Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

RPG Superstar 2015

Adding mechanical benefits for Charisma


Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew

101 to 132 of 132 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Maybe, by relating Charisma with PC fate (or luck, as someone pointed before) is a good start, perhaps adjusting rewards (something like 5% x Cha modifier applied to WBL and XP). Just a thought.


Ricardo Pennacchia wrote:
Maybe, by relating Charisma with PC fate (or luck, as someone pointed before) is a good start, perhaps adjusting rewards (something like 5% x Cha modifier applied to WBL and XP). Just a thought.

I think 5% * CHA_MOD is a bit much, but CHA_MOD% bonus to XP might be enough to discourage dumping it (or at least apply some minor penalty), while a minor enough boon to avoid overpowering Sorcerers and Oracles.

Modifying treasure is much harder, as it's quite meta to apply gains to specific characters when the entire body of treasure is being split across the whole party.

As for modifying the cost of items only affecting the party's face -- I suppose if the GM allows one character to handle all mercantile activity. That isn't particularly believable, however. I could see the party face accompanying every character on their shopping trips (which would work like aid another), but it doesn't seem likely that every character would just hand over a list with their purse.

And when it comes to acquiring the raw components for magical item crafting, I think it's fair to say that the character creating the item has to be present as describing exactly what's needed isn't something that can be easily written down and understood.

Liberty's Edge

Just a thought, but if you impose upkeep costs for living like a certain social level, you could have Charisma reduce this cost, or at particularly high levels even produce income. People buy you drinks (not the cheap stuff, either), people of high station that you befriend insist on giving you lavish gifts, a fancy place to stay, etc.

It's not a huge game impact, but it would be amusing to have a high Charisma character living like royalty, yet oddly never having to pay any money for it.

To have it impact the game, require a minimum upkeep level that's tied to character level, and players that don't meet it have trouble being taken seriously, getting job offers, or is offered less money for a job, etc. The high Charisma guy has a lower outlay, which would affect his WBL versus other characters.

Eh, just throwing it out there...


I like the idea of a social save based on charisma.
Also, social combat(parlaying) should be based on charisma.
This is how a character convinces NPCs that the paladin leads the party, or that the PCs can lead them out of the dungeon.


Goth Guru wrote:

I like the idea of a social save based on charisma.

Also, social combat(parlaying) should be based on charisma.
This is how a character convinces NPCs that the paladin leads the party, or that the PCs can lead them out of the dungeon.

Already exists in the game...as skill checks.

Social encounter save - Sense Motive.
Convince a character of something - Bluff or Diplomacy.

It's all already been rolled into the skill system.

And most of this can be handled by a single party member (aka the Face).

The thing that makes this hardest to fix is that pretty much everything that is thematically fitting for Charisma is already covered by a skill check (or the Leadership Feat). Using it as a "luck stat" is stretching.

Honestly the best idea I've seen was moving Will save to Cha and ranged attack to Wis (to avoid making Wis the new Cha).

Star Voter 2013, Star Voter 2014

My idea. But it's about charisma based skill check.

PCs can't have more ranks in those skills than their charisma score minus 4.

Thus, for example, a Fighter with Charisma 7 can't have more than 3 ranks in bluff, diplomacy, etc.


Yumeko wrote:

My idea. But it's about charisma based skill check.

PCs can't have more ranks in those skills than their charisma score minus 4.

Thus, for example, a Fighter with Charisma 7 can't have more than 3 ranks in bluff, diplomacy, etc.

At least this is a new angle of approach, although it still feels more like "punish the player for dumping Cha" than "make Cha more useful/desirable".

At 2 skill points per level a Fighter with Charisma 7 will be lucky to manage even that many ranks. (and it gets worse if he dumped Int as well)

Of course, why should he when the party face has those skills covered?

The question of "Why should Cha based skills work differently than other skills?" is an indicator of bad game design. If you apply such a cap to one key stat, it should apply to all of them.

Not exactly loving that -4 part either. It really gives this a "penalty" feel to me.

