 'diced' out. Otherwise one can use certain skills to steal control of a character away from others, there are some classes who will NEVER compete with a  Barbarians intimidate, or a Rogues lies and there are some of them which push it beyond the realms of plausibility, I'm sure you can think of some examples for all of this.

There is also times when you cannot intimidate things. Say you have met a dragon, who isn't initially hostile. You're Mr. Scary the level 20 Barbarian with a high intimidate, you beat the dragon's role and it agrees to let you have some/all of it's treasure. Or let's say, Mr Undead, you try and intimidate him into giving up his current evil course of action. There are times when intimidate doesn't work. The same *should* be true of bluff. For example, you witness the rogue, in open sight stab someone in the town center, is it reasonable, for him to bluff and tell people he didn't really do it, when they saw him......

I'm sure many will disagree, but I *hope* this has raised a point I didn't see/missed being mentioned.

Personally I think it should be used only when applicable, and when used should be opposed to a level check + will, intimidate versus combined levels of the ones you are trying to intimidate. Otherwise barbarians would just scare and rule the world, bust into the mage tower screaming move and you're dead with your level 20 barbarian and the mages all cower and just give you their stuff, I mean, come on. Or what about an insane cleric of pyrotechnon, or a drow priestess, so on and so forth, sometimes intimidate just doesn't make even a little sense.

[Filatus]

If anyone tries to intimidate my chars I go with the following save.

Intimidate :: d20srd.org

(1d20 + character level or Hit Dice + target’s Wisdom bonus [if any] + target’s modifiers on saves against fear)

Which in Hardragh's case is somewhere around (1d20+21-1+12), so 1d20+32. Level 21, 8 wisdom and around 12 will save, no special bonus vs fear if unbuffed.

And if the other person does manage to intimidate him, I first consider his initial attitude. He will be helpful, but he'll also remember the deed, for a while at least.

I refuse to roll will save or intimidate as opposing roll, it makes absolutely no sense at all.

[LightlyFrosted]

I generally roleplay intimidation as the ability to convince someone that you have both the means and desire to do them harm, albeit not necessarily physical.  Telling someone that you'll turn them over to the guard if they don't give you the information you need is as much an intimidation tactic as threatening to smash their face in, although it may have very different effects.

Viewing intimidation as the ability to convince someone of your desire and ability to do them harm does not necessarily mean that they'll immediately do what you say.  If you offer someone a physical threat who responds poorly to bullying, you may provoke them into fleeing your presence, or your attempt to bully them may just make them angry.  You've certainly succeeded in intimidating them, but the effect is that they've decided to attempt to remove that very real threat to them.

There are consequences to using any of the social-skills.  If you're using intimidate to strong-arm someone, it MIGHT get them to back down... or it might lead to them and their gang jumping you the next day, to have a kindly chat about acceptable behaviour with their broken beer bottles.  You can't bluff someone into thinking that the sky is green if it isn't - they can SEE the sky - but in a sense, the same holds true for any other bluff you make.  If they see overwhelming evidence against what you said, they won't magically have faith in you, and again, Mister Dark Alley might not be your friend for a while.

Persuasion, like Intimidation, is limited.  Certainly you can convince someone that what you suggest is the best course of action, and they may well believe it, too, but you'd have to do VERY well to convince Joe Peasant to go fight the dragon, regardless of how much Joe Peasant may agree that yes, indeed, it would be nice if someone were to slay it.

Simply put, social skills are useful, but they're not magical - a contrast made evident by the very really magical spells designed to GIVE you direct influence over someone's actions.  By all means, use them, but remember that just because John the Shoemaker rolled a natural twenty on his intimidate check over Mr. Pickles, Barbarian Warlord of the Seven Straights, 15th level (and exceptionally unlucky/unwise) half-orc and won doesn't mean that Mister Pickles might not just cut him in half to remove the source of the threat.  Sure Mister Pickles might face some consequences for THAT, but John the Shoemaker's consequences were a trifle more immediate and, shall we say, sharp.

