AMIA ARCHIVE • View topic - Intimidation

Yep, how do you react to it when someone has a +40, and you have:

1d20 (which they have that too)
+
Character Level
+
Wisdom Modifier

Well, here is my character's base score

1d20+7+0 = Maximum of 27, but lets say I am level 1. My maximum score will be 21.

Anyone that wants to try and intimidate any level 1 character just has to have a +1 or +2 in charisma (which, most of my characters have charisma bonus) and 4 skill points in intimidate.

This equals a

1d20 + 2 + 4 = Maximum score of 26

So, for the hell of it, lets say the intimidating guy decides to get to level 21 fighter. At level 21, he decides to get the epic skill focus in intimidate, because at a lower level, he decided to get a skill focus in intimidate.

Together, the skill focus bonus = +13

So lets roll up our intimidate with our fighter vs. random guy.

Fighter:
1d20+ 13 (skill focus) + 2 (charisma) + 24 (ranks in the skill)
this equals
1d20 + 39 = Minimum of 40, Maximum of 59

So let's take our other guy that has little defense. He is now level 21 too, and his modifier is:

1d20 + 21 + 0 = Minimum of 22, Maximum of 41

The chances of success with our other guy is basically improbable. The intimidator has a 5% chance of rolling a 1, and the defender has a 5% chance of rolling a 20. I don't see this happening. With levels, the intimidater gains skill, and the defending guy gains skill too. The intimidater will always win though.

Oh, and it isn't hard to get to level 21. One more thing I may as well add is the fact that the person doesn't even have to be a fighter, he could just skill bank and put the points in intimidate as a fighter at level 18-21, getting the skill focuses on the intimidate skill (the fighter could probably have less levels in fighter because of his bonus feats).

So, my questions is, how do you react to someone that has intimidated you?

My opinion: social skills on other PCs: fail. Especially with no attempt to RP your high skill points and just tossing out the dice.

For other opinions, clickest thou on search.

But a wisdom modifier has nothing to do with social skills, just ability to learn, common sense, perception of surroundings and so on.

I did some searching and other posts point out how it is not fair to have a counter intimidate score based off of ability bonuses, rather than skill bonuses.

I really don't think it is fair to have my characters controlled by other players because they have the OOC skill of skill banking. Its not only happened once, but twice, and I am considering disregarding the intimidation rolls people dish out (or just reacting with minimal RP towards the roll, as in a simple 4 word emote like *quivers in his boots*). So through this thread, I am wondering out to RP a situation where someone has a completely overpowering intimidation skill.

Moridan_X wrote:

But a wisdom modifier has nothing to do with social skills, just ability to learn, common sense, perception of surroundings and so on.

Quote:

Wisdom describes a character's willpower, common sense, perception, and intuition.

Willpower, common sense?

Anyway, do it like me and just walk away, slightly intimidated. Epic intimidate tossing just makes me epic yawn and want to RP with someone else.

Moridan_X wrote:

But a wisdom modifier has nothing to do with social skills, just ability to learn, common sense, perception of surroundings and so on.

I did some searching and other posts point out how it is not fair to have a counter intimidate score based off of ability bonuses, rather than skill bonuses.

I really don't think it is fair to have my characters controlled by other players because they have the OOC skill of skill banking. Its not only happened once, but twice, and I am considering disregarding the intimidation rolls people dish out (or just reacting with minimal RP towards the roll, as in a simple 4 word emote like *quivers in his boots*). So through this thread, I am wondering out to RP a situation where someone has a completely overpowering intimidation skill.

If someone spent the skill points on a skill that has no use for them (Note: This does not include Barbarians) other than in an RP sense, I would respect that. Even if they banked it. It's one of the few ways a character can actually try to make their character "scary" or "frightening", and it's not even that. It's just intimidation.

To be intimidated means your character rather suddenly loses his "OMFG I R TEH BADASSZ" for a second, and maybe, just perhaps, has a doubt about his own ability to lay a beat down. It's not a run-in-terror type of thing. At least, that's not how I percieve it. It's a "Damn. He's big. You know, I could probably take him... but... maybe not."

