Why sorcerers use charisma to cast?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 113 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Look up monsters with high Charisma. How many of them are actually attractive? Idk about PF, but in 3.5 there are many monsters that are ugly or terrifying, but have high Cha scores. Demons, Devils, some Aberrations. Aboleth is a good example. Cha higher than some Sorcerers and yet it's a fish-looking monster.

Also they added appearance to Charisma so they have justification for sexy Sorcerer and Bard chick pics in the handbooks. And that I'm thankful for.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just remember that if CHA is appearance squid heads are hot, few races have the high average of the mindflayer.......


Charisma is used because that is how it was set up in 3.5

I have read (but can not confirm) 3.x set it up to use charisma in order to make it a more useful ability. Instead of the almost universal dump stat.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Take Boat wrote:
UMD relying on Charisma is even more confusing than sorcerers.

Charisma for casting is only confusing if you assume that the world is entirely mechanistic, governed by inexorable laws.

If you assume the game world is animistic, full of invisible spirits in everything which can be communicated with, suddenly Charisma makes perfect sense. The sorcerer (oracle, paladin) has a sort of right/power/authority to call on the spirits derived from his bloodline (the touch of the gods), then uses Charisma to issue the commands. The better he is at bluffing/persuading/commanding the spirits, the more effective the results.

In UMD, you obviously aren't the kind of person who can normally use the device, otherwise you wouldn't have to rely on UMD. So, instead, you're trying to convince the anima/spirit/kami of the device to do what you want anyway, and the better you're able to bluff/persuade/command it, the more likely you are to get positive results.


I can't remember if it was 1st or 2nd Ed but there was an option Comeliness (beauty) Stat.

If you had a high Cha it gave you a bonus to your stat. Also races had pluses and minuses to the stat you could end up with an elf with a 25 Comeliness it was a crazy system.

We house rule that you can determine how attractive your character is independently of your Cha.

I have known some very attractive people who have had a personality enema.

So Cha for our group is primarily is the external force of will (the sword) and wisdom is the internal force of will (the shield). Thus Cha dictates your ability to persuade, convince and intimidate, to make your will work upon the world. Wis is you abilty to mitigate, resist, adapt and adjust.

Liberty's Edge

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

I can't remember if it was 1st or 2nd Ed but there was an option Comeliness (beauty) Stat.

That was 1st edition in Unearthed Arcana


CHA makes a sort of sense. While a wizard has to learn the tricks and use his brains, a Sorcerer has so much force of personality that the world just changes itself to play along. Everyone wants to be picked to hang with the cool kids, even the underlying reality of things.


Fleshgrinder wrote:

Strength is the power of the machine.

Dexterity is the precision of the machine.
Constitution is the heartiness of the machine.
Intelligence is the raw processing power of the machine.
Wisdom is the database that the processor uses for context.
Charisma is what makes this specific machine say "I".

Int's the "mind, Wisdom is the "gut feeling", and Charisma is the "heart".

Sounds very Freudian (or Star Trek):

Id -- CHA (McCoy--speaks from passion)
Ego -- INT (Spock--reasons by logic)
Super Ego -- WIS (Kirk--balances the two to fit the situation)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Orthos wrote:
Jodokai wrote:
Captain Netz wrote:
A rich Wizard puts a Sorcerer to shame. That's the only issue I have with the two. I'll still play nothing but Sorcerers as my choice as an arcane caster but it is annoying that the one advantage that Sorcerers have over Wizards can be circumvented through magical items some of which Sorcerers can't even use.
And a rich sorcerer puts a wizard to shame and overcomes his one limitation.
Still say the wizard and his unlimited spells-known has the upper hand over the Sorc who has to cast lower-level magic from scrolls and wands rather than his own spellbook.

A campaign that is that demonstrably out of balance, takes the discussion beyond any meaningful input. I can prove anything if I skew the situation enough.

In a balanced campaign however a wizard is going to have to work for every single spell he gets outside of his two freebies per level, and he won't even get those if he's shifted to a PrC.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Wisdom/Will is the awareness of self and your surroundings and self control.
Charisma is the ability to influence/control others. A sorceror uses charisma to tap into and control their magical abilities an UMD uses it to influence/control a magical device. Appearance does affect charisma, but is only part of the stat.


