Diplomacy mechanically does three things: alters npc attitudes, lets you make requests of npcs, and allows you to gather information. Regardless of the fluff that is all it does. By the same token all charisma does mechanically is alter charisma stat checks and charisma based skill rolls. All the rest is fluff and role play.
- Can someone use diplomacy to replace charisma... not mechanically. They can fluff it however they think fits best, but if the game master calls for a charisma check then 10 ranks of diplomacy aren't going to help. However diplomacy CAN make others treat you better. This is the attitude adjusting part of that skill. Someone who defines his diplomacy ranks as charm can turn his charm way up with but a minute of interaction. Like the skill says this affects one target and can change up or down the attitude of the target. But if you are in the company of others they won't be affected unless you spend more time one by one charming them in turn.
- Can charisma change how others react to you... not mechanically. If a game master uses a stat check in some situations it can, but that's all role play. Role play is good, but as we have seen everyone does things a little differently. There is no set right or wrong way to role play. Some ways are better than others and as such get supported by consensus. But if everyone is having fun then even the bad ways work.
The biggest issue of contention seems to be treating fluff as if it were mechanical and expecting others to do the same. If you want to get that indifferent orcish guard to let you pass then roll diplomacy. I don't care if you have an 18 charisma and defined it by saying you have all the charm of a succubus... the orc won't care until your dice hit the table. On the flip side if the party were in a mercenary camp role playing out the encounter with the npcs, then you probably won't roll diplomacy even once. At that point it is pure role playing the traits you gave yourself good or bad and THEN having the "charm of a succubus" is suddenly far more useful than the fellow player who has "no one takes seriously".
|
I was specifically asking about BF's statement of actively using Cha-based skills.Time requirements for the skill for one thing.So you're saying the only time Diplomacy cannot be used is when it wouldn't work anyway?
E.G. the orc barbarian swinging an axe at you.
Do you always give strangers a full uninterrupted minute before you move on to someone who seems interesting?
|
My observation is this: I've never seen a character dump Charisma and then heavily invest in social skills. It is theoretically possible, but I've never seen it happen and would bet it is rare. If you really cared about the social skills, you wouldn't have dumped Charisma in the first place.
My character had to do it. His noble officier background made it as naturally not charismatic and pretty much with a broom in the ass, cha 7 like. Then, character development and sheer necessity made him reconsider his comportment and invest in talky skills. Plus, since we had a lot of meetings with kings, emperors and important people, the knowledge = nobility ranks and 13 Int gave me an indeniable advantage as the court's party face.
It was as much for roleplaying than because it was either the CN 5 Int/5 Wis/13 Cha half-ogre barbarian, the N magus damphir girl wearing a smoked glass mask not be be blinded in countries where what comes from evil is globally -seen- as evil, or the crazy LE/LG vivisectionist-master chymist (which is freaking crazy and unpredictable) to do the talk. These were the three with more charisma or intelligence than me.So yes, it can happen. I guess it's a question of DM and player - I know that even with a low stat, I would not have fun if I didn't roleplay a lot. So when I drop a stat, I'm ready to assume the consequences and "pay" later to compensate. (And I did pay a lot of times from being of a low charisma ; still my DM did well not to make it too frustrating, and each time it opened new possibilities.)
.
..
...
....
.....
TOZ: An inability to use the charisma-dependent skill.
Being unable to communicate/gesticulate/postulate - interact with others, either due to lack of awareness or inability to act. (For example - being oblivious to the existence of an other/s and/or asleep.)
So yes - when you can't use the Diplomacy skill you cannot enjoy the effects of using the Diplomacy skill.
::
SOD: Regarding the design of the table:
It would depend on how you map out the bonuses with regards to charisma scores.
Directly answering your question:
The higher you 'go up in the table' the greater your influence/reaction modifier.
When you have a strength of 300 you can carry more than a strength of 200. Whether you need that much strength would depend on your assessment of your needs.
