Intimidate to Surrender [Archive] - Wizards Community

Intimidate to Surrender [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
FponkDamn
09-14-07, 07:46 AM I like fights that don't end in slaughter, personally. Many of my players feel the same way. Sometimes, it is easy to determine when a character will surrender (especially if there was pre-set conditions to that effect). Other times, it is harder to adjudicate. What do you all think of the following?

Intimidate: New use - Force Surrender

You may use a full-round action to make any creature that has line of sight to you, can understand you, and has an Int of 5 or greater to surrender, convincing it of the folly of continuing to fight. The DC of the Intimidate check is equal to 10 + the target's current HP + Will save bonus (including bonuses to save against fear). Creatures immune to fear effects cannot be made to surrender in this way (though they still may, in the right conditions, surrender willingly).

Special: You automatically fail this check if the target has knowledge that you will not honor the surrender (such as seeing you or your allies attack another creature that has surrendered).
Special: You gain a +4 circumstance bonus on this check if the creature saw you kill another creaure that refused to surrender within the last minute.

Diplomacy: New use - Grant Mercy

Basically the same as above, but convinces the target that mercy will be granted if the target ceases to battle, as opposed to simply cowing the target into laying down its weapons.

Instead of gaining a +4 bonus to this check for killing others that refused to surrender, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus if the target saw you accept a peaceful surrender within the last minute, and that creature is still unharmed.

Any thoughts?

- Johnny
bloodtalon
09-14-07, 02:05 PM the one thing i see that might be a promblem is the dc when you add in remaining hit points
lets say they are fighting some big bad dude with alot of hps and they been wailing on him so they are thinking that he must be low o0n hp's so the spend a turn trying to get him to surrender and he laughs and smites them
a better way is go 1 point per 10% of max hps
but also lower the dc if the guy can see he is out matched
Eerongal
09-14-07, 02:17 PM you can all ready do this

You can change another’s behavior with a successful check. Your Intimidate check is opposed by the target’s modified level check (1d20 + character level or Hit Dice + target’s Wisdom bonus [if any] + target’s modifiers on saves against fear). If you beat your target’s check result, you may treat the target as friendly, but only for the purpose of actions taken while it remains intimidated. (That is, the target retains its normal attitude, but will chat, advise, offer limited help, or advocate on your behalf while intimidated. See the Diplomacy skill, above, for additional details.) The effect lasts as long as the target remains in your presence, and for 1d6×10 minutes afterward. After this time, the target’s default attitude toward you shifts to unfriendly (or, if normally unfriendly, to hostile).

If you shift them away from hostile, they wont want to fight you.

But it requires 1 minute (10 rounds) to do so.
Lefty
09-15-07, 09:03 PM There is a source for all that and it worse
than grapple. Using Armed Force with an
Armed Force, I can't remember what it was called
but causing a ROUTE and using FIGHTING
RETREATetc...it is a great idea to use
for an individual fighter and I starts with hit dice
not hit points and hit points remaining is the next
factor...damage dealt and arms remaining as well
as any terrain advantage.
The spell CHARM is only as sweet as you feel like
making also.
And for those who know not: hit dice and level is
approximately equal however I believe that multi classes
characters who are simply dragging a second set of
skills upward without spending the point (and thus leveling
the dice rolls) need not apply. There may even be some rules
against two hit point increase roles to begin with, being only
one person.
MORALE is the bottom line on these dominances of no more
thanphysical force. And why intelligence of 5 or less, when
someone without the rudimentary intelligence is being
dominated it is a bit more warlock-like.
I would say that without a High Strength score and several
levels, ability to trade in violence should be very convincing.
But how long would it last?
What else could you make them do?

Lefty
FponkDamn
09-15-07, 10:48 PM I think the point should be that if the big baddie has a lot of HP left, and the PCs think he's a goner, then they should end up failing the check. They're demanding a surrender and the baddie doesn't think he's out yet, so they fail. With a good Intimidate check, you could potentially force a surrender of someone at full health, if they were much weaker than you (which is something I like).

While making someone friendly with Intimidate (or Diplomacy) does make them not want to fight you, it would be for different reasons. They'd be friendly (or forced-friendly) and that's not quite the same thing. A friendly person might not walk into manacles, and trying to make them do so might un-friendly them in a hurry. Plus, the surrender thing isn't as much based on whether an NPC likes you as much as whether he respects your honor, or your ability to kill him.

