One of the basic problems is that the system lumps both looks and personality under Charisma.
So dump CHA:
Is he just ugly/ deformed/ problems
(Spawn would have a very low charisma, as would V from the movie V for Vendetta)
Is he maladjusted socially? And how?
I can think of quite a few examples:
The misogynist (get me mah sammich, woman) around females in power
A bigot
My personal favorite, the crusty "old sarge" from most any war film (constant vulgar language and insults that he doesnt realize are insults)
"Gibbs" from NCIS would be a low CHA character
So would McGee and, to a lesser extent Abby
Intelligent and wise, but socially awkwardThat doesnt necessarily affect his ability to interact with people, though.
Look how many musicians are but-ugly (most rockers) but still have force of personality
And look actors that are attractive, but have the personality (outside of their roles) of a stumpHitler was ugly as sin, but managed to lead the world into war
Churchill was compared to a bulldog, and recognized for his charisma
Donald Trump is considered attractive (:roll:) yet the man has an abrasive personality, as do many reality show B and C rate hollywood stars that go on them (just look at Snooki and Paris Hilton)So first, if you want to have your players roleplay their charisma, you need to specify what it signifies more specifically in your game:
Is it primarily looks
Or personality
Or is it just "first impression"
I think that's true more or less. Though as a DM I usually ask the player if they take a stat that's below average if they can illustrate why it is that way .i.e low cha then he's deformed or morose and what not. My fave though is one of my player's Rogue has a low Wiz and he says it's cause he's always has a buzz going so he's a little less than attentive. With that knowledge I'm able to give character related reasons why there may be social difficulties for low Cha. Rather than the blanket statement like that NPC hates women or things like that.
The same thing goes for any other low stat. Though that may be my preference to see characters strive through personal frailties.There's always reasoning for dump stats (I hope at least), but that doesn't make a player stupid or inferior for the decision. Cha is useful in battle too because of some feats. Or you may save your party from a a situation that would completely wipe them out with a good diplomacy roll.
|
One of the basic problems is that the system lumps both looks and personality under Charisma.
So dump CHA:
Is he just ugly/ deformed/ problems
(Spawn would have a very low charisma, as would V from the movie V for Vendetta)
Is he maladjusted socially? And how?
I can think of quite a few examples:
The misogynist (get me mah sammich, woman) around females in power
A bigot
My personal favorite, the crusty "old sarge" from most any war film (constant vulgar language and insults that he doesnt realize are insults)
"Gibbs" from NCIS would be a low CHA character
So would McGee and, to a lesser extent Abby
Intelligent and wise, but socially awkwardThat doesnt necessarily affect his ability to interact with people, though.
Look how many musicians are but-ugly (most rockers) but still have force of personality
And look actors that are attractive, but have the personality (outside of their roles) of a stumpHitler was ugly as sin, but managed to lead the world into war
Churchill was compared to a bulldog, and recognized for his charisma
Donald Trump is considered attractive (:roll:) yet the man has an abrasive personality, as do many reality show B and C rate hollywood stars that go on them (just look at Snooki and Paris Hilton)So first, if you want to have your players roleplay their charisma, you need to specify what it signifies more specifically in your game:
Is it primarily looks
Or personality
Or is it just "first impression"
I'm a big fan of back story. I always ask the player to tell me how the scores reflect in the character, and not just for charisma. In what way are they clumsy, naive, dumb, sickly, etc...playing these things can be a lot of fun. The low con character always sneezing, the naive person believing everything they are told, the clumsy character breaking things...it's part of the flavor of the character that makes them interesting.
As far as charisma, they can be pretty but annoying, or as you said ugly with a forceful personality that lets everyone know they are in charge. It isn't up to the DM to decide in what way it manifests, only to adjudicate it when it comes up.
It's up to the player to make the character, and as I said if the ugly, socially awkward guy saves your life, you think he is pretty awesome. A good role player adapts and compensates. But if you have a 7 and someone else in the party has a 20, people are generally going to be more drawn to the person with the 20 than to you unless other circumstances are at play.
