I think a lot of the problem is that Intimidation either doesn't make sense at all, or is badly explained.
The basic logic of intimidation is that you want to convince your target that the cost of resisting is greater than the cost of giving you what you want. As the target, I have to guess at the following:
How likely is it that you'll actually try to harm me? (you might be unwilling to pay the costs of attacking me)
How effective are you likely to do if you do decide to harm me?
What does it cost me to prevent you from harming me?
What other options to prevent you from harming me do I have? (running away yelling for the guards is actually usually a failure).
A demonstration of force is relevant to (2), and is something that strength can reasonably do (as can other stats), but the others are all best interpreted as charisma or just situational modifiers.
I don't think intimidation has to work like that.. Your points make a fair bit of sense in a universe where people react in a rational manner, but that isn't really the case in my experience. In reality I think a lot of intimidation is done simply by behaving in a way the throws someone off and makes them nervous enough to act in an irrational manner. The person doesn't have to actually think you're going to harm them, all you need to do is trigger their animalistic flight response.
As a teenager I worked the night shift at a seven eleven for a while, this particular seven eleven being located right beside a night club. During my first weekend working the night shift, this burly, rough looking dude came up to me and bought something.. He then claimed I'd given him back the wrong change.. Saying it in a very firm tone, bordering on aggression, but making no actualy threat at alll... I was fairly certain I'd given him the right change.. But the his physique and general attitude made me try to convince myself he was right so that I could make him go away and end the encounter, it was extremely uncomfortable.
Right as I was about to give in, he cracked into a wide grin and slapped me on the shoulder in a friendly manner.. Turns out this was the bouncer from the night club, and he had a habbit of pulling this stunt with all the new guys working that shift..
My point is that I definitely felt threatened, and my instincts were telling me to give him what he wanted, despite the fact that he never actually threatened me directly and I never actually considered the odds of him attacking me or anything like that.. But the animal inside of me made my wanna act in an irrational manner.
Edit: Mind you, we werent alone or anything, there was a line of other people behind him and 2 other guys worked with me, so there was very little chance of him actually doing anything..
Obviously having dexterity is important for climbing, but it's not sufficient. If you have very little functional strength (maybe you've been bedridden for months, maybe you're elderly) no amount of coordination and balance is going to get you up a cliff face. That's why Strength is a better default.
Ability checks only come into play if success isn't guaranteed. Depending on what's being climbed, the weather conditions and the DM's judgement there could be multiple ways to approach the challenge, calling for different ability checks.
You can't be dexterous if you ain't strong. But it's a different kind of strength. You can't have an 18 dex and not have some kind of functional strength or else how are you getting those damage bonuses on your Bow? Ever Shoot a bow? you need strength. Acrobats? ever do a pull up? you need strength. Grapple. Ever Tap someone twice your size? Toss someone? You need strength. IT is way easier to climb being light than being strong. any climber will back that up. THey also havwe very strong hands. BUt a 145 lb mountain climber that can scale a cliff barehanded isn't the type of strong that an 18 strength is meant to translate too. I feel like that's written by nerds who watch Andre the giant carry two people up a rope and think somewhere thats a real thing. Or Conan scaling the side of the temple barehanded. That's not real.
You buy magical elves, fire breathing dragons and living mushrooms, but climbing being strength based is a "realism" problem for you?
No offense to you, and apologies for going off topic for a sec, but this is a terrible point to raise. It's just nonsense. D&D has a lot of fantastical elements, which obviously aren't grounded in realism, but also a ton of non-fantastical elements - and the latter ones only make sense if they are plausible, believable, realistic (even if not 100% accurate because it's a tabletop RPG and not Starfleet's holodeck functionality). Unless magic changes gravity somewhere, gravity always pulls you down. Unless there's some fantastical lineage in your ancestry, you're a human with human characteristics. Unless some Fireball-type magic happens, the air isn't spontaneously going to burst into flame. And unless you have a snake-like body or adhesive appendages, climbing is primarily going to involve grabbing handholds and pulling yourself up. "Magic is real" is not the same thing as "nothing works normal anymore".
I think a lot of the problem is that Intimidation either doesn't make sense at all, or is badly explained.
The basic logic of intimidation is that you want to convince your target that the cost of resisting is greater than the cost of giving you what you want. As the target, I have to guess at the following:
How likely is it that you'll actually try to harm me? (you might be unwilling to pay the costs of attacking me)
How effective are you likely to do if you do decide to harm me?
What does it cost me to prevent you from harming me?
What other options to prevent you from harming me do I have? (running away yelling for the guards is actually usually a failure).
A demonstration of force is relevant to (2), and is something that strength can reasonably do (as can other stats), but the others are all best interpreted as charisma or just situational modifiers.
There are also concepts like "Do you have any idea who I am?". I think back to the Godfather II scene with the slumlord's initial meeting with Vito.
Or "I have been through this before with your kind."