Granted I can see how one could view tying max skill ranks more closely to the key stat for a skill to be logical and even desirable.

Please don't take my criticism too harshly, your idea shows a novel approach and an interesting line of thought to explore.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Amazing thread necromancy, good subject though.

My two domars (and most of this has been stated in form or another already) -

Biggest impact:

Cha could serve as a function of luck/grace so maybe a chance to re-roll any action = CHA modifier/day. So a 14 (+2) Cha fighter gets two re-rolls a day; could be used for saves, attacks, damage rolls, CMD checks, skill checks, etc.

Could also be used for re-rolling damage attacks against him (not to hits) - full sets or single die - but would have to take the second set of damage once he decides to use this ability. 1 use is one die, 2 uses for more than one die - or something.
Not sure about the damage re-rolls, it would be a nice bonus to people who put points on Cha, just trying to figure out a way to implement it.

Less impact
A less invasive approach would be to have a positive Cha mod add to AC as "luck" bonus. Most high Cha characters could use the bonus.
Would help clerics with their med armor prof.

I think it would be a nice feature - plus it gives the lighter fighter types a bit of a nice bonus - Dex fighter, bard, rogue, ranger, etc.

The pally would stand to gain the biggest benefit, but I don't mind if he is very hard to hit - considering his niche role in combat it would be a valuable boost.

Also the bonus would help out the crappola AC on a few creatures that need it. No double dipping for incorporeal undead. Need to look at some creatures/re-stat nat armor (balor goes from AC 36 to 44 with these changes)

Just some ideas - thinking about using a few of them in my upcoming reboot.


Honestly, I would just add minimal language that set NPC's initial opinions based on Cha.

You might make the case that it is "punishing" low-Cha characters, but any rule that increases the profile of Cha is doing that.

I think the intent of Cha is to have it affect social situations. Some style of play are certainly less affected by that, but if you think about it for even a second, that makes sense. A game where brutality and effective combat is paramount isn't going to be full of charming folks. It's going to be hardened mercenaries at best, and ruthless sociopaths at most probable.

Luck and Subbing out will saves are the best alternative suggestions. All three, or more than that, might actually be an over-correction.


What I meant was that the social save should be used in all cases where the GM thinks diplomacy and intimidation does not apply.
When you try to tell the king that his adviser is evil, you will be making a social save to avoid being ignored. You need to make such a save to even get an audience. Also to get on the list for a party. Some monsters, such as vampires will have no trouble getting into the party.
By completely missing my point you made my point because I failed my social save. I posted something very cleaver and all you heard was, "Bar bar bar bar........" :(


Goth Guru wrote:

What I meant was that the social save should be used in all cases where the GM thinks diplomacy and intimidation does not apply.

When you try to tell the king that his adviser is evil, you will be making a social save to avoid being ignored. You need to make such a save to even get an audience. Also to get on the list for a party. Some monsters, such as vampires will have no trouble getting into the party.
By completely missing my point you made my point because I failed my social save. I posted something very cleaver and all you heard was, "Bar bar bar bar........" :(

No, you failed your Diplomacy skill roll, and possibly a Perception skill roll.

PRD wrote:


If a creature's attitude toward you is at least indifferent, you can make requests of the creature. This is an additional Diplomacy check, using the creature's current attitude to determine the base DC, with one of the following modifiers.

Asking for an audience with the king - making a request.

Asking the king to believe that his adviser is evil - making a request.
Ask to get on the list for the part - making a request.

Any time you ask something of another character, it is covered by a Diplomacy skill check.

If their attitude is not at least indifferent, then you need to - make a Diplomacy check to change their attitude.

The only times when Diplomacy does not apply is when Intimidate or Bluff does.

Any time you ask for information, access, items, favors, anything - it is covered by the Diplomacy skill. In fact pretty much any social interaction not specifically spelled out under another skill is most likely covered by the Diplomacy skill because that's how it was written.


