[Abombom]

Hi, I was wondering what the default stance is of the rules in Shadowrun regarding using Intimidate or even Con on PCs? Is it possible to do so? The rules I've read seem to point towards "yes."

Of course, I do know that taking away control from PCs is just a bad GM strategy altogether, and should be used sparingly. Or that sometimes it depends on the players; some like the realism of their character being intimidated, others don't like any control being taken away from them.

If this is a common question then sorry, I didn't find it in my initial search.

[JustADude]

By default, yes you can.

However, many players just really can't (or won't) "shift gears" on how they're playing their character if they're thinking "Man, this guy's a twerp. I could grease him, easy," but the enemy Face rolled 42 dice and got 11 Net Hits on an Intimidate roll.

[Black]

This one will come down to the players and the GM.

I have used social skills on players, but the players have played along to great effect.  If players and GMs are creating stories together and its a co-operative experience, then it should be all cool and a chance for extra roleplaying...

.. but if the players and the GM have a more competitive combative type relationship, players may see it as undermining their control of the character etc.

Its really like Fear, influence and similar effects.  The difference between a critter using a power, a mage using emotion control and highly skilled seductress using con (seduce)?  None really. 

Note: It will really come down to if players are open to embracing things like this, or if they will be upset.  GMs and players need to work together to set the style of their table.

[Mirikon]

The trick is in how you relate the information to them. Be descriptive, while not inflicting actions upon their character. Phrases like "palpable aura" or "menacing glare that pierces to your core" work well. Or you can bust out the DikuMUD references with "Death will thank you for your gift."

[Black]

By default, yes you can.

However, many players just really can't (or won't) "shift gears" on how they're playing their character if they're thinking "Man, this guy's a twerp. I could grease him, easy," but the enemy Face rolled 42 dice and got 11 Net Hits on an Intimidate roll.

I get this, I really do.  Me, I'm no actor, and I certainly aint no face.  So when my NPC face does his thing, I say to the players, for example 'this guys, he comes accross as a good kid.  sure his a bit arrogant, but his got class and style and you like what his saying'.... and then let the players go with it.

I had a great scene which is still a classic at our table where the 'Cleo' in Dreamchipper kept seducing each player character one by one at a party while the hacker etc sitting outside listing on the comlinks kept losing their sh@t!  The players really went for it and they still mention her favourable.

[Black]

The trick is in how you relate the information to them. Be descriptive, while not inflicting actions upon their character. Phrases like "palpable aura" or "menacing glare that pierces to your core" work well. Or you can bust out the DikuMUD references with "Death will thank you for your gift."

I find fear and intimidation a bit harder with players.  They can often accept being conned or seduced easier then their hero characters actually being scared.  Particularly if ithe NPC isnt a twelve foot tall insect, but some... (meta)human.  But I totally agree with your approach.

Players will always react more favourable to situations where they control their character.  I like to think the GM can trust the players to go with it, so provide the description of the feeling and let them respond.

[Crunch]

I think the key is letting the characters know what the effect is, but not to dictate their actions.

So - he's very convincing and you think he's telling the truth- not -he talks you into opening the door. Or -this guy is cold as nails and you find him scary as hell- not -he intimidates you and you start groveling.

[RHat]

While the rules might technically allow it, you shouldn't ever use social skills to FORCE an action out of a player - that's like stabbing their agency in the heart (agency is a term used in psychology and game design that refers, essentially, to an individuals sense that they have some degrees of control, and loss of agency has a direct negative impact on people's enjoyment in gaming).  What works well, however, is to use those skills to establish a character's perception or emotional response.  So, for example, you tell a character that he finds himself feeling that a character that's just rolled a highly successful intimidation test is very capable of rendering harm (or, simply, that he's afraid of this guy).  Different characters, however, will respond differently.  Some might respond as would be expected, but others might get highly confrontational as that's how they respond to such things.  So long as the characterization is consistent, all is good.

And if you think responding to intimidation with confrontation is somehow unfair, keep this in mind:  They're probably the only one doing so.  That likely means taking on a superior enemy on their own at times.

[All4BigGuns]

The trick is in how you relate the information to them. Be descriptive, while not inflicting actions upon their character. Phrases like "palpable aura" or "menacing glare that pierces to your core" work well. Or you can bust out the DikuMUD references with "Death will thank you for your gift."

What I never figured out is if it was that Death would thank you for giving yourself early, or for getting lucky and killing that critter. (I tend to lean toward the former myself)

[Mirikon]

The trick is in how you relate the information to them. Be descriptive, while not inflicting actions upon their character. Phrases like "palpable aura" or "menacing glare that pierces to your core" work well. Or you can bust out the DikuMUD references with "Death will thank you for your gift."

What I never figured out is if it was that Death would thank you for giving yourself early, or for getting lucky and killing that critter. (I tend to lean toward the former myself)

It is unequivocally the former. Level 1 character looks at a dragon, that's what you'll see. Basically, anything that is going to utterly destroy you without question.

[All4BigGuns]

The trick is in how you relate the information to them. Be descriptive, while not inflicting actions upon their character. Phrases like "palpable aura" or "menacing glare that pierces to your core" work well. Or you can bust out the DikuMUD references with "Death will thank you for your gift."

What I never figured out is if it was that Death would thank you for giving yourself early, or for getting lucky and killing that critter. (I tend to lean toward the former myself)

It is unequivocally the former. Level 1 character looks at a dragon, that's what you'll see. Basically, anything that is going to utterly destroy you without question.

And yet there were times on MUDs when I had level 5 characters ream-out mobs that gave that message.      (Helps when you know high level spell-chuckers that can buff the holy piss out of ya)

[Glyph]

I agree with RHat; social skill stats and dice rolls are better off used for social perception than forcing a specific action.  The social skills rules are very poorly designed.  Too many things that stack, situational modifiers that don't have nearly as much of an effect as they should, and the mechanic of resisting social skills with social skills means that you can't really play a character who is antisocial but stubbornly resistant to being influenced by others.  Combine that with vagueness in both the calculation of modifiers, and what the effect of a successful roll is, and you have a recipe for pissed-off players who feel like they have no say in how their character reacts.

It's better to convey social ability with appropriate descriptions, both IC and OOC, and let the player retain control of his character.  Because social skills are on, all the time.  If you let them take player control away, then they might as well not even bother to show up.