I am in agreement with many on here that using alternative abilities for skills checks can, and should, be used where the situation calls for it. Personally, I would want my players to describe their actions, upon which I would ask for a specific roll. However, I would have no problem with my players suggesting an alternative: I'd consider it acceptable if I had asked for a Strength (Athletics) check for something, but a player asked if they could use Dex (Acrobatics) instead because of XYZ. I may not agree to it (it would depend on the situation) but I don't think it's wrong for them to ask.
Edit: Similarly I would see nothing wrong, if I asked for a Charisma (Persuasion) check, but the player said he was using his knowledge of the NPCs background/history so asked to make it an Intelligence (Persuasion) roll.
As for the Intimidation thing, I think you could probably use any ability for that.
A character describing (or hinting at) what the consequences of not cooperating could be Charisma (Intimidation)
The fighter smashing a table while asking the questions could be Strength (Intimidation)
The Barbarian cutting himself with a grin on his face could be Constitution (Intimidation)
The Rogue suddenly producing a throwing knife from his sleeve with a flourish and then cleaning his nails with it while questioning could be Dex (Intimidation)
The Ranger describing the dangers he can see in the surrounding area (unstable cliffs, loose branches etc) could be Wisdom (Intimidation)
The Wizard describing the anatomy and how damage can be done, or a Cleric describing the religious consequences of sin, could be Inteligence (Intimidation)
Any spellcaster demonstrating their spellcasting ability could be their <spellcasting ability modifer> (Intimidation)
You tend to see lots of these at once in fantasy novels: One will approach and start hinting at unpleasant consequences, while another produces a dagger to clean their fingernails and another flexes their muscles and leans on their axe. They would all be valid methods of intimidation.
All of those involve a significant level of showmanship (charisma) though....
Depending on the character, not necessarily... If the fighter is angry and yelling, then smashes something, that's not showmanship. If the barbarian actually likes pain, it doesn't have to be showmanship. If the wizard just finds it interesting and starts listing ways they could cause pain or injury due to their anatomical and/or medical knowledge, that's not showmanship.
Also, if a character announces they want to do a somersault off a roof and land with a flourish in the middle of a crowd... That involves significant showmanship, but Dex is still the main ability needed to pull it off. I'd say each of those primarily needs the ability mentioned, and showmanship is just a helpful extra. It doesn't matter how charismatic you are if you try to flourish a knife and drop it, or if you cut yourself and yell in pain...
Yes, and “do you have any idea who I am?” is a perfect example of a Charisma (Intimidation) check.
And that is precisely why Intimidation is a CHA based check. Pretty much all of the examples I see of a non-CHA based check for Intimidation leave out the key element: The protagonist must interact with the target in some social manner.
Watching some huge guy at the gym deadlift 600 pounds on the other side of the room, completely ignoring you, is not intimidating. Having the same guy drop that weight 2 feet from your head while glowering at you might be. But that requires social interaction, be it verbal or non-verbal, with the target. It is still a Cha based check.
I think it's really important to look at what Strength and dexterity really are.
Strength is your ability to plan out a physically demanding thing and accomplish it. Gymnastic routine? Running a marathon? Deadlifting? All strength and athletics.
Dexterity on the other hand is a frustratingly misnamed stat that is supposed to be about reflexes and balance... and it keeps strength from being the only melee attack mod... and your "hand eye coordination" controls your ability to walk quietly and jump out of the way (acrobatics and saving throws).
As previously mentioned, climbing requires strength. I love rock climbing and I can tell you from personal experience that my reflexes and balance don't factor in much. Is big part of climbing smart is setting yourself up to catch yourself if something goes wrong, so when you lose a handhold, or try a foothold you can respond. It's all planned out and that means your reactions aren't factored in. Sure, you could say that 1:1000 situations might require it, but that doean't mean you should be able to dodge your way up a cliff.
And that is precisely why Intimidation is a CHA based check. Pretty much all of the examples I see of a non-CHA based check for Intimidation leave out the key element: The protagonist must interact with the target in some social manner.
The key problem is that it's both: you have to do something scary (really, any stat, or possibly just a function of level) and leverage that to convince the target.
It is also worth remembering that "X is scared of me" is not a successful intimidation check. "X is scared of me and as a result will do what I want" is a successful intimidation check. "X is scared of me and as a result will run off and round up a bunch of his buddies before attacking me" is really not all that productive.
I think a lot of the problem is that Intimidation either doesn't make sense at all, or is badly explained.
The basic logic of intimidation is that you want to convince your target that the cost of resisting is greater than the cost of giving you what you want. As the target, I have to guess at the following:
How likely is it that you'll actually try to harm me? (you might be unwilling to pay the costs of attacking me)
How effective are you likely to do if you do decide to harm me?
What does it cost me to prevent you from harming me?
What other options to prevent you from harming me do I have? (running away yelling for the guards is actually usually a failure).
A demonstration of force is relevant to (2), and is something that strength can reasonably do (as can other stats), but the others are all best interpreted as charisma or just situational modifiers.
