Intimidate Foe, a little too good?

[zedturtle]

Yep, with one foe Intimidating can be extreme. I've done some testing with a single heavy hitter and even with a tonne of special abilities and an artefact that restored 1 Hate each round (so he was never Weary) he never got to pull off any of his special abilities until I gave him a largish bodyguard (this was against 100 XP heroes with magical weapons, so they could one shot Black Uruks).

[Earendil]

Thanks for finding those quotes, Rich. I still think Intimidate is overpowered against a single foe or maybe a small group, but simply saying you can't repeatedly do it against the same foe solves that for me.

To respond to your own points:

Yes, it's true that the hero is vulnerable while doing it, but even a Hill-Troll is very unlikely to do more than 15 damage in one round (8 on an ordinary hit) and besides, it may make more sense for the enemy to attack another hero who looks close to dropping instead of the one doing the intimidating

That's circumstance dependent - why would another hero look close to dropping. He wouldn't necessarily, so the LM could select any he wanted - eg, the hero standing there posturing in a more unguarded stance, the hero he's previously hit, the one shouting like a loon, the hero who looks like a wimp, etc. However, if the intimidate action worked I'd suggest that the foe may avoid the PC in question, he's been intimidated by him after all, but that's really up to each LM.

I would imagine someone who's Weary should look close to dropping, at least relative to someone who isn't. A savvy foe (probably not a troll) might decide to finish them off so as to have less enemies to fight (this actually happened in my game last night, in the Grand Melee at the start of "The Crossings of Celduin"). Yes, it's circumstance dependent, but that doesn't mean it won't happen!

I'd say the foe might avoid the person who intimidated them, but it makes just as much sense that they might lash out at the object of their fear. You can rationalise it either way, I think.

By the way, I would definitely allow it to be used on non-sentient creatures; animals are, if anything, easier to scare than people.

What adversaries in TOR constitute being non-sentient? I'm not talking about real world equivalents here but stuff within the game so far - it feels like a grey area to me.

Dunno. Cave Trolls or Sarnlug, maybe? I haven't really thought about it, I was just responding to the OP's comment that he might only allow intelligent (which i took to mean sentient) foes to be intimidated.

[bluejay]

Again I think that what we're seeing is that a Fellowship can be especially effective against a single foe, even a really tough one. Variations of this seem to come up from time to time.

[Rich H]

I would imagine someone who's Weary should look close to dropping, at least relative to someone who isn't. A savvy foe (probably not a troll) might decide to finish them off so as to have less enemies to fight (this actually happened in my game last night, in the Grand Melee at the start of "The Crossings of Celduin"). Yes, it's circumstance dependent, but that doesn't mean it won't happen!

Agreed. Just so you know, I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was just trying to illustrate how different options could be used depending on circumstances.

I'd say the foe might avoid the person who intimidated them, but it makes just as much sense that they might lash out at the object of their fear. You can rationalise it either way, I think.

Great point!

Dunno. Cave Trolls or Sarnlug, maybe? I haven't really thought about it, I was just responding to the OP's comment that he might only allow intelligent (which i took to mean sentient) foes to be intimidated.

Yeah, it was just a general question, sort of to everyone; not trying to catch you out or anything!

[Corvo]

A bit late to the discussion, but I would give another perspective.

We all agree that Intimidate foe is very powerful when used by a group against a lone Great Size opponent.
I find it fitting: think about a pack of dogs against a bear. It happened: it was a way for hunting bears.

The bear can kill a dog with a single swipe, yet rarely it resulted in a dead pack.
The dogs cannot wound a bear with their bites, yet the
bear was usually cornered by the pack. The bear fought ineffectively against the pack: in game terms, he was intimidated and out of hate.
Long enough for the hunters to come and line the killing shot.

One Troll against 4-6 Men/Elves/Dwarves? If the opponents don't scatter under the initial assault, the Troll is in deep trouble: someone will bury a spear in his back, sooner or later.

I think lone Trolls would rarely attack sizable groups. There are band of Trolls for such job.

In my games the players learned that lone Trolls are dangerous, but they are going down against a coordinated groups. It's just matter of reducing the risks (and avoiding that lucky blow). Against two or three, all bets are off.

[Fatpob]

I must be the only person who finds Awe(ful). (I only Play and I don't LM the game)

When fighting a packs 6 or more it is absolutely shocking, worse than pointless. You stand at the front Make a brave statement and chuck the dice, if there are no 6's then the deflation is instant. A success gets rid of 2 hate....

I understand the all vs one mob statements, but lets look at the reality, if there is only 1 mob, then he is going to be tough.
Cave Troll has Hate of 7 - so 2 hate loss is barely a worry. Troll has Crush underlined and though only 1 dice, he will roll D6, Feat die +6.
Stood forward you have defence 6 + parry. So troll needs to roll over your parry on D6 + Feat die. The pun writes itself here based on average parry of 5..... Not a great feat really

When we talk a tougher creature - Great Orc with Hate 8 - the hate loss is irrelevant as he will be attacking you with 3d6 + 7 + Feat Die - (3d6+1 + Feat die over the parry....) there will be blood patterns for sure.

