Why would anybody prefer Intimidation over Persuasion? They both use Charisma, they can be used to achieve the same goals, but one has a greater potential for problems (Intimidation). Sure, they have different flavor, and thematically one might be more appropriate than the other, but it seems to me that Intimidation is strictly worse than Persuasion.
It's for that thematic approach, I take my H-Orc Fighter, hang my meaty fist in the opponent's face and ask politely "Tell me what I need to know or you'll find out how this tastes...". roll for intimidation
Now, one would say that's intimidation and that's perfectly reasonable but, how could you refer to that as persuasion? So now we get into a semantic thing. It's my belief that they're left in these separate categories to help define the intent behind the act. To be quite frank, intimidation, persuasion, and deception could all be rolled into one category since they all refer to using your charisma to bluff/convince/scare someone into to doing/saying/believing something.
At the very end of the day, it all depends on the approach you make. People generally roleplay out their character, then go with whatever dice pool the DM tells them to roll. If you're mad and threatening someone, that's Intimidation. If you're being diplomatic, then that's Persuasion. Persuasion isn't exactly entirely all benefit either. You might be able to persuade an enemy to surrender, but they'll demand an oath to let them go free. Or get a thief to flip about their Guild, but at the cost of money, favors or some other resource. Its reinforcement versus punishment. Persuasion is "do what I want and get a reward," while Intimidate is "do what I want or get punished."
Also, there are times when social situations are set up much like complex traps are in dungeons. Sorry, but no, you can't use Thief Tools as a one-size-fits-all answer. Sometimes, you need an Athletics check, or an Arcana check. Do you need to Investigate the door to find out the right way to disarm the trap (roll Insight for social).
There are times when Persuading a guard is harder than Intimidating them. Someone who's uptight won't be easily bribed to ignore their duty (thus a high DC), whereas they're susceptible to threats to their body or family (lower DC). Or the guard is already crooked, and threatening exposure (intimidate) works better than trying to be a nice girl/guy.
At the very end of the very end of the day, though? D&D suffers from a lack of rules for social interaction; the game is very heavily built towards dungeon exploration and combat, with only a tiny nod towards Interaction pillar stuff. There''s a million permutations that could happen here, but the book just kind of leaves things open for different DMs to handle at their discretion instead of giving a good set of guidelines for how to handle this kind of thing. So, there are plenty of people who just run things as one-and-done on the roll, both player and DMs alike. But there's also lots of potential variations here.
So persuade people in jerk-like ways. Why two separate skills, that do the exact same thing, and only vary in flavor? Especially when skills like Survival and Sleight of Hand have so many different uses?
At the very end of the day, it all depends on the approach you make. People generally roleplay out their character, then go with whatever dice pool the DM tells them to roll. If you're mad and threatening someone, that's Intimidation. If you're being diplomatic, then that's Persuasion. Persuasion isn't exactly entirely all benefit either. You might be able to persuade an enemy to surrender, but they'll demand an oath to let them go free. Or get a thief to flip about their Guild, but at the cost of money, favors or some other resource. Its reinforcement versus punishment. Persuasion is "do what I want and get a reward," while Intimidate is "do what I want or get punished."
Also, there are times when social situations are set up much like complex traps are in dungeons. Sorry, but no, you can't use Thief Tools as a one-size-fits-all answer. Sometimes, you need an Athletics check, or an Arcana check. Do you need to Investigate the door to find out the right way to disarm the trap (roll Insight for social).
There are times when Persuading a guard is harder than Intimidating them. Someone who's uptight won't be easily bribed to ignore their duty (thus a high DC), whereas they're susceptible to threats to their body or family (lower DC). Or the guard is already crooked, and threatening exposure (intimidate) works better than trying to be a nice girl/guy.
At the very end of the very end of the day, though? D&D suffers from a lack of rules for social interaction; the game is very heavily built towards dungeon exploration and combat, with only a tiny nod towards Interaction pillar stuff. There''s a million permutations that could happen here, but the book just kind of leaves things open for different DMs to handle at their discretion instead of giving a good set of guidelines for how to handle this kind of thing. So, there are plenty of people who just run things as one-and-done on the roll, both player and DMs alike. But there's also lots of potential variations here.