I don't think intimidation has to work like that.. Your points make a fair bit of sense in a universe where people react in a rational manner, but that isn't really the case in my experience. In reality I think a lot of intimidation is done simply by behaving in a way the throws someone off and makes them nervous enough to act in an irrational manner. The person doesn't have to actually think you're going to harm them, all you need to do is trigger their animalistic flight response.
As a teenager I worked the night shift at a seven eleven for a while, this particular seven eleven being located right beside a night club. During my first weekend working the night shift, this burly, rough looking dude came up to me and bought something.. He then claimed I'd given him back the wrong change.. Saying it in a very firm tone, bordering on aggression, but making no actualy threat at alll... I was fairly certain I'd given him the right change.. But the his physique and general attitude made me try to convince myself he was right so that I could make him go away and end the encounter, it was extremely uncomfortable.
Right as I was about to give in, he cracked into a wide grin and slapped me on the shoulder in a friendly manner.. Turns out this was the bouncer from the night club, and he had a habbit of pulling this stunt with all the new guys working that shift..
My point is that I definitely felt threatened, and my instincts were telling me to give him what he wanted, despite the fact that he never actually threatened me directly and I never actually considered the odds of him attacking me or anything like that.. But the animal inside of me made my wanna act in an irrational manner.
Edit: Mind you, we werent alone or anything, there was a line of other people behind him and 2 other guys worked with me, so there was very little chance of him actually doing anything..
IN this type of situation, I doubt that guy has the skills of a rogue when it comes to persuasion for instance (Like a car salesman or a con artist). It's his shear size and rough demeanor that is intimidating. I doubt he would run for governor. Charisma is so many things that are not relevant to intimidation and vice verse. So strength as an alternate, and roll playing it intelligently, is a good option.
I think it's really important to look at what Strength and dexterity really are.
Strength is your ability to plan out a physically demanding thing and accomplish it. Gymnastic routine? Running a marathon? Deadlifting? All strength and athletics.
Dexterity on the other hand is a frustratingly misnamed stat that is supposed to be about reflexes and balance... and it keeps strength from being the only melee attack mod... and your "hand eye coordination" controls your ability to walk quietly and jump out of the way (acrobatics and saving throws).
As previously mentioned, climbing requires strength. I love rock climbing and I can tell you from personal experience that my reflexes and balance don't factor in much. Is big part of climbing smart is setting yourself up to catch yourself if something goes wrong, so when you lose a handhold, or try a foothold you can respond. It's all planned out and that means your reactions aren't factored in. Sure, you could say that 1:1000 situations might require it, but that doean't mean you should be able to dodge your way up a cliff.
Ok then, you are a climber. How much do you weigh? How much can you bench? I can guarantee if you are an actual rock climber you can NOT compete with a strong man. A power lifter, or wield a great sword with ease. It's a DIFFERENT strength. Also, you are wrong. Gymnastics is ACROBATICS in DND, not Athletics. Dexterity implies the character has a different kind of strength from someone with a high strength. You have the strength to pull back a bow, to perform physical feats requiring agility (a form of strength). Pull your self up a banister or jump down with a back flip. All of this is a combination of a specific kind of strength with a LIGHT WEIGHT. 18 strength implies heavier muscle mass which is why you roll athletics to bash down a door or carry a heavy boulder. The combination of the two is the equivalent of a Gymnast, who is both STRONG and ACROBATIC. I gaurantee You as a rock climber can NOT kick as hard as I can no matter how hard you try. Just like I can't kick as hard as a heavyweight who has been practicing as long as me, because all things being equal, he has more mass. You as a rock climber would not be considered an 18 strength. An though you have strong hands and a strong frame for climbing, you are not strong like a power lifter. TWO different strengths. You would be considered dexterous. Also marathon running is stamina which is under constitution
I am in agreement with many on here that using alternative abilities for skills checks can, and should, be used where the situation calls for it. Personally, I would want my players to describe their actions, upon which I would ask for a specific roll. However, I would have no problem with my players suggesting an alternative: I'd consider it acceptable if I had asked for a Strength (Athletics) check for something, but a player asked if they could use Dex (Acrobatics) instead because of XYZ. I may not agree to it (it would depend on the situation) but I don't think it's wrong for them to ask.
Edit: Similarly I would see nothing wrong, if I asked for a Charisma (Persuasion) check, but the player said he was using his knowledge of the NPCs background/history so asked to make it an Intelligence (Persuasion) roll.
As for the Intimidation thing, I think you could probably use any ability for that.
