4th- Intimidate, too powerful?

[Cobra]

Just started playing 4th ed. It seemed to me that intimidate seems pretty strong, mostly because it can be used on a while group of opponents at once.

Anybody used it extensively? Has it seemed strong, weak, or inbetween?

[Mewtarthio]

Don't you get like a -10 penalty when you're using it in battle? I guess it'd be overpowered if you stumbled across one of your friends losing a fight and decided to intimidate him into surrendering, but how often does that happen?

[Exarch]

As written, it's decently powerful. It can effectively cut a combat counter in half, as you only need to Bloody your opponents to force them to give up.

However, your DM can always rule otherwise. After all, attempting to intimidate a Hydra into giving up is silly, as with an orc. Heck, some creatures get more vicious if they're Bloodied and so have less incentive to give up.

So, yeah, it seems powerful till you try to use it and your DM looks at you and says "no," which (s)he always has the ability to do.

[Edea]

It's very weak (probably because of what things like Diplomacy did in 3e). First off, you only get one shot per monster per encounter, and secondly (much more importantly) you can't overpump your skill check modifiers in this edition. In 3e, you could easily have insane check mods at relatively low levels; not anymore, and the hefty penalty assigned to using it on combat targets makes it a weak strategy.

[Oracle_Hunter]

4e Intimidate-to-Surrender in a nutshell:
- It's an Encounter Power (Standard Action)
- It only works on Bloodied Opponents
- If you use it on someone who is hostile to you, you suffer a -10 penalty
- You have to make a separate vs. Will attack on each opponent it targets.

So no, it's not too powerful. It provides a mechanic for awe-ing enemies to surrender, but only if they're already losing pretty bad, and only reliably for extremely charismatic characters. It's far superior to the 3e Intimidate, and it provides a role for Intimidate in combat.

[Zeful]

There was a warlock build that used beguiling tongue and intimidate, to get like a +20 or so at level ten, I'm looking it up will post when I find it.

[Fiendish_Dire_Moose]

At first glance it's strong, but when you actually read up on it, it's a little weak and hard to use.
The second you try to intimidate, wether you succeed or not, they automatically become hostile towards you and your group. So now that you have failed, your buddies, should they try, have to face a +10 to the targets Will defense due to him being hostile. And GODS FORBID that the person you're trying to intimidate doesn't speak the languages you speak because that gives you a -5 penalty.
So, no. Intimidate is not overpowered. Especially in many cases how you are staring down a -15 to you check basically.

[Oracle_Hunter]

There was a warlock build that used beguiling tongue and intimidate, to get like a +20 or so at level ten, I'm looking it up will post when I find it.

No, that's true, but remember that Will scales with level.

Even an optimized Intimidator isn't anything like a 3e Bard. That -10 penalty is nothing to sneeze at, and you still have to reduce your target(s) to 1/2 HP before you can use it.

Plus, you make a separate roll for each check, so Beguiling Tongue won't work for everyone.

[Zeful]

Yeah I know but it was an impressive build. I thought it would be a good benchmark for the discussion.

[Yakk]

Note that in 4e, Intimidate skill checks tend not to grow as fast as Will defense does.

Note that +20 intimidate at level 10 was considered good -- now subtract -10 for hostile, and you are d20+10 vs a level 10 monster's will, which is less than a 50/50 chance.

A typical +4 charisma, +5 skilled, +3 focus, +4/30 levels character has:
+12+19/30*L intimidate skill
subtract 10 for hostile, gives you:
+2+19/30*L
against 12+L will defense...

Now, if you have a problem, you can say that an intimidate check attempts every target -- and those that are not-bloodied are immune for the rest of the encounter.

You could also give elites/solos a bonus to defend against intimidate (because they represent 2 or 5 monsters).

[erikun]

There was a warlock build that used beguiling tongue and intimidate, to get like a +20 or so at level ten, I'm looking it up will post when I find it.

+5 for level 10, +5 for trained, +5 for 20 Cha, +3 for Skill Focus. That's +18 already, assuming the race gives a bonus to Charisma. Actually, Beguiling Tongue would boost that up to +23.