I get all that, but that just sounds to me like different ways to use your skill at getting people to do what you want using your Charisma.
Why would anybody prefer Intimidation over Persuasion? They both use Charisma, they can be used to achieve the same goals, but one has a greater potential for problems (Intimidation). Sure, they have different flavor, and thematically one might be more appropriate than the other, but it seems to me that Intimidation is strictly worse than Persuasion.
I would see Intimidation as a quick show of force that does not need an exchange of arguments and takes a lot less time. You might be better at persuasion, but talking to the humanoids blocking the road requires language skills and times to lay down the arguments. Asking the leader of the group if he is willing to suffer the consequences for delaying your travel while caressing the pommel of your sword might be a lot quicker. Using skills light Slight of Hand, Minor Illusion and Thaumaturgy to enhance you show of force a lot more than citing facts from a tax ledger. In my experience Intimidation check well played often give you advantage on rolls or a lower number to hit for the skill check, if played out well.
Why would anybody prefer Intimidation over Persuasion? They both use Charisma, they can be used to achieve the same goals, but one has a greater potential for problems (Intimidation). Sure, they have different flavor, and thematically one might be more appropriate than the other, but it seems to me that Intimidation is strictly worse than Persuasion.
I would see Intimidation as a quick show of force that does not need an exchange of arguments and takes a lot less time. You might be better at persuasion, but talking to the humanoids blocking the road requires language skills and times to lay down the arguments. Asking the leader of the group if he is willing to suffer the consequences for delaying your travel while caressing the pommel of your sword might be a lot quicker. Using skills light Slight of Hand, Minor Illusion and Thaumaturgy to enhance you show of force a lot more than citing facts from a tax ledger. In my experience Intimidation check well played often give you advantage on rolls or a lower number to hit for the skill check, if played out well.
The way you describe it, though, makes it sound like Persuasion should be INT based, not CHA based. As written in the books, though, they both accomplish the same thing: get someone to do something you want by using your Charisma. To be clear, I fully understand the difference in "flavor" between the two, and completely understand why a player may decide one is more appropriate, given the situation and their character. What I find odd, though, is why they're separate skills, when mechanically they accomplish the same goals, in the same way (mechanically... fluff-wise, they're different), especially considering other skills encompass a wide range of different goals: Athletics lets you jump, swim, climb, grapple, escape grapples... Survival lets you track creatures, find food, navigate, predict the weather...
Intimidation can you let use non-Charisma ability scores in certain situations too.
That's entirely up to the DM, an optional rule, and can apply to any skill. I can make the same case for: "I try to convince the goblins to let us pass, by impressing them with all the knowledge I have about these caves, and about their history, and about their gods, so that they think I must be one of their gods, or at least in cahoots with their gods"... "Ok, roll Intelligence (Persuasion)". Basically: if there were one skill dedicated to "getting people to do what you want", it should be Charisma based by default, could be used to sweet talk someone into doing what you want (what is now Persuasion), to get them to do what you want out of fear (what is now Intimidation), or by other, more creative, means (basing it off a stat other than Charisma).
Put another way, why is "let me pass, or I'll hurt you!" Intimidation, while "let me pass, or I'll be unable to prevent you from getting hurt!" Persuasion? In both cases, the target will (or won't) comply out of fear of being hurt, and in both cases you're convincing them that's true. Is it the "menacing" attitude? What if I sweetly (honestly sweetly) let them know I'm really a very bad guy, who's currently happy, but will fly into an uncontrollable rage if not allowed to pass, and I don't want that to happen? What if I angrily and with hostility tell them to let me through or else they'll know the wrath of that big ol' dragon I'm trying to go kill? What happens if I tell them "let us through, or my Barbarian friend will knock you upside the head in a bad way!"? Is that Persuasion or Intimidation? Why is there a difference, mechanically?
I will say that intimidation is one of those things that was more fun for me in Pathfinder when it gave me an edge in combat as well.