1. "This encounter occurred during an actual game."
Your quote, which I read as meaning "This is how I played this encounter"
And more to the point, if you are citing an example, I would assume you are going to cite an example that would best illustrate how you think things should work. And in your example, you admitted that you picked whatever skill you had the most ranks in, even if it wasn't the skill that most closely governed what you were trying to do.
I wouldn't have said it was for entertainment purposes only if I was using it for an argument, genius.
2. I copied and pasted what Charisma does into the comment. The above is a list of what Charisma governs. Which would be the rules that say what Charisma governs. So I don't know how much more I could cite rules.
Is your argument that Charisma doesn't govern "a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance." or that those things don't have in game effects?
The description of Charisma has no more to do with game effects than the description of a class. The description does not determine the game effects and is purely 100% fluff. Let me give you an example.
This is Fluff
Some take up arms for glory, wealth, or revenge. Others do battle to prove themselves, to protect others, or because they know nothing else. Still others learn the ways of weaponcraft to hone their bodies in battle and prove their mettle in the forge of war. Lords of the battlefield, fighters are a disparate lot, training with many weapons or just one, perfecting the uses of armor, learning the fighting techniques of exotic masters, and studying the art of combat, all to shape themselves into living weapons. Far more than mere thugs, these skilled warriors reveal the true deadliness of their weapons, turning hunks of metal into arms capable of taming kingdoms, slaughtering monsters, and rousing the hearts of armies. Soldiers, knights, hunters, and artists of war, fighters are unparalleled champions, and woe to those who dare stand against them.
These are Mechanics
Bravery (Ex): Starting at 2nd level, a fighter gains a +1 bonus on Will saves against fear. This bonus increases by +1 for every four levels beyond 2nd.
Armor Training (Ex): Starting at 3rd level, a fighter learns to be more maneuverable while wearing armor. Whenever he is wearing armor, he reduces the armor check penalty by 1 (to a minimum of 0) and increases the maximum Dexterity bonus allowed by his armor by 1. Every four levels thereafter (7th, 11th, and 15th), these bonuses increase by +1 each time, to a maximum –4 reduction of the armor check penalty and a +4 increase of the maximum Dexterity bonus allowed.
In addition, a fighter can also move at his normal speed while wearing medium armor. At 7th level, a fighter can move at his normal speed while wearing heavy armor.
One is purely descriptive, the other actually means something. One is for ideas and flavor, the other actually has rules and mechanics that influence the game world.
All you did was parrot the description of Charisma, but you provided no rules. Show me how you're supposed to do it. It's been about 3 pages that I've been asking, and you still apparently have < Nothing.
|
|
1. "This encounter occurred during an actual game."
Your quote, which I read as meaning "This is how I played this encounter"
And more to the point, if you are citing an example, I would assume you are going to cite an example that would best illustrate how you think things should work. And in your example, you admitted that you picked whatever skill you had the most ranks in, even if it wasn't the skill that most closely governed what you were trying to do.
I wouldn't have said it was for entertainment purposes only if I was using it for an argument, genius.
2. I copied and pasted what Charisma does into the comment. The above is a list of what Charisma governs. Which would be the rules that say what Charisma governs. So I don't know how much more I could cite rules.
Is your argument that Charisma doesn't govern "a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance." or that those things don't have in game effects?
So to be clear.
You posted an example, in a discussion thread, not for the purpose of discussion. And despite the fact that it included the words ""This is how I played this encounter" it is foolish of me to think that is how you played the encounter.
As to your "Fluff" argument, by your logic this
"You can use this skill to persuade others to agree with your arguments, to resolve differences, and to gather valuable information or rumors from people. This skill is also used to negotiate conflicts by using the proper etiquette and manners suitable to the problem."
is also fluff, and not a description of what the diplomacy skill governs. Which is why I guess you are allowed to expand it's use to encompass, what seems to be, pretty much anything.
