using Intimidation on a Bear / Cat / Dog

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

a deer small enough to be seriously threatened by a large house-cat.

Of course a cat has a 50/50 chance in Hand to Hand combat vs a Level 1 wizard. (LoL last played DnD in 1985 or so).

[Phil Masters]

Originally Posted by Prince Charon

My guess (after finding out that there are over a dozen species of muntjac deer, most of them in East and Southeast Asia) is that you encountered a pair of Reeves's muntjacs, a deer small enough to be seriously threatened by a large house-cat.

Yeah, the Reeves is the species that's become established in Britain. A housecat would have to be feeling confident to take one on, but I assume that the urban foxes round here get a fair amount of venison (and save the gardens from being stripped bare).

Most Muntjacs are small, though apparently there's one oversized species in Asia. Anyhow, the mothers definitely have a threat display and ignore size differentials when using it.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Witchking

Of course a cat has a 50/50 chance in Hand to Hand combat vs a Level 1 wizard. (LoL last played DnD in 1985 or so).

https://finalfantasy.fandom.com/wiki...nal_Fantasy_VI)

don't underestimate them

[oneofmanynameless]

Using intimidation to try to convince your dog to eat the food you laid out for it, or to convince it to go get your mail from the mail box or else, probably requires animal empathy.

Using intimidation to say, "I will hurt you if you don't back off or back down" I would argue doesn't require empathy of any kind, or understanding your targets motivations in any way, or even really the ability to speak, and is a pretty universal language.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by oneofmanynameless

Using intimidation to try to convince your dog to eat the food you laid out for it, or to convince it to go get your mail from the mail box or else, probably requires animal empathy.

Definitely. Both threats require the dog to somehow understand that bad consequences await if it doesn't perform some act, as opposed to just stopping what it's currently doing.

Originally Posted by oneofmanynameless

Using intimidation to say, "I will hurt you if you don't back off or back down" I would argue doesn't require empathy of any kind, or understanding your targets motivations in any way, or even really the ability to speak, and is a pretty universal language.

Of course, the "universal language" breaks down if one of the parties doesn't understand the warning signs that the other party is willing to use violence. This might be a problem if you're dealing with alien or unfamiliar animals. (E.g., Native American creatures generally understand the threat implied by a rattlesnake's rattle, a skunk's raised tail, or a porcupine's raised quills. Invasive/ imported creatures like cats and dogs sometimes don't get the message.)

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by Plane

https://finalfantasy.fandom.com/wiki...nal_Fantasy_VI)

don't underestimate them

Well that page is blank (at least for me).

In Ye Olden Days...

A Dnd House cat had 3 HP (IIRC) claws for 1-3 DAM and a better AC and THACO than the wizard.

The level 1 Wizard had a 1d4 roll for HP modded by Con (max of +2) and either a dagger 1d4 DAM or a staff 1d6 DAM.

So the wizard would only have a hair more HP (and that would be if he was A- very lucky B- very lucky to be able to put a 14+ in Con or C- Dice Fudging aggressively at roll up). He would hit slightly harder but be less likely to hit and more likely to BE HIT.

There are reasons the DnD Wizards got a significant rework over the years after First Edition.

[Plane]

Originally Posted by Witchking

Well that page is blank (at least for me).

Stray Cat

sorry the bracket got chopped off

In Ye Olden Days...

Originally Posted by Witchking

A Dnd House cat had 3 HP (IIRC) claws for 1-3 DAM and a better AC and THACO than the wizard.

The level 1 Wizard had a 1d4 roll for HP modded by Con (max of +2) and either a dagger 1d4 DAM or a staff 1d6 DAM.

So the wizard would only have a hair more HP (and that would be if he was A- very lucky B- very lucky to be able to put a 14+ in Con or C- Dice Fudging aggressively at roll up). He would hit slightly harder but be less likely to hit and more likely to BE HIT.

There are reasons the DnD Wizards got a significant rework over the years after First Edition.

I think in a lot of games you just start out fighting sewer mice.

Human combat capacity being more like "fainting from not being able to handle stress" moreso than "your actual physical limits"

[Witchking]

Originally Posted by Plane

Stray Cat

sorry the bracket got chopped off

In Ye Olden Days...



I think in a lot of games you just start out fighting sewer mice.

Human combat capacity being more like "fainting from not being able to handle stress" moreso than "your actual physical limits"

Well old skcool DnD Fighters, Clerics, Thieves all had combat niches they were good to excellent in. Even at 1st level they could hang with a kobold or three.

Wizards however had multiple problems at low levels...the d4 hit die meant a couple of early 1s or 2s and you could have a 6th level wizard with a HP value expresses in a single digit. Also they did not start getting heavy hitting combat spells until Spell Level 3 (IIRC the Wiz got those at level 7). Also of course DnD limited his weapons and armor options.

There are reasons some groups would not start a character's playtime at 1st level but picked level 6-7-8 instead.

The curve of the rampup was much steeper in the other game...