Matthew Morris wrote:

For me, it's that Charisma = mental strength, Intelligence = mental dexterity, Wis = mental constitution.

Great analogy!


brreitz wrote:

The best way, I find, to look at it is this:

Sorcerers (and related Cha-based casters) do not rely on high Charisma to cast their innate magic. It is their innate magic nature that grants them high Charisma.

That was deep! :)


Atarlost wrote:
Spontaneous casters use the worst casting stat possible, get delayed spell access, can't use metamagic without surrendering their move actions, and get fewer spells known than a penniless wizard. One of those prices is reasonable. Two are okay. Three are excessive. All four are WotC begrudgingly offering non-vancian magic in the hopes that if they could make it suck enough people would stop requesting it.

Let's take a closer look at those "limitations":

1. Worst Casting Stat Possible: This can be changed to ANY mental stat. Wizards can't do this. Not a hinderance gone.
2. Delayed spell access - Yup that's 1
3. Metamagic: This is so far away from a hinderance that it's actually a benefit of the class. I'll house rule it so sorcerers HAVE to prepare metamagic before hand. They have to have their slots set aside for a specific spell/metamagic combination, and can't use those slots for anything except those metamagic spells. You somehow think that's a better deal? Being a Wizard fan, I would LOVE to hamstring sorcerers like that.
4. Few Spells Known - Yup, but more than made up for by more spells per day.

So when you look at it you really only have 2 hinderences, which you say is Okay. Each one of those is balanced by something else though, the Delayed Spell access is made up for by having Bloodline abilities, and Few Spells known is made up for by more spells per day.

Let me close by saying if you ever go to a convention, the sorceres ALWAYS way outnumber the wizards you think it's because everyone like playing a gimped class or is it more likely that no one likes playing the gimped class?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Jodokai wrote:


Let me close by saying if you ever go to a convention, the sorceres ALWAYS way outnumber the wizards you think it's because everyone like playing a gimped class or is it more likely that no one likes playing the gimped class?

You'll probably find though that many of those sorcerers are just dips to buff another class, typically barbarian.

Liberty's Edge

Take Boat wrote:
UMD relying on Charisma is even more confusing than sorcerers.

That is weird.

I like to pretend that all magic items are just a little bit sentient, if not outright intelligent. UMD is the skill of diplomancy with these regressive item minds.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's a post I found on the D&D forums that might be useful.

Sorcerer’s and casting spells. (Importance of Charisma)

Sorcerers create magic the way a poet creates poems, with inborn talent honed by practice. They have no books, no mentors, no theories -- just raw power that they direct at will.

In religious studies, "charisma" sometimes refers to the inner personal power in an individual, divinely conferred. I had to read endless writings about it in college, especially Max Weber, who described it as:
Charisma is a certain quality of a individual by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These ... are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader.

This is the aspect of Charisma often underplayed. (Also, I am not suggesting that anybody involved in writing D&D had to have read Weber, only that he's a good source for reading about this aspect of it.)
Charisma isn't just good looks or even greatness of personality. There is a sense of transcendent greatness about highly charismatic people.

The d20 SRD notes "This ability [Charisma] represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting." Wizards engage in study and make their magic through careful scholarship; clerics pray and get in tune with their god's will; sorcerers have innate magical powers that manifest themselves upon the world through pure strength of spirit.


Matthew Morris wrote:

For me, it's that Charisma = mental strength, Intelligence = mental dexterity, Wis = mental constitution.

Short example. Rogue (dex) and Fighter (str) encounter a locked door. Rogue picks the lock and the fighter knocks it down. Same thing for the wizard vs Sorcerer.
The wizard takes out his picks (spell book) looks to see if he has the right tool on hand for the job (memorized spells) if he doesn't, then he can get the right tool out of his pack (rest and rememorize spells).
The Sorcerer has his axe (prepared spell list) if his axe doesn't have a lockpick on the end, all he can do is use the axe, or grab a snap gun (i.e. scroll, wand) to pick the lock.

Hmm, interesting take. Gygaxx did a game called Dangerous Journeys in the early 90s that too that approach a bit farther. Cool game too bad it was never developed because TSR thought it infringed on their trademark.