The fact that there is a number after Charisma, and that there are many, many references to charisma checks taking place is the result of incredibly poor editing on the part of the Paizo staff. Clearly they didn't actually intend your charisma score to impact "a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance." in any way.
But, you also argue that it is important that I not be rigid in my interpretation of skills, and "punish" my players when I interpret charisma as having an effect on "a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance." because that is just fluff.
Got it.
As to your "Fluff" argument, by your logic this
"You can use this skill to persuade others to agree with your arguments, to resolve differences, and to gather valuable information or rumors from people. This skill is also used to negotiate conflicts by using the proper etiquette and manners suitable to the problem."
That's correct. Otherwise the Diplomacy skill would be broken internally, because it allows you to do things that the initial summary of the skill does not say that you can do; including make requests of NPCs and to change their attitudes towards you. This is merely a description, the fluff portion. The mechanics begin from this point:
Check: You can change the initial attitudes of nonplayer characters with a successful check. The DC of this check depends on the creature's starting attitude toward you, adjusted by its Charisma modifier. If you succeed, the character's attitude toward you is improved by one step. For every 5 by which your check result exceeds the DC, the character's attitude toward you increases by one additional step. A creature's attitude cannot be shifted more than two steps up in this way, although the GM can override this rule in some situations. If you fail the check by 4 or less, the character's attitude toward you is unchanged. If you fail by 5 or more, the character's attitude toward you is decreased by one step.
You cannot use Diplomacy against a creature that does not understand you or has an Intelligence of 3 or less. Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future. Any attitude shift caused through Diplomacy generally lasts for 1d4 hours but can last much longer or shorter depending upon the situation (GM discretion).
Starting Attitude Diplomacy DC
Hostile 25 + creature's Cha modifier
Unfriendly 20 + creature's Cha modifier
Indifferent 15 + creature's Cha modifier
Friendly 10 + creature's Cha modifier
Helpful 0 + creature's Cha modifierIf 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. Once a creature's attitude has shifted to helpful, the creature gives in to most requests without a check, unless the request is against its nature or puts it in serious peril. Some requests automatically fail if the request goes against the creature's values or its nature, subject to GM discretion.
Request Diplomacy DC Modifier
Give simple advice or directions –5
Give detailed advice +0
Give simple aid +0
Reveal an unimportant secret +5
Give lengthy or complicated aid +5
Give dangerous aid +10
Reveal an important secret +10 or more
Give aid that could result in punishment +15 or more
Additional requests +5 per requestGather Information: You can also use Diplomacy to gather information about a specific topic or individual. To do this, you must spend at least 1d4 hours canvassing people at local taverns, markets, and gathering places. The DC of this check depends on the obscurity of the information sought, but for most commonly known facts or rumors it is 10. For obscure or secret knowledge, the DC might increase to 20 or higher. The GM might rule that some topics are simply unknown to common folk.
Action: Using Diplomacy to influence a creature's attitude takes 1 minute of continuous interaction. Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request. Using Diplomacy to gather information takes 1d4 hours of work searching for rumors and informants.
Try Again: You cannot use Diplomacy to influence a given creature's attitude more than once in a 24-hour period. If a request is refused, the result does not change with additional checks, although other requests might be made. You can retry Diplomacy checks made to gather information.
Special: If you have the Persuasive feat, you gain a bonus on Diplomacy checks (see Feats).
To give another example. Let's look at the Craft Skill.
The fluff portion will be written in italics. The mechanics portion will be after the bolded text.You are skilled in the creation of a specific group of items, such as armor or weapons. Like Knowledge, Perform, and Profession, Craft is actually a number of separate skills. You could have several Craft skills, each with its own ranks. The most common Craft skills are alchemy, armor, baskets, books, bows, calligraphy, carpentry, cloth, clothing, glass, jewelry, leather, locks, paintings, pottery, sculptures, ships, shoes, stonemasonry, traps, and weapons.
A Craft skill is specifically focused on creating something. If nothing is created by the endeavor, it probably falls under the heading of a Profession skill.
