I feel that strength should not directly affect intimidation. I expect that a knowing smile and a finger on a blinking button should be much scarier than a hundred kilograms of muscle and a nervous request to avoid dangerous conflict. In D&D I feel that strength can e applied to intimidate only by creating circumstances. It is up to your charisma to imply that your victims have a choice to agree with you or to experience what happens if they don’t, and that they do not want to gamble on a potentially bad outcome. Punching a hole through a metal door in order to reach them will lend weight to your argument, but simply possessing the means to do so without the demonstration that it is likely to be used will not.
A decent D.M. should be making decisions for their pawns. If you have just ripped a full-grown dragon into halves with your bear hands, then they should probably either decide that you are too dangerous to be left uncontained or too dangerous for them to do anything about. If you have 4 charisma then making an effort to communicate(intimidate check) will probably make your situation worse as they stop focusing on the dragon halves as their attention drifts to your pained efforts to find words and nervousness about being in a social situation.
In the cataclysm, being sufficiently lacking in armour that your musculature is discernible is probably going to harms your intimidation, but carrying around a Jabbercorpse would probably convey the situation much more articulately and forcefully…
Perhaps there could be trinkets that would add to diplomacy. You could convert a metal pipe into a piece of scrap metal for example, or you could carry around a bag of skulls and you crush one every time you pronounce an exclamation point… Being fancy might help convince people that you are civilised and maintaining your equipment might convince people that you are capable…