Jodokai wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
Spontaneous casters use the worst casting stat possible, get delayed spell access, can't use metamagic without surrendering their move actions, and get fewer spells known than a penniless wizard. One of those prices is reasonable. Two are okay. Three are excessive. All four are WotC begrudgingly offering non-vancian magic in the hopes that if they could make it suck enough people would stop requesting it.

Let's take a closer look at those "limitations":

1. Worst Casting Stat Possible: This can be changed to ANY mental stat. Wizards can't do this. Not a hinderance gone.
2. Delayed spell access - Yup that's 1
3. Metamagic: This is so far away from a hinderance that it's actually a benefit of the class. I'll house rule it so sorcerers HAVE to prepare metamagic before hand. They have to have their slots set aside for a specific spell/metamagic combination, and can't use those slots for anything except those metamagic spells. You somehow think that's a better deal? Being a Wizard fan, I would LOVE to hamstring sorcerers like that.
4. Few Spells Known - Yup, but more than made up for by more spells per day.

So when you look at it you really only have 2 hinderences, which you say is Okay. Each one of those is balanced by something else though, the Delayed Spell access is made up for by having Bloodline abilities, and Few Spells known is made up for by more spells per day.

Let me close by saying if you ever go to a convention, the sorceres ALWAYS way outnumber the wizards you think it's because everyone like playing a gimped class or is it more likely that no one likes playing the gimped class?

1) The stat can't be changed easily. It's one bloodline or the other and i think you pay for that in how those blood suck. Suck is a strong word but I do think they are one of the weaker blood lines. Still Chr isn't a bad stat. It boosts a ton of skills and skills you use quite regularly. A sorcerer with Diplomacy is mising out.

2) Fewer Known spells, yeah that sucks.

3) This is terrible. I rarely ever see a sorcerer cast with metamagic because of it.

4) Few spells known don't equal more spells per day. It's pretty much the on par. Look at it like this, at 4th level both sorcerer and specialist wizard have the same amount of 2nd level spells per day. 3 + casting stat bonus. At level 3 the wizard has 2 + casting stat bonus the sorcer has no second level spells. The only advantage is the sorcerer get a max of 6+ casting stat where as the wizard maxes out 5 + casting stat. But the wizard can easily make up for that with pearls of power and scolls as free feat.

Sorcerers get the shaft! But they are still fun to play flavor wise.


Midnight_Angel wrote:
Atarlost wrote:
Spontaneous casters use the worst casting stat possible, get delayed spell access, can't use metamagic without surrendering their move actions, and get fewer spells known than a penniless wizard. One of those prices is reasonable. Two are okay. Three are excessive. All four are WotC begrudgingly offering non-vancian magic in the hopes that if they could make it suck enough people would stop requesting it.

Actually, what I have a gripe with is the fact that the Sorcerer gets shafted when entering a new spell level.

All the 6-Level progressions start their new spell level with two known spells.
The Oracle gets three (one pick, one from the mystery, one from the cure/inflict list)
The Sorcerer gets one. Sorry, but Bloodline spells kick in a level later than the Oracle's mystery spells, nice to screw ya.

I do think that the 1 level later acquisition of the sorcerer spells is a little weird, that weirdness is why they have been houseruled to get them when they gain their new spell level instead.

Shadow Lodge

Judging by some comments here I guess most GM doesn't force players to play theircharacters based on their stats, and charisma is usually the one with most influence.
first of all a low charisma pc cannot be the leader of the group.
If his charisma is really low (below 8) I usually forbid him to argue with the party. eexpecially against high charisma characters.
the same with npc, if you have charisma 7 don't even try to interact with a charisma 20+ without struttering from shyness and cower from his magnificence.
your other stats may say that you ar tall, athletic and a regular genius who can kick ass all night long.
but your charisma says you are a shy gutless pathetic being that do not believe in himself no matter what.
So go ahead and dump charisma... just remember, you are not allowed to be cool


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Accessories, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

To the OP, Your just over thinking it...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scarletrose wrote:

Judging by some comments here I guess most GM doesn't force players to play theircharacters based on their stats, and charisma is usually the one with most influence.

first of all a low charisma pc cannot be the leader of the group.
If his charisma is really low (below 8) I usually forbid him to argue with the party. eexpecially against high charisma characters.
the same with npc, if you have charisma 7 don't even try to interact with a charisma 20+ without struttering from shyness and cower from his magnificence.
your other stats may say that you ar tall, athletic and a regular genius who can kick ass all night long.
but your charisma says you are a shy gutless pathetic being that do not believe in himself no matter what.
So go ahead and dump charisma... just remember, you are not allowed to be cool

Eeeh, the game is about being cool. If you care about charisma that much, just don't let your players dump it lower than 10. Otherwise, I feel you are being a little passive aggressive.