After a while it would, to my mind, be simply a race against others who are seeking to carry as much as possible - assuming you've deemed that 'carrying as much as possible' is a worth while race to participate in.
A real world example would be the concept of the 'arms race'. Yes all parties can wipe out all life but WHO CAN WIPE OUT THE MOST LIFE HUH!?!
::
I would say it's the same for when a strength 38 character meets a strength 30 character in a battle of carrying capacity. Both carry vast amounts but, between them, one carries the most - those possessing the carrying capacity of mere mortals can fight it out after the giants of carrying capacity have battled and decided who can carry the most.
Seemingly, the charisma 38 character would have a higher modifier than the charisma 32 character so when the two are being considered the charisma 38 character would have the advantage.
The charisma 18 character would become a factor after the two charisma scores of the two charisma overlords have played their part.
::
When two beings with god-like strength attempt a carrying competition, the being with the highest god-like strength wins.
So, seemingly, when meeting beings of god-like charisma you would initially react the strongest/greatest/bestusessss to the being with the highest god-like charisma.
Circumstances being equally favourable to all beings.
::
Do you always give strangers a full uninterrupted minute before you move on to someone who seems interesting?Yes, I do.
I sure as heck don't. But then, if they are trying to actively diplomacy me, they won't let me leave or will follow me and unless they chase me out of the area (unlikely), if they roll high enough, I just might stay.
Unless of course, I'm brutish and there charisma is so low that their attempt to pester me disturb me so I punch them in the face. I think that would have to be a diplomacy check though.
Do you always give strangers a full uninterrupted minute before you move on to someone who seems interesting?Yes, I do.
You are seemingly a more decent human!
When you are not foiling my fist shaking..
There was an interesting study on the juries - long story short, the shambling ape man was more likely to be deemed guilty than the pretty elf.
This was based purely on a photo of the two participants.
Granted this is not a conclusive assertion of reality but rather an indication that the majority of people form opinions within moments of perceiving someone.
Whether this opinion is upheld or modified would, to my mind, depend on how the other actively engages the perceiver and whether or not the perceiver gives them the opportunity to do so.
.
..
...
....
.....TOZ: An inability to use the charisma-dependent skill.
Being unable to communicate/gesticulate/postulate - interact with others, either due to lack of awareness or inability to act. (For example - being oblivious to the existence of an other/s and/or asleep.)
So yes - when you can't use the Diplomacy skill you cannot enjoy the effects of using the Diplomacy skill.
::
SOD: Regarding the design of the table:
It would depend on how you map out the bonuses with regards to charisma scores.
Directly answering your question:
The higher you 'go up in the table' the greater your influence/reaction modifier.
** spoiler omitted **...
There are only about 5 starting attitudes an npc can have, more realistically a CHA 14 would initiate the same reaction as an 18 in order to span it out across possible ability scores so that itself is another issue.
About the strength thing, There is always reason to carry more if you can. The ability to lift a castle wall will forever be better then being able to lift half a castle wall (turns out most castle build full walls, go figure). The more strength you have the larger the obstacle that no longer becomes an obstacle.
Charisma on the other hand, investing into a 34 just means you will be considered well liked, just like the guy with CHA 22 (because the chart ends there). No noticeable difference.
About the strength thing, There is always reason to carry more if you can. The ability to lift a castle wall will forever be better then being able to lift half a castle wall (turns out most castle build full walls, go figure). The more strength you have the larger the obstacle that no longer becomes an obstacle.
Charisma on the other hand, investing into a 34 just means you will be considered well liked, just like the guy with CHA 22 (because the chart ends there). No noticeable difference.
I agree - if you deem carrying capacity important then carrying more will be more important to you.
Regarding charisma - you could argue that those with the highest charisma score could passively influence those with the highest carrying capacity the greatest.
If two beings of god-like charisma prioritised carrying capacity and were both vying for the attention of such strength-blessed beings then it would be advantageous to have the higher charisma score.