A character describing (or hinting at) what the consequences of not cooperating could be Charisma (Intimidation)
The fighter smashing a table while asking the questions could be Strength (Intimidation)
The Barbarian cutting himself with a grin on his face could be Constitution (Intimidation)
The Rogue suddenly producing a throwing knife from his sleeve with a flourish and then cleaning his nails with it while questioning could be Dex (Intimidation)
The Ranger describing the dangers he can see in the surrounding area (unstable cliffs, loose branches etc) could be Wisdom (Intimidation)
The Wizard describing the anatomy and how damage can be done, or a Cleric describing the religious consequences of sin, could be Inteligence (Intimidation)
Any spellcaster demonstrating their spellcasting ability could be their <spellcasting ability modifer> (Intimidation)
You tend to see lots of these at once in fantasy novels: One will approach and start hinting at unpleasant consequences, while another produces a dagger to clean their fingernails and another flexes their muscles and leans on their axe. They would all be valid methods of intimidation.
All of those involve a significant level of showmanship (charisma) though....
While I don't agree with every one of those six examples equally, I'd say the showmanship part is best represented by the skill - hence, the proficiency bonus if the character is proficient.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yes, and “do you have any idea who I am?” is a perfect example of a Charisma (Intimidation) check.
And that is precisely why Intimidation is a CHA based check. Pretty much all of the examples I see of a non-CHA based check for Intimidation leave out the key element: The protagonist must interact with the target in some social manner.
Watching some huge guy at the gym deadlift 600 pounds on the other side of the room, completely ignoring you, is not intimidating. Having the same guy drop that weight 2 feet from your head while glowering at you might be. But that requires social interaction, be it verbal or non-verbal, with the target. It is still a Cha based check.
Yes, they must interact, but charisma is not necessarily the key skill. That's the point, here: A Wizard or Barbarian with the social skills of a tomato could intimidate someone by other means. The wizard could be very intimidating by just listing all the possible ways to keep someone in pain for days, or by just blasting a wall with a fireball then asking a question/giving an order in a mild mannered voice. A barbarian who smashed a hole in a wall then yelled in their face needs little-to-no social skills to be intimidating (in fact, fewer may make them more successful with this kind of technique). In both those, charisma is a secondary skill requirement at best.
Yes, they must interact, but charisma is not necessarily the key skill. That's the point, here: A Wizard or Barbarian with the social skills of a tomato could intimidate someone by other means. The wizard could be very intimidating by just listing all the possible ways to keep someone in pain for days, or by just blasting a wall with a fireball then asking a question/giving an order in a mild mannered voice. A barbarian who smashed a hole in a wall then yelled in their face needs little-to-no social skills to be intimidating (in fact, fewer may make them more successful with this kind of technique). In both those, charisma is a secondary skill requirement at best.
Doing those things effectively is charisma. It doesn't take charisma to just engage in violence or threat of violence; charisma (and intimidation skill) is about getting the best results out of doing so.
I think it's really important to look at what Strength and dexterity really are.
Strength is your ability to plan out a physically demanding thing and accomplish it. Gymnastic routine? Running a marathon? Deadlifting? All strength and athletics.
Dexterity on the other hand is a frustratingly misnamed stat that is supposed to be about reflexes and balance... and it keeps strength from being the only melee attack mod... and your "hand eye coordination" controls your ability to walk quietly and jump out of the way (acrobatics and saving throws).
As previously mentioned, climbing requires strength. I love rock climbing and I can tell you from personal experience that my reflexes and balance don't factor in much. Is big part of climbing smart is setting yourself up to catch yourself if something goes wrong, so when you lose a handhold, or try a foothold you can respond. It's all planned out and that means your reactions aren't factored in. Sure, you could say that 1:1000 situations might require it, but that doean't mean you should be able to dodge your way up a cliff.
Ok then, you are a climber. How much do you weigh? How much can you bench? I can guarantee if you are an actual rock climber you can NOT compete with a strong man. A power lifter, or wield a great sword with ease. It's a DIFFERENT strength. Also, you are wrong. Gymnastics is ACROBATICS in DND, not Athletics. Dexterity implies the character has a different kind of strength from someone with a high strength. You have the strength to pull back a bow, to perform physical feats requiring agility (a form of strength). Pull your self up a banister or jump down with a back flip. All of this is a combination of a specific kind of strength with a LIGHT WEIGHT. 18 strength implies heavier muscle mass which is why you roll athletics to bash down a door or carry a heavy boulder. The combination of the two is the equivalent of a Gymnast, who is both STRONG and ACROBATIC. I gaurantee You as a rock climber can NOT kick as hard as I can no matter how hard you try. Just like I can't kick as hard as a heavyweight who has been practicing as long as me, because all things being equal, he has more mass. You as a rock climber would not be considered an 18 strength. An though you have strong hands and a strong frame for climbing, you are not strong like a power lifter. TWO different strengths. You would be considered dexterous.
Lol, sure dude. Throw your mantrum and compare how hard you think you and a person on the internet can kick. It's a game that simplifies things. 5e especially is about simplification. That's why 5e is so much more popular than 3e or 4e. The real problem is that you're trying to put abilities in a different box to get something for free. Again, I say, "You can't dodge up a cliff". Here's the actual rules on Strength, Athletics, Dexterity, and Acrobatics.