I also disagree that a Cha 7 character would "cower from his magnificence" when he meets a Cha 20 character. The low char character might have high wisdom which governs seeing through lies and trickery (Sense Motive) and strength of will (Will saves). Maybe he can't convince others, and maybe he will try to avoid confrontation, but he can still be stubborn.

Also, what if I play a character with Cha 7, but put max ranks in Diplomacy, and take Skill Focus (Diplomacy). How do I role-play that?

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Grima Wormtongue.
You are good with words but you have the presence of an actual worm. people could value your words maybe, but will never value you as a man.
you may whisper to your king but when you say to aragorn that he is not welcome you do so behind your king's back or through his voice


artificer wrote:

OK! RL Max Weber gave me the answer.

Wikipedia says: Weber applies the term charisma to a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader [...] How the quality in question would be ultimately judged from an ethical, aesthetic, or other such point of view is naturally indifferent for the purpose of definition."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_authority#Charisma

Went to Weber, good call. Sociologist f%$ here.

Charisma always made sense to me. Now I also recall a long discussion with a dm who loved sorcerers and child sorcerers, who found it unfathomable that a sorcerer with "the blood" wouldn't take all their levels in sorcerer, or even focus on it.

I argued that culture and background could influence one of the blood to take up a different direction. For a young possibly sorcerer to be, if they give into the self and hone its power, they become sorcerers. If they allowed or able to do this, if it isn't crushed out of them, they can become sorcerers. If they leave it un-harnessed and focus on other areas or are directed to other types of skills by background, they will become something else. I am reminded of elves, their connections to magic and fey, but sorcery is looked down upon compared to wizard magic.

There is also ability scores to factor in. Does a quick and tricky you lass with 14 dex and 14 cha and a background of the magic blood go sorcerer, rogue or both in time? Depends what matters to her. Does she value inner power, or pick-pocketing and coin?


Scarletrose wrote:

Judging by some comments here I guess most GM doesn't force players to play theircharacters based on their stats, and charisma is usually the one with most influence.

first of all a low charisma pc cannot be the leader of the group.
If his charisma is really low (below 8) I usually forbid him to argue with the party. eexpecially against high charisma characters.
the same with npc, if you have charisma 7 don't even try to interact with a charisma 20+ without struttering from shyness and cower from his magnificence.
your other stats may say that you ar tall, athletic and a regular genius who can kick ass all night long.
but your charisma says you are a shy gutless pathetic being that do not believe in himself no matter what.
So go ahead and dump charisma... just remember, you are not allowed to be cool

Doraleous! Domato!

Strange they would both be fighter party leaders with poor charisma.

Coolness isn't just charisma. A low cha barb that sits atop mountains of skulls calling out for a worthy challenge is cool, a monk that stuns and trips an opponent all while perfectly composed is cool. A defensive fighter that doesn't seem to be able to be hit, is extremely cool, but I take your meaning in social settings.

As for charisma and how characters should act, certainty hard and cynical old mercs/adventurers may not be impressed by honeyed words or the background of someone with 20+ charisma. "Yeah yeah, another pretty noble, I don't let them finish their talking, as I don't care what they have to say. Pampered city dwellers."


Andrew R wrote:
Just remember that if CHA is appearance squid heads are hot, few races have the high average of the mindflayer.......

Seduced victim: I don't know how you talked me into sleeping with you mind flayer, but damn, I am cowed by your magnificence.

Flayer: gopple slick slop hiss.

The Exchange

Use the paizo options to cast with int or wis, so pick your sorceror's build to fit your view.


I think a better question is "Why do Clerics not use Charisma to cast?", with them basically having to ask their gods for favor (so a higher Charisma score means you get more powerful "favors", aka, spells) and having the task of converting more people to their faith.