That I can buy. They might be similar, but if one's limited in approach while giving you an extra bonus, I can see a separation. Although it might be tough to adjudicate some uses... when does it cross from Intimidation into Persuasion?
I often try to persuade people to believe what I'm saying is true, even though I'm proficient in Deception as well.
More on topic, but not at all defined by the rules. In my games I allow the players to use any skill once in their turn in combat without using their action, and contest it with a roll from the opponent in either of two appropriate skills. Then I roll on a table to determine the effect. Sometimes the winner of the contest gets advantage. The effect varies. Anyway. Intimidation is a popular choice, and the two appropriate skills I've chosen to contest intimidation are Insight and Intimidation.
In my game at least intimidation is worth being proficient in just to counter all the intimidation attempts the enemies make against you. But the Coliseum of Conquest is a unique campaign where the enemy is usually a player.
That I can buy. They might be similar, but if one's limited in approach while giving you an extra bonus, I can see a separation. Although it might be tough to adjudicate some uses... when does it cross from Intimidation into Persuasion?
You've stumbled across the answer: intimidation, persuasion, and deception should all be the same "social" skill. The fact that the distinction between deception, intimidation, and persuasion is hard to put your finger on and comes down to the speaker's attitude and not the actual words that are said out loud or the effect one is desiring to have upon the listener is the first good hint that the design team got a little too carried away with granularity. If Athletics can be running and climbing and swimming and power lifting and wrestling (basically, anything and everything "athletic"), and Acrobatics can be balance and flexibility and tumbling and evasion (everything dexterous that isn't a fine motor skill), then there should be a similar catch-all social skill as well. It strains the imagination to picture the sort of character that would be really good at talking people into things, but not that good at telling half-truths or preying on people's fears, its all just reading people.
When it comes to say finding out information sometimes persuasion just will never cut it, if someone has a magic item that needs a command word to work why would you be able to persuade them to tell you. That would fall to what Intimidate is for, those 3 skills for charisma all feel a use, to me the bigger isser is Persuasion/Deception you can deceive someone into believing you have there interest at heart and get the same result as persuasion.
That I can buy. They might be similar, but if one's limited in approach while giving you an extra bonus, I can see a separation. Although it might be tough to adjudicate some uses... when does it cross from Intimidation into Persuasion?
When you stop threatening the person?
"Let us pass, or I'll kill you."
"Let us pass, or my friend will kill you."
"Let us pass, or I won't be able to keep my friend from killing you."
"Let us pass, or the madman who is after me might kill you, too."
"Let us pass, or I won't be able to stop an assassin from killing your family."
"Let us pass, or I won't be able to stop an assassin from killing some random strangers."
"Let us pass, or I'll be killed by an assassin. You don't want that on your conscience, right?"
Or, what about: "Let us pass, and I'll put in a good word for you with the Captain of the Guard. Stop us, and we'll hurt you."?
I very often ask my players to make Any charisma skill, and they will end up playing it based on the skill they chose. Sometimes this means they perform to get their discount at the smith. But I'm ok with that.
Persuasion and Intimidation are social-based aspects and will carry their own respective DC for any situation.
It will be much harder for a small, weak-looking creature to intimidate me than it will persuade me. It will be much harder for an enemy of mine to persuade me, than it will be to intimidate me.
You must take into account social cues from and during these interactions to determine how hard (DC) each would be. Instead of combat scenarios where we match weapon, armor, etc, now we're comparing social status, context, company, etc. It's a different sort of encounter - these skill rolls aren't just interchangeable.
The point of intimidation is to get somebody to do what you want by making them afraid of you. It may not be cowering crying fear but just enough to make them think "I better do what he says to avoid being harmed".
Charisma based intimidation is things like using words to convey a threat, use an imposing presence, that cold dagger-eyes stare, etc.
Alternatively use Strength to swing heavy dangerous swords as a threatening display to let them know you can **** them up and show how physically stronger than them you are.
Use Constitution by drinking acid or poison in front of them with a smile to let them know how pitiful such things are to you. Or stick your finger into an open wound and laugh as if you enjoy it.
Perhaps you move quickly so you display this to show them there have no chance to escape you - that would be Dexterity.