Still, most people you're fighting are going to be hostile (+10 Will Defense) and might not even speak common (-5 on your roll).

Looking through the MM, the lowest defense I see at level 10 is a 21 Will. Quite a few are higher, and a couple don't speak common. That's up to 31 Will, as if you're beating them until their bloody, I'd have a hard time figuring they wouldn't be hostile yet. You'll need a roll of 8-18 in most cases to get them to back down.

Also, a failed check is a +10 to further Intimidate checks, because they turn hostile to you. Nowhere does it say that a failed Intimidate check gives a +10 to Will Defense.

[Kurald Galain]

you can't overpump your skill check modifiers in this edition.

At least, not yet.

[horseboy]

It's very weak (probably because of what things like Diplomacy did in 3e). First off, you only get one shot per monster per encounter, and secondly (much more importantly) you can't overpump your skill check modifiers in this edition. In 3e, you could easily have insane check mods at relatively low levels; not anymore, and the hefty penalty assigned to using it on combat targets makes it a weak strategy.

Well, Dragonborn warlord, 18 Cha has a +11 at first level, +14 if they burn their feat on it. Even at -10, that puts it on par with their other powers.

[Colmarr]

Well, Dragonborn warlord, 18 Cha has a +11 at first level, +14 if they burn their feat on it. Even at -10, that puts it on par with their other powers.

True, at level 1.

Will defence scales faster than skill bonuses though, so I wouldn't expect it to remain a valid tactic for long.

[horseboy]

If it scales faster than your ability to hit it, then how do you hit it? The only thing missing would be the enchantment bonus from a weapon, which is at best a +5.

[Colmarr]

If it scales faster than your ability to hit it, then how do you hit it? The only thing missing would be the enchantment bonus from a weapon, which is at best a +5.

IIRC, monster defences rise approximately 1 point per level.

Your Intimidate bonus rises by between 6 and 8 points per 10 levels (depending on whether you bump charisma at every opportunity). 5 for half level and +1 to +3 for attribute bumps.

Using your example character, a theoretical foe with will defence 14 and assuming the character bumps Cha at every possible opportunity, we have the following:

Spoiler

Show

Level 1: Intimidate +14 vs Will 24 (10+ to succeed)
Level 2: Intimidate +15 vs Will 25 (10+ to succeed) * level bump
Level 3: Intimidate +15 vs Will 26 (11+ to succeed)
Level 4: Intimidate +17 vs Will 27 (10+ to succeed) * level bump, ability bump
Level 5: Intimidate +17 vs Will 28 (11+ to succeed)
Level 6: Intimidate +18 vs Will 29 (11+ to succeed) * level bump
Level 7: Intimidate +18 vs Will 30 (12+ to succeed)
Level 8: Intimidate +20 vs Will 31 (11+ to succeed)* level bump, ability bump
Level 9: Intimidate +21 vs Will 32 (11+ to succeed)
Level 10: Intimidate +23 vs Will 33 (10+ to succeed) * level bump, ability bump
Level 11: Intimidate +23 vs Will 34 (11+ to succeed)
Level 12: Intimidate +24 vs Will 35 (11+ to succeed) * level bump
Level 13: Intimidate +24 vs Will 36 (12+ to succeed)
Level 14: Intimidate +26 vs Will 37 (11+ to succeed) * level bump, ability bump
Level 15: Intimidate +26 vs Will 38 (12+ to succeed)

So the answer to your question is that generally you don't hit it after a while. It's a slow progression, but the progression is there.

You'll notice that racial powers that don't have the implement or weapon keywords are usually "Attribute + X vs Defence", and that X increases at various levels. That "+X" is intended to make up for the lack of magic bonus to the attack. As far as I can tell, for powers that are based of key attack stats, "X" is usually 2 at heroic levels (because it's assumed you'll increase your attack rating by 8 per 10 levels). For powers not based off key attack stats, the bonus is usually +4, because it's assumed the stat will only increase by 6 per 10 levels.