::
As you imply, the table/system, as it stands, would require work to create a mechanic that rewarded X charisma versus Y charisma equally, through out the table's progression.
As it stands, with our lot, we do not use any such table - we simply assign reactions based on charisma scores, when such situations occur.
::
BATH TIME!
You give a guy asking for change a full minute? Uninteruoted?
Do you always give strangers a full uninterrupted minute before you move on to someone who seems interesting?Yes, I do.
Whens the last time they had a full minute of things to say before waiting for you to respond? They aren't even attempting a diplomacy check, not to mention even though most homeless people have abysmal cha people still give them the change.
About the strength thing, There is always reason to carry more if you can. The ability to lift a castle wall will forever be better then being able to lift half a castle wall (turns out most castle build full walls, go figure). The more strength you have the larger the obstacle that no longer becomes an obstacle.
Charisma on the other hand, investing into a 34 just means you will be considered well liked, just like the guy with CHA 22 (because the chart ends there). No noticeable difference.
I agree - if you deem carrying capacity important then carrying more will be more important to you.
Regarding charisma - you could argue that those with the highest charisma score could passively influence those with the highest carrying capacity the greatest.
If two beings of god-like charisma prioritised carrying capacity and were both vying for the attention of such strength-blessed beings then it would be advantageous to have the higher charisma score.
However, now I feel we're entering active skill use - an active attempt to influence others would be derived from charisma-based skill checks.
::
As you imply, the table/system, as it stands, would require work to create a mechanic that rewarded X charisma versus Y charisma equally, through out the table's progression.
As it stands, with our lot, we do not use any such table - we simply assign reactions based on charisma scores, when such situations occur.
::
BATH TIME!
I agree - if you deem carrying capacity important then carrying more will be more important to you.
Regarding charisma - you could argue that those with the highest charisma score could passively influence those with the highest carrying capacity the greatest.
If two beings of god-like charisma prioritised carrying capacity and were both vying for the attention of such strength-blessed beings then it would be advantageous to have the higher charisma score.
::
As you imply, the table/system, as it stands, would require work to create a mechanic that rewarded X charisma versus Y charisma equally, through out the table's progression.
As it stands, with our lot, we do not use any such table - we simply assign reactions based on charisma scores, when such situations occur.
::
BATH TIME!
In theory I get what your trying to do, until someone comes up with a workable table I am going to deem it wishful thinking. :)
In theory I get what your trying to do, until someone comes up with a workable table I am going to deem it wishful thinking. :)
Oh yes!
The theory is oh so much easier than the practice!
Wish wish wish...
I figured everyone needed a laugh. ^.^
I was specifically asking about BF's statement of actively using Cha-based skills.
Well, I assumed you were just asking an OT question. Since nobody has said you can't use your skills, that I've seen (well, people have said OTHER people said it, but they didn't).
The posts directly above your question were discussing what could go into initial impressions, and nobody there said 'You can't use your skills after the initial impressions are made', unless I missed it.
Action
Influence Attitude: Using Diplomacy to influence a creature’s attitude takes 1 minute of continuous interaction.
Make Request: Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request.
Interaction. And interaction is not defined to "1 minute spiel where you yap". It is from when we are aware of each other, and interact at any degree. Be it verbally or no. Sure, you can actively shut people out, like beggars on the street, but consider this for a thought: YOU are being unfriendly/hostile. Begging is a request. Requests can take 1 round. If your initial response is favorable/indifferent, you might give money. Anyone with the starting attitude of Unfriendly (most people with regards to beggars) are not subject to requests.
So you can actively ignore someone, but I would still say that if someone have interacted for a minute, they get to roll. And most likely, they fail the DC20/25+cha to make you indifferent or better, where they can make requests.
I am pretty sure it is:"Dwarf has Cha of 5, needs to roll 18 if he has no ranks in diplomacy."
and
"Dwarf has Cha of 16, needs to roll a 12 if he has no ranks in diplomacy."