Maybe you can read their faces and body language so well it's almost like you read their mind to unsettle and unnerve them, to know you cannot be lied to and they better talk. Or maybe you know how to play on their primal fears, use their instincts aganst them. That kind of understanding is instinctual so use Wisdom.
Do you know their darkest secrets, could you explain the intricate detail of how to dismantle everything about their identity, can you use telepathy to let them know even that most vulnerable part of them, their mind, can be targeted and destroyed by you? That's Intelligence.
Use intimidate in battle to make them fear you, even if only for a turn, where they cannot attack or can be convinced to surrender after brutally murdering their allies with ease.
Intimidation is much easier to achieve and requires no sophistication so you can be much more flexible in using different ablities and situations with it. However, the use of it is indeed going to mean that person and those around them are going to like you less which can make future dealings more difficult. The locals may learn of you and be far more wary of you. The local guard will be more alert around you, thinking you're the type to get dangerous quickly. When something bad happens in town people start thinking of who to blame and who might be violent or dangerous -- if you've intimidating all the local bar patrons and such in a small town well, they're going to think of you and so suddenly you're being accused of something you didn't do.
It is also unpredictable how people will react. Some people may just swallow pride and do what you want, others will start to do it but constantly look for ways not to and a single moment of distraction and they're out of there. Others cannot handle it and might just break down crying. Some end up far too heavily in fight or flight and can start either attacking you desperately or running for their life.
Intimidate is the easier and more flexible route but the more predictable and more likely to have negative consequences.
---
Persuasion is about getting somebody to do what you want through amicable means. There's no fear involved. Using Charisma is about using natural charm, smooth-talking and just placating their ego in a subtle way. The way you smile, your posture, the way you control your voice - they're disarming and so if you say the right things, flatter them, you can make them melt like butter - or at least find you likeable/annoying enough to give in.
Using other abilities for the skill will be less flexible and more dependent on the situation - if you're trying to convince somebody to hire you as a guard then using your Strength is usually good. Likewise showing high movement speed can let you use Dexterity for the check to persuade somebody to hire you as a courier. It's just going to be extremely specific situations which are very unlikely to occur.
The only other ability you could use for Persuasion is Intelligence when your argument, or attempt to convince somebody, is less charm and skllful use of speech but rather about using logic, facts, figures, data and one's sense of reasonable judgement.
Beyond this the Persuasion skill is less flexible. However, it is easier to get situational bonus - by advantage or lowered DC, by making a network of friends, parting with coins, social status and fame, and the like. That guard is much more likely to "forget you were there" if you can persuade them with some clever words and shiny shiny gold.
Persuasion has no direct negative consequences - it gives you control over lasting effects and can even make things more and more easy over time as you can use persuasion to get into the higher functons and parties of society to get more renown and status or become known to guards that you might be willing to bribe them: eventually you could have the town guard in your back pocket and can get away with anything.
--
Some people can be immune to one of these. Some people just don't fear you or anything you can ever do, so trying to intimidate them isn't going to work. Others might have such a stubbornness, believing themselves so socially above you that your words are nothing (and anyone who has worked in Customer Service like I have knows how true this is). But the fearless person could still enjoy flattery or a pretty face or charming smile and the stuck up social elite will listen to you if they fear for their life. So a different NPCs may react dfferently to the skills either by different DCs or being flat-out immune.
The skills are very dfferent, used differently, both have their place, both are situational, and both have pros and cons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Why would anybody prefer Intimidation over Persuasion? They both use Charisma, they can be used to achieve the same goals, but one has a greater potential for problems (Intimidation). Sure, they have different flavor, and thematically one might be more appropriate than the other, but it seems to me that Intimidation is strictly worse than Persuasion.
Sometimes it's just more fun to be a jerk.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
It's for that thematic approach, I take my H-Orc Fighter, hang my meaty fist in the opponent's face and ask politely "Tell me what I need to know or you'll find out how this tastes...". roll for intimidation
Now, one would say that's intimidation and that's perfectly reasonable but, how could you refer to that as persuasion? So now we get into a semantic thing. It's my belief that they're left in these separate categories to help define the intent behind the act. To be quite frank, intimidation, persuasion, and deception could all be rolled into one category since they all refer to using your charisma to bluff/convince/scare someone into to doing/saying/believing something.