Strength Checks
A Strength check can model any attempt to lift, push, pull, or break something, to force your body through a space, or to otherwise apply brute force to a situation. The Athletics skill reflects aptitude in certain kinds of Strength checks.
Athletics
Your Strength (Athletics) check covers difficult situations you encounter while climbing, jumping, or swimming. Examples include the following activities:
You attempt to climb a sheer or slippery cliff, avoid hazards while scaling a wall, or cling to a surface while something is trying to knock you off.
You try to jump an unusually long distance or pull off a stunt midjump.
You struggle to swim or stay afloat in treacherous currents, storm-tossed waves, or areas of thick seaweed. Or another creature tries to push or pull you underwater or otherwise interfere with your swimming.
Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance.
Dexterity Checks
A Dexterity check can model any attempt to move nimbly, quickly, or quietly, or to keep from falling on tricky footing. The Acrobatics, Sleight of Hand, and Stealth skills reflect aptitude in certain kinds of Dexterity checks.
Acrobatics
Your Dexterity (Acrobatics) check covers your attempt to stay on your feet in a tricky situation, such as when you're trying to run across a sheet of ice, balance on a tightrope, or stay upright on a rocking ship's deck. The DM might also call for a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to see if you can perform acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, somersaults, and flips.
Again, you want climbing for free with your dexterity. Ask for special cases from your DM all you want. Just remember, you can't dodge up a cliff. You can't slink your way up a wall. You can't delicately feel your way up a tree. You can't climb via sense.
Yes, they must interact, but charisma is not necessarily the key skill. That's the point, here: A Wizard or Barbarian with the social skills of a tomato could intimidate someone by other means. The wizard could be very intimidating by just listing all the possible ways to keep someone in pain for days, or by just blasting a wall with a fireball then asking a question/giving an order in a mild mannered voice. A barbarian who smashed a hole in a wall then yelled in their face needs little-to-no social skills to be intimidating (in fact, fewer may make them more successful with this kind of technique). In both those, charisma is a secondary skill requirement at best.
Doing those things effectively is charisma. It doesn't take charisma to just engage in violence or threat of violence; charisma (and intimidation skill) is about getting the best results out of doing so.
OK, I am not charismatic. I have very little "presence", I don't project confidence, I am not charming or commanding.
However, if I walked into a room where someone was tied up, I was holding a gun and I started shooting nearby the person while asking questions, I am pretty certain that most would feel incredibly intimidated. I could stammer, or even look nervous while doing so, but it is the threat of violence which is intimidating.
If someone was proficient in intimidation and had a low Cha but a high Str, it makes a lot of sense that they would still be very intimidating by using demonstrations of violence.
For all those that talk about Str versus Dex for Climbing, or able to use an Ability with a Intimidation check, I will say you all make some fair points.
Pee Wee Herman can't be a bouncer, but Dwayne Johnson could be.
But 5e is about simplicity, like it or not. The mechanics were laid out in a very specific manner when it comes to Skill Checks. Now, if a DM said "OK, Mr Half-Orc, roll an Intimidation check using Strength, then re-roll using Charisma, and average them together", I could see that. But that is too complicated for 5e, which was supposedly designed to streamline things.
So only one can be used. I choose to stick with the rules, because Cha is a common denominator in ANY Intimidation check. And all Stealth checks have a common denominator of Dex, no matter what other Ability might be involved.
Yes, they must interact, but charisma is not necessarily the key skill. That's the point, here: A Wizard or Barbarian with the social skills of a tomato could intimidate someone by other means. The wizard could be very intimidating by just listing all the possible ways to keep someone in pain for days, or by just blasting a wall with a fireball then asking a question/giving an order in a mild mannered voice. A barbarian who smashed a hole in a wall then yelled in their face needs little-to-no social skills to be intimidating (in fact, fewer may make them more successful with this kind of technique). In both those, charisma is a secondary skill requirement at best.
Doing those things effectively is charisma. It doesn't take charisma to just engage in violence or threat of violence; charisma (and intimidation skill) is about getting the best results out of doing so.
OK, I am not charismatic. I have very little "presence", I don't project confidence, I am not charming or commanding.
However, if I walked into a room where someone was tied up, I was holding a gun and I started shooting nearby the person while asking questions, I am pretty certain that most would feel incredibly intimidated. I could stammer, or even look nervous while doing so, but it is the threat of violence which is intimidating.
If someone was proficient in intimidation and had a low Cha but a high Str, it makes a lot of sense that they would still be very intimidating by using demonstrations of violence.
Variant: Skills with Different Abilities
Normally, your proficiency in a skill applies only to a specific kind of ability check. Proficiency in Athletics, for example, usually applies to Strength checks. In some situations, though, your proficiency might reasonably apply to a different kind of check. In such cases, the DM might ask for a check using an unusual combination of ability and skill, or you might ask your DM if you can apply a proficiency to a different check. For example, if you have to swim from an offshore island to the mainland, your DM might call for a Constitution check to see if you have the stamina to make it that far. In this case, your DM might allow you to apply your proficiency in Athletics and ask for a Constitution (Athletics) check. So if you're proficient in Athletics, you apply your proficiency bonus to the Constitution check just as you would normally do for a Strength (Athletics) check. Similarly, when your half-orc barbarian uses a display of raw strength to intimidate an enemy, your DM might ask for a Strength (Intimidation) check, even though Intimidation is normally associated with Charisma.