But this isn't my issue, the problem I have is with multiple opponents. A pack of orcs (Hate 1- 3 each), or worse a horde of spiders (hate 2+ ) losing 2 hate is like losing a bucket of sand on the beach.

If you get an Extraordinary Success, 4 Hate or Valour if higher (shared out by the LM) against a tide may do a little, perhaps make a mob weary, but not much more, especially if there are more behind.

Just to put some context I have played my char for over 3 years well over 1xp Char and have Awe skill at 5, Valour 5. For RP encounters this is great.
For Battle it is rubbish, I just get battered. No point being the Hero on the wall/at the breach/at the Front - just getting a beat down to reduce 2 orcs to weary... Shark Sandwich.

[Terisonen]

Don't forget that if the cible as the "ability" Craven, it run away from battle when at zero Hate.

[Rich H]

I must be the only person who finds Awe(ful). (I only Play and I don't LM the game)

TLDR; Intimidate Foe is fine as-is, LMs need to apply a little common sense, that's all. I'll try and respond constructively...

When fighting a packs 6 or more it is absolutely shocking, worse than pointless. You stand at the front Make a brave statement and chuck the dice, if there are no 6's then the deflation is instant. A success gets rid of 2 hate....

Not really. PCs that don't have a high enough Awe skill should really think about where and when it should be used. If a character has an Awe of 4 or more then they will be regularly getting good results. Also a lone character isn't facing such a 'mob' alone so used in conjunction with other options it works nicely. Even if you're only getting an ordinary success, that's two points of Hate which can be taken from an enemy (the LM decides how); personally I apply a bit of common sense based on how the player describes his intimidating action. So, for example, in a party of 4 PCs facing 6 mobs such a character is going to either face one or two opponents directly. I'll target the Hate point loss against those unless the player narrates otherwise. Regarding Hate, the rules state the following:

Hate points represent the intensity of a creature’s determination and resourcefulness. The Loremaster
uses a creature’s Hate point rating to gauge its resolve and to fuel its special abilities.

So, even a small loss of Hate can effect how an adversary behaves in a battle; even fleeing if the LM decides such an action makes sense.

I understand the all vs one mob statements, but lets look at the reality, if there is only 1 mob, then he is going to be tough.

Cave Troll has Hate of 7 - so 2 hate loss is barely a worry. Troll has Crush underlined and though only 1 dice, he will roll D6, Feat die +6. Stood forward you have defence 6 + parry. So troll needs to roll over your parry on D6 + Feat die. The pun writes itself here based on average parry of 5..... Not a great feat really

Well, the reality of the situation is that a single tough creature has multiple targets so he won't be striking the intimidating PC every turn. In fact, as an LM I'd argue that he'd be focussing on the enemies actually doing physical damage.

When we talk a tougher creature - Great Orc with Hate 8 - the hate loss is irrelevant as he will be attacking you with 3d6 + 7 + Feat Die - (3d6+1 + Feat die over the parry....) there will be blood patterns for sure.

As a player you may not know this, so you're not commenting from a fully informed position, but Hate loss (however small) impacts on an adversary's use of key abilities. Hate is the cost of powering many of those so even taking two points away from such a creature impacts on their effectiveness; more and it gets really challenging for such enemies to be truly effective in battle.

But this isn't my issue, the problem I have is with multiple opponents. A pack of orcs (Hate 1- 3 each), or worse a horde of spiders (hate 2+ ) losing 2 hate is like losing a bucket of sand on the beach.

Not really; see all my above comments.

If you get an Extraordinary Success, 4 Hate or Valour if higher (shared out by the LM) against a tide may do a little, perhaps make a mob weary, but not much more, especially if there are more behind.

As previously mentioned, reduced Hate is a reflection of how such an enemy approaches the battle. I use it as a gauge of morale, as per the rules (quoted above), so it can really impact how enemies behave, what decisions they make, and even if they stay around to fight or not.

For Battle it is rubbish, I just get battered. No point being the Hero on the wall/at the breach/at the Front - just getting a beat down to reduce 2 orcs to weary... Shark Sandwich.

I don't agree, as per my comments above. Intimidate Foe works just fine. It's not an "I win" button so shouldn't always produce awesome results but the rules are there and applying some common sense to how Hate is lost and interprested among adversaries means that the problems you're describing simply don't occur.

[aramis]

Even for those of us who ignore the official limit of 3 levels of success (Basic, great, Exceptional), allowing even 4-6 successes... it's useful but not overpowered.

Remember: for opponents, hate 0 at start of turn is weary. Only the craven flee, but Orcs suffer heavily for wearied. And wearied does not go away until a rest, so even if an ally gives them more hate, technially, they should remain weary.

That's useful, but not overpowering.

[Rich H]

Yes, my experience is that Intimidate Foe is just about right with regard to power level and useful application.