Intimidate and Animals

[DSC]

It is entirely reasonable that Intimidate doesn't work on truly unintelligent creatures (e.g. oozes). And it's justifiable that it doesn't work on arthropods like spiders and scorpions - one could make a case either way, really, but the present system is reasonable enough.

But why on earth doesn't Intimidate work on regular mammals like Dogs and Wolves? If anything, one would think Dogs would be easier to intimidate, not impossible to intimidate. I realize this quickly ceases to be an issue at the higher levels, but at low levels it's both unrealistic and vexing. (With their Trip attacks dogs can actually be more of a pain for the non-tanks than many humanoid opponents.)

[Angelus_dead]

But why on earth doesn't Intimidate work on regular mammals like Dogs and Wolves?
Regardless of whatever else, rangers should be able to influence animals. It's what they do.

[Turial]

Regardless of whatever else, rangers should be able to influence animals. It's what they do.

I assume you mean with intimidate and diplo rather then wild empathy or IWE.

[Borror0]

But why on earth doesn't Intimidate work on regular mammals like Dogs and Wolves?

Ok, this is my take on Intimidate.

Your intmidate score represents your capacity to use your charisma to convince the opponent that you're a thread. When activating Intimidate, you're just attracting their attention so they can see you. Upon looking at you, they decide you're the most important threat and they start attacking you, a bit in the way you should always heal clerics and then casters in an encounter as those are the ones causing most damage (usually).

Animals are not going through that proccess of thoughts. They attack whatever happens to be in their way (to put it bluntly). Obviously, they'll turn around and hit whatever beats them most. They can still recognise something hurts them a lot, can still feel anger, etc.

As for AD's comment, Handle Animal should be the skill in charge of that by making it work like both Intimidate and Diplomacy on animal. However, we all know the troubles of adding a new skill in the game right now. So, a possible workaround would be an enhancement enabling Intimidate and/or Diplomacy to work on animals. The drawback of that change is that it makes rangers multiclasses the best at intimidate... making the Handle Animal even a better fix to the situation.

[MrWizard]

just have a caster use hypno and their is no need to even use the intimidate skill....

[iruka41]

just have a caster use hypno and their is no need to even use the intimidate skill....

Not enough happy barbarians leaving any hypnotized mobs behind and move on.
Red circle means 'kill it first!' for them :D

[Borror0]

Red circle means 'kill it first!' for them :D

Nah, it means 'Aggro them all with your glancing blows'.

[DSC]

Animals are not going through that proccess of thoughts. They attack whatever happens to be in their way (to put it bluntly). Obviously, they'll turn around and hit whatever beats them most. They can still recognise something hurts them a lot, can still feel anger, etc.

I would personally argue that animals like dogs or wolves have plenty enough intelligence to judge one threat compared to another. Regardless, though, I certainly agree Animal Handling would be a more elegant solution... I don't know that it's a likely one, though.

Under the current system, I think letting social skills work on any mammal would make more sense than not.

[Borror0]

I would personally argue that animals like dogs or wolves have plenty enough intelligence to judge one threat compared to another.

You already met people that look scary dangerous to you? You'll notice that animals are not usually scared of them.


Regardless, though, I certainly agree Animal Handling would be a more elegant solution... I don't know that it's a likely one, though.

Fact is, skill respec is needed in the game. I'll repeat until I devs makes it so I shut up. ;)

[DSC]

Fact is, skill respec is needed in the game. I'll repeat until I devs makes it so I shut up. ;)

No argument there. :)

[Borror0]

No argument there. :)

Silly. That was the part where you push me into talking more and then pretend I convinced to. -_- ;)