This is 100% in line with your gun example. You don't need to use your words to intimidate, nor your understanding of the social contract between people to just show that you can eff them up and intimidate.
OK, I am not charismatic. I have very little "presence", I don't project confidence, I am not charming or commanding.
However, if I walked into a room where someone was tied up, I was holding a gun and I started shooting nearby the person while asking questions, I am pretty certain that most would feel incredibly intimidated. I could stammer, or even look nervous while doing so, but it is the threat of violence which is intimidating.
Again, intimidation is not the ability to scare people. It's the ability to usefully scare people. Yes, crazy guy coming in with a gun will likely get a response, particularly against an average person who doesn't exactly have high saves, but the victim fainting, screaming, begging for mercy, or telling you what they think you want to hear regardless of whether it's actually true are all failures.
So as a rogue, it really annoys me that climbing is a strength thing. mostly because an 18 strength is a totally massive beast with the ability to hold a great axe, which is really heavy. That kind of Strength does not translate to climbing at all. Ever meet an actual climber? light and lean and agile. they are strong, yes, but not in a translatable 18 strength kind of way. Now, I get the Conan thing. He climbed the wall and that's a cool visual. I'm not saying that if your strong you shouldn't be able to climb, but definitely you should not be able to climb better than an 18 agility rogue (same with JUMP). Why doesn't the skill have a dual Strength or Dexterity mod? Intimidation gives you the option to use Strength, and I would think that a negative modifier in Charisma would be a PLUS to intimidation in combination with a Strength Intimidation check. "The Teifling death knight grabs the kobold by the neck and slowly begins to squeeze, his horrid scars (8 charisma), repulsive features and glowing fire flamed eyes (Thaumaturgy) burning with hate as he says "Tell me where the hidden entrance is"...
How do you deal with this, particularly if your DM chooses to follow the rules because "that's the rules".
I mean, I'm cool with all that if we get initiative that queues of strength, and armor bonus that goes off strength as well.
It really comes down to strength vs body weight ratio if considering the real world.
But we can all agree that dexterity doesn't need any buffs. Strength does.
I don't think intimidation has to work like that.. Your points make a fair bit of sense in a universe where people react in a rational manner, but that isn't really the case in my experience. In reality I think a lot of intimidation is done simply by behaving in a way the throws someone off and makes them nervous enough to act in an irrational manner. The person doesn't have to actually think you're going to harm them, all you need to do is trigger their animalistic flight response.
As a teenager I worked the night shift at a seven eleven for a while, this particular seven eleven being located right beside a night club. During my first weekend working the night shift, this burly, rough looking dude came up to me and bought something.. He then claimed I'd given him back the wrong change.. Saying it in a very firm tone, bordering on aggression, but making no actualy threat at alll... I was fairly certain I'd given him the right change.. But the his physique and general attitude made me try to convince myself he was right so that I could make him go away and end the encounter, it was extremely uncomfortable.
Right as I was about to give in, he cracked into a wide grin and slapped me on the shoulder in a friendly manner.. Turns out this was the bouncer from the night club, and he had a habbit of pulling this stunt with all the new guys working that shift..
My point is that I definitely felt threatened, and my instincts were telling me to give him what he wanted, despite the fact that he never actually threatened me directly and I never actually considered the odds of him attacking me or anything like that.. But the animal inside of me made my wanna act in an irrational manner.
Edit: Mind you, we werent alone or anything, there was a line of other people behind him and 2 other guys worked with me, so there was very little chance of him actually doing anything..
No offense to you, and apologies for going off topic for a sec, but this is a terrible point to raise. It's just nonsense. D&D has a lot of fantastical elements, which obviously aren't grounded in realism, but also a ton of non-fantastical elements - and the latter ones only make sense if they are plausible, believable, realistic (even if not 100% accurate because it's a tabletop RPG and not Starfleet's holodeck functionality). Unless magic changes gravity somewhere, gravity always pulls you down. Unless there's some fantastical lineage in your ancestry, you're a human with human characteristics. Unless some Fireball-type magic happens, the air isn't spontaneously going to burst into flame. And unless you have a snake-like body or adhesive appendages, climbing is primarily going to involve grabbing handholds and pulling yourself up. "Magic is real" is not the same thing as "nothing works normal anymore".
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
There are also concepts like "Do you have any idea who I am?". I think back to the Godfather II scene with the slumlord's initial meeting with Vito.
Or "I have been through this before with your kind."