Then again, I'm also a fan of "Win Big - React Big; Win Small - Lose Small" with skills and social skills. A 100 pickpocket lets you steal someone's shadow, yadda yadda yadda, whatever.

At any rate... yes, skilldumping is annoying, but is RPable. Intimidate is hard to counter, but nobody takes the skill focuses unless they're a Barbarian (and the rare few in that case). Yes, there's plenty of Intimidate gear but it takes a lot of mythalling to be worth anything other than the Intimidate bonuses. No, you don't have to respond to social roles. Yes, I do feel like people should because skills help you understand how that player wants to portray their character.

If you fail a counter intimidate, it's no different than failing a will save against a death spell. You can't say "BULL, my character can't be killed! That's not how I imagined them!" And oftentimes, I feel that's how people view the social skills - optional because it makes them change their story. Personally, I say Roll with the Punches.

Tirade aside: Discipline should be able to counter Intimidate.

The intimidate skill disturbs me slightly. It's used in many ways and just rolling an intimidate check has no real grounding on what the character is doing.

Some characters the intimidate might be their appearance. Blood, spikes, a bunch of badges and trophies, that sort of thing.

The intimidate required for the Weapon Master class is more to do with weapon handling.

Take, for example someone spinning a pair of nunchuks wildly and skilfully or some serious skills with a katana.

I'm reminded of an intimidation / counter intimidation that has happened in a film. Batman (the 1989 version) where some outlaw is showing his sword skills, dual wielding some blades and spinning them with such skill and grace (intimidate roll).

Batman shrugs and kicks him in the balls.

Wyjyn: Loving all of you (and above all Disco) since 11 Jan 2007.

I dislike it, because it doesnt use will in the counter roll which I think it is meant to. I have brought this up time and again, I guess for some reason it wont be changed..maybe 3.0 has a different roll than 3.5. In 3.5, the equation definitely includes will. Furthermore, isnt fear a bit more complex than something a univeral skill can define?

What if my char finds goblins and kobolds laughable? Nope, they rolled the roll so he is 'scared'. I think that it would be an OOC struggle for a kobold to scare me, its like being scared by a chihuahua to my mind..and I am not a level 30 adventurer. So many issues with the intimidate skill, really.

My personal standpoint is much the same as Wyjyn's here.

On a note about 3.0 rules, here's the check made to succeed an intimidate check:

"You can change other's behaviour with a successful check. The DC is typically 10 + the target's Hit Dice. Any bonuses that a target may have on saving throws against fear increase the DC"

~ quote from the 3.0 Player's Handbook

So essentially the counter intimidate should be roughly

10 + Character Level + fear save (will + any other modifiers)

I guess that means mind blank would make one immune?

SephiraAndy wrote:

I guess that means mind blank would make one immune?

Magical fear =/ fearsome appearance

A paladin is immune against a dragons fear aura, but he sure as hell has some sweat on his forehead and a slighty increased pulse.

Oh, is mind blank only against magical fear?

I assumed it just gave the recipient ultra clarity and lucidity.

Quote:

Description: This spell renders all allies within the area of effect immune to mind-affecting spells and effects. All negative mind-affecting effects are also removed from the target creatures.

I'd say an ugly half-orc brute yelling down at your hin to crunsh her doesn't fall under the category "effects".

here is a question for pallys, if they have fear immunity. does that mean that are not afraid of going into a dragon's den without armor on and with no weapons? or *insert any other insanely dangerous suicidal scenario you can think of. *

Can't answer that question completely, really. It's about how you interpret game rules. I would say that, yes, paladins are afraid. If they felt no fear, they would not be heroic. However, they do not let that fear affect their judgement, and every time they defeat their fear is an act of worship and personal devotion. They are immune to supernatural fear and the mechanical effects of "fear" because of their devotion and the divine help of their patron, but the feeling itself doesn't impose those mechanical effects on you; only the power you let that feeling have over you. If paladins couldn't feel fear, I'd say they'd be inhuman, unsuitable role models and thoroughly boring.