So with a regular Intimidate check - they're friendly. They'll do a lot for you, under penalty of pummeling.

With the surrender check - they just surrender, no more. But the check is quicker, and involves different things.

I think they're different enough to warrent different applications of the skill.

- Johnny
Lefty
09-17-07, 02:47 PM Fundamentally a higher level character, regardless
of hit points remaining is much more powerful than a
low level character.
The ability to deal more damage more easily and use
available skills as well as having more of them gives
a high level character every advantage.
Surrendering to low level characters is improbable.

Lefty
slwoyach
01-05-08, 11:36 PM I really like this house rule and intend to use it from now on.
Positronica
01-06-08, 03:30 AM I would include the creatures HD into the equation somehow. As you have it right now, the players could convince creatures that are far higher in levels than them to surrender, just by happening upon them at a time when the creature was low on HP. Perhaps you could make the DC be The Target Creatures HD + Remaining Hitpoints + Will Save Bonus.

Another option would be to put in a -10 or -15 circumstance penalty if the characters asking for the surrender were not responsible for the target creature's hit point loss. That would keep the players getting "surrenders" in situations that they shoulded. For example, some very low level players could stumble across two dragons fighting. One dragon kills the other, but in the process is knocked down to very low hitpoints. One of the players steps forward and demands surrender, and makes the DC, despite the fact that even with low hitpoints the dragon could still eliminate the entire party in one round.

One other option might be to give the surrendering creature an intelligence check to see if the players asking for the surrender are actually a threat. You could make the DC for this check 20 - the HD difference between the creature and the party average. For example, a 1st level (1 HD) player asks an injured 15 HD dragon to surrender. The dragon would then only needs to make a DC 6 Intelligence check to know that surrendering in this situation would be a mistake, even if the dragon only had 1 hp left. You could also let the player make some sort of bluff check if he wanted to pretend he had more HD than he really had.
Slapstick87
01-06-08, 02:14 PM Also, the DC being set by 10 + Hit Points + Will save makes it more likely that the warrior will surrender than the wizard. That's not how I think it should be. How about using HD x 1.5 + Hit points?
UAMDB
01-07-08, 10:44 AM I don't think a skill should ever force a player to do anything. Spells do this kind of thing. Would your players like to be forced to surrender. Think about this. The BBG forces the players to have to fight through his minions before facing him. After the last fight before they have a chance to heal up, he comes in the room and forces everyone to surrender.

Not every fun for the PC's. The BBg comes in the room says surrender and they do because they have just got done fighting. They get no save against it what so ever. Good way to railroad the PC's if you ask me.
Master_Vega
01-07-08, 12:19 PM I like the house rule, but I agree with UAMDB. You should add somewhere that the power does not effect Player Characters, as with the normal (not combat) functions of Intimidate and Diplomacy.
Sergikins
01-08-08, 06:05 PM I like the house rule, but I agree with UAMDB. You should add somewhere that the power does not effect Player Characters, as with the normal (not combat) functions of Intimidate and Diplomacy.

Where does it say that out of curiousity? though as a DM, I understand why i don't do that often

Either way, I really really like this. However, I don't think it should be based on HP. If based on HP, it loses value as a tactic at higher levels

Heres my 2 cents. I think The intimidate check should be opposed by a normal opposed level check +wisdom +bonus vs. fear with a +20 bonus. there are circumstances that add or subtract to the roll on either players part

For every two more people that are in a group, that group gains a +1 to whatever check

If the group being intimidated is at full or near full strength, that group gains a +2 to the opposed check (DM call)

If the group being intimidated is at 1/4 or less strength, they gain a -2 to the check (DM call)

If the group intimidating is at 1/2 or less strength (DM call), they gain a -2

If the group intimidating did not honor their part of their bargain or are notorius for this, the targets gain a +2 to the check

If the intimidating group intends to not honor the bargain, they must also make a bluff check. if the other group makes a sucessful sense motive, they gain a +4 to the check.

If i had more time, I'd proof read it. I'll check on this later
Master_Vega
01-08-08, 11:53 PM Where does it say that out of curiousity? though as a DM, I understand why i don't do that often

Check: you can change the attitudes of others (nonplayer characters) with a successful Diplomacy check...