I am in agreement with many on here that using alternative abilities for skills checks can, and should, be used where the situation calls for it. Personally, I would want my players to describe their actions, upon which I would ask for a specific roll. However, I would have no problem with my players suggesting an alternative: I'd consider it acceptable if I had asked for a Strength (Athletics) check for something, but a player asked if they could use Dex (Acrobatics) instead because of XYZ. I may not agree to it (it would depend on the situation) but I don't think it's wrong for them to ask.
Edit: Similarly I would see nothing wrong, if I asked for a Charisma (Persuasion) check, but the player said he was using his knowledge of the NPCs background/history so asked to make it an Intelligence (Persuasion) roll.
As for the Intimidation thing, I think you could probably use any ability for that.
You tend to see lots of these at once in fantasy novels: One will approach and start hinting at unpleasant consequences, while another produces a dagger to clean their fingernails and another flexes their muscles and leans on their axe. They would all be valid methods of intimidation.
Yes, and “do you have any idea who I am?” is a perfect example of a Charisma (Intimidation) check.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Depending on the character, not necessarily... If the fighter is angry and yelling, then smashes something, that's not showmanship. If the barbarian actually likes pain, it doesn't have to be showmanship. If the wizard just finds it interesting and starts listing ways they could cause pain or injury due to their anatomical and/or medical knowledge, that's not showmanship.
Also, if a character announces they want to do a somersault off a roof and land with a flourish in the middle of a crowd... That involves significant showmanship, but Dex is still the main ability needed to pull it off. I'd say each of those primarily needs the ability mentioned, and showmanship is just a helpful extra. It doesn't matter how charismatic you are if you try to flourish a knife and drop it, or if you cut yourself and yell in pain...
And that is precisely why Intimidation is a CHA based check. Pretty much all of the examples I see of a non-CHA based check for Intimidation leave out the key element: The protagonist must interact with the target in some social manner.
Watching some huge guy at the gym deadlift 600 pounds on the other side of the room, completely ignoring you, is not intimidating. Having the same guy drop that weight 2 feet from your head while glowering at you might be. But that requires social interaction, be it verbal or non-verbal, with the target. It is still a Cha based check.
I think it's really important to look at what Strength and dexterity really are.
Strength is your ability to plan out a physically demanding thing and accomplish it. Gymnastic routine? Running a marathon? Deadlifting? All strength and athletics.
Dexterity on the other hand is a frustratingly misnamed stat that is supposed to be about reflexes and balance... and it keeps strength from being the only melee attack mod... and your "hand eye coordination" controls your ability to walk quietly and jump out of the way (acrobatics and saving throws).
As previously mentioned, climbing requires strength. I love rock climbing and I can tell you from personal experience that my reflexes and balance don't factor in much. Is big part of climbing smart is setting yourself up to catch yourself if something goes wrong, so when you lose a handhold, or try a foothold you can respond. It's all planned out and that means your reactions aren't factored in. Sure, you could say that 1:1000 situations might require it, but that doean't mean you should be able to dodge your way up a cliff.
The key problem is that it's both: you have to do something scary (really, any stat, or possibly just a function of level) and leverage that to convince the target.
It is also worth remembering that "X is scared of me" is not a successful intimidation check. "X is scared of me and as a result will do what I want" is a successful intimidation check. "X is scared of me and as a result will run off and round up a bunch of his buddies before attacking me" is really not all that productive.
IN this type of situation, I doubt that guy has the skills of a rogue when it comes to persuasion for instance (Like a car salesman or a con artist). It's his shear size and rough demeanor that is intimidating. I doubt he would run for governor. Charisma is so many things that are not relevant to intimidation and vice verse. So strength as an alternate, and roll playing it intelligently, is a good option.
Ok then, you are a climber. How much do you weigh? How much can you bench? I can guarantee if you are an actual rock climber you can NOT compete with a strong man. A power lifter, or wield a great sword with ease. It's a DIFFERENT strength. Also, you are wrong. Gymnastics is ACROBATICS in DND, not Athletics. Dexterity implies the character has a different kind of strength from someone with a high strength. You have the strength to pull back a bow, to perform physical feats requiring agility (a form of strength). Pull your self up a banister or jump down with a back flip. All of this is a combination of a specific kind of strength with a LIGHT WEIGHT. 18 strength implies heavier muscle mass which is why you roll athletics to bash down a door or carry a heavy boulder. The combination of the two is the equivalent of a Gymnast, who is both STRONG and ACROBATIC. I gaurantee You as a rock climber can NOT kick as hard as I can no matter how hard you try. Just like I can't kick as hard as a heavyweight who has been practicing as long as me, because all things being equal, he has more mass. You as a rock climber would not be considered an 18 strength. An though you have strong hands and a strong frame for climbing, you are not strong like a power lifter. TWO different strengths. You would be considered dexterous. Also marathon running is stamina which is under constitution
While I don't agree with every one of those six examples equally, I'd say the showmanship part is best represented by the skill - hence, the proficiency bonus if the character is proficient.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yes, they must interact, but charisma is not necessarily the key skill. That's the point, here: A Wizard or Barbarian with the social skills of a tomato could intimidate someone by other means. The wizard could be very intimidating by just listing all the possible ways to keep someone in pain for days, or by just blasting a wall with a fireball then asking a question/giving an order in a mild mannered voice. A barbarian who smashed a hole in a wall then yelled in their face needs little-to-no social skills to be intimidating (in fact, fewer may make them more successful with this kind of technique). In both those, charisma is a secondary skill requirement at best.