You can't get that "+X" for intimidate (as far as I know), so it's invariably going to fall in usefulness at higher levels.

[Kurald Galain]

You can't get that "+X" for intimidate (as far as I know), so it's invariably going to fall in usefulness at higher levels.

Even if it eventually hits a "14+ to succeed", it's still worth it because it's an area-effect "save-or-lose" effect.

[Charity]

There are items in the Adventurers vault that boost Intimidate.

It is quite powerful i guess, but it does make it quite clear that the DM can gimp it anytime he wants, so I doubt it'll be a 3e diplomancer sized problem.

I'm going to focus on it with my Drow paladin so I'll let you know how it goes in a couple of weeks.

[Heliomance]

Intimidate is virtually useless due to not being able to use it on unbloodied foes - hence no out-of-combat usage.

[Jim Profit]

I'd prefer to use bluff.

I don't know know these people! They just kidnapped me and forced me to do wash their clothes and stuff! No able' englis'!


I'm gonna do that next session.

[Charity]

Intimidate is virtually useless due to not being able to use it on unbloodied foes - hence no out-of-combat usage.

INTIMIDATE (CHARISMA)


Make an Intimidate check to influence others through hostile actions, overt threats, and deadly persuasion.

Intimidate can be used in combat encounters or as part of a skill challenge that requires a number of successes. Your Intimidate checks are made against a target’s Will defense or a DC set by the DM. The target’s general attitude toward you and other conditional modifiers (such as what you might be seeking to accomplish or what you’re asking for) might apply to the DC.

INTIMIDATE
Intimidate: Standard action in combat or part of a skill challenge.

Opposed Check: Intimidate vs. Will (see the table for modifiers to your target’s defense). If you can’t speak a language your target understands, you take a –5 penalty to your check. If you attempt to intimidate multiple enemies at once, make a separate Intimidate check against each enemy’s Will defense. Each target must be able to see and hear you.

Success: You force a bloodied target to surrender, get a target to reveal secrets against its will, or cow a target into taking some other action.

Failure: If you attempted to intimidate the target during combat, you can’t try again against that target during this encounter.

Target Becomes Hostile: Using Intimidate usually makes a target hostile toward you, even if you don't succeed on the check.

Enemy is . . . Will Defense Modifier
Hostile +10
Unfriendly +5

You appear to be confused. The bloodied part is only relivant if you are trying to make the enemy surrender by using intimidate, that is a combat limitation, and not a general limitation on it's usage.

[Heliomance]

Still, you should be able to go to a quiet little merchant "I suggest that if you don't want trouble, you should surrender to us and cooperate fully" without having to rough him up first.

[kjones]

Success: You force a bloodied target to surrender, get a target to reveal secrets against its will, or cow a target into taking some other action.

Only the first requires the target to be at half hp.

[ShaggyMarco]

That's true. Grammatically You is the SUbject of the sentence, and then it procedes to list 3 Verb/Object combinations.

1. force (verb) a bloodied target (object) to surrender (infinitive phrase)

OR

2. get (verb) a target (object) to reveal secrets against its will (infinitive phrase)

OR

3. cow (verb) a target (object) into taking some other action (not an infinitive phrase, but a prepositional phrase...similar sort of thing.)

If all of them had to be bloodied, it would be worded: "You force a bloodied target to surrender, reveal secrets against its will, or take some other action."

The restatement of the object (bloodied target, a target, a target) specifies who you can make do what.

[Yakk]

Attacks go up with:
+4/29 from stat-bumps
+15/29 from level-raises
+6/29 from enchantment-raises
=
+25/29

On top of that, you generally pick up a +1 to +3 from 'other' sources (demigod, kensai, etc), or something equivalent (+1 crit width is worth about +1 to hit).

That brings it to +26 to +28/29 from level 1 to 30. The remainder is delt with because the "penalty to defense" and "bonus to attack" powers become larger and more powerful as you gain levels.

The weapon enchantment and/or implement bonus matters, because losing that +6/29 increase ... sucks.