As for the example you mentioned, the ideal paladin would do it if it was his duty, if it was the best way to further the cause of good; whether he was afraid or not plays no part in his decision.

hendrack wrote:

Quote:

Description: This spell renders all allies within the area of effect immune to mind-affecting spells and effects. All negative mind-affecting effects are also removed from the target creatures.

I'd say an ugly half-orc brute yelling down at your hin to crunsh her doesn't fall under the category "effects".

Fear is a mind affecting effect. I don't mean that just in terms of the spell "Fear". I mean the effect.

Fear as a rule is psychologically damaging and is considered mind-affecting.

Remove fear would surely also give a +4 save against intimidate. It gives +4 save against fear spells and effects. The effects of fear are mind-affecting and hence Mind Blank (and the lesser version) are applicable.

Last edited by hendrack on Fri, Jan 02 2009, 19:11 PM, edited 1 time in total.

http://nwn.wikia.com/wiki/Effect

Quote:

Game effects help to describe the results of a character's interaction with the game environment, creatures, and items.

True enough, imho chugging a potion and be fear-immune to everything and their grandmother is still rubbish, mind. But so are all other immunity giving potions.

On the other side I must admit I'am tempted to go around all day with mind blank to negate silly intimidate rolls.

I see nothing wrong with an immunity. As long as it's costs enough. There's immunity to all sorts of effects that are permanent. Poison, disease immunities on rings, etc. Chugging a mind blank potion is still only giving it temporarily.. and are rather dear.

Mind blank isn't exactly a low level spell.

My take on social skills is that they are supposed to be role played. That means you RP the stats first, THEN roll for emphasis, it gives the other player an indication on how to react.

An Eldathian should be persuasive (epic points in persuade) and be able to stop fights purely by her ability to solve disputes.

A charlatan character should be able to dupe you most times.

A Barbarian -is- scary when they get all angry...

When they don't RP the stats first, but simply roll, that's an epic fail in RP. When they RP the stats as best they can, then roll, that's a DC wand coming out of my pocket. *nods sagely*

soundofastream wrote:

My take on social skills is that they are supposed to be role played. That means you RP the stats first, THEN roll for emphasis, it gives the other player an indication on how to react.

An Eldathian should be persuasive (epic points in persuade) and be able to stop fights purely by her ability to solve disputes.

A charlatan character should be able to dupe you most times.

A Barbarian -is- scary when they get all angry...

When they don't RP the stats first, but simply roll, that's an epic fail in RP. When they RP the stats as best they can, then roll, that's a DC wand coming out of my pocket. *nods sagely*

I agree here. Someone just rolling a skill without any indication on what's going on is more Roll Play than Role Play. Seems more like snakes and ladders (chutes and ladders?) than an RPG.

It's always worth RPing what they are attempting to do... Roll ... then RP the result accordingly

I think certain scenes, as in where you are and what happens, should also be taken into account.

You just trashed a few dozen undead and defeated Ankh and gave the ring to the Priestess after you rested?

I don't think you'd be intimidated by some hin coming at you then. They could pretty much roll all they want , even 127 without any real Rp reasons.

Coming out of the barbarian caves, exhausted and beaten but happy with your loot and undead summon when you see someone of the Eter
nal order standing in front of the caves, fully buffed nontheless.

I'd crap my pants and hope I get away, no roll neccesary.