Asking politely is a diplomacy check, however you turn it.
Nope, it can't be. It takes 3 seconds to say 'Help please?'. Using diplomacy takes 1 minute. Ergo, you can NEVER use diplomacy to ask a single question of a complete stranger.
You could, if you had time, approach and begin chatting with them, use diplomacy, and then ask for help. Two completely different things.
EDIT : Forgot about the 'Make a request' part of Diplomacy, so see below for that response. The above applies to changing attitude only.
Action
Influence Attitude: Using Diplomacy to influence a creature’s attitude takes 1 minute of continuous interaction.
Make Request: Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request.
Interaction. And interaction is not defined to "1 minute spiel where you yap". It is from when we are aware of each other, and interact at any degree. Be it verbally or no. Sure, you can actively shut people out, like beggars on the street, but consider this for a thought: YOU are being unfriendly/hostile. Begging is a request. Requests can take 1 round. If your initial response is favorable/indifferent, you might give money. Anyone with the starting attitude of Unfriendly (most people with regards to beggars) are not subject to requests.
So you can actively ignore someone, but I would still say that if someone have interacted for a minute, they get to roll. And most likely, they fail the DC20/25+cha to make you indifferent or better, where they can make requests.
So, in my examples above, which were strictly GM determining initial reaction, the CHA went into it. THEN the dwarf makes his diplomacy check to see if his request is honored. If you remove the request from my examples of initial response, it really doesn't make a difference, either way, the dwarf makes his diplomacy check AFTER initial attitude is determined, not before.
I removed some posts. Cool down.
|
|
Diplomacy mechanically does three things: alters npc attitudes, lets you make requests of npcs, and allows you to gather information. Regardless of the fluff that is all it does. By the same token all charisma does mechanically is alter charisma stat checks and charisma based skill rolls. All the rest is fluff and role play.
- Can someone use diplomacy to replace charisma... not mechanically. They can fluff it however they think fits best, but if the game master calls for a charisma check then 10 ranks of diplomacy aren't going to help. However diplomacy CAN make others treat you better. This is the attitude adjusting part of that skill. Someone who defines his diplomacy ranks as charm can turn his charm way up with but a minute of interaction. Like the skill says this affects one target and can change up or down the attitude of the target. But if you are in the company of others they won't be affected unless you spend more time one by one charming them in turn.
- Can charisma change how others react to you... not mechanically. If a game master uses a stat check in some situations it can, but that's all role play. Role play is good, but as we have seen everyone does things a little differently. There is no set right or wrong way to role play. Some ways are better than others and as such get supported by consensus. But if everyone is having fun then even the bad ways work.
The biggest issue of contention seems to be treating fluff as if it were mechanical and expecting others to do the same. If you want to get that indifferent orcish guard to let you pass then roll diplomacy. I don't care if you have an 18 charisma and defined it by saying you have all the charm of a succubus... the orc won't care until your dice hit the table. On the flip side if the party were in a mercenary camp role playing out the encounter with the npcs, then you probably won't roll diplomacy even once. At that point it is pure role playing the traits you gave yourself good or bad and THEN having the "charm of a succubus" is...
See I told you we agreed.
So, in my examples above, which were strictly GM determining initial reaction, the CHA went into it. THEN the dwarf makes his diplomacy check to see if his request is honored. If you remove the request from my examples of initial response, it really doesn't make a difference, either way, the dwarf makes his diplomacy check AFTER initial attitude is determined, not before.Action
Influence Attitude: Using Diplomacy to influence a creature’s attitude takes 1 minute of continuous interaction.
Make Request: Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request.
Interaction. And interaction is not defined to "1 minute spiel where you yap". It is from when we are aware of each other, and interact at any degree. Be it verbally or no. Sure, you can actively shut people out, like beggars on the street, but consider this for a thought: YOU are being unfriendly/hostile. Begging is a request. Requests can take 1 round. If your initial response is favorable/indifferent, you might give money. Anyone with the starting attitude of Unfriendly (most people with regards to beggars) are not subject to requests.