This is how I deal with low stats:

If anybody wants to have a stat with a malus, for example a charisma of 7 and thus a malus of -2, the player has to "take" flaws that explain this malus.

These flaws cannot be related to (and thus negated by) a skill, it needs to be stat-related only.

So, somebody who dumps his charisma to 7 cannot just state "oh the character is georgeous, but just not used to social stuff" and then procede to increase diplomacy to make up for the low charisma.
As a DM I'll ask for a real explanation, why that character is having a harder time with diplomacy... something/anything that can only negated by increasing charisma itself (for example through items).

In my flaws system, a character has to have as many flaws as his malus is... so a malus of -2 means he has to get 2 flaws.
possible flaws with a real RP impact:
- has a sweat/smell problem (enemies get a bonus to finding him [tracking and perception] and he has a hard time hiding in crowds because of people's obvious reactions)
- is shifty/uncomfortable all the time (looks like he needs to pee and cannot hod still, meaning a penalty to stealth and concentration)
- stammers (can never be a spellcaster, harder to understand, can't whisper, it's impossible to read his lips, cannot use speech-triggered items)
- get's upset quickly (prone to strong emotions: people get a bonus to sense motive vs him, also he gets a malus to saves vs fear/charm and anything related to selfcontrol, if character is a Barbarian DM can force willsave on occasions, if save fails character enters rage for X rounds and attacks source of anger, if character is diplomatic he needs to make willsaves on lengthy negotiations to not be influenced by his emotions)
- ... players can make up anything that sounds reasonable to the DM and fits their character

All flaws need to be similar to traits in "strenght", ie they are negative traits, flaws with heavy penalties can count as double. How severe such penalties are is of course heavily dependent on the campaign, so it's up to the DM+player decision (worst case the player needs to find a different flaw).

I tend to use this system with all stats, as either a way to enhance RP if people enjoy having characters with flaws and as a deterrent to dump stats and then compensate through feats or by boosting related skills.

Different examples: somebody could decide to dump wisdom and then take "iron will" as a feat, the flaws system will make certain that he has some non-negotiable disadvantage because of his deliberate choice of low wisdom. Same goes for constitution and toughness/save-boosting feats, the player will need to come up with a flaw that has a meaningful impact that actually creates RP/atmosphere.


Here is a solution to the Charisma conundrum I've been wanting to try out.

Numina

Charisma, in addition to being a measure of how well you interact with people, is a measure of how well you interact with magic.

The first time you gain a magic item with plusses (swords, armor, ring of protection, etc) your Charisma modifier is added to the plus value of the item. If you have more items it only affects one. You can choose which one by taking them off, waiting a while, and then putting the desired item back on first.

Example: Elric has just found his first magic item, a +1 sword. In his hands it acts as a +2 sword. Later, he finds a ring of protection +1. Prefering this, he drops the sword, waits a while, puts on the ring (which is now +2 for him) and picks the sword back up.

If a character has a negative Charisma modifier it lowers the effect of the plus. Its as if your soul has a empty gulf that can only be filled by magic.

Example; Elric is killed by Dorn the Dwarf who keeps Elrics stuff. “Nice sword!” he says. However Dorn has a -1 Charisma modifier and the sword is now +0 (its still a magic sword for DR, and its still masterwork too.) “This will not do!” says Dorn. He drops the sword, waits a while, picks up the ring (it’s now +0, and takes a up a ring slot), and picks up the sword (which now retains its +1 bonus for him).

For charisma based casters this can seem like a lot (+4 or +5), but remember, it only applies to one item, and if it were me, I would apply that to protection, since most Charisma types can’t wear heavy armor (or armor of any sort for sorceres.)

The bonus is of the same type it modifies so stacking issues remain the same.


The Terrible Zodin wrote:

Here is a solution to the Charisma conundrum I've been wanting to try out.

Numina

Charisma, in addition to being a measure of how well you interact with people, is a measure of how well you interact with magic.