IMO, Rangers, Druids and other nature-themed classes should be the only ones to have Wisdom as their casting attribute, since they (supposedly) strive to reach balance with nature and must be good at things like Perception and Survival to live in the wilds.

I also think there should be a way to use Charisma instead of Wisdom on Will Saves, but that's a different topic...


Lemmy wrote:

I think a better question is "Why do Clerics not use Charisma to cast?", with them basically having to ask their gods for favor (so a higher Charisma score means you get more powerful "favors", aka, spells) and having the task of converting more people to their faith.

IMO, Rangers, Druids and other nature-themed classes should be the only ones to have Wisdom as their casting attribute, since they (supposedly) strive to reach balance with nature and must be good at things like Perception and Survival to live in the wilds.

I also think there should be a way to use Charisma instead of Wisdom on Will Saves, but that's a different topic...

Because it makes sense for clerics to use Wisdom. They are channeling the power of their gods and need good mental fortitude to do it, thus Wisdom.


Talynonyx wrote:
Because it makes sense for clerics to use Wisdom. They are channeling the power of their gods and need good mental fortitude to do it, thus Wisdom.

But that could be said about almost any caster. Wizards are channelling ancient arcane energy, so are sorcerers. Wtches are channeling the energy of an unknown entity. I'm guessing all that also requires mental fortitude.

And unlike a god, who supposedly cares for its servants (and their usefulness), arcane energy doesn't give a f*** if they harm the caster, same thing can possibly apply to witches and their obscure not-always-benevolent patrons.

And what about Oracles?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Marthian wrote:


On a related note, make's me question the flavor of the sorcerer class. What would happen if you did have magic blood flowing through someone, yet they chose to pursue, say: the way of the Fighter? The study of the Wizard? The Nature-loving Druid? What happens to that magical blood?

The answer is that he simply doesn't have it in him the way his ancestry might hint at. Or it hasn't expressed itself yet.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
QXL99 wrote:
Fleshgrinder wrote:

Strength is the power of the machine.

Dexterity is the precision of the machine.
Constitution is the heartiness of the machine.
Intelligence is the raw processing power of the machine.
Wisdom is the database that the processor uses for context.
Charisma is what makes this specific machine say "I".

Int's the "mind, Wisdom is the "gut feeling", and Charisma is the "heart".

Sounds very Freudian (or Star Trek):

Id -- CHA (McCoy--speaks from passion)
Ego -- INT (Spock--reasons by logic)
Super Ego -- WIS (Kirk--balances the two to fit the situation)

Although if you dropped the Freudian part I would probably reverse the ability score associations for Kirk and McCoy.

McCoy is all about wisdom/intuition -- he knows what is right and wrong even if he cannot work his way to his conclusion logically.

Kirk is all about charisma -- while Spock or McCoy may come up with the solution to a problem, he is the one who gets everyone else to go along with it.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

An old RPG (Fighting Fantasy,written by the guys who founded GW,no less, and based on the FF books, but later an RPG) has distinctive Wizards and Sorcerers. Wizards are pretty similar to the D&D/PF ones, whilst Sorcs draw from their inner-strength,essence and stamina.
Stamina is your HP, basically...That's right,Sorcs do damage to themselves, actually pouring their life essence into their magic.
I love this. The game was reprinted recently, and we are loving it.
A bit of a side-track, but I have been advocating a Con-Based Sorc for a bit.

-Uriel


Lemmy wrote:
Talynonyx wrote:
Because it makes sense for clerics to use Wisdom. They are channeling the power of their gods and need good mental fortitude to do it, thus Wisdom.

But that could be said about almost any caster. Wizards are channelling ancient arcane energy, so are sorcerers. Wtches are channeling the energy of an unknown entity. I'm guessing all that also requires mental fortitude.

And unlike a god, who supposedly cares for its servants (and their usefulness), arcane energy doesn't give a f*** if they harm the caster, same thing can possibly apply to witches and their obscure not-always-benevolent patrons.

And what about Oracles?

Wizards use knowledge and study to harness the power. Witches... witches are a bit odd I admit. And gods that do care for their servants only grant power to those who can handle it.

For oracles, I see the difference as being a cleric is a direct instrument of their god's will, while an oracle is more of a free agent. A god channels power into a cleric, while they give an oracle access to power. Like having a battery vs. a cord.