So you can actively ignore someone, but I would still say that if someone have interacted for a minute, they get to roll. And most likely, they fail the DC20/25+cha to make you indifferent or better, where they can make requests.
Sure, but if you make cha have that big an impact before skills come into the equation, you bar the Cha5 from being able to even make requests. He will have to defer to intimidate "If you don't help me, I am gonna be sure the guard knows who let my friend bleed out on the floor." in order to be able to save his buddy.
Also, Cha 5 is -3. If you rule that Cha5 also makes indifferent into unfriendly, it is effectively a -8 (5 higher DC to beat to do anything).
So does cha 1-4 automatically register as hostile? Attack on sight! Hes funny lookin and doesnt mind his manners!
You give a guy asking for change a full minute? Uninteruoted?
Often more than a full minute, in my case -- the guy asking for change is still a person, isn't he? And TOZ is on the whole a much nicer person than I am. Your sort-of-calling-him-a-liar isn't too cool.
Pretty much. Why is it that no one understands the mechanical ramifications, or how it's really stupid to create extra penalties when the penalty is already taken into account?
Likewise, I love how everyone in their worlds is apparently so amazingly erratic in the head that they make judgments about people so powerful that they are equivalent to the penalty or bonus of a 1 or 20 Charisma (unfriendly is +5 to the DC, friendly is -5 to the DC, which is equivalent to a whole 10 points of Charisma difference).
Also, Cha 5 is -3. If you rule that Cha5 also makes indifferent into unfriendly, it is effectively a -8 (5 higher DC to beat to do anything).
If you look up there again, the initial attitude was unfriendly, less unfriendly, and then dipped it's toe into indifferent before the CHA sent it back into unfriendly. You consider someone who started off as unfriendly, almost went to indifferent based on the dwarf helping someone the person doesn't know, and then resettled into unfriendly to be a huge stretch? You did read the little comments right?
|
|
You give a guy asking for change a full minute? Uninteruoted?Often more than a full minute, in my case -- the guy asking for change is still a person, isn't he? And TOZ is on the whole a much nicer person than I am. Your sort-of-calling-him-a-liar isn't too cool.
I am saying that if a diplomacy roll to change initial attitude takes a full minute, you need to be able to get someone to talk to you for a full minute.
And most people don't want to talk to people who they are unfriendly toward for a full minute, unless you can come up with a reason they might want to...or unless that person seems really interesting. Maybe if the person has a certain personal magnetism, is really attractive, or just seems like the kind of guy people would follow...
Also, escalating disbelief to calling someone a liar...I know you don't agree with me, but don't bait an empty hook.
|
|
Action
Influence Attitude: Using Diplomacy to influence a creature’s attitude takes 1 minute of continuous interaction.
Make Request: Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request.
Interaction. And interaction is not defined to "1 minute spiel where you yap". It is from when we are aware of each other, and interact at any degree. Be it verbally or no. Sure, you can actively shut people out, like beggars on the street, but consider this for a thought: YOU are being unfriendly/hostile. Begging is a request. Requests can take 1 round. If your initial response is favorable/indifferent, you might give money. Anyone with the starting attitude of Unfriendly (most people with regards to beggars) are not subject to requests.
So you can actively ignore someone, but I would still say that if someone have interacted for a minute, they get to roll. And most likely, they fail the DC20/25+cha to make you indifferent or better, where they can make requests.
Me walking through mall:
Uncharismatic guy
Hello sir, might I interest you in a set of steak knives.
Me keeps on walking:
Cute Charismatic Girl
Hello sir, might I
Me: You had me at hello.
Yes this is oversimplified, and actually I'm married so I wouldn't stop either way.
But that is also part of the point.