[Baron Corm]

There's nothing under Success which says you can't use it more than once per encounter if you succeed. So you could theoretically use this once per round to cause an enemy to do an action of your choice, though depending on the action it could be hard to get that past the DM. I don't think he would be able to say no if you just used the skill to make the enemy take no actions, that makes sense in most situations. So if an enemy is powerful but has a poor Will defense, you got it covered. That's probably a specific situation by itself though, and in any other situation you'd rather just kill it with regular powers.

[horseboy]

Even if it eventually hits a "14+ to succeed", it's still worth it because it's an area-effect "save-or-lose" effect.

Plus I'm pretty sure being beaten bloody qualifies for that "causes discomfort to the target" bringing in situation modifiers into it to bring it back down to around 12ish. Can't find my book, 1 year old nephew just went through me room, can't find anything.

[Grey Watcher]

Still, you should be able to go to a quiet little merchant "I suggest that if you don't want trouble, you should surrender to us and cooperate fully" without having to rough him up first.

If you're able to actually talk to these people long enough to make a threat, they're probably still Unfriendly (+5 to Will defense vs. Intimidate), not Hostile (+10 to Will defense vs. Intimidate), so if you're in a situation where the blows don't start flying right away, forcing a preemptive surrender is definitely possible. And even if the orcs start attacking as soon as you walk through the door, maybe make it possible, but just at an additional +something to Will to get them to surender before they're bloodied (something that's an actual threat to you should be hard to cow without you roughing it up first, but most things of substantially lower level will have a lousy Will defense compared to your Intimidate....

I don't know if any of that made sense, but I hope it did.

[Oracle_Hunter]

Some uses of Intimidate:

Spoiler

Show

- Bullying an innkeeper to give you free beer
This does not require the Innkeeper to be bloodied (he's not surrendering) and unless you've ticked him off sometime early in the evening, he's probably not even Unfriendly (so +0 to his Will save). You probably are speaking the same language (so +0 to your check). In any case, he's going to be Hostile afterwards, whether this works or not, so I wouldn't stick around the bar for too long.

- Bullying a thief into revealing the location of his Guild
Again, he doesn't need to be bloodied, but he is almost certainly going to be an Unfriendly kind of guy (+5 Will).

- A Paladin of Pelor bullying an acolyte of Orcus into revealing the location of his Cabal
Again, he doesn't need to be bloodied, but he is going to be Hostile to the questioner, even if the Acolyte has had not other interactions with the Paladin.

- An Inspiring Warlord flying neutral colors demanding that a squad of badly wounded soldiers fleeing from the Duke's Army surrender to his patrol.
We're talking about Surrender, so the forces need to be bloodied - fortunately, the squad is. The squad has had no interactions with the Warlord, and he's flying colors that are neither allied nor opposed to either their liege or the Duke, so they are probably neutral (+0 Will)

- An Inspiring Warlord flying unfriendly colors demanding that the squad surrender.
The Warlord is allied to the Duke, sure, but provided that the Warlord's lord isn't known for brutality, I'd say the bloodied squad is probably only Unfriendly (+5 Will) to the suggestion. After all, the Warlord hasn't taken a shot at them yet.

- An Inspiring Warlord demanding that the now-bloodied squad he's been fighting surrender.
There's been a lot of blood shed on both sides; that's Hostility (+10 Will) right there.

To me, this seems to be the sort of breakdown that WotC was going for. You can use it in non-combat settings to get people to do things for you via the threat of violence. However, once fighting has actually broken out, you can use it to force your opponents to surrender rather than die or run away... but it's much harder.

Now, if you manage to find a wounded force and, throw sheer force of personality, convince them to seek mercy from you rather than fight, well, that's pretty darn heroic, wouldn't you say?

[Kurald Galain]

If you're able to actually talk to these people long enough to make a threat, they're probably still Unfriendly (+5 to Will defense vs. Intimidate), not Hostile (+10 to Will defense vs. Intimidate), so if you're in a situation where the blows don't start flying right away, forcing a preemptive surrender is definitely possible.

No, because they won't be bloodied.