Any intinidate roll in Corder, under the eyes of the guards. Well, threats like : I will beat you so ahrd... I will do that and that with you if you don't move aside, etc. Are pretty harmless. Why? Because of the guards who would come to stop this guy. Everything else would just be metagaming.
A more subtle threat: I know where you live. I know about your kids/wife/man, etc. Will be far more effective than that.

soundofastream wrote:

When they don't RP the stats first, but simply roll, that's an epic fail in RP. When they RP the stats as best they can, then roll, that's a DC wand coming out of my pocket. *nods sagely*

Roleplaying excellent persuasion, bluffing or intimidation alone is enough to earn my admiration. Leave the dice in your pocket, it doesn't matter to me how many points you put in if you can't back it up. And this is coming from an idiot who wasted skill points putting his persuasion into epic levels. I don't ever roll my social skills unless I'm asked to by another player or a DM, and even then, sometimes I'll just ignore the request.

soundofastream wrote:

My take on social skills is that they are supposed to be role played. That means you RP the stats first, THEN roll for emphasis, it gives the other player an indication on how to react.

An Eldathian should be persuasive (epic points in persuade) and be able to stop fights purely by her ability to solve disputes.

A charlatan character should be able to dupe you most times.

A Barbarian -is- scary when they get all angry...

When they don't RP the stats first, but simply roll, that's an epic fail in RP. When they RP the stats as best they can, then roll, that's a DC wand coming out of my pocket. *nods sagely*

Seconded.

I ignore rolls when there is no RP backing them up. But if you give me a good description (Bobo! Where's that description of your hin's appearance?) you don't even need to roll.

However, not always the other character will react as you expect. Some of them could despair and run. Others could apologize and walk away. Others will simply be frozen in place. Others will cry. Some male characters might act like girls.

Really, it all depends on the other player's interpretation.

In my opinion, rolling Intimidate should be grounds for PvP. The skill makes no sense unless it's used with stakes that high.

Insofar as lying down for the five or ten minutes of body-disposal RP counts as high stakes.

As I've said many many times in the past, what I think the skill does is to convince the other person that you really are going to try your very very best to kill them unless they fold. Not that you can, just that you'll definitely try.

That plan works brilliantly with commoners and other NPCs, but with professionally violent people it really just means they'll kill you to eliminate a threat. That doesn't even mean they have to be brave. Shooting first is perfectly compatible with cowardice; it's putting up with the risk of being shot first that means you're brave, and when the other dude is springing Intimidate on you, that's not the case because it's being forced on you.

Every time you walk into view of a mage with a PvP spellbook, and to a lesser extent a Devcritter or Implosion DC-whore etc etc, you are in effect putting a loaded shotgun in your mouth and handing them the butt.

Do you want to make a person in that position nervous? Then keep your Intimidate roll in your pants, Furryboots.

Really short answer. React how your character would.

Eary's response to intimidation varies between laughing in your face (low intimidate), simply shrugging (mid intimidate), or killing you first (high intimidate).

Just as an example

WonWon wrote:

Really short answer. React how your character would.

Eary's response to intimidation varies between laughing in your face (low intimidate), simply shrugging (mid intimidate), or killing you first (high intimidate).

Just as an example

SephiraAndy wrote:

Batman shrugs and kicks him in the balls.

I don't really like the idea of dice rolls to decide how we react, but I do believe we should put into social skills if our character is supposed to be sociable in that way. Dice rolls then become more of a, "I have this amount, gauge your reaction as desired."

Of course as Hendrack said, if there's not the roleplay to back it up, you can hardly expect people to run around panicking for the sake of, "*growls angrily*" or, "*eyes you like a madman*"

To be truly intimidating, I recommend following characters like Ryan 'Blackwell' Banesman around. He comes off as an intimidating psychotic who you definitely should be afraid of.

Reacting to intimidation in itself is not the easiest roleplay. How your mannerisms change and what you are willing to do depends on your character. Just keep in mind that running around panicking generally harms roleplay because chasing you around and trying to roleplay is more trouble than it's worth. For this reason, I tend to feel terrifying rage should not be used to enforce an intimidate check. All in all, it's better for your character to break down into tears, try to weasel out of it, launch a desperate attack, et cetera. Even then, the situation might not requre begging for one's life or anything that drastic. Best to stop and have a think about how your character would react in various situations.