You don't know my motivations, you don't know if I am in a hurry, if I am a secret agent for the BBEG, if I just bought steak knives and don't need any more....
And maybe I don't want to interact with you for a full minute so you can tell me about why I should overlook whatever makes you have a 5 charisma, specifically because I am a very shallow NPC and I would rather talk to your 18 charisma friend than talk to you for a minute and find out how polite you are. Once you do get me to talk to you, sure you can change my attitude...for 1d4 hours...
You don't know if the NPC would want to talk to you or not, or if the NPC will approach you before you can approach them, or if they will approach someone else in the party before they approach you.
In game, it is generally an NPC looking at the options with Charisma being a factor considered. Most times you will be able to get to a position where you can make a diplomacy role. But if you are uncharismatic you are at a disadvantage to get the attention of the NPC relative to someone with a high charisma.
Also, escalating disbelief to calling someone a liar...I know you don't agree with me, but don't bait an empty hook.
Q: "Do you do X?"
A: "Yes."Q: "Really?"
A: "Yes, really."
Q: "C'mon! Not really! Right?"
Please. A guy tells you he does X. How many times does he have to answer to "disbelief" before it becomes apparent that you're all all but claiming flat-out that he doesn't?
So does cha 1-4 automatically register as hostile? Attack on sight! Hes funny lookin and doesnt mind his manners!Strawman 2, electric boogaloo?
The Strawman Fights Back?
I know it is easier to create a scenario and then attack it, but no one is saying what you are saying, except for you.
So cha 5 is automatically unfriendly before circumstance modifiers, for example look at mdt's posts and the suggestion that charisma influences starting attitude.
For this to be true then when you reach the low point on CHA (1-4) you reach the low point on the starting attitude scale (hostile)
Absolutely not a strawman, you just want to ignore it because it ruins the whole CHA 5-7 causes unfriendly idea. Calling strawman is often times the more strawman argument if you don't back it up.
So does cha 1-4 automatically register as hostile? Attack on sight! Hes funny lookin and doesnt mind his manners!Strawman 2, electric boogaloo?
The Strawman Fights Back?
I know it is easier to create a scenario and then attack it, but no one is saying what you are saying, except for you.
So cha 5 is automatically unfriendly before circumstance modifiers, for example look at mdt's posts and the suggestion that charisma influences starting attitude.
For this to be true then when you reach the low point on CHA (1-4) you reach the low point on the starting attitude scale (hostile)
Absolutely not a strawman, you just want to ignore it because it ruins the whole CHA 5-7 causes unfriendly idea. Calling strawman is often times the more strawman argument if you don't back it up.
Perfect, thank you Shadow. This is the perfect example of the BS you and those on your side have spewed in this thread. You pick one bit of information in a post, and then say that was the entirety of the post. You completely ignore EVERYTHING in the post, and pick just the bits you want and then claim you are right because your strawman version of what was posted is right. Let's look at my post and break it down for everyone else (I know you are beyond hope).
This plus circumstancial things.Example
NPC innkeeper is an elf that dislikes dwarves.
Dwarf is filthy from the road.
Dwarf is supporting a wounded human as they stumble into the inn.
Dwarf looks up tiredly. "Room please? And a healer?"Initial Reaction :
Dwarf : Unfriendly
Dirty Dwarf : More Unfriendly, not hostile
Dwarf is helping wounded person : Less Unfriendly (Assumes Good elf)
Dwarf asks for help politely : Indifferent
Dwarf has a CHA of 5 : UnfriendlyInitial Reaction :
Dwarf : Unfriendly
Dirty Dwarf : More Unfriendly, not hostile
Dwarf is helping wounded person : Less Unfriendly (Assumes Good elf)
Dwarf asks for help politely : Indifferent
Dwarf has a CHA of 16 : Mildly Helpful
So let's break down the setup. Elf Innkeeper dislikes dwarves. A dirty dwarf comes into her inn. However, he's helping a wounded human and the elf is good aligned. The only variable is the Dwarf's charisma.