At the very end of the day, it all depends on the approach you make. People generally roleplay out their character, then go with whatever dice pool the DM tells them to roll. If you're mad and threatening someone, that's Intimidation. If you're being diplomatic, then that's Persuasion. Persuasion isn't exactly entirely all benefit either. You might be able to persuade an enemy to surrender, but they'll demand an oath to let them go free. Or get a thief to flip about their Guild, but at the cost of money, favors or some other resource. Its reinforcement versus punishment. Persuasion is "do what I want and get a reward," while Intimidate is "do what I want or get punished."
Also, there are times when social situations are set up much like complex traps are in dungeons. Sorry, but no, you can't use Thief Tools as a one-size-fits-all answer. Sometimes, you need an Athletics check, or an Arcana check. Do you need to Investigate the door to find out the right way to disarm the trap (roll Insight for social).
There are times when Persuading a guard is harder than Intimidating them. Someone who's uptight won't be easily bribed to ignore their duty (thus a high DC), whereas they're susceptible to threats to their body or family (lower DC). Or the guard is already crooked, and threatening exposure (intimidate) works better than trying to be a nice girl/guy.
At the very end of the very end of the day, though? D&D suffers from a lack of rules for social interaction; the game is very heavily built towards dungeon exploration and combat, with only a tiny nod towards Interaction pillar stuff. There''s a million permutations that could happen here, but the book just kind of leaves things open for different DMs to handle at their discretion instead of giving a good set of guidelines for how to handle this kind of thing. So, there are plenty of people who just run things as one-and-done on the roll, both player and DMs alike. But there's also lots of potential variations here.
So persuade people in jerk-like ways. Why two separate skills, that do the exact same thing, and only vary in flavor? Especially when skills like Survival and Sleight of Hand have so many different uses?
Other times the law doesn't permit socializing with criminals, but if they confess early the punishment might be less severe.
I am one with the Force. The Force is with me.
I get all that, but that just sounds to me like different ways to use your skill at getting people to do what you want using your Charisma.
I would see Intimidation as a quick show of force that does not need an exchange of arguments and takes a lot less time. You might be better at persuasion, but talking to the humanoids blocking the road requires language skills and times to lay down the arguments. Asking the leader of the group if he is willing to suffer the consequences for delaying your travel while caressing the pommel of your sword might be a lot quicker.
Using skills light Slight of Hand, Minor Illusion and Thaumaturgy to enhance you show of force a lot more than citing facts from a tax ledger. In my experience Intimidation check well played often give you advantage on rolls or a lower number to hit for the skill check, if played out well.
That's a fair take. Then again, I could define intimidation as "jerk-like persuasion"
EDIT: I will say that intimidation is one of those things that was more fun for me in Pathfinder when it gave me an edge in combat as well.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Intimidation can you let use non-Charisma ability scores in certain situations too.
The way you describe it, though, makes it sound like Persuasion should be INT based, not CHA based. As written in the books, though, they both accomplish the same thing: get someone to do something you want by using your Charisma. To be clear, I fully understand the difference in "flavor" between the two, and completely understand why a player may decide one is more appropriate, given the situation and their character. What I find odd, though, is why they're separate skills, when mechanically they accomplish the same goals, in the same way (mechanically... fluff-wise, they're different), especially considering other skills encompass a wide range of different goals: Athletics lets you jump, swim, climb, grapple, escape grapples... Survival lets you track creatures, find food, navigate, predict the weather...
That's entirely up to the DM, an optional rule, and can apply to any skill. I can make the same case for: "I try to convince the goblins to let us pass, by impressing them with all the knowledge I have about these caves, and about their history, and about their gods, so that they think I must be one of their gods, or at least in cahoots with their gods"... "Ok, roll Intelligence (Persuasion)". Basically: if there were one skill dedicated to "getting people to do what you want", it should be Charisma based by default, could be used to sweet talk someone into doing what you want (what is now Persuasion), to get them to do what you want out of fear (what is now Intimidation), or by other, more creative, means (basing it off a stat other than Charisma).
