I just ran a small session using the basic rules and the starter set. My son and friend were playing. My son, a dwarf cleric, on his turn decided to use thaumaturgy and make his voice super scary and loud. I asked him to roll an intimidation check and had the ruffians he was trying to scare make will saves vs his intimidation total.
The result of this intimidation was to have those who failed their will saves gain disadvantage on their next turn. Does this seem an ok adjudication or is it an over powered used of the skill and thaumaturgy power?
Thoughts?
Hmmm. Interesting question. It entirely depends on the monster, though if we're just talking about run-of-the-mill Starter Set monsters (goblins, bugbears, etc...) I would make the judgement that they would get disadvantage for a round on their attacks, but I don't think the effect would continue to persist once the goblins or whatever realized they are being tricked.
Also, depending on how badly the monsters failed their checks they may just cower or even run away (nat 1). Of course, if any of the monsters saved they could take their action to convince their buddies that its all a silly Cleric Mind Trick.
Sounds completly fine to me. You made a check and the monsters got a save, so there was no automatic success. Good play!
I can see how this might be abused to such an extent that it becomes the equivalent to an at-will or encounter power. How will you deal with the situation in which the player decides to try this maneuver in every single encounter? Players tend to expect consistent rulings from their DMs. Because the enemy is in combat, I would at the very least give them advantage on their Will saves to be affected by the Intimidate check. This would help to tone down the potential for abuse at least somewhat.
Impalpable wrote:
Leugren wrote:
Impalpable wrote:
Leugren wrote:
I guess I don't see the problem with letting players use Thaumaturgy like that. Honestly, what else are you going to use the spell for anyway? Personally I'd much rather players think of (and be allowed to succeed at) creative uses for non-damaging spells than be shut down because they didn't swing their sword or cast Sacred Flame. Again.
That reminds me of the time in 4e when my DM had a monster use a special ability to "disappear in a cloud of smoke" and turn invisible. On my turn, I wanted to use Prestidigitation to create a gust of wind to dissipate the smoke, thus making the monster visible again. The DM said no, citing the same misplaced fears I see here. So instead I made a perpcetion check (failed), swung at the square the monster was in (missed), and then took damage from its special ability. 
If your players start abusing it and it becomes a real problem, deal with it creatively. Maybe word has spread among the goblins of a tricksy cleric and it loses its efficacy (advantage on checks to resist). Maybe the player gets labeled a witch and is tied to a stake by an angry mob. I also like Iserith's idea of a trade-off to the check, as it acknowledges the player's idea as valid and engages it in a meaningful way.
I let my cleric use Thaumaturgy to get one chance to intimidate/scare off enemies. I allow her to make a Wisdom (Intimidation) check and contest it with Wisdom (Insight). Normally I would use Charisma (Intimidation), but because she's using a spell, I allow her the Wisdom. I've tossed between giving her the proficiency bonus twice (for Intimidation and for spellcasting), or just giving her Advantage on the check to intimidate due to the spell. It only works once, and they typically try to start off with it.
Now, it might come to question as to why they would do this, so I'll explain some things that happen in my games as to why I allow the players to use an at will ability to have so much effect.
1. Combat is Serious Business
My players avoid combat at all costs. They understand that the enemy is "somebody's son" and look to each confrontation as a failing of diplomacy. They do not walk into a dungeon with weapons sheathed, mind you, but they are slow to attack unless it is something clealry unnatural in its combat desire (devil/demon/undead/aberrations, etc.) They are also very careful in combat and make sure to not let the abstraction of hit points get in the way of "being careful." The fighter may have 37 hit points, but even if he takes 10 damage he doubles his defenses and begins actively using his environment. The players loathe killing humanoids, except the fighter (elf with a vendetta against orcs and goblins who laid waste to his entire company). It makes encounters lean towards intimidation and using spells to command enemies away from combat (a favorite tactic is to cast command on the biggest orc and hope for the best - oftentimes if he runs, the rest do by proxy).
2. Magic is Serious Business
Because of our "gamer mindset," we often forget that magic is altering reality without physical methodology. In the real world, if you saw someone move a table with their mind, you would likely brick and then get excited - or run to the police if you were lacking in psycho-emotional fortitude. In the D&D world, magic is not entirely as rare as the Golden Dawn or OTO in our real world. It exists daily for some people (yearly for others), but should never be taken for granted. If a wizard unleashes a fireball on a village square... that hits the news. Compare magic users to "mass shootings" and you get a completely different viewpoint of the seriousness of magic in the world. (Note that my term "mass shootings" comes from "mass homicide" which is defined as 4+ victims in the same event, as defined by most law enforcement agencies.)
3. I am bigger than You
In our current adventure, goblins are in many encounters. Goblins are small and fierce. They aren't invincible and they know it. If I stand twice your body size and yell at you in a booming voice, ... are you really just going to stand there?
I'm not. I'm going to take cover, draw my firearm and prepare for the worse. But that is because I am a trained combatant and firearms trainer. The "average" person might not feel comfortable with this, and they would be completely justified in "RTFA." (Running the *expletive* away.)
I think you are completely justified in allowing for an at will, seemingly "flashy use only," cantrip to do some amazing things if you back it up with an ability check in conjunction. Yes, I understand that intimidation is usually an action by its own right, but why not have a conjoined action with the spell? Besides, the tremors and booming voice can last for at least a few seconds for you to cast and then make the check on the following round - or you might award a bonus action on the same turn that plays off the speaking non-action. I do not think you will break the game, unless you are the DM who demands your characters kill every monster. Then try other methods to incite them to violence - like making the enemies attack first! :D
Three javelins to the chest of the rogue make for an interesting combat beginning. "OH MY **********... SHE WAS HIDDEN!"
Leugren wrote:
It's not a question of whether it's okay, it's a question of how often it can be done. Something which is fine once a day can be really too much when it can be done an unlimited number of times per day. Just asking if it's okay without any indication as to this makes for a missleading question.
So which is it?
Personally, I would have granted the character advantage on the Intimidation check, and kept things at a social interaction level - if they could bluff / scare their way past the goblins, more power to them!
I'm going to tell my son all about this discussion. I orignally asked the question just to see if it seemed like a reasonable adjudication. But I've heard a few of you compliment the "Out of the Box" thinking. I think a young player, our next generation of gamer, needs to hear that too.
Thanks to all of you!
My opinion is that if it didn't work the first time, a second time won't work to intimidate someone.
New creatures? Go for it. They haven't felt your earth shaking voice.
Noon wrote:
Well, poor Clara is going to be in for a shock tonight.
Thanks, Ittyan.
hehehe sounds fun! Let us know how it turns out.
Bahahaha! I was sad. She didn't try it out tonight. 
But then again she was mostly fighting spirits and constructs tonight so... yeaaaaaah.
Ah well. I'll let you know when I start spilling her giggles. :D
iserith wrote:
ittyan wrote:
Noon wrote:
Impalpable wrote:
ittyan wrote:
Noon wrote: