(Apologies if this has been discussed to death, I couldn't find a thread for it when I searched)
It makes sense for Bards. Because they're magic is tied to performance abilities, I imagine the bard sings/dances/plays whenever he casts a spell, and the better one performs, the harder it is to resist the spell.
Paladins I can sort of see it. Since they're spells an abilities mainly have to do with buffing allies and fighting off evil creatures, high Charisma means "convincing" targets of the spell's potency which in turn makes it stronger.
But how does having high Charisma make a sorcerer better at shooting bolts of lightening? The flavor of sorcerers in Pathfinder is that they wiled magic on instinct as opposed to learning. To quote the 3.5 rulebook "Like a poet writes poems: inborn talent honed by practice".
But isn't instinct and common sense governed by Wisdom in all other cases? I just can't get my head around it, if someone else gets it, please explain it to me. As is, I would only ever play one of the bloodlines that makes the sorc cast based on Wisdom or Int, because it just makes more thematic sense to me.
It makes the most thematic sense, with the sorcerer imposing their will upon magical energies to create their effects. If you think of Charisma as mental Strength, Intelligence as mental Dexterity, and Wisdom as mental Constitution, it makes more sense, with sorcerers brute-forcing their magic, instead of the more nuanced approach of learning to understand it.
It makes the most thematic sense, with the sorcerer imposing their will upon magical energies to create their effects. If you think of Charisma as mental Strength, Intelligence as mental Dexterity, and Wisdom as mental Constitution, it makes more sense, with sorcerers brute-forcing their magic, instead of the more nuanced approach of learning to understand it.
I never thought about Charisma as mental strength. That does make more sense, though I suppose I still see wizards and clerics as more closely fitting my personal concept of magic. At least now I have of defining it and explaining it to my players. Thanks.
I view it as a kind of confidence. They have some innate power(akak bloodline) that lets them change the universe. The confidence and self assurance in themselves is what allows them to be more or less powerfull with this innate power.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"I fuel my spells with my pretty looks and confidence" -sorcerer
the sorcerer draws power from thier confidence in thier self, based upon thier strength of personality and assertive nature, as they assert thier will over the laws of the universe. making reality submit to thier sheer will and accomodate what they wish. the spells they know are techniques they have mastered from the assertion of thier will. anything else requires a consumable focus, such as a scroll or wand.
the sorcerer draws power from thier confidence in thier self, based upon thier strength of personality and assertive nature, as they assert thier will over the laws of the universe. making reality submit to thier sheer will and accomodate what they wish. the spells they know are techniques they have mastered from the assertion of thier will. anything else requires a consumable focus, such as a scroll or wand.
That would explain why dragons are so arrogant.
|
Yup. I've also seen it explained that Charisma is concept of Self, whereas Wisdom is insight into the Other. While Sorcerers (and Bards, Paladins, Oracles, and Summoners) tap into inner power, Clerics, Druids, and Inquisitors are relating to some external force. And of course Wizards, Witches, and Alchemists use analysis, theory, and cunning.
Actually, why do Summoners use Cha? I assume it's because they're bending summoned creatures to their will, but I can easily see them being Int-based theorists, or even Wis-based semidivine casters calling on an aspect or servant of some pure extraplanar entity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The universe itself thinks you are awesome so it remakes itself according to your wishes.
Also what Lumiere said, but I like the sound of mine better.
A wizard casts spells using the power of his mind.
A sorcere casts spells using the power of his id.
Huh, this reminds me of the concept I had for a character, who becomes more powerful the more confident he is.
Problem for most people trying to beat him is that he has one of the biggest egos in the world. Arrogant is putting it lightly.
|
|
It makes more sense, with sorcerers brute-forcing their magic, instead of the more nuanced approach of learning to understand it.