Put another way, why is "let me pass, or I'll hurt you!" Intimidation, while "let me pass, or I'll be unable to prevent you from getting hurt!" Persuasion? In both cases, the target will (or won't) comply out of fear of being hurt, and in both cases you're convincing them that's true. Is it the "menacing" attitude? What if I sweetly (honestly sweetly) let them know I'm really a very bad guy, who's currently happy, but will fly into an uncontrollable rage if not allowed to pass, and I don't want that to happen? What if I angrily and with hostility tell them to let me through or else they'll know the wrath of that big ol' dragon I'm trying to go kill? What happens if I tell them "let us through, or my Barbarian friend will knock you upside the head in a bad way!"? Is that Persuasion or Intimidation? Why is there a difference, mechanically?
That I can buy. They might be similar, but if one's limited in approach while giving you an extra bonus, I can see a separation. Although it might be tough to adjudicate some uses... when does it cross from Intimidation into Persuasion?
I often try to persuade people to believe what I'm saying is true, even though I'm proficient in Deception as well.
More on topic, but not at all defined by the rules. In my games I allow the players to use any skill once in their turn in combat without using their action, and contest it with a roll from the opponent in either of two appropriate skills. Then I roll on a table to determine the effect. Sometimes the winner of the contest gets advantage. The effect varies. Anyway. Intimidation is a popular choice, and the two appropriate skills I've chosen to contest intimidation are Insight and Intimidation.
In my game at least intimidation is worth being proficient in just to counter all the intimidation attempts the enemies make against you. But the Coliseum of Conquest is a unique campaign where the enemy is usually a player.
Extended Signature
When you stop threatening the person?
The Forum Infestation (TM)
You've stumbled across the answer: intimidation, persuasion, and deception should all be the same "social" skill. The fact that the distinction between deception, intimidation, and persuasion is hard to put your finger on and comes down to the speaker's attitude and not the actual words that are said out loud or the effect one is desiring to have upon the listener is the first good hint that the design team got a little too carried away with granularity. If Athletics can be running and climbing and swimming and power lifting and wrestling (basically, anything and everything "athletic"), and Acrobatics can be balance and flexibility and tumbling and evasion (everything dexterous that isn't a fine motor skill), then there should be a similar catch-all social skill as well. It strains the imagination to picture the sort of character that would be really good at talking people into things, but not that good at telling half-truths or preying on people's fears, its all just reading people.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
When it comes to say finding out information sometimes persuasion just will never cut it, if someone has a magic item that needs a command word to work why would you be able to persuade them to tell you. That would fall to what Intimidate is for, those 3 skills for charisma all feel a use, to me the bigger isser is Persuasion/Deception you can deceive someone into believing you have there interest at heart and get the same result as persuasion.
"Let us pass, or I'll kill you."
"Let us pass, or my friend will kill you."
"Let us pass, or I won't be able to keep my friend from killing you."
"Let us pass, or the madman who is after me might kill you, too."
"Let us pass, or I won't be able to stop an assassin from killing your family."
"Let us pass, or I won't be able to stop an assassin from killing some random strangers."
"Let us pass, or I'll be killed by an assassin. You don't want that on your conscience, right?"
Or, what about: "Let us pass, and I'll put in a good word for you with the Captain of the Guard. Stop us, and we'll hurt you."?
I very often ask my players to make Any charisma skill, and they will end up playing it based on the skill they chose. Sometimes this means they perform to get their discount at the smith. But I'm ok with that.
Extended Signature
Persuasion and Intimidation are social-based aspects and will carry their own respective DC for any situation.
It will be much harder for a small, weak-looking creature to intimidate me than it will persuade me.
It will be much harder for an enemy of mine to persuade me, than it will be to intimidate me.
You must take into account social cues from and during these interactions to determine how hard (DC) each would be. Instead of combat scenarios where we match weapon, armor, etc, now we're comparing social status, context, company, etc. It's a different sort of encounter - these skill rolls aren't just interchangeable.