The first time you gain a magic item with plusses (swords, armor, ring of protection, etc) your Charisma modifier is added to the plus value of the item. If you have more items it only affects one. You can choose which one by taking them off, waiting a while, and then putting the desired item back on first.

Example: Elric has just found his first magic item, a +1 sword. In his hands it acts as a +2 sword. Later, he finds a ring of protection +1. Prefering this, he drops the sword, waits a while, puts on the ring (which is now +2 for him) and picks the sword back up.

If a character has a negative Charisma modifier it lowers the effect of the plus. Its as if your soul has a empty gulf that can only be filled by magic.

Example; Elric is killed by Dorn the Dwarf who keeps Elrics stuff. “Nice sword!” he says. However Dorn has a -1 Charisma modifier and the sword is now +0 (its still a magic sword for DR, and its still masterwork too.) “This will not do!” says Dorn. He drops the sword, waits a while, picks up the ring (it’s now +0, and takes a up a ring slot), and picks up the sword (which now retains its +1 bonus for him).

For charisma based casters this can seem like a lot (+4 or +5), but remember, it only applies to one item, and if it were me, I would apply that to protection, since most Charisma types can’t wear heavy armor (or armor of any sort for sorceres.)

The bonus is of the same type it modifies so stacking issues remain the same.

You might want to make a complete list of what that applies to before trying it out; I see headbands of alluring charisma +X being the first thing a sorcerer puts on.


I see your point. Although headbands of alluring charisma +X are already the first thing that a sorcerer or bard puts on.

Some points: 1) that headband is only a +1,+2 or +3 bonus. If the game can survive a sorcerer/bard/oracle/summoner with a +3 to spell DCs then it can survive the same with a +3 to AC or to hit/damage.

2) this gives a reason for the fighter/cleric/alchemist etc to care about the headband since they can actually use that bonus to AC or hit/damage

3) you can't go above the normal limits of an item (+5 for a ring of protection.) (My bad for not saying this before.)

4) its not every item, just one.

So, Like? Dislike? Any other comments?


I'm not sure how I feel about rings of protection +1 becoming +5 for sorcerers -- or giving the paladin a +1 sword at 1st level and forgetting that, for him, it's actually a +5 sword. Seems like there might be some balance issues there.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8 , Star Voter 2013

@Zodin,

Addressing Kirth's fears, would adding a +1 to a number of items equal to the Cha mod work? Might ramp up the Paladin a bit (he basically could get a +1 to his sword, shield, armor, etc etc.)


Matthew Morris wrote:

@Zodin,

Addressing Kirth's fears, would adding a +1 to a number of items equal to the Cha mod work? Might ramp up the Paladin a bit (he basically could get a +1 to his sword, shield, armor, etc etc.)

Numina could work that way too. In fact, for a paladin that is a better way to do it as she won't have enough items to match the high Charisma modifier until higher levels.

I'm not too worried about paladines for two reasons.

1) If a player isn't willing to deal with roleplaying baggage that a paladin brings to the table then he can't play one. So they are suitable rare and restricted to more mature players.

2) Paladins are fairly MAD. Let me ask you a question: How much are you willing to dump Str or Con to get one more +1 out of Charisma?

Let me put that question out to everyone. If everyone answers the same way then I'll know what to expect at the game table (or make changes).


Evil Lincoln wrote:
I think the intent of Cha is to affect social situations (...) A game where brutality and effective combat is paramount isn't going to be full of charming folks.

Hum, I can get behind that to a certain extent, and would totally approved if the "feel" of the game was more clearly defined toward the gritty martial mercenary genre like Warhammer RPG for example. I do think that Pathfinder RPG can afford to be a bit more "generic" however.

I agree that a simple luck mechanics would do "just enough"; Int and Wis also have a relatively low impact on martial characters as well (but are more represented than Cha as prerequisite stats for combat feats)

Personally, I made substitution of Will saves to Cha, and created a fourth saving throw (well, a third really as Will is now the fourth save) based on Wisdom against illusions and magical deceptions. That gives enough to Cha IMO (and helps reinforce the virtues of Valour and Wisdom as two distinct entities).