WonWon wrote:

Really short answer. React how your character would.

That.

When I use Lyle's intimidate, I don't necessarily expect you to run, back down from a fight, or even be frightened by it (even though he has 61 in it with his current gearset.) It's just a roll to back up the paragraph or so I type describing how scary Lyle is making himself look.

If i'm feeling up to it i roll counter intimidate then discipline. The first guages whether or not your intimidation has any effect the second determines what my characters reaction is. I only do this on Tjorn because thats how he would react. If i roll ten less say i may back down, show nervousness, if i roll my will score less i'll flee. If i roll ten more i'll tell you to get piked. If i roll miles higher he'll become agressive as you've offended him.

I know that this is a totally 100 percent homebrewed way of dealing with it but if someone puts in the RP to back there Die rolls i'll put in the RP/rolls in reaction to it.

What most people here are failing to realize is that being intimidated does NOT mean you run with your tail between your legs. Sure, there are people who would, but there are also people who become highly aggressive, defensive, change their tone, etc. etc. when intimidated. Intimidation does not equal "::runs away, crying, like a chiwawa that was just stepped on::".

o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote:

What most people here are failing to realize is that being intimidated does NOT mean you run with your tail between your legs. Sure, there are people who would, but there are also people who become highly aggressive, defensive, change their tone, etc. etc. when intimidated. Intimidation does not equal "::runs away, crying, like a chiwawa that was just stepped on::".

He said it better than I did on my previous post.

The point is that intimidation requires acknowledgment on the player's part, immediately associated with backing off. And we can't have that. 'Cause we're heroes, and we're winners. All the time.

Not a clue what you're trying to say there, xordae. All I could catch out of it was a snipe at players who play characters that don't back off.

Which, for all Level 30 Characters, is a pretty valid thing. A man who has killed dragons and slain Abyssals by the dozen is likely to see anything short of that as rather blasé and unintimidating.

WonWon wrote:

Which, for all Level 30 Characters, is a pretty valid thing. A man who has killed dragons and slain Abyssals by the dozen is likely to see anything short of that as rather blasé and unintimidating.

Na, not all level 30's can or do go out and kill dragons, fiends, and celestials on their own. One could argue that a number of the level 30's who go in parties only do so BECAUSE they're in that party and would not even dream of doing it on their own. It's a matter of character and that characters personality really.

Intimidation can be handled so many ways. Compare it to real life. some dude comes up in your face, all scary and looking like he'll rob and/or kill you.... you can;

1. Run away. Probably not the best option
2. Give him cash and hope he doesn't kill you anyway
3. Pull out your own gun before he pulls his, and shoot.(IE, starting the fight before they start it)

And if you compare it to different situations on Amia, I think it could be handled so many many ways, depending on the characters involved, how secure the intimidated person is and so on.

Rolling intimidation is different from a barbarians terrifying aura.
Sort of like a thief threatening you, and a tank charging..(of course there are those that would do that too, if they were completely gung-ho like Steven Segal or Chuck Norris) if you fail the will, you might not want to attack the tank with the handgun and hope it'll just die. The thief on the other hand might not be very educated, and you can talk around him, then shank him when he's distracted, or just kill him outright.

People that always go "intimidation = you are scared of me and run away or back down" is sort of saying that a high intimidation would let them make others think they were just impossible to defeat. Which is another thing all together. Some PCs on Amia actually pull it off, and never get dragged into PvP, because (most) others, think they're just WAAAAY too epic and powerful.

Just how I see it anyway.

o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote:

WonWon wrote:

Which, for all Level 30 Characters, is a pretty valid thing. A man who has killed dragons and slain Abyssals by the dozen is likely to see anything short of that as rather blasé and unintimidating.

Na, not all level 30's can or do go out and kill dragons, fiends, and celestials on their own. One could argue that a number of the level 30's who go in parties only do so BECAUSE they're in that party and would not even dream of doing it on their own. It's a matter of character and that characters personality really.