Doing those things effectively is charisma. It doesn't take charisma to just engage in violence or threat of violence; charisma (and intimidation skill) is about getting the best results out of doing so.
Lol, sure dude. Throw your mantrum and compare how hard you think you and a person on the internet can kick. It's a game that simplifies things. 5e especially is about simplification. That's why 5e is so much more popular than 3e or 4e. The real problem is that you're trying to put abilities in a different box to get something for free. Again, I say, "You can't dodge up a cliff". Here's the actual rules on Strength, Athletics, Dexterity, and Acrobatics.
Strength Checks
A Strength check can model any attempt to lift, push, pull, or break something, to force your body through a space, or to otherwise apply brute force to a situation. The Athletics skill reflects aptitude in certain kinds of Strength checks.
Athletics
Your Strength (Athletics) check covers difficult situations you encounter while climbing, jumping, or swimming. Examples include the following activities:
Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance.
Dexterity Checks
A Dexterity check can model any attempt to move nimbly, quickly, or quietly, or to keep from falling on tricky footing. The Acrobatics, Sleight of Hand, and Stealth skills reflect aptitude in certain kinds of Dexterity checks.
Acrobatics
Your Dexterity (Acrobatics) check covers your attempt to stay on your feet in a tricky situation, such as when you're trying to run across a sheet of ice, balance on a tightrope, or stay upright on a rocking ship's deck. The DM might also call for a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to see if you can perform acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, somersaults, and flips.
Again, you want climbing for free with your dexterity. Ask for special cases from your DM all you want. Just remember, you can't dodge up a cliff. You can't slink your way up a wall. You can't delicately feel your way up a tree. You can't climb via sense.
OK, I am not charismatic. I have very little "presence", I don't project confidence, I am not charming or commanding.
However, if I walked into a room where someone was tied up, I was holding a gun and I started shooting nearby the person while asking questions, I am pretty certain that most would feel incredibly intimidated. I could stammer, or even look nervous while doing so, but it is the threat of violence which is intimidating.
If someone was proficient in intimidation and had a low Cha but a high Str, it makes a lot of sense that they would still be very intimidating by using demonstrations of violence.
For all those that talk about Str versus Dex for Climbing, or able to use an Ability with a Intimidation check, I will say you all make some fair points.
Pee Wee Herman can't be a bouncer, but Dwayne Johnson could be.
But 5e is about simplicity, like it or not. The mechanics were laid out in a very specific manner when it comes to Skill Checks. Now, if a DM said "OK, Mr Half-Orc, roll an Intimidation check using Strength, then re-roll using Charisma, and average them together", I could see that. But that is too complicated for 5e, which was supposedly designed to streamline things.
So only one can be used. I choose to stick with the rules, because Cha is a common denominator in ANY Intimidation check. And all Stealth checks have a common denominator of Dex, no matter what other Ability might be involved.
Variant: Skills with Different Abilities
Normally, your proficiency in a skill applies only to a specific kind of ability check. Proficiency in Athletics, for example, usually applies to Strength checks. In some situations, though, your proficiency might reasonably apply to a different kind of check. In such cases, the DM might ask for a check using an unusual combination of ability and skill, or you might ask your DM if you can apply a proficiency to a different check. For example, if you have to swim from an offshore island to the mainland, your DM might call for a Constitution check to see if you have the stamina to make it that far. In this case, your DM might allow you to apply your proficiency in Athletics and ask for a Constitution (Athletics) check. So if you're proficient in Athletics, you apply your proficiency bonus to the Constitution check just as you would normally do for a Strength (Athletics) check. Similarly, when your half-orc barbarian uses a display of raw strength to intimidate an enemy, your DM might ask for a Strength (Intimidation) check, even though Intimidation is normally associated with Charisma.
This is 100% in line with your gun example. You don't need to use your words to intimidate, nor your understanding of the social contract between people to just show that you can eff them up and intimidate.
Again, intimidation is not the ability to scare people. It's the ability to usefully scare people. Yes, crazy guy coming in with a gun will likely get a response, particularly against an average person who doesn't exactly have high saves, but the victim fainting, screaming, begging for mercy, or telling you what they think you want to hear regardless of whether it's actually true are all failures.
I mean, I'm cool with all that if we get initiative that queues of strength, and armor bonus that goes off strength as well.
It really comes down to strength vs body weight ratio if considering the real world.
But we can all agree that dexterity doesn't need any buffs. Strength does.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter