The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

How do you use Intimidation in your game?
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters -> How do you use Intimidation in your game? Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Wed May 18, 2011 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vanir wrote:
Of course now Ewoks, well they're just annoying Twisted Evil
Well they are cute and fuzzy. But that's not really a problem. Cover them in a sticky clay coating before baking in a Tandori Oven. After cooking, crack the fire hardened clay. The fur sticks to the clay and peels right off when they are done. Mmmm. Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fallon Kell
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 1846
Location: Tacoma, WA

PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2011 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bren wrote:
Fallon Kell wrote:
Bren wrote:
Fallon Kell wrote:
garhkal wrote:
Wow.. didn;t know that... Might explain why so many protesters get whakked!

That, combined with the fact that protesters are generally jerks towards cops...
Yeah, darn those pesky first amendment rights.

Just making an observation. Protesters tend to like to fight the system. Cops tend to be seen as representations of the system. People with big sticks tend to whack the jerk first.
I don't want to tangent off on a discussion of the merits and demerits of civil disobedience, but given this is a SWD6 forum I find your comment a bit ironic. That is, unless you exclusively run a valiant and honorable soldiers protecting civilization and the Empire from those nefarious Rebel jerks campaign.

I almost do, of course the jerk is my player and he's a pirate, not a rebel.

I'm just saying I've lived in a fairly protest-heavy town and know a lot of protestor-type people. I also know a few cops. The protestors tend to do and say more things that make people want to hit them. I think it's part of the nature of people who like to protest, and also has to do with what they're looking for when they hire police officers. Mainly though, I want to point out that I was making a factual observation and not a value judgement.

Now I'm going to work real hard to try and come up with a salient point to make this discussion non-tangential...
...
...
...
Okay, so in real life, obviously responses to intimidation vary depending on the relative authority and power of the intimidator/intimidated. For example, if a protester calls a cop a nazi and threatens him, the officer is allowed to hit him with a knight stick, or shoot bean bags at him, or pepper spray. He may do so, since he has been insulted an threatened. If, however, the protester is likely to become a rioter, the officer has some cause for concern because he's in his normal uniform, not riot gear. Say the protesters outnumber him 500 to one and if they start rioting they could actually kill him. an officer in this situation is likely to respond with much more force. He may use tear gas or tazers or wooden bullets. In this circumstance coming closer to success with an intimidation roll without succeeding may lead to more sever consequences, or at least the modifiers applied before the rolls may lead to more sever consequences for failure. Does anyone have any way of reflecting that in game mechanics?
_________________
Or that excessively long "Noooooooooo" was the Whining Side of the Force leaving him. - Dustflier

Complete Starship Construction System
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vanir
Jedi


Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793

PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2011 5:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Like I suggested earlier, use it as the opening phase of combat. Give combat bonuses/penalties based on Intimidation rolls.

modify initiative, catch them flat footed, cause a fear reaction, these things can modify combat rolls or negate parries/dodges.

It's easier using it that way so that players have full control over role playing their characters (except for the success/failure of skills). I don't like forcing them to do anything relating to how they play their characters (like fleeing in magical horror in D&D), instead I prefer to try to break it down and for a badly failed Willpower/Intimidation give a fear reaction in the form of a simple free attack by the enemy with you caught flat footed.

Frustrates players without routinely taking over their characters. It's not so good to do that very much.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bren
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2011 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fallon Kell wrote:
...In this circumstance coming closer to success with an intimidation roll without succeeding may lead to more sever consequences, or at least the modifiers applied before the rolls may lead to more sever consequences for failure. Does anyone have any way of reflecting that in game mechanics?
Failing an intimidation roll will usually result in the target having a hostile reaction and thus tends to increase the likelihood of a violent confrontation.

Opposing Intimidation with Intimdation instead of Willpower basically guarantees a confrontation unless one party rolls much higher than the other. Which I think is what you are intending.

This old article had some interesting general ideas. http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/Roleplayer/Roleplayer23/Intimi-Inept.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2011 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vanir wrote:
I don't like forcing them to do anything relating to how they play their characters (like fleeing in magical horror in D&D), instead I prefer to try to break it down and for a badly failed Willpower/Intimidation give a fear reaction in the form of a simple free attack by the enemy with you caught flat footed.

Thats why i prefer a standard chart.