I said it's valid, mind, in that... It's not off the wall. There's always exceptions, but for the most part, if you've hit level 30; you've fought some things that are far nastier than a guy with a sword.

Without reading this topic, I will say that unless there is something extraordinary bout the situation, I will probably ignore your intimidate,persuade, or whatever rolls. I don't feel these skills are made for PC vs PC use, so don't bother rolling against me. I prefer to actually be... persuaded, I guess.

TormakSaber wrote:

Without reading this topic, I will say that unless there is something extraordinary bout the situation, I will probably ignore your intimidate,persuade, or whatever rolls. I don't feel these skills are made for PC vs PC use, so don't bother rolling against me. I prefer to actually be... persuaded, I guess.

This.

However, if you roll Intimidate/Persuade/Whatever, and then back it up with some very nice RP, then I'll happily go along with it. I know what makes my characters tick, and if all you do is roll, I'm just going to assume your character tried their best, and failed. Far too many people try to get away with not RPing the roll, and so the roll counts for very little.

Carter wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

Without reading this topic, I will say that unless there is something extraordinary bout the situation, I will probably ignore your intimidate,persuade, or whatever rolls. I don't feel these skills are made for PC vs PC use, so don't bother rolling against me. I prefer to actually be... persuaded, I guess.

This.

However, if you roll Intimidate/Persuade/Whatever, and then back it up with some very nice RP, then I'll happily go along with it. I know what makes my characters tick, and if all you do is roll, I'm just going to assume your character tried their best, and failed. Far too many people try to get away with not RPing the roll, and so the roll counts for very little.

These bits, yus.

Social skills are fine on NPCs, though. They don't have such depths of personality most of the time.

Carter wrote:

TormakSaber wrote:

Without reading this topic, I will say that unless there is something extraordinary bout the situation, I will probably ignore your intimidate,persuade, or whatever rolls. I don't feel these skills are made for PC vs PC use, so don't bother rolling against me. I prefer to actually be... persuaded, I guess.

This.

However, if you roll Intimidate/Persuade/Whatever, and then back it up with some very nice RP, then I'll happily go along with it. I know what makes my characters tick, and if all you do is roll, I'm just going to assume your character tried their best, and failed. Far too many people try to get away with not RPing the roll, and so the roll counts for very little.

It specifically states in the PHB that these skills are for use on NPCs ... prsonall, I will respond to these rolls to support the RP: a diplomatic person talking will sound different to an undiplomatic, even if they are using the same words.
To me skills like these have the same problem as intelligence - what do you do if your character is smarter / more diplomatic than you? No matter what, yo are the one RPing your character, and your stats are there to support that RP, not take its place.

Yossarin wrote:

soundofastream wrote:

When they don't RP the stats first, but simply roll, that's an epic fail in RP. When they RP the stats as best they can, then roll, that's a DC wand coming out of my pocket. *nods sagely*

Roleplaying excellent persuasion, bluffing or intimidation alone is enough to earn my admiration. Leave the dice in your pocket, it doesn't matter to me how many points you put in if you can't back it up. And this is coming from an idiot who wasted skill points putting his persuasion into epic levels. I don't ever roll my social skills unless I'm asked to by another player or a DM, and even then, sometimes I'll just ignore the request.

I'm pretty sure I'll disagree on that, Yossarin.
Even if a character will come and try to persuade mine, my characters would all react accordingly to their personality, and if someone rolls a persuade/bluff check, even with no points invested in the skill, it could still change their reaction. (And make me appriciate the player a whole lot more.)
Personally, I like to think those skills are good to have with social characters, and could greatly change another's reaction.

I'd like to think intimidate is more "what you see is what you get" based, for example, if an orc would stand and fart, scream, or so on.. near my elf (Which is a coward) He'll be intimidated without a roll beacuse he's a coward, if it would be a hin or a kobold, which are "cute" in his opinion, he'll most likely shoo them away.