'findel

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Laurefindel wrote:


Personally, I made substitution of Will saves to Cha, and created a fourth saving throw (well, a third really as Will is now the fourth save) based on Wisdom against illusions and magical deceptions.

'findel

Great minds think alike.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Great minds think alike.

hum, apparently they do, which makes me look like "lesser mind steals idea from greater mind"...

To be fair however, Kirth sparked the first interest for me in switching Will to Cha. T'was during Alpha testing a few years back IIRC, when "strength of character" and "force of personality" were used in Charisma's descriptive text.

'findel

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

A bunch of monkey banging on keys will produce the same words once in awhile. :D


TriOmegaZero wrote:
A bunch of monkey banging on keys will produce the same words once in awhile. :D

At least for the first two letters at any case. I called that save Insight.

[edit] always great to be compared to a key-banging monkey! Coming from TOZ that can be a great compliment... or a pretty rude insult. Hard to know ;)


The Terrible Zodin wrote:
Numina

I love the term, and am thinking about appropriating it (with your permission, and applying it to a slightly different house rule) -- but I notice that "numina" is the plural of "numen."


I think I would make illusions not have saves. They'd have perception DCs.

In literature when someone breaks out of an illusion it's usually because they noticed something not right.


I've used it to modify either the dice roll or number of Hero/Action Points a PC gets. For instance you might get 3 + 1/2 level +/- Cha or add + Xd6 +/- Cha to a d20 roll.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Atarlost wrote:

I think I would make illusions not have saves. They'd have perception DCs.

In literature when someone breaks out of an illusion it's usually because they noticed something not right.

That is what our Intuition save represents.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Laurefindel wrote:


At least for the first two letters at any case. I called that save Insight.

[edit] always great to be compared to a key-banging monkey! Coming from TOZ that can be a great compliment... or a pretty rude insult. Hard to know ;)

The best compliments are backhanded ones. ;)

Kirth didn't want name overlap, and Insight is already a bonus type.


Honestly, I think I'd be okay with Charisma working for Illusions, too. The mechanics aren't just about noticing the illusion isn't real, but also disbelieving in the illusion. A character's friends can all tell him the dragon attacking him is an illusion, but until he can convince himself, that dragon is still "real" to him.

That, or, related to Atarlost's suggestion, Perception is used to figure out something is an illusion, but the Charisma-backed Will save (likely with a bonus due to the successful Perception check) is still needed to disbelieve it.

Shadow Lodge Star Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014

Roll initiative for social situations based off Charisma. Person with the highest init is the one who gets to speak first etc rather then letting the RL person who has the loudest mouth and can get the GM's attention first go first.

In fact that would mirror RL.


Kerney wrote:

Roll initiative for social situations based off Charisma. Person with the highest init is the one who gets to speak first etc rather then letting the RL person who has the loudest mouth and can get the GM's attention first go first.

In fact that would mirror RL.

That would not affect players that don't care about social stuff and dump charisma. That is, all the players that dump charisma anyway. Not only that, does going first in a conversation really make that much difference?

Shadow Lodge Star Voter 2013, Dedicated Voter 2014

Umbral Reaver wrote:
Kerney wrote:

Roll initiative for social situations based off Charisma. Person with the highest init is the one who gets to speak first etc rather then letting the RL person who has the loudest mouth and can get the GM's attention first go first.

In fact that would mirror RL.

That would not affect players that don't care about social stuff and dump charisma. That is, all the players that dump charisma anyway. Not only that, does going first in a conversation really make that much difference?

It's part of why it's partially a joke based off playing with a few people who DOMINATE the table rather partially a half serious suggestion.

Seriously, this is part of why Charisma has been weak mechanically, because you have real life charisma effecting the actual game play. I notice this in PFS when my 7 Cha half orc alchemist sometimes dominates the table. I've also had it done to me.

All the best,

Kerney

101 to 132 of 132 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew / Adding mechanical benefits for Charisma All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.