I've never liked this explaination, as it's actually the wizard who is brute-forcing his magic, not the sorcerer. The sorcerer IS magic...it flows through him naturally. The wizard, on the other hand, is trying to force magic through a conduit (himself) that is ill-suited for it. That's why, in my opinion, the wizard should be the one with the delayed spell progression, not the sorcerer.
Well, a recent thread was here. I still like the answer I gave
I see sorcerers as being analogous to mutant superheroes, like the X-Men. They were born with certain abilities, and they use their own force of personality to control them.
Intelligence to me is the mental equivalent of dexterity, how fast does the character think, how quickly can they grasp new ideas or concepts, how laterally can they think, how many ideas can they think of at once.
Intuitively, I would have said charisma is force of personality, which roughly equates to strength and will saves are the mental equivalent of fortitude saves. As fortitude is CON based and Will is WIS based I would have said they were equivalent. This also sat nicely with the harpy's captivating song being a CHA based will save, which I could easily imagine being based on strength of personality.
However, according to the CRB willpower is wisdom and unnatural lifeforce is charisma. Willpower sounds close to strength and lifeforce sounds closer to Constition.
Any being with SLAs also uses CHA as a casting stat.
Examples: angels, demons, devils, dragons, powerful undead, and other beings of power.
Look at the CHA-casters: Bards, Sorcerers, Paladins, Oracles...
Now perhaps another way to look at it is... CHA doesn't affect casting, but raw cosmic power manifests as charisma. That is to say, powerful beings are powerful, but as a consequence, they are also very influential at dominating social interactions (intimidation, disguising, diplomacy, bluffing).
That said, you can say the Charisma stat is many things: presence, personality, force of will (to force, not to resist like a Will save), and cosmic power.
|
Real-World explanation, AFAIK: because Charisma was basically worthless in 2e AD&D, and so WotC wanted there to be a class that actually made use of it for 3e D&D. Paladins, Bards, and Clerics need it as well, but only the Sorcerer was based around it. We had Clerics and Druids for 2 different approaches to Divine magic, but only Wizards for Arcane. Why not kill two birds with one stone?
(Lisa, Vic, or anybody else in the know please correct me if I'm out in left field here or something.)
The core book needed another reason to not dump charisma.
Long ago, in the days of 3.5, Charisma used to be a relevant statistic which was an inherent part of a character. It was the force of personality, the "spirit" of a character, the part of a character that made it self-aware and able to distinguish itself from its surroundings. Like every other statistic, is was something that determined if a being was alive or able to change its environment- Strength to exert force, dexterity to move oneself, constitution to have tangible form, wisdom to have understanding, intelligence to be capable of learning, and charisma to be self-aware. Without any one of these, a being was dead, undead or inanimate.
Pathfinder dumbed it down to "How good you look and how people think of you", and messed up many facets of the game-feel. From this instance to animals apparently just being ugly.
Long ago, in the days of 3.5, Charisma used to be a relevant statistic which was an inherent part of a character. It was the force of personality, the "spirit" of a character, the part of a character that made it self-aware and able to distinguish itself from its surroundings. Like every other statistic, is was something that determined if a being was alive or able to change its environment- Strength to exert force, dexterity to move oneself, constitution to have tangible form, wisdom to have understanding, intelligence to be capable of learning, and charisma to be self-aware. Without any one of these, a being was dead, undead or inanimate.
Pathfinder dumbed it down to "How good you look and how people think of you", and messed up many facets of the game-feel. From this instance to animals apparently just being ugly.
I think the concept of Mental Strength makes the low Charisma for animals appropriate. All they have is instinct (Wisdom, which I see now as mental Constitution), no capacity for logical reason or manner of exerting their will/personality over others.
|
Long ago, in the days of 3.5, Charisma used to be a relevant statistic which was an inherent part of a character. It was the force of personality, the "spirit" of a character, the part of a character that made it self-aware and able to distinguish itself from its surroundings. Like every other statistic, is was something that determined if a being was alive or able to change its environment- Strength to exert force, dexterity to move oneself, constitution to have tangible form, wisdom to have understanding, intelligence to be capable of learning, and charisma to be self-aware. Without any one of these, a being was dead, undead or inanimate.
