Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Shin_Okada 01-18-08, 09:43 PM	Intimidate makes a NPC temporary friendly. But it is usually not enough to draw information from that one. Some published modules mention that "this one does not reveal secrets unless one's attitude is changed to cooperative." and such. As intimidate cannot make someone cooperative, no matter how the check result is high, often useless as a way of interrogation. Then, is it possible to change that same (now friendly) NPC's attitude further into cooperative, by using Diplomacy skill? In fact, carrot and stick (stick then carrot, in this case) is considered to be a good old technique of interrogation.
jaelis 01-18-08, 10:53 PM	There's no "cooperative" attitude, I guess you mean "helpful"? Nothing in the rules says you can't follow up an intimidate check with a diplomacy check, but I'm not sure it would work the way you want. Intimidate says "the target retains its normal attitude, but will chat, advise, offer limited help, or advocate on your behalf while intimidated." I would take that to mean that the Diplomacy check would be based off the target's normal attitude, not the friendly behavior that Intimidate provokes.
Leaflitter 01-18-08, 11:23 PM	id rule that it would if i were DMing. its like in the moves and on TV. your all tough then you say "ok ok you know what i help you out..." and the person would be more helpful. some role playing would be involved not just dice tho. but thats my take on the topic
strenoth 01-18-08, 11:59 PM	Bad Cop (intimidate) good cop (Diplomacy), Capeche? (and I probably mangled the spelling on that last)
Shin_Okada 01-19-08, 12:57 AM	There's no "cooperative" attitude, I guess you mean "helpful"? My mistake. Yes, "helpful".
1 ton ghost 01-19-08, 01:27 PM	typically, the 2, coming from the same source, do not work unless situation changes radically. ie)bust someone down to roll over on their source, then use Diplomacy to "cut a deal", convince them to plea bargain, etc. rare, but it could happen. traditionally, Intimidate will get you the info you want. especially when you get to its pure source, torture. i find this particularly effective and another excuse to crack open Book of Vile Darkness as the system for that and Sacrifice are refreshing and drive game play well. this is another example of why it is preferable to cut down and stabilize your enemy or capture outright. intel. they can always be killed, ransomed, bargained w/ later. besides, Speak w/ Dead isn't a sure bet all the time. Intimidate isn't contingent on a clock, # of ?'s, etc. besides, your friends can assist you. oh, and every person has a breaking point no matter how well trained or stoic.
jaelis 01-20-08, 02:18 AM	oh, and every person has a breaking point no matter how well trained or stoic. Well... in dnd, anyone immune to fear can't be intimidated. So a 3rd level paladin (for instance) won't break.
1 ton ghost 01-20-08, 02:36 PM	Well... in dnd, anyone immune to fear can't be intimidated. So a 3rd level paladin (for instance) won't break. i'm not implying fear vs. mental intimidation. flesh and blood often have this problematic issue of pain as a byproduct...
Trewgle 01-20-08, 03:51 PM	As I recall, one looses EXP upon death and resurrection. ;) "Oops, did you delevel and loose immunity? Perhaps now you'll talk..." *slide red, hot poker along skin from ear to jaw* =P
jaelis 01-21-08, 08:01 AM	True, but you can't bring an unwilling soul back from the dead, so that wouldn't necessarily work. Better would be to let a level-draining undead rough the paladin up, then wait a day until the drain turns into level loss. It might be a little tricky to make sure you dropped him to level 1 or 2 without killing him, though.
Belkar 01-21-08, 11:46 AM	Better would be to let a level-draining undead rough the paladin up, then wait a day until the drain turns into level loss. It might be a little tricky to make sure you dropped him to level 1 or 2 without killing him, though. Wow. My evil BBEG has just found a new hobby.
InkBlot 01-21-08, 01:29 PM	id rule that it would if i were DMing. its like in the moves and on TV. your all tough then you say "ok ok you know what i help you out..." and the person would be more helpful. some role playing would be involved not just dice tho. but thats my take on the topic It is very important to determine the success of the encounter by the skill check results, and not your roleplaying ability. If failure or success is indicated by how you roleplay a the interrogation encounter, then you're just being incredibly unfair to any player who isn't naturally charismatic. If an incredibly socially awkward guy is playing the interrogator, then you've just made his character's 13 ranks in Diplomacy utterly useless. Better leave it to the Barbarian with 7 Charisma and no ranks played by the president of the local theater club. This is the reason why D&D 3.5 has defined rules for diplomacy, intimidate, bluff, and sense motive skills. When a barbarian attempts to kick in a wooden door in a dungeon, you don't have the barbarian's player roleplay the scene with your bathroom door first and then roll his strength check. Besides, nobody at your game table can negotiate as well as a 7th level Rogue with max ranks in Diplomacy. It's better to roll the dice first, check the result, and then use that result as a guideline for roleplaying. That way the guy you're interrogating will tell the suave Bard what he wants to know, no matter how often the the Bard's player stutters. Playing suave characters shouldn't be restricted to suave players.