In both situations, the elf starts out Unfriendly (it's a dwarf, I hate dwarves). He's dirty (not helping). However, he's helping a wounded man (Ok, less unfriendly now, seems maybe he's an ok sort). Says 'Help please', ok, worded the request nicely, maybe he's not too bad, maybe, but I still don't like dwarves.
CHA 5 : Dwarf is unlikeable. Blech, No, my first gut reaction was right, he's just another bleedin dwarf, but I guess I'll put up with him if he's got gold and cleans up the blood (back to unfriendly). "You can put him in the corner, the doc's office is houses down, and two blocks over. You should hurry."
CHA 16 : Dwarf is likeable. Well, maybe he's one of the good ones, and that guy looks hurt. "Yeah, put him in the room under the stairs, I'll send a girl to get the doctor."
And now, Shadow's interpretation of that :
So cha 5 is automatically unfriendly before circumstance modifiers, for example look at mdt's posts and the suggestion that charisma influences starting attitude.
EDIT :
Just to make it 100% clear so no one can wriggle out of it. The Elf starts off unfriendly because she hates dwarfs. The poor CHA dwarf doesn't get unfriendly because he's got a low cha, it's because his low charisma wipes out any benefit of the doubt she would have given getting out of that unfriendly state. The high cha dwarf got props for both the situation and his high cha. Yet, it's mangled and misrepresented as 'Oh, MDT says you start off hostile because the dwarf has a 5 cha! So you is all wrong!'.
|
|
So does cha 1-4 automatically register as hostile? Attack on sight! Hes funny lookin and doesnt mind his manners!Strawman 2, electric boogaloo?
The Strawman Fights Back?
I know it is easier to create a scenario and then attack it, but no one is saying what you are saying, except for you.
So cha 5 is automatically unfriendly before circumstance modifiers, for example look at mdt's posts and the suggestion that charisma influences starting attitude.
For this to be true then when you reach the low point on CHA (1-4) you reach the low point on the starting attitude scale (hostile)
Absolutely not a strawman, you just want to ignore it because it ruins the whole CHA 5-7 causes unfriendly idea. Calling strawman is often times the more strawman argument if you don't back it up.
No one is saying 5-7 causes unfriendly but you.
It is the the strawman you created for us to have to fight.
What we are saying is 5-7 charisma is significantly lower than a normal person, and COULD lead people to be unfriendly toward them depending on all circumstances.
If you would like to argue someone having a -3 to -4 charisma should not make it more likely people may be unfriendly, then you would be discussing what we are saying.
If you want to keep saying we are saying something we are not, and then saying what you are saying we are saying is wrong...well that is the definition of a strawman.
Just to make it clear:
A high Charisma does not make you more likable and a low Charisma does not make you less likable. Your Charisma has an impact on how people react to you, but your likability is based on your character's actions.
Charlie Sheen is a very charismatic person. Is he likable? Is he unlikable? That's going to depend on the non-Charlie Sheen person.
A likable person with a low charisma would be someone like Danny in Unleashed. He is very likable and approachable but has a low Charisma. Someone with a high Charisma that is not likable would be someone like Casanova Frankenstein in Mystery Men.
Charisma should not determine if someone likes you. That's what role playing your character does. Even someone who is Helpful may not like you. If someone like JD from Heathers uses his Diplomacy to convince you to kill two jocks and then make it look like a lovers' suicide, you don't have to like him but he still managed to make your attitude Helpful. Helpful does not mean likable.