Mechanics
Check: You can practice your trade and make a decent living, earning half your check result in gold pieces per week of dedicated work. You know how to use the tools of your trade, how to perform the craft's daily tasks, how to supervise untrained helpers, and how to handle common problems. (Untrained laborers and assistants earn an average of 1 silver piece per day.)The basic function of the Craft skill, however, is to allow you to make an item of the appropriate type. The DC depends on the complexity of the item to be created. The DC, your check result, and the price of the item determine how long it takes to make a particular item. The item's finished price also determines the cost of raw materials.
In some cases, the fabricate spell can be used to achieve the results of a Craft check with no actual check involved. You must still make an appropriate Craft check when using the spell to make articles requiring a high degree of craftsmanship.
A successful Craft check related to woodworking in conjunction with the casting of the ironwood spell enables you to make wooden items that have the strength of steel.
When casting the spell minor creation, you must succeed on an appropriate Craft check to make a complex item.
All crafts require artisan's tools to give the best chance of success. If improvised tools are used, the check is made with a –2 penalty. On the other hand, masterwork artisan's tools provide a +2 circumstance bonus on the check.
To determine how much time and money it takes to make an item, follow these steps.
1. Find the item's price in silver pieces (1 gp = 10 sp).
2. Find the item's DC from Table: Craft Skills.
3. Pay 1/3 of the item's price for the raw material cost.
4. Make an appropriate Craft check representing one week's worth of work. If the check succeeds, multiply your check result by the DC. If the result × the DC equals the price of the item in sp, then you have completed the item. (If the result × the DC equals double or triple the price of the item in silver pieces, then you've completed the task in one-half or one-third of the time. Other multiples of the DC reduce the time in the same manner.) If the result × the DC doesn't equal the price, then it represents the progress you've made this week. Record the result and make a new Craft check for the next week. Each week, you make more progress until your total reaches the price of the item in silver pieces.
If you fail a check by 4 or less, you make no progress this week. If you fail by 5 or more, you ruin half the raw materials and have to pay half the original raw material cost again.
Progress by the Day: You can make checks by the day instead of by the week. In this case your progress (check result × DC) should be divided by the number of days in a week.
Create Masterwork Items: You can make a masterwork item: a weapon, suit of armor, shield, or tool that conveys a bonus on its use through its exceptional craftsmanship. To create a masterwork item, you create the masterwork component as if it were a separate item in addition to the standard item. The masterwork component has its own price (300 gp for a weapon or 150 gp for a suit of armor or a shield, see Equipment for the price of other masterwork tools) and a Craft DC of 20. Once both the standard component and the masterwork component are completed, the masterwork item is finished. The cost you pay for the masterwork component is one-third of the given amount, just as it is for the cost in raw materials.
Repair Items: You can repair an item by making checks against the same DC that it took to make the item in the first place. The cost of repairing an item is one-fifth of the item's price.
Table: Craft Skills Item Craft Skill Craft DC
Acid Alchemy 15
Alchemist's fire, smokestick, or tindertwig Alchemy 20
Antitoxin, sunrod, tanglefoot bag, or thunderstone Alchemy 25
Armor or shield Armor 10 + AC bonus
Longbow, shortbow, or arrows Bows 12
Composite longbow or composite shortbow Bows 15
Composite longbow or composite shortbow with high strength rating Bows 15 + (2 × rating)
Mechanical trap Traps Varies*
Crossbow, or bolts Weapons 15
Simple melee or thrown weapon Weapons 12
Martial melee or thrown weapon Weapons 15
Exotic melee or thrown weapon Weapons 18
Very simple item (wooden spoon) Varies 5
Typical item (iron pot) Varies 10
High-quality item (bell) Varies 15
Complex or superior item (lock) Varies 20
* Traps have their own rules for construction (see Traps).Action: Does not apply. Craft checks are made by the day or week (see above).
Try Again: Yes, but each time you fail by 5 or more, you ruin half the raw materials and have to pay half the original raw material cost again.