That's the diplomacy one, and I honestly think it's stupid to take control out of the PC's hands even with an intimidate check (which I couldn't find anything suggesting it was not legal). Penalties are one thing, but players should be able to decide whether they support someone or not, period. The lack of decent called-shot rules takes enough control out of the players' hands. >_>

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FponkDamn 09-14-07, 07:46 AM	I like fights that don't end in slaughter, personally. Many of my players feel the same way. Sometimes, it is easy to determine when a character will surrender (especially if there was pre-set conditions to that effect). Other times, it is harder to adjudicate. What do you all think of the following? Intimidate: New use - Force Surrender You may use a full-round action to make any creature that has line of sight to you, can understand you, and has an Int of 5 or greater to surrender, convincing it of the folly of continuing to fight. The DC of the Intimidate check is equal to 10 + the target's current HP + Will save bonus (including bonuses to save against fear). Creatures immune to fear effects cannot be made to surrender in this way (though they still may, in the right conditions, surrender willingly). Special: You automatically fail this check if the target has knowledge that you will not honor the surrender (such as seeing you or your allies attack another creature that has surrendered). Special: You gain a +4 circumstance bonus on this check if the creature saw you kill another creaure that refused to surrender within the last minute. Diplomacy: New use - Grant Mercy Basically the same as above, but convinces the target that mercy will be granted if the target ceases to battle, as opposed to simply cowing the target into laying down its weapons. Instead of gaining a +4 bonus to this check for killing others that refused to surrender, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus if the target saw you accept a peaceful surrender within the last minute, and that creature is still unharmed. Any thoughts? - Johnny
bloodtalon 09-14-07, 02:05 PM	the one thing i see that might be a promblem is the dc when you add in remaining hit points lets say they are fighting some big bad dude with alot of hps and they been wailing on him so they are thinking that he must be low o0n hp's so the spend a turn trying to get him to surrender and he laughs and smites them a better way is go 1 point per 10% of max hps but also lower the dc if the guy can see he is out matched
Eerongal 09-14-07, 02:17 PM	you can all ready do this You can change another’s behavior with a successful check. Your Intimidate check is opposed by the target’s modified level check (1d20 + character level or Hit Dice + target’s Wisdom bonus [if any] + target’s modifiers on saves against fear). If you beat your target’s check result, you may treat the target as friendly, but only for the purpose of actions taken while it remains intimidated. (That is, the target retains its normal attitude, but will chat, advise, offer limited help, or advocate on your behalf while intimidated. See the Diplomacy skill, above, for additional details.) The effect lasts as long as the target remains in your presence, and for 1d6×10 minutes afterward. After this time, the target’s default attitude toward you shifts to unfriendly (or, if normally unfriendly, to hostile). If you shift them away from hostile, they wont want to fight you. But it requires 1 minute (10 rounds) to do so.
Lefty 09-15-07, 09:03 PM	There is a source for all that and it worse than grapple. Using Armed Force with an Armed Force, I can't remember what it was called but causing a ROUTE and using FIGHTING RETREATetc...it is a great idea to use for an individual fighter and I starts with hit dice not hit points and hit points remaining is the next factor...damage dealt and arms remaining as well as any terrain advantage. The spell CHARM is only as sweet as you feel like making also. And for those who know not: hit dice and level is approximately equal however I believe that multi classes characters who are simply dragging a second set of skills upward without spending the point (and thus leveling the dice rolls) need not apply. There may even be some rules against two hit point increase roles to begin with, being only one person. MORALE is the bottom line on these dominances of no more thanphysical force. And why intelligence of 5 or less, when someone without the rudimentary intelligence is being dominated it is a bit more warlock-like. I would say that without a High Strength score and several levels, ability to trade in violence should be very convincing. But how long would it last? What else could you make them do? Lefty
FponkDamn 09-15-07, 10:48 PM	I think the point should be that if the big baddie has a lot of HP left, and the PCs think he's a goner, then they should end up failing the check. They're demanding a surrender and the baddie doesn't think he's out yet, so they fail. With a good Intimidate check, you could potentially force a surrender of someone at full health, if they were much weaker than you (which is something I like). While making someone friendly with Intimidate (or Diplomacy) does make them not want to fight you, it would be for different reasons. They'd be friendly (or forced-friendly) and that's not quite the same thing. A friendly person might not walk into manacles, and trying to make them do so might un-friendly them in a hurry. Plus, the surrender thing isn't as much based on whether an NPC likes you as much as whether he respects your honor, or your ability to kill him. So with a regular Intimidate check - they're friendly. They'll do a lot for you, under penalty of pummeling. With the surrender check - they just surrender, no more. But the check is quicker, and involves different things. I think they're different enough to warrent different applications of the skill. - Johnny