Pathfinder dumbed it down to "How good you look and how people think of you", and messed up many facets of the game-feel. From this instance to animals apparently just being ugly.
Because according to the rules it measures 'personality' instead of 'strength of personality' I fail to see them dumbing down...
|
|
Originally (3E version I mean), it was because SLA and other special abilities like that either worked off of Con or Cha. A lot of people felt that Cha was the dump stat, and didn't have any uses outside of things like leadership and RP skills, so made Sorcerers Cha based, thoug your right it really doesn't make any sense. Wis is much more appropriate.
Another side affect of this is that it really blurs the lines for what Wis and Cha actually mean, what they should govern, and what they should do. Cha is power of personality and looks, (or social graces/demeanor). Wisdom is deeper understanding, mental stregth and fortitude, natural resistance to manipulationand both inside and outside affects, the ability to relate/understand abstract information (or to actually use your Int and rational thought appropriately), and perception/insight.
Later on, it became an unofficial fact that spontanious magic was Cha based, and prepared magic was other attributes, with a few exceptions here and there, pretty much al on the prepared side. PF went even further, making this an official rule, but also wanted to uber-boost some classes like the Paladin, so dropped Wis almost completely, again kind of confussing the issue.
I would honestly say, logically, Cha is the least reasonable Attribute to work any sort of magic off of, (minus for balance issues). Particularly for a Class whose entire concept is based around natural (genetic) affinity for magic based on ancestry or some sort of mmagical mutation, Con and Wis are on top, but Int, Str, and even Dex make more sense than Cha, (in my opinon). Particularly, Con, but all the physical stats could easily indicate that as your (and don't shoot me for this comparison. . .) midichlorians are growing stronger and more powerful as your body grows stronger, Wis, (the most obvious in my opinion) is kind of like the mental version of all the physical stats in many ways, but from the natural intuition of their own body/history/bloodline, to the basic use of Wis for things like understanding, mental fortitude/strength, it seems the most reasonible. Especially when compaired to being Socially manipulative, eloquent, and friendly somehow making you more powerful with your magic? Uh huh, right. . .
|
|
Long ago, in the days of 3.5, Charisma used to be a relevant statistic which was an inherent part of a character. It was the force of personality, the "spirit" of a character, the part of a character that made it self-aware and able to distinguish itself from its surroundings. Like every other statistic, is was something that determined if a being was alive or able to change its environment- Strength to exert force, dexterity to move oneself, constitution to have tangible form, wisdom to have understanding, intelligence to be capable of learning, and charisma to be self-aware. Without any one of these, a being was dead, undead or inanimate.
Pathfinder dumbed it down to "How good you look and how people think of you", and messed up many facets of the game-feel. From this instance to animals apparently just being ugly.
That's partially correct. Physical appearance is an aspect of Cha, but honestly, it doesn't work at all. Many hidious aberations have supr high, inhuman Cha scores and can not by any means be seen as attractive. Really, and this isn't always true, the appearance part of Cha is more along the lines of "there's just something about you that people find comfortable/friendly/trustworthy" or "there is something in the way you walk or stand" that makes you seem confident. A lot of what you said about Cha (Self-Aware, "spirit"), can just as easiy be is. Spirit in the sense of maybe passion, but Wis in most other ways, core self (by deeper understanding of self and the universe, and your place in it), utilizing your past experience and understanding to overcome temptations and obsticles, not give up, and to think outside the box and on your feet, (vs Int more memorization). You may have a point with the more instinctually driven idea, but animals also have a low Int, which might be more indicitive than having it tied to Cha.
I say it is mainly because they didn't want to insert a "Magic" stat into the system. I mean that all the way back to 3e when they started the whole Sorcerer thing.