Marthian wrote:
I'd like to point out Sorcerers tend to actually get their spells and abilities from their blood (force of self, and whatever.) They don't just study it, they are just born with it usually

Maybe they're born with it.

Maybe it's Maybelline.

(Which would certainly explain the Charisma thing.)


Talynonyx wrote:

Wizards use knowledge and study to harness the power. Witches... witches are a bit odd I admit. And gods that do care for their servants only grant power to those who can handle it.

For oracles, I see the difference as being a cleric is a direct instrument of their god's will, while an oracle is more of a free agent. A god channels power into a cleric, while they give an oracle access to power. Like having a battery vs. a cord.

I understand why wizards use Int and I understand why sorcerers use Cha. That was not my point. My point is that "needing good mental fortitude to do it" could apply to all of them (hence the good Will save progression), probably even more than for a Cleric, whose god supposedly doesn't want to hurt its servants.

I dunno, A Cleric with nice charisma would be a lot more useful, being more capable of getting lots more of converts. I dare say that most preachers (or really, any leadership figure) around the world are more charismatic than they're wise.

Shadow Lodge

I don't think doraleous actually has low cha, I have only seen a few episodes. drak feels like a character with cha as a dump stat.
Is not about forbidding people from dumping stats (a lot of my players still do it) but dump stats should reflect something a pc lacks.
as a player I dump wisdom a lot. as a result I usually play my characters as not having the common sense of a pigeon.
I had a character with cha 6 in my last 3.5 game. Great in ccombat but he would shy away in any social situation.
a couple of times he tried to do say something a little too boldly and I made him rephrase.
also no npc gave him much credit
to them he was as important as the druid's pet


Drak is abysmally low, but Doraleous has a hard time leading, can't keep people on task, isn't very inspiring (but is fine with a sword). That is where a lot of the humour comes from. He isn't Julius Caesar, he is trying to direct a group of odd-balls and generally does a poor job, but luckily they are very skilled at ganking.

Ah, wis is great fun to dump. A cowardly young barbarian adventurer can be a great joy to play.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of my favorite characters ever was a Wis-dumped paladin. She was quite aware of her ... eh ... ineptitude? in certain situations, and generally defaulted to the Rogue... who, while her brother, had distinctly different methods and values (LG vs CG). She never could quite catch him in the act though. And was a TERRIBLE cook.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Think of clerics as guns. They are the barrel for the divine powder propelling the bullet (spell). They don't need to know how it works (Int casting) or the strength to bend the forces to their will (Cha) They just need to channel someone else's energy and not go all banana peel.

Oracles and Paladins, while they may worship a deity, aren't directly channelling the power, they're using their own force of personality to bend the ambient energy of their faiths.

Shadow Lodge

3.5 Loyalist wrote:

Drak is abysmally low, but Doraleous has a hard time leading, can't keep people on task, isn't very inspiring (but is fine with a sword). That is where a lot of the humour comes from. He isn't Julius Caesar, he is trying to direct a group of odd-balls and generally does a poor job, but luckily they are very skilled at ganking.

Ah, wis is great fun to dump. A cowardly young barbarian adventurer can be a great joy to play.

I think doraleous difficulties comes more likely from this party lack of common sense and attention span (or low wis) than leader lack of cha.

doraleous would be a fine leader given a party of sane and efficient people.

you play low wis as a coward?
given that it influences saves vs. fear it makes sense.
still sounds odd to me since I use to play it in the opposite way.
impatient and careless.
some of my characters are famous for drinking unidentified potions, running through corridors or opening chest before anyone check for traps.
basically they rarely worry about consequences until it's too late.


Matthew Morris wrote:

Think of clerics as guns. They are the barrel for the divine powder propelling the bullet (spell). They don't need to know how it works (Int casting) or the strength to bend the forces to their will (Cha) They just need to channel someone else's energy and not go all banana peel.

Oracles and Paladins, while they may worship a deity, aren't directly channelling the power, they're using their own force of personality to bend the ambient energy of their faiths.

That makes sense... But again, it could be said about mostly every caster. A wizard has to "channel" arcane energy too. Since they are not sorcerers, I suppose they also use "ambient" energy.