I don't agree that you should just ignore another character's skills out right. Not everyone is a roleplay genius with a huge vocabulary and excellent grip on the situation. Most people are just easy going casual roleplayers and some either don't speak enough English to properly describe the intimidation or are new to roleplaying and aren't used to lengthy emotes.

I think so long as someone roleplays it to the best of their ability and has the skill there to back it up, then they are scary. It's better if they can roleplay it well, but the fact that they've dumped some skill points in should pay back dividends in the roleplayed reactions of others. Kind of like an alternative to settling everything with hack 'n' slash.

All things considered, however, I wouldn't often make a counter roll because I don't think it's necessary and I don't think it's beneficial to roleplay to settle everything with chance. Your social skills inform another player of two things:

That you've invested skill points into roleplay, thus clearly desire to roleplay whether you're good at it or not.
That your character is good at a particular thing and that the other player should keep that in mind regarding their own roleplay.

In summary, you should not ignore the skills of another player, but to base your roleplay on the decision of a die is surely folly. Ignore the d20, remember the base skill.

Social skills are optional for player/player interaction. Though I typically react if it's in my character.

Typically when I'm intimidated in a corner I throw a punch. Call it a "I'm shit scared, I want to down him before I get hurt" situation.

It's kinda moot anyway since all a roleplayer or rollplayer can do is put their dicebag or text out there and see what the other folk do with it. You're not in control of your material as soon as it's their turn to type. Learn that and accept it and the world will turn much smoother for you. Same goes for posts on public forums, incidentally.

Skill rolls, no matter how high, and actual words or emotes, no matter what their literary value, are both going to bounce off a godplayer.

Conversely, tiny skill rolls and inept or lazy roleplay are both going to be accepted and incorporated into someone who's playing for laughs or emo.

It's best to consider your RP as a suggestion, not an instruction. I like people making suggestions, but instructions tend to bring out the Rage Against The Machine in me.

Uberuce wrote:

Conversely, tiny skill rolls and inept or lazy roleplay are both going to be accepted and incorporated into someone who's playing for laughs or emo.

What do you mean by emo? do you think it's possible to notice that about the person by their RP?

I think Uberuce is just trying to say some people are gits and will ignore you no matter what you do.

I think intimidation should be RPed based on how your character would react, I don't think there is a certain defined way of how to behave when intimidated. Some people when intimidated, get angry, slink away, become quiet, stutter, or some are intimidated but have enough discipline to not show it. It really just depends on the character I think.

Summed Up: If someone rolls a social skill, they better darn well be roleplaying well enough to back up that roll. They shouldn't need that roll to "make" your character do whatever it is you want them to, but if a roll helps demonstrate to you a futhering of that roleplay, then it's acceptable. Acknowleding that roll isn't necessary, but appreciated and respected.

Also: Rolling a skill without RP is bushu. Rolling anything without heavy RP is bushu. Just roleplay. We don't need numbers popping up over our heads to disrupt the immersion unless there's a darn good reason for it.

willow wrote:

What do you mean by emo? do you think it's possible to notice that about the person by their RP?

Yes.

Meh, again one post about social skills. This is based on personal taste. Some go with it some dont. And basically there is nothing we can do about it before the DM's deside it is a must. So, is there a point at this topic.. these things come up every now and then...

willow wrote:

I'm pretty sure I'll disagree on that, Yossarin.
Even if a character will come and try to persuade mine, my characters would all react accordingly to their personality, and if someone rolls a persuade/bluff check, even with no points invested in the skill, it could still change their reaction. (And make me appriciate the player a whole lot more.)
Personally, I like to think those skills are good to have with social characters, and could greatly change another's reaction.

And personally, I think that roleplaying my best to persuade your PC and accomplishing my goal and then rolling my d20+100 persuade skill check just to "prove my point" is overkill, total showboating, and absolutely disingenuous to the other player.

Like Tormak says, these skills are not intended for PC-PC interaction. They are for PC-NPC interaction if anything.

Intimidation - How to react

Who is online