The point of intimidation is to get somebody to do what you want by making them afraid of you. It may not be cowering crying fear but just enough to make them think "I better do what he says to avoid being harmed".
Charisma based intimidation is things like using words to convey a threat, use an imposing presence, that cold dagger-eyes stare, etc.
Alternatively use Strength to swing heavy dangerous swords as a threatening display to let them know you can **** them up and show how physically stronger than them you are.
Use Constitution by drinking acid or poison in front of them with a smile to let them know how pitiful such things are to you. Or stick your finger into an open wound and laugh as if you enjoy it.
Perhaps you move quickly so you display this to show them there have no chance to escape you - that would be Dexterity.
Maybe you can read their faces and body language so well it's almost like you read their mind to unsettle and unnerve them, to know you cannot be lied to and they better talk. Or maybe you know how to play on their primal fears, use their instincts aganst them. That kind of understanding is instinctual so use Wisdom.
Do you know their darkest secrets, could you explain the intricate detail of how to dismantle everything about their identity, can you use telepathy to let them know even that most vulnerable part of them, their mind, can be targeted and destroyed by you? That's Intelligence.
Use intimidate in battle to make them fear you, even if only for a turn, where they cannot attack or can be convinced to surrender after brutally murdering their allies with ease.
Intimidation is much easier to achieve and requires no sophistication so you can be much more flexible in using different ablities and situations with it. However, the use of it is indeed going to mean that person and those around them are going to like you less which can make future dealings more difficult. The locals may learn of you and be far more wary of you. The local guard will be more alert around you, thinking you're the type to get dangerous quickly. When something bad happens in town people start thinking of who to blame and who might be violent or dangerous -- if you've intimidating all the local bar patrons and such in a small town well, they're going to think of you and so suddenly you're being accused of something you didn't do.
It is also unpredictable how people will react. Some people may just swallow pride and do what you want, others will start to do it but constantly look for ways not to and a single moment of distraction and they're out of there. Others cannot handle it and might just break down crying. Some end up far too heavily in fight or flight and can start either attacking you desperately or running for their life.
Intimidate is the easier and more flexible route but the more predictable and more likely to have negative consequences.
---
Persuasion is about getting somebody to do what you want through amicable means. There's no fear involved. Using Charisma is about using natural charm, smooth-talking and just placating their ego in a subtle way. The way you smile, your posture, the way you control your voice - they're disarming and so if you say the right things, flatter them, you can make them melt like butter - or at least find you likeable/annoying enough to give in.
Using other abilities for the skill will be less flexible and more dependent on the situation - if you're trying to convince somebody to hire you as a guard then using your Strength is usually good. Likewise showing high movement speed can let you use Dexterity for the check to persuade somebody to hire you as a courier. It's just going to be extremely specific situations which are very unlikely to occur.
The only other ability you could use for Persuasion is Intelligence when your argument, or attempt to convince somebody, is less charm and skllful use of speech but rather about using logic, facts, figures, data and one's sense of reasonable judgement.
Beyond this the Persuasion skill is less flexible. However, it is easier to get situational bonus - by advantage or lowered DC, by making a network of friends, parting with coins, social status and fame, and the like. That guard is much more likely to "forget you were there" if you can persuade them with some clever words and shiny shiny gold.
Persuasion has no direct negative consequences - it gives you control over lasting effects and can even make things more and more easy over time as you can use persuasion to get into the higher functons and parties of society to get more renown and status or become known to guards that you might be willing to bribe them: eventually you could have the town guard in your back pocket and can get away with anything.
--
Some people can be immune to one of these. Some people just don't fear you or anything you can ever do, so trying to intimidate them isn't going to work. Others might have such a stubbornness, believing themselves so socially above you that your words are nothing (and anyone who has worked in Customer Service like I have knows how true this is). But the fearless person could still enjoy flattery or a pretty face or charming smile and the stuck up social elite will listen to you if they fear for their life. So a different NPCs may react dfferently to the skills either by different DCs or being flat-out immune.
The skills are very dfferent, used differently, both have their place, both are situational, and both have pros and cons.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.