EG
Intim over willpower
0-5 = Can react only. No full reactions for first round
6-10 = -2d but as above

and so on..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vanir
Jedi


Joined: 11 May 2011
Posts: 793

PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2011 9:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes that seems a good system, we don't have a table written down but essentially abstract that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Fri May 20, 2011 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Give me a few days.. i will make a proper chart.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 2:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bringing this question back up. In one of the modules Sparks uses, one of the combat situations has a Whiphid who possesses a 10d intimidation value, and it is wrote that he opens the combat scene up with that skill, everyone resolves it against their willpower. Every 10 less they get on their willpower roll equates to a 1d penalty to all skill (not attribute) rolls made.
But in looking up the skill, i see nothing mentioning whether it is a ME vs You
or a ME vs all of you skill.

Who here runs it where an intimidation works against all who are witnessing it, versus where its an opposed roll of PC (or npc) vs NPC (or pc)?
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DougRed4
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 18 Jan 2013
Posts: 2258
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Tue Jun 03, 2014 4:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Very interesting thread! The hulking Barabel in our game tends to use Intimidation quite a bit, and I usually rule it very much as the rules suggest. If he were doing it to a group of people, I tend to figure out how the leader responds, with the followers falling in line. In a recent event, for example, had he successfully Intimidated the Whiphid leader, the others would have likely followed his lead (fortunately for him, the Jedi used the Force to calm things instead).

vanir wrote:
Not sure if you might find it relevant but under legislative conventions relating to assaults psychological intimidation is considered the first tier of a physical altercation. Police in the US and Commonwealth for example are authorised to exercise use of force if presented with psychological intimidation or passive resistance, by that I mean a cop can literally, legally punch you in the face if you attempt to inimidate him and this is regarded in most courts as proportionate use of force for an officer of the law performing his duties (that would be why they get away with things like hitting protesters that give them lip instead of moving on when instructed).


I know this is over three years old, but this was so horribly wrong and inaccurate that I couldn't let it stand. Sadly, vanir could hardly be more wrong in his statement. In fact, things are almost the exact opposite of what he's written (at least for the U.S.). One would have to really, significantly intimidate someone in law enforcement (with far more than just words) to justify any use of force, and even then the burden would be on the officer, rather than the citizen. The courts will almost universally side with the civilian or protestor, and many in law enforcement have lost not only their jobs but their agencies have suffered large lawsuits (see what has resulted from the Occupy protests, for instance). FWIW I not only have legal training (certified as a paralegal), but am a Sheriff's Deputy and have worked in this field for 18 years. I've even been involved in writing departmental Use of Force policies before.

Back to SW, though. the discussion was very interesting. I have to admit that our drinks (and meals) tend to fall more into what Whill described at one point, where they're mostly handwaved away ("After a hearty meal, you notice so-and-so enter the restaurant"). In fact, like using the toilet/bathroom, it's rarely mentioned in our game. Sure the PCs visit lots of cantinas/bars, but when they do they rarely imbibe much, as they're usually more "on duty" with a heightened state of awareness (due to their current mission or operation).

I tend to view things more like Bren did, earlier in this thread. Some games (like the award-winning but underappreciated CODA system) give numerical values for social interactions, which can really help in the role-playing of such encounters.

One thing I don't get - for those who believe that all encounters should be entirely role-played - is how they differentiate between themselves and their characters. In my view, each PC is unique and different, and most (if not all) don't view things or have the same tastes, interests, fears, insecurities, dreams, values, or opinions that I do. Nor is role-playing (to me, anyway) a vehicle for me to be some kind of method actor, where I inhabit completely the character I'm playing. Perhaps to illustrate my point I'll give an example.

In our D6 SW game each of the players only has one PC. But in our Star Trek game, most players had at least two. In our supers (V&V) game, most of the players have at least three (active) PCs, some even more. So let's take an example, just for the sake of illustration.

I'll use three of my PCs. Suppose - for sake of this - the characters encounter a massive dragon-like creature that attempts to use its fear aura to intimidate the PCs.

Majestic, a heroic, altruistic PC who wears a suit of armor and teleports, would likely face the beast bravely. He's got a high Charisma, very high Level, and would (in SW terms) have a high Willpower, I would imagine.

Compass, an American of Indian descent, wields powerful magnetic forces. His biggest interest is in ecological issues, and seeks to save the Earth (he got his superpowers from the Bhopal disaster in India). Right now he's under a poweful curse from a demonic entity, so he might be more inclined to be swayed or cowed by the dragon's intimidation.

Maleshift, a quirky gadgeteer who is also an absent-minded professor (and forgets how he invented amazing gadgets out of household items) is really low-level and would likely pee his pants at the sight of such a monster.

