Passive Intimidate

[GreatWyrmGold]

In 5e, there is a mechanic called Passive Perception, where a number equal to 10 plus the character's Perception bonus can be checked against a Stealth check or what-have-you to see if the character noticed anything. There are other skills (in 5e and other games) for which this can sometimes make sense. One possibility brought up at ast night's Pathfinder session is Intimidate—passively looking so terrifying that people get intimidated when you just walk in the door.

How would that work, exactly? I mean, the Intimidate skill relies on some amount of active action, so they should be able to avoid scaring people when they're not trying to, so just doing Intimidate bonus plus 10 doesn't make much sense. But I'm not sure what else you could do. Circumstance bonuses plus 10 or something? Do you guys have ideas? It's not an important question, but it's one I find interesting.

[weckar]

Looking scary by default is not necessarily 'Intimidate': Think of the kind-hearted Bloody Ogre. He looks scarier than me after a shower, but probably has no ranks in intimidate whatsoever.

[DrMotives]

Draconomicon, page 106. Frightful presence as feat, which is checked for every time you attack or charge by all opponents who can see you and are within 30 feet. That's pretty much a passive intimidate.

[atemu1234]

Draconomicon, page 106. Frightful presence as feat, which is checked for every time you attack or charge by all opponents who can see you and are within 30 feet. That's pretty much a passive intimidate.

Yeah, this is probably as close as you're gonna get.

[Geddy2112]

There is "passive" everything, it is called taking 10. You can simply have somebody take 10 on an intimidate check if they so wish. Certainly for a mid to high level PC walking into a bar full of commoners-anyone good at mean mugging should be able to cow and quiet the patrons when they walk in.

As others have suggested, a frightful presence feat, or having some kind of aura of shaken through a spell or ability like a bards dirge of doom to mechanically inflict shaken. To intimidate out of combat and coerce or influence attitude, just take 10 should a player wish, or they could roll to threaten the bar or whatever.

[Zanos]

I mean, the Intimidate skill relies on some amount of active action, so they should be able to avoid scaring people when they're not trying to, so just doing Intimidate bonus plus 10 doesn't make much sense.
I think this is better handled by fluff, so I'm going to say this isn't necessarily true. If you cultivate fear through your appearance and reputation, it's entirely possible that you couldn't turn it off. Rooms should get pretty icy when someone with sky-high intimidate walks in. World of Darkness actually had a pretty cool "passive" affect to intimidate, where crowds would consciously or subconsciously part around you.

[Ashtagon]

As others have noted, frightful presence is a thing. However, Intimidate is simply not a passive skill. It doesn't do anything until you choose to threaten someone. While you could tell your DM you are spending every standard action going "grrr" at the nearest NPC, which would have the effect of taking 10 every round, it's still only one person at a time (barring feats and/or samurai class features), and it still consumes an action each round, just as "passive searching" does.

(The above relates to 3.pf. Things are probably utterly different in 5e)

[PaucaTerrorem]

Start keeping trophies of your slain foes.
A necklace made from the jaw bone of a dragon.
A famous high level humanoid that you've cut the face off of and turned into a hood for your cloak.
Eyeballs made into earrings.

Stuff like that should work well to cause a passive Intimidate check. But of course, first ask the DM if this would have any effect.

[Deophaun]

How would that work, exactly?
You enter a tavern. DM decides you look scary to the hoi polloi. Crowd reacts accordingly. Simple.

Not everything needs to be a dice roll. Heresy, I know.

If you want something needlessly complicated, you could adapt the reputation mechanics in UA.

[atemu1234]

Start keeping trophies of your slain foes.
A necklace made from the jaw bone of a dragon.
A famous high level humanoid that you've cut the face off of and turned into a hood for your cloak.
Eyeballs made into earrings.

Stuff like that should work well to cause a passive Intimidate check. But of course, first ask the DM if this would have any effect.

Wearing a dragon's severed hemipenes as a necklace would be quite a fashion statement, though it may send the wrong message if you go to a bar and ask to speak to Dorothy.

[dagfari]

You enter a tavern. DM decides you look scary to the hoi polloi. Crowd reacts accordingly. Simple.

Not everything needs to be a dice roll. Heresy, I know.

If you want something needlessly complicated, you could adapt the reputation mechanics in UA.

One of the characters I made for an upcoming session with my friends is a half-orc drifter type (FTR 4) who is a natural werewolf. On the night of a full moon, he has to make a DC20 will save or lose control of his character for the night. There's a herbal tea available from the town witchdoctor that can grant a +4 bonus to that roll (and 1d6 strength damage in case he has chained himself up...)

In combat, I'm going to treat the act of transforming itself as an Intimidate check against all enemies that can see him.

There hasn't been a full moon yet, he hasn't deliberately transformed, and the population of the village treats him reasonably well. But if he were to transform in the middle of the town square during market hours, I think he should be expecting the innkeeper to have packed his bags for him by the time he gets back to his room, and maybe a helpful Angry Mob to drive him out of town. (And that's if he doesn't hurt anyone...)

Intimidate isn't an alternative to Diplomacy - it has social consequences.

[atemu1234]

Intimidate isn't an alternative to Diplomacy - it has social consequences.

Well, not with that attitude it's not.

[Zanos]

I think turning into a Werewolf has way more to do with that than an intimidate check.

That said, with a good intimidate check, most of those peasants would probably want to stay home.

[Vaern]

I don't think intimidate can work as a passive skill as is. It runs off of the same ability score that is defined as representing personal magnetism and physical attractiveness, which is basically the opposite of a passive intimidate's intended effect.

That being said, many groups rule that characters may substitute strength when making intimidate checks if they are making obvious physical threats to someone. I'd use 10+strength as a passive score to determine how intimidating some random person looks without actively trying to appear intimidating. A high-charisma bard or sorcerer may be able to make sinister veiled threats that'll make a fighter or a barbarian take a step back, but a random commoner walking through the door is likely to find the fighter and barbarian to be much more frightening at a glance.

[GreatWyrmGold]

You enter a tavern. DM decides you look scary to the hoi polloi. Crowd reacts accordingly. Simple.
My 8-year-old cousin could tell me that, and she's never played D&D. Nobody with two brain cells and an interest in being helpful would bother to point that out. They'd just point to the UA stuff and call it a post.

[Deophaun]

My 8-year-old cousin could tell me that, and she's never played D&D.
Out of the mouths of children...

Nobody with two brain cells and an interest in being helpful would bother to point that out.
When you're limited to only two brain cells, you tend to miss the obvious solutions.

[GreatWyrmGold]

It should be noted that I was not trying to imply that you had two brain cells; I was trying to imply that you had no interest in being helpful. Replying to my post by implying I only have two brain cells only reinforces my point, don't you think?

[Deophaun]

It should be noted that I was not trying to imply that you had two brain cells;
Obviously, as you explicitly said someone with only two brain cells wouldn't do what I did.

I was trying to imply that you had no interest in being helpful.
Now you couldn't have been doing that, as you cited the fact that I had quoted UA and that the section was helpful, which someone who had no interest in being helpful would not do. Hence the previous statement.

Replying to my post by implying I only have two brain cells only reinforces my point, don't you think?
I do not recall implying such thing. However, I have no power to control what you choose to infer.