I see your point, but IMO, it'd still make more sense if it was Charisma.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Lemmy wrote:
Matthew Morris wrote:

Think of clerics as guns. They are the barrel for the divine powder propelling the bullet (spell). They don't need to know how it works (Int casting) or the strength to bend the forces to their will (Cha) They just need to channel someone else's energy and not go all banana peel.

Oracles and Paladins, while they may worship a deity, aren't directly channelling the power, they're using their own force of personality to bend the ambient energy of their faiths.

That makes sense... But again, it could be said about mostly every caster. A wizard has to "channel" arcane energy too. Since they are not sorcerers, I suppose they also use "ambient" energy.

I see your point, but IMO, it'd still make more sense if it was Charisma.

Oh it could, I should have added 'IMC'.

if Magic = a trebuchet.

Int "If I pull this lever here, the reaction should be to launch this and the counterbalance should...."
Cha "I'm strong enough to just get this thing spinning myself."
Wis *climbs in the sling* "Ok god-I-worship, pull the trigger!"

This also could be my cleric bias showing ;-)


Matthew Morris wrote:

if Magic = a trebuchet.

Int "If I pull this lever here, the reaction should be to launch this and the counterbalance should...."
Cha "I'm strong enough to just get this thing spinning myself."
Wis *climbs in the sling* "Ok god-I-worship, pull the trigger!"

Heh... That made me laugh...

Again, I get your point. I really do. I also understand the difference between casting with Int, Wis and Cha. I just don't agree that Clerics should be Wisdom based.

Using your metaphor, I think a wizard would say something like:
"If I pull this lever here, the reaction should be to launch this and the counterbalance should...." *climbs in the sling, then fires and thinks in mid air* "Yu. Just like I thought..."

A sorcerer would go:
"F*** this!" *raises rock over his head and throws against the castle* or, since the power is coming from inside him *jumps head first against the castle. And actually destroys a tower"

But a Cha-based Cleric would be something like
Cleric:"God-I-Worship, destroy that castle!",
God: "I dunno..."
Cleric "C'mon, please. It's for a good cause!"
God: "Yeah... Okay." *throws rock against castle the Cleric points at.

So a more charismatic Cleric would convince his/her God to throw bigger rocks.

Matthew Morris wrote:
This also could be my cleric bias showing ;-)

True. Or it could be my Charisma bias. I feel bad for the poor guy, it's amounts to little more than skill bonuses. It should be more useful. A nice idea is Kirthfinder way of dividing up Will save in two, one for Wis and one for Cha. A simpler idea would be create feats to make it less of a dump stat.


I don't think cha and wis should be separate stats. There's no reason to have three mental stats when the biggest difference is that different classes use them for casting.

If all casters used int for spells known, cha for DCs, and wis for spells/day or whatever then there would be a reason for cha and wis to be different stats, but as it is you could merge all three and all it would do is improve the skills and will saving throws of spellcasters and deprive people of dump stats. It might even be a net negative for non-charisma casters since charisma is their dump stat too and I think it's normal to buy charisma down more than they buy their other non-casting up if they do so at all.


Atarlost wrote:

I don't think cha and wis should be separate stats. There's no reason to have three mental stats when the biggest difference is that different classes use them for casting.

If all casters used int for spells known, cha for DCs, and wis for spells/day or whatever then there would be a reason for cha and wis to be different stats, but as it is you could merge all three and all it would do is improve the skills and will saving throws of spellcasters and deprive people of dump stats. It might even be a net negative for non-charisma casters since charisma is their dump stat too and I think it's normal to buy charisma down more than they buy their other non-casting up if they do so at all.

If Will saves were based on the highest between Charisma and Wisdom, a la 4e, it'd be enough for me.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8

Well as I see it (Mattfinder?) The DCs should be based on Charisma for all casters. In essense, the casting stat says how you get your power, Charisma means how hard you hit.

best analogy I can think is melee combat.

Piercing/Bludgeoning/Slashing all the hit/damage is increased (barring feats) by strength

It would also have the dual effect of making casters (except the Sorcerer) MAD, and the Sorcerer makes up for having a 'sucky casting stat'.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Yes, Kirthfinder made save DCs Cha based for all casters as well.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Charisma casting is The Will and The Word.

Quote:

"Command it to open."

"Command? Me?"

"Thou art a man. It is but a rock."

51 to 100 of 113 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why sorcerers use charisma to cast? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.