Lefty 09-17-07, 02:47 PM	Fundamentally a higher level character, regardless of hit points remaining is much more powerful than a low level character. The ability to deal more damage more easily and use available skills as well as having more of them gives a high level character every advantage. Surrendering to low level characters is improbable. Lefty
slwoyach 01-05-08, 11:36 PM	I really like this house rule and intend to use it from now on.
Positronica 01-06-08, 03:30 AM	I would include the creatures HD into the equation somehow. As you have it right now, the players could convince creatures that are far higher in levels than them to surrender, just by happening upon them at a time when the creature was low on HP. Perhaps you could make the DC be The Target Creatures HD + Remaining Hitpoints + Will Save Bonus. Another option would be to put in a -10 or -15 circumstance penalty if the characters asking for the surrender were not responsible for the target creature's hit point loss. That would keep the players getting "surrenders" in situations that they shoulded. For example, some very low level players could stumble across two dragons fighting. One dragon kills the other, but in the process is knocked down to very low hitpoints. One of the players steps forward and demands surrender, and makes the DC, despite the fact that even with low hitpoints the dragon could still eliminate the entire party in one round. One other option might be to give the surrendering creature an intelligence check to see if the players asking for the surrender are actually a threat. You could make the DC for this check 20 - the HD difference between the creature and the party average. For example, a 1st level (1 HD) player asks an injured 15 HD dragon to surrender. The dragon would then only needs to make a DC 6 Intelligence check to know that surrendering in this situation would be a mistake, even if the dragon only had 1 hp left. You could also let the player make some sort of bluff check if he wanted to pretend he had more HD than he really had.
Slapstick87 01-06-08, 02:14 PM	Also, the DC being set by 10 + Hit Points + Will save makes it more likely that the warrior will surrender than the wizard. That's not how I think it should be. How about using HD x 1.5 + Hit points?
UAMDB 01-07-08, 10:44 AM	I don't think a skill should ever force a player to do anything. Spells do this kind of thing. Would your players like to be forced to surrender. Think about this. The BBG forces the players to have to fight through his minions before facing him. After the last fight before they have a chance to heal up, he comes in the room and forces everyone to surrender. Not every fun for the PC's. The BBg comes in the room says surrender and they do because they have just got done fighting. They get no save against it what so ever. Good way to railroad the PC's if you ask me.
Master_Vega 01-07-08, 12:19 PM	I like the house rule, but I agree with UAMDB. You should add somewhere that the power does not effect Player Characters, as with the normal (not combat) functions of Intimidate and Diplomacy.
Sergikins 01-08-08, 06:05 PM	I like the house rule, but I agree with UAMDB. You should add somewhere that the power does not effect Player Characters, as with the normal (not combat) functions of Intimidate and Diplomacy. Where does it say that out of curiousity? though as a DM, I understand why i don't do that often Either way, I really really like this. However, I don't think it should be based on HP. If based on HP, it loses value as a tactic at higher levels Heres my 2 cents. I think The intimidate check should be opposed by a normal opposed level check +wisdom +bonus vs. fear with a +20 bonus. there are circumstances that add or subtract to the roll on either players part For every two more people that are in a group, that group gains a +1 to whatever check If the group being intimidated is at full or near full strength, that group gains a +2 to the opposed check (DM call) If the group being intimidated is at 1/4 or less strength, they gain a -2 to the check (DM call) If the group intimidating is at 1/2 or less strength (DM call), they gain a -2 If the group intimidating did not honor their part of their bargain or are notorius for this, the targets gain a +2 to the check If the intimidating group intends to not honor the bargain, they must also make a bluff check. if the other group makes a sucessful sense motive, they gain a +4 to the check. If i had more time, I'd proof read it. I'll check on this later
Master_Vega 01-08-08, 11:53 PM	Where does it say that out of curiousity? though as a DM, I understand why i don't do that often Check: you can change the attitudes of others (nonplayer characters) with a successful Diplomacy check... That's the diplomacy one, and I honestly think it's stupid to take control out of the PC's hands even with an intimidate check (which I couldn't find anything suggesting it was not legal). Penalties are one thing, but players should be able to decide whether they support someone or not, period. The lack of decent called-shot rules takes enough control out of the players' hands. >_>