All I'm saying is that you can roleplay your character however you like, but whatever the dice say is going to dictate how people react.
For example if your 5 charisma dwarf with no ranks in perform wants to think and act like he's a world class trumpet player, that's fine. But when he sits down and plays the trumpet the odds are better that the audience throws fruit than throws money. Sure, sometimes that character is going to roll a 20, but literally the best trumpet performance that character is capable of only rates as "enjoyable" (and 65% of the time he wouldn't even play well enough to get paid.)
So at that point it's less that "my character is a world class trumpet player" and more "my character is under the delusion that he is a world class trumpet player" and both are completely valid characters to play, they're just not the same thing. If you go around saying (in character) "I am the world's greatest trumpet player" eventually people are going to demand you play for them, and if you want them to think you're not a braggart you ought to be able to actually play the trumpet at least reasonably well.
It's the same where if you're a high charisma character with max ranks in diplomacy, but you roll a 1 on your attempt to impress the Duke, it might take some work to overcome that first impression.
All I'm saying is that you can roleplay your character however you like, but whatever the dice say is going to dictate how people react.
That's exactly what Letric is saying.
Your 10 Charisma human with no ranks in perform is doing only marginally better (still 50% chance of not getting paid) - and a 5 charisma dwarf with ranks or skill focus is better than that human. A level 20 dwarf with 5 Charisma and 20 ranks in perform *is* a world-class trumpet player.The point being, just because you have low charisma doesn't mean you are by definition bad at social skills. The negative you receive for low charisma is not particularly crippling mechanically.
An unfortunate side-effect of the system is that, if the dwarf wants to be decent socially over his 20 level adventuring career, instead of using his point-buy to get higher CHA, the dwarf is actually much, mmuch better off dumping CHA and taking more INT so he can sink 20-40 more ranks into social skills.
Another way to look at it: there are 7 CHA based skills. Thus, each 2 points of CHA you dump gives you a combined -7 to CHA based skills. Each point of INT gives you 20 ranks of skills, so in the most favourable scenario where all those skills are useful to you, by level 7 an 8 CHA 12 INT character is as good as a 12 CHA 8 INT character at all CHA skills, and from that point becomes better -- PLUS the extra INT is giving a bonus language and a combined +14 to INT based skills.
Thus, an INT based character is likely to be *better* socially than a CHA based character in the long run. CHA just isn't really that necessary to be socially apt.
I think what we're just seeing is that the person who learns things and acquires skills quickly can be better at things in the long run than the person who is simply naturally gifted at showmanship, talking to people, etc. This is more or less as it should be.
But your attributes are basically a measure of your potential. The guy with the 20 charisma at level 1 can end up being a better trumpet player at level 20 than the guy with 5 charisma at level 1 could ever be. Sure the guy with 5 charisma and 20 intelligence can be way better at all sorts of things than the guy with 20 charisma and 10 intelligence, but the only way he can be a better trumpet player is if the high charisma character doesn't put everything he can into mastering the trumpet.
It's the difference between "these sorts of things come naturally to you" (our 20 CHA trumpet virtuoso could also be a passable comedian with effort put into that skill) versus "these are things you have put effort towards learning how to do" (the 5 charisma dwarf could be a fantastic comedian, but it would be less from innate talent and more from the work he's put in on his jokes.)
If you want to be a really accomplished engineer, you can just put ranks in knowledge (engineering) and that will suffice. But if you want to be a really accomplished engineer who is also a polymath, both mechanically and flavorwise I think you should have a high INT. Both can design the hell out of a bridge or a trebuchet, but the latter has mastered more things.
Simply put there are 9 different kinds of perform, the core book lists 21 different kinds of craft, and 30 different kinds of profession. There are more things that you could potentially be good at than you anybody plausibly have enough skill ranks to buy (a human rogue with 20 intelligence "only" gets 14 per level, so they can't be masterful at *every* craft). The guy with the high charisma is simply the person with natural potential in dancing, comedy, acting, playing the drums, etc. even if he never practices them a day in his life, just like the guy with high intelligence is the person with more natural potential in bookbinding, shipbuilding, carpentry, basketweaving, painting, and glass-blowing even if they never bother to study any of those activities for even an afternoon.
I mean, if you had an NPC say "one of you may play my jewel encrusted piano with no magical assistance, and if it pleases me I will grant you a boon" and nobody has any ranks in "perform(keyboard)" (because when is that going to come up?), you're nominating the high charisma character, right?
I know this is a thread necro, but I'm playing in a group with a Tielfing with 5 CHA and to see him constantly engage in every social situation with no Diplomacy skill is HIGHLY annoying. I understand it's the GM job to impose drawbacks, but to see clear exploitation of the rules is a joke to me.
Call me Grognard or whatever but cheese is cheese. Period. I'd rather a GM force my group into awkward and tense social situations as a result of the PC than to completely ignore it.
I know this is a thread necro, but I'm playing in a group with a Tielfing with 5 CHA and to see him constantly engage in every social situation with no Diplomacy skill is HIGHLY annoying. I understand it's the GM job to impose drawbacks, but to see clear exploitation of the rules is a joke to me.
Call me Grognard or whatever but cheese is cheese. Period. I'd rather a GM force my group into awkward and tense social situations as a result of the PC than to completely ignore it.
Unfortunately, I've been in situations where I built low CHA characters and intended not to participate in social situations, only to discover that I was the player best suited to moving the plot forward and thinking of the clever things to ask NPCs and what not. That led to some interesting situations because I had to be careful to avoid things that used my low skill rolls, where when playing a diplomacy focused guy I'd just say whatever and let my score carry me.
These days I tend to default to high Charisma characters to avoid this, unless I know I'm at a table with someone who can handle that role.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Back to the OP topic in a necro'd thread.
Untyped Cha to all saves only options:
Paladin 2
Antipaladin 2
Bestow Grace of the Champion (requires Lawful Good target)
Steadfast Personality (sadly it's Cha instead of Wis)
Divine Protection (now 1/day)
Sacred Cha to all saves:
Bestow Grace (requires Good)
This ignores all the 20th level things and all the "Cha instead of Dex" things.
Anyone know of something I don't know? That a lower level character could make use to add Cha to saves?