Special: You may voluntarily add +10 to the indicated DC to craft an item. This allows you to create the item more quickly (since you'll be multiplying this higher DC by your Craft check result to determine progress). You must decide whether to increase the DC before you make each weekly or daily check.
To make an item using Craft (alchemy), you must have alchemical equipment. If you are working in a city, you can buy what you need as part of the raw materials cost to make the item, but alchemical equipment is difficult or impossible to come by in some places. Purchasing and maintaining an alchemist's lab grants a +2 circumstance bonus on Craft (alchemy) checks because you have the perfect tools for the job, but it does not affect the cost of any items made using the skill.
A gnome receives a +2 bonus on a Craft or Profession skill of her choice.
One is a description, and flavor, while the other is the rules.
|
|
Wall of text that could have been a link
And so when the rules for diplomacy only say it can change the attitude, and the attitude has the clear definitions I provided...or is that also "fluff".
Following your logic, you would never do any ability checks, as the description of what they govern is "fluff".
Your example made my point better than I could have. You showed that in your game you pick whatever you have the highest likelihood of succeeding on rather than what would actually govern what you were doing. The rules you showed above even say "Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future", so unless the Templars were selling Templar Scout cookies...
Circumstances are the primary way interactions are determined. The DM knows the plot and should know how all the NPC's will act based on who they are and what is going on.
I love how you say to cite the rule, and when I cite the rule for what Charisma governs your response is "that's fluff" while you citing 3rd party feats and examples of skill uses that go WAY off book.
It's role playing, not roll playing. If your example doesn't show how you play, post one that does. I'll post below how the encounter would have gone in my game.
1. If the templars had orders to capture them, they would do that.
2. If the templars had orders to capture them if they didn't cooperate, they would have been hostile after the first failed diplomacy check.
3. If the templars were selling templar scout cookies, they would have been very confused by your "intimidating" threat to scream for help.
Oh wait, I can't do your example since you didn't include the single most important part of the example, what the Templars orders were. I suppose you are often able to make a diplomacy check on the BBEG right before the climatic battle, and if you roll high you can get him to go out with you for coffee or a movie later.
And so when the rules for diplomacy only say it can change the attitude, and the attitude has the clear definitions I provided...or is that also "fluff".
Following your logic, you would never do any ability checks, as the description of what they govern is "fluff".
No. Ability checks are made when they are called for. Strength checks to open doors, for example. Strait Charisma checks are used as an opposed test of wills, and can be found used in spells and effects such as charm person and planar binding.
Your example made my point better than I could have. You showed that in your game you pick whatever you have the highest likelihood of succeeding on rather than what would actually govern what you were doing. The rules you showed above even say "Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future", so unless the Templars were selling Templar Scout cookies...
I posted that for entertainment purposes. I've said this thrice. I have a variety of house rules in my games. Sometimes I will provide excerpts from my games for entertainment purposes, but I will note that it is not part of the official discussion, so drop it.
I love how you say to cite the rule, and when I cite the rule for what Charisma governs your response is "that's fluff" while you citing 3rd party feats and examples of skill uses that go WAY off book.
You didn't cite a rule. You cited a description of an ability, which is no more the rules than the description for the Rogue is a rule. A rule is something that has a tangible mechanical effect.
I said that you could increase your carrying capacity via a feat, or a trait. I gave an example. There have been similar feats in Dragon Magazine, the Planar Handbook, and so forth. I gave an example of something that could hypothetically alter your carrying capacity without altering your strength.
There is a precedent for similar effects in the 3.x/PF system, so even if it is not core, the example is valid as an example of something that "could alter your carrying capacity". That does not change the fact you merely quoted a descriptive piece of fluff with no mechanical influence.
Dude. You're both like the Knights of the Round attacking the French castle. Just run away already. Both of you.
Hmmm, you're right. Thanks Tri. :)
|
|
And so when the rules for diplomacy only say it can change the attitude, and the attitude has the clear definitions I provided...or is that also "fluff".
