Is it acceptable to substitute Strength in the place of

>>54188199
Not very often. Even when it's a direct show of force, a low-charisma brute can make the whole act fall flat.

>>54188199
>not having a derived stat calculated by the formula [INTIMIDATE=(.75STR)+ CON×.25CHA]
shit system detected

>>54188199
Depends on the system.
Because there are systems where you will substitute Charisma in place of Strength in Intimidate rolls if anything.

File: IMG_7297.jpg (338KB, 2048x1229px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 2048x1229px

>>54188260
This line of thinking seems dumb to me a non living thing has effectively no charisma yet by sheer size or force I am intimidated by it

>>54188199
Definitely. Just like you should replace Strength bonuses to hit with dex bonuses. And rebalance point buy.

Or just give up on dnd,

>>54188199
It can be. Depends on the situation.

>>54188199
Depends on the GM

>>54188303
but that's a different kind of intimidation. in terms of "looking scary," sure, but I think the intimidation skill generally implies demanding someone do something and producing some kind of threat

I can see strength being used in an intimidation roll to help out someone else's charisma-based attempt though

File: USS Washington.jpg (2MB, 1600x1361px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1600x1361px

>>54188199
Depends on context.
1:1 where the target has no recourse or protection from a position of authority, yes, other times strength merely provides a bonus: i.e. it's fine for intimidating a thug, if you want to intimidate, say, a magistrate you'd still have to be playing your cards right.

>>54188303
Inanimate objects can have charisma, or at least an equivalent to it - buildings, statues and machines can be beautiful or intimidating. Or both

>>54188260
>Punches a castle out of the planet
>"Kek, look at this monstruous strongman, like that is going to scare me or anything"

Something like this happened to me the other day
>Be monk
>Surrounded by thughs in city
>Beat like 60% of them
>But because my Cha is 10 and monk doesn't have intimidate or diplomacy as class skills my intimidate was shit as fuck
>Thugs kek and attack me
>Beat 100% of them easily
More XP for me I guess

From what I've seen, yes.

A lot of skills in 5e are mentioned as Intelligence (Arcana) or Charisma (Intimidation)

So what I took that to mean was that I could also have Charisma (Arcana) for a Sorcerer using their inborn magic to "feel" out some Wild Magic nearby, or Strength (Intimidation) for a large brute to crush a skull with a single hand to scare off some bandits

>>54188199
No. Strength is just how swole you are. Charisma is how effectful your words are. So a strong but uncharismatic person is either a big dude who acts like a "beta", strong but doltish, gentle giant, or big but socially not confident. This is why Strength should not be used for intimidation. Think of Hodor, he is pretty strong in the books, being giantblooded. But he has no effective personality to use when trying to threaten somebody. He is intimidating the same way a spooked horse is intimidating. It's because something large could hurt you, but not in the same way as someone threatening to blackmail you or gut you like a pig or something else to that effect.

>>54188199
Just take the feat.

>>54189136
That's actually listed under the Skill section. The DM can decide to have the player roll a mismatched skill and stat, like Con (Athletics) for endurance running.

It's quite sensible and allows you to give players more freedom and options with their skill use.