[miltonyorkcastle]

Well put, LightlyFrosted.

[Gulnyr]

(1d20 + character level or Hit Dice + target’s Wisdom bonus [if any] + target’s modifiers on saves against fear)

Which in Hardragh's case is somewhere around (1d20+21-1+12), so 1d20+32. Level 21, 8 wisdom and around 12 will save, no special bonus vs fear if unbuffed.

I agree with the method, but I'm not clear on your numbers.  I bolded the confusing part.  Are you saying you're adding Hardragh's Will save as a save modifier against Fear?  

I don't think a Will save is a modifier to a Will save, which is what a Fear check is.  Modifiers to Fear checks are the bonuses that apply to that Will save, like the Halfling's Fearless "feat" (+1 vs. Fear).

So, Jennara would roll 1d20 + 31 (her level) + 7 (her Wisdom modifier) + 1 (her Halfling Fearless Bonus), or 1d20+39 against an Intimidation attempt, not 1d20+64 (all that plus a 25 Will saving throw).

[Filatus]

Yeah, I realized that later. Fearless is +2 by the way. So it would end up with Hardragh rolling 20.

Makes more sense too come to think of it.

[Stephen_Zuckerman]

In this medium, I very much agree with you, Frosty. Most of us aren't prepared or capable of RPing a 30+ social roll, apart, perhaps, from Intimidate (which can be just as much body language). The rolls were, in PnP, the actual "persuasion" your character was doing. For example, I have no idea how Ronny Rogue could convince someone that a lich cowered in fear of his might, but if he had +20 to Bluff, he could do it, at least to someone without much of a Sense Motive. That's how the system's designed to work - remember, these are AMAZING characters! Making someone believe the unbelievable without a terribly sound way of supporting their claim is part of what shows how terribly good they are. That said, there should be at least some description of their argument... *Shrug.*

But, in this medium and in general, I'm not denying that it's a very good argument.

[Faldred]

While it's good to have fixed ways of doing things, sometimes there should be multiple options specified as well.

Countering Intimidate with Intimidate makes sense, of course.  If someone tries to intimidate you, you can try to offset that by being more intimidating than they are.  Whomever is scarier, wins.  

On the other hand, you could just try to resist the intimidation, and that's where the level check plus Wisdom/Fear modifiers come into play.  As Intimidate is a Charisma-based skill, it's counter should be Wisdom-based.

In any case, as with any other opposed roll on "social" skills, be sure to think about what reasonable modifiers would be for the situation, and have both parties agree to them before rolling it out.  This is also one of the times where I think degree of success/failure should be represented by the difference in the opposed rolls -- when the hulking menace says "step aside", if you fail your opposed roll by only a couple, you simply step aside, but a huge failure could be represented as perhaps cowering and simpering.

[jrizz]

I have been thinking about this whole intimidation thing. There is a RP factor that needs to be factored in as well. As stated earlier in this thread for RP you should work up to a intimidate check, not just:

PC 1 and 2 have just run into each other.
PC 1 "hey dont make me smash you"
PC 1 *intimidate check*
Player 1 [tell to player 2] hey you have to make a roll

So we all agree on this, I think. Now another dimension that needs to be considered is, does it make sense for PC 2 to be afraid of PC 1 under any conditions. Here is a scenario that does not make sense.

A half giant fighter (say 10th level, that means he has seen a good amount of battles) and a halfling fighter (with a high intimidate). The half giant is 7 feet tall and over 400 pounds the halfling is 4 feet tall and 80 pounds. Without a incredible and public show of power/prowess/skill the half giant just will not be intimidated by the halfling on words alone.