Following your logic, you would never do any ability checks, as the description of what they govern is "fluff".
No. Ability checks are made when they are called for. Strength checks to open doors, for example. Strait Charisma checks are used as an opposed test of wills, and can be found used in spells and effects such as charm person and planar binding.
So you are arbitrary applying where ability scores apply based on what exactly? I agree 100% you can use a strength check to open doors. Saying "Ability checks are made when they are called for" is something we can both agree on. You have just decided Charisma checks don't apply to the things that are listed that they apply to.
Your example made my point better than I could have. You showed that in your game you pick whatever you have the highest likelihood of succeeding on rather than what would actually govern what you were doing. The rules you showed above even say "Diplomacy is generally ineffective in combat and against creatures that intend to harm you or your allies in the immediate future", so unless the Templars were selling Templar Scout cookies...
I posted that for entertainment purposes. I've said this thrice. I have a variety of house rules in my games. Sometimes I will provide excerpts from my games for entertainment purposes, but I will note that it is not part of the official discussion, so drop it.
You posted it as an example of how you think the rule works. Now that you've been called on it, you are back pedaling. Is that or is that not how you played that scenario. And if so, will you admit it was very, very house ruled.
I love how you say to cite the rule, and when I cite the rule for what Charisma governs your response is "that's fluff" while you citing 3rd party feats and examples of skill uses that go WAY off book.
You didn't cite a rule. You cited a description of an ability, which is no more the rules than the description for the Rogue is a rule. A rule is something that has a tangible mechanical effect.I said that you could increase your carrying capacity via a feat, or a trait. I gave an example. There have been similar feats in Dragon Magazine, the Planar Handbook, and so forth. I gave an example of something that could hypothetically alter your carrying capacity without altering your strength.
You are willing to cite hypothetical feats, but anything that doesn't go along with your argument is "fluff" or in the case of the example you gave "for entertainment purposes...pay no attention to the fact that I said this is from my game, or the man behind the curtain...."
I've cited the charisma rules from the SRD as to what the ability governs, and you declared them "fluff". I cited the attitude adjustment chart for diplomacy which described what "attitude" entails, and you gracefully avoided comment on that.
You are more interested in being right than being accurate. TriMegaZero's right, I'm going to turn my attention to posters who actually want to discuss the rule.
Suddenly I understand with my Successful Knowledge (Local) check! Large Humanoid (Giant) with regeneration and rend. It explains it all.
|
|
Dude. You're both like the Knights of the Round attacking the French castle. Just run away already. Both of you.
But he said my mother was a hamster. This aggression cannot stand, man.
I know you disagree with me, but I would think you would concede the example he gave pretty much made my point.
And as to diplomacy, what are your thoughts on the description of what initial attitude means in game terms. That was how we have always played, specifically it applies to diplomatic negotiations in the same way you would negotiate treaties between kingdoms. Friendship, flirtations, etc...was circumstance with a little charisma mixed in if the roleplay wasn't clear.
|
I know you disagree with me, but I would think you would concede the example he gave pretty much made my point.
I can't concede or deny that, since I stopped really reading you guys somewhere on the previous page. :)
And as to diplomacy, what are your thoughts on the description of what initial attitude means in game terms. That was how we have always played, specifically it applies to diplomatic negotiations in the same way you would negotiate treaties between kingdoms. Friendship, flirtations, etc...was circumstance with a little charisma mixed in if the roleplay wasn't clear.