Now the player for each of these three is myself. When I role-play any of these three, I'm going to (of course) factor in things like experience and backstory/origin. But without the numbers on the character sheet, how else do we differentiate between one PC and another? Being as I am the one running them, should their response be the same for each (since I am the one deciding things?)

I guess I don't follow the logic of using the character's Dodge score to see how well he ducks and dives out of the way of a laser bolt, but don't use that same character's Willpower score to see how well he/she reacts in the face of danger.

And I don't mean to make this sound like "my way is best" or that I don't appreciate other methods of doing things. On the contrary, there's a great variety here (and anywhere else) among RPG afficianados, and everybody should use what method works best for them and their group.

I just personally appreciate the systems like Unisystem (one I'm prepping for a con adventure for later this month) where there's a dedicated Fear Chart, with the results that players have to abide by depending on how they roll.

In V&V, one of our players likes to say (loudly) "I Resist!", in character, when someone tries to use mental powers on him (Mind Control or Emotion Control). Often he rolls amazingly, and it adds to our fun (as it's become somewhat of a long-running 'in' joke). But he understands that if and when he fails, his character then has to do what the GM tells him he has to do. He would no more try to get around this than he would try to explain why he doesn't have to mark off 25 Hit Points of damage done by a power blast.
_________________
Currently Running: Villains & Vigilantes (a 32-year-old campaign with multiple groups) and D6 Star Wars; mostly on hiatus are Adventures in Middle-earth and Delta Green
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14021
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Mon Mar 21, 2016 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bringing this thread up, as i have yet to see anyone reply to the last question i posed, in that is this skill a One vs One, or one vs all who see it roll?

IE if darth vader showed up and wanted to intimidate a group of 5 PC's does he have to declare 5 actions to Intimidate everyone individually, suffering MAPS on all of it, or can he just do the One Intimidation roll, versus all the PC's individual Willpower rolls??
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ebertran
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 190
Location: Miami, FL

PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2016 7:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would do it as D&D handles it with its monsters.... basically anyone that can see Vader would have to roll their willpower. He makes one Intimidation roll and everyone would have to try to resist.

My solution for how NPCs intimidate PCs without taking away player's agency to decide how their characters act? By treating them as "stunned". Vader intimidates you by beating your willpower, you are "stunned".

Pretty simple solution.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Naaman
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral


Joined: 29 Jul 2011
Posts: 3191

PostPosted: Sat Dec 17, 2016 8:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess that would he situational, but going with the face value of your question, I'd roll once for Vader and everyone would each roll to resist individually.

I might even give the group a bonus based on their numerical advantage (if that would be relevant to the circumstances).

Also, FWIW, I don't consider intimidation an "action," though, you could assign MAPs and make a single roll (in this case at -4D) to simulate the obvious numerical advantage of the opposing party (instead of granting the bonus I mentioned above).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Error
Captain
Captain


Joined: 01 May 2005
Posts: 680
Location: Any blackberry patch.

PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I use Intimidation in my games basically just as it is written here, which I believe is basically the wording from the 2E R&E Core Rulebook.

If a character succeeds wildly in intimidating someone, it is generally that someone's response to put as much distance between him- or herself and the intimidating character as fast as possible (e.g. "The Weequay customs officer gets one look at you and runs screaming from your ship's entry ramp, disappearing somewhere into the crowded spaceport."). If someone who has been greatly intimidated can't do that, they will be generally be cowed enough to give up real information and/or be temporarily more susceptible to the Command skill.

Characters who only succeed in intimidating someone lightly (by like 1-10 points) I generally treat a little less severely. They may still back away and let their hands drift down toward weapons. They may give up some information, but definitely not the juiciest bits. The objective for any intimidated character (who can't immediately disengage) is generally to mollify the intimidating character, so whatever they have to do to accomplish that is generally what they'll do.
_________________
The only words of explanation you need for any concept in the entire Star Wars universe are the words Science Fiction and Space Opera.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
ebertran
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 14 Jul 2005
Posts: 190
Location: Miami, FL

PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How do you make NPCs intimidate PCs? Do you force PCs to say things they dont want to?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10286
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 18, 2016 8:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ebertran wrote:
How do you make NPCs intimidate PCs? Do you force PCs to say things they dont want to?

You see the problem with game mechanics undermining player free will over their characters and dice rolls overriding roleplaying.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> Gamemasters All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0