[Hellblazer]

I agree that depending on the physical aspect of the people intimidating each other, there will be a limit to what can be done. But taking out the overly abundant differences in height and all, someone who doesn't know his opponent will most likely have an apprehension in the back of his head because he doesn't know who he is dealing with. So beside obvious disparity in race and size, there is always a likely hood that someone will be intimidated. I'd dare to say that for race, even a half giant may be intimidated from the start if he sees a dark elf come out of the shadow just in front of him with his weapons drawn and ready to strike if he was not intimidated, why then did he take his weapon out when he saw the dark elf?

[jrizz]

yes there are some races that have that mystique about them, I agree. But on the flip side there are races that have just the opposite air about them.

[Faldred]

The half giant is 7 feet tall and over 400 pounds the halfling is 4 feet tall and 80 pounds. Without a incredible and public show of power/prowess/skill the half giant just will not be intimidated by the halfling on words alone.

I don't know about 3.0, but in 3.5, there's a +/-4 modifier for each size category difference (in this case, a modifier of 8 between a half-giant [large] and a halfling [small]).

[jrizz]

So a HG would have a +8 against a halfling and a halfling would have a -8 against a HG?

I dont think that is taken into account since a intimidate roll does not have a target.

[Eorendil]

Remember that there are all kinds of situational modifiers.  If someone is trying to intimidate someone else using information that they are somewhat ignorant in and someone else is very knowledgeable about and vice versa that DC is change some.

You just have to be flexible and RP it out. I tend to ignore persuasion and intimidation attempts that aren't really RP'd and equate to "I intimidate you!" *intimidate check*.

That Halfling might have a much better chance at intimidating that Hill Giant if he's standing on Mr.  Hill Giant's friend or leaning on the severed head of another Hill Giant and covered in gore and bits.

[jrizz]

exactly my point but said much better, thanks.

I also ignore rolls that are made during RP when they don't fit or make sense for the situation.

[Gulnyr]

I understand the point, but I think it's important to point out that if someone has ranks in the Intimidate skill, he IS intimidating, regardless of his physical attributes.  Intimidation might involve the threat of direct harm, but it isn't necessarily about direct damage, after all.

[Eorendil]

That's why I say it requires rp and a lot more than just say "I intimidate you.. grrrr"  There are a lot of possible situational modifiers and its as much about knowing how to be intimidating.  I mean, being the head of an order or being seriously famous can have an effect on the result and no it doesn't have to be under threat of bodily harm.

As an example.. A militia drill sergeant may have an incredibly high skill in intimidation and he may still succeed if he were wearing a pink tutu, lipstick and eye liner but I'll bet you that most of the people he's trying to intimidate are not going to take him seriously.  The DC set by his skill is going to have a lot more negative modifiers in that instance.

Apply that same thing to you boss, a gangster.. etc.  That particular example may be a bit far fetched but it illustrates what I mean.

It'd be like trying to intimidate a Rofi by telling them they're going to be locked up till the end of their days by a non-existent law in a region where they are intimately familiar with the laws.

There are a lot of ways people can be intimidating.. beauty, fame, position of authority, brutish, intellect, knowledge.. it just needs to be rp'd a little and there are always possible situations where they may, in part, be mitigated by situational modifiers..

[Gulnyr]

Absolutely.  I'm not questioning how circumstances affect intimidation at all, or saying a character should just be intimidating without a little effort to RP it from the player.

I'm just not certain that in a world where there are multiple races and magic is a real thing that size would be that big a deal.  There are rumors and stereotypes about every race, and there are stories told about powerful heroes and villains of every race.  Some people may grow up in more sheltered environments, a lot of people probably feel that their race is superior for one reason or another, and some people are just dumb, but most people who grew up and live in civilized areas where the races mix aren't likely to assume anything about people just because of their sizes.

Sure, that Halfling looks little and a Half Giant could throw him across town in one heave, maybe, but Halflings are sneaky, and he'll get you where it hurts when you least expect it!  And that Elf looks like a good, stiff breeze could blow her over and break her in half, but those Elves wield magics that make steel seem pitiful and useless...