Hmm. I honestly have always based initial attitude on the situation in which the characters meet, with adjustments based on how much they know about the party. Charisma never really comes into play. Any changes to that are usually through roleplay/social skill checks regardless of what kind of social interaction it is. I feel like I've used a straight Charisma check before, but not in any such situation.
|
|
I know you disagree with me, but I would think you would concede the example he gave pretty much made my point.I can't concede or deny that, since I stopped really reading you guys somewhere on the previous page. :)
And as to diplomacy, what are your thoughts on the description of what initial attitude means in game terms. That was how we have always played, specifically it applies to diplomatic negotiations in the same way you would negotiate treaties between kingdoms. Friendship, flirtations, etc...was circumstance with a little charisma mixed in if the roleplay wasn't clear.Hmm. I honestly have always based initial attitude on the situation in which the characters meet, with adjustments based on how much they know about the party. Charisma never really comes into play. Any changes to that are usually through roleplay/social skill checks regardless of what kind of social interaction it is. I feel like I've used a straight Charisma check before, but not in any such situation.
It is very, very rarely a roll in my games.
Like you said, circumstances dictate first, with my argument being tie going to the pretty, if charisma is the governing ability.
For example, when approaching the party for the first time, an NPC may assume the high charisma character is the leader of the group, and approach them directly. Or if two people may be interested in flirting with the barmaid, and they will have to roll a charisma check to see who she is interested in talking to first (rarely comes up in our games, as we are too old with too many wives playing to even do that kind of stuff in the world of illusion). Basically where the circumstances are a tie, charisma can be a tie breaker.
If someone has a low charisma, I ask them how it manifests and that gets put into the game. Same with high charisma and other ability scores that manifest like a somewhat clumsy low dex character who can't dance and knocks stuff over or a really naive low wisdom character who never gets the joke and always takes things literally.
It is up to the player who they make, but if they decide to take a penalty score in an area, it comes up sometimes in the course of roll playing. It isn't impossible to over come, like I said if the ugly, gruff guy saves a puppy, people like him. But he's still and ugly gruff guy.
It got me 3 days to read through it all. But I'm determined. I must agree a little bit more with Ciratose, of course I'm much more of a Role player than a Roll player, so I think everything on the sheet must have an external non rolled effect, at least sometimes.
And reactions adjustment was a GREAT mechanic, that I have no idea why they tossed it. If it came back, it would make things much easier for those of us that don't like the fact that people dump charisma. And yes, if I would GM to someone who would dump charisma that much i would go after them, HARD, cause it's a stat like any other, and it deserves respect, like any other.
.
..
...
....
.....
And yes, if I would GM to someone who would dump charisma that much i would go after them, HARD, cause it's a stat like any other, and it deserves respect, like any other.
THEY MAY TAKE OUR LIVES
(maybe)
BUT THEY WILL NEVER, EVER, EVER EVER EVER, TAKE OUR..
-.o Word.
Glad to see you posting Mr. Facist!
What side of the world are you on?
I've been participating in a thread about evocation, and all I can think of is your post about FIREBALL!
.
..
...
....
.....
Glad to see you posting Mr. Facist!
What side of the world are you on?
I've been participating in a thread about evocation, and all I can think of is your post about FIREBALL!
*flying-high fives The Fergster*
Hail! I am on the rainy side. The cold, wet & grey rainy side.
*hunts down evocation thread*
.
..
...
....
.....And yes, if I would GM to someone who would dump charisma that much i would go after them, HARD, cause it's a stat like any other, and it deserves respect, like any other.
THEY MAY TAKE OUR LIVES
(maybe)
BUT THEY WILL NEVER, EVER, EVER EVER EVER, TAKE OUR..
-.o Word.
Hehehehe.
|
|
Like you said, circumstances dictate first, with my argument being tie going to the pretty, if charisma is the governing ability.
Well, it could be thanks to my higher power level of gaming that it never comes into play for me. Since my characters never have a stat below 10, even Cha, I leave it to the roleplay. The good thing about these threads is that I plan on paying a little more attention to Cha scores in my future games, even if I don't act on it much.
Edit: Thinking about it, I recall I based my roleplay of the skulks in Shackled City off their low Cha. Basically played them as not having much concept of individuality, referring to 'this one' instead of 'me'.
hehehe
Most gamers have a low charisma ourselves. Just being us IS "playing in character" using CHA as a stat dump :D
And Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution generally. Most would like to believe it is because they put all their points in Intelligence. Hmm.