Now for Diplomacy, it does not require 1 minute to use. That's influencing someone to change their attitude. Making requests only takes 1 round and the person you are talking to needs to be at least Indifferent. I'll use MDT's example (but I'm putting the elf at Indifferent because in my inn he's a merchant first), the DC is 15+Elf's Charisma Modifier (generic elf is +0). The dwarf made a simple request and simple directions so the DC is 15. The elf is good aligned (mdt said so) so you can reduce the DC by 2 (circumstances). The dwarf also is going to pay (and probably doesn't have time to negotiate prices with the elf) so I would reduce the DC by another 2 (the reason I would reduce it is because it would favor the merchant to have more income). This brings the DC to 11. If the human can speak at all, he can try to Aid Another to give the dwarf a +2 bonus. This would essentially bring the DC to 9. Even the dwarf with a Charisma of 5 has a 45% chance of getting help. The dwarf with a 16 Charisma has a 75% chance of getting the help he's asking for.
If the dwarf does have one minute, he can try to adjust the elf's attitude by at least one step. If he can make the elf at least Friendly, his odds of getting help are now increased by 10 points (55% and 85% respectively).
You'll notice that the dwarf's likability never comes into play.
Most GMs I know won't go this far but it is all right there for those who want to use it.
|
There was an interesting study on the juries - long story short, the shambling ape man was more likely to be deemed guilty than the pretty elf.
This was based purely on a photo of the two participants.
Granted this is not a conclusive assertion of reality but rather an indication that the majority of people form opinions within moments of perceiving someone.
Whether this opinion is upheld or modified would, to my mind, depend on how the other actively engages the perceiver and whether or not the perceiver gives them the opportunity to do so.
And yet none of this deals with their Charisma, but instead springs from the personal views of the viewer and societal stereotypes of appearance. Which is why lawyers have their clients dress in fine suits with well groomed hair.
|
|
Just to make it 100% clear so no one can wriggle out of it. The Elf starts off unfriendly because she hates dwarfs. The poor CHA dwarf doesn't get unfriendly because he's got a low cha, it's because his low charisma wipes out any benefit of the doubt she would have given getting out of that unfriendly state. The high cha dwarf got props for both the situation and his high cha. Yet, it's mangled and misrepresented as 'Oh, MDT says you start off hostile because the dwarf has a 5 cha! So you is all wrong!'.
So Charisma doesn't affect initial impressions before a skill check is rolled?
Dwarf asks for help politely : Indifferent
Dwarf has a CHA of 5 : Unfriendly
He went from indifferent (where he would theoretically start before any circumstance modifiers) and moved to unfriendly purely due to charisma.
So logic dictates that a CHA of 5 would drop your starting attitude to unfriendly before circumstance modifiers.
Just to make it 100% clear so no one can wriggle out of it. The Elf starts off unfriendly because she hates dwarfs. The poor CHA dwarf doesn't get unfriendly because he's got a low cha, it's because his low charisma wipes out any benefit of the doubt she would have given getting out of that unfriendly state. The high cha dwarf got props for both the situation and his high cha. Yet, it's mangled and misrepresented as 'Oh, MDT says you start off hostile because the dwarf has a 5 cha! So you is all wrong!'.So Charisma doesn't affect initial impressions before a skill check is rolled?
*sigh* ToZ? Are you seriously trolling me, or did you just fail your reading check? The CHA affected the initial impression, please reread what you quoted. It just wasn't the only thing that was taken into account.
Dwarf asks for help politely : Indifferent
Dwarf has a CHA of 5 : UnfriendlyHe went from indifferent (where he would theoretically start before any circumstance modifiers) and moved to unfriendly purely due to charisma.
So logic dictates that a CHA of 5 would drop your starting attitude to unfriendly before circumstance modifiers.
Wrong, and you know it.
If the Elf had started out at indifferent, then the charisma may or may not have affected them to unfriendly. It all depends on how close to unfriendly they were to start with. In the example I gave, it was obvious that the elf was predisposed to dislike the dwarf, so anything that was negative was given more weight.
If the elf had started out with a fetish for dwarves instead, then the low cha might have sent it down to indifferent. I have a fetish for redheads, that doesn't mean that because a 400 lb redhead comes in the room I'm going to be attracted to them. It means that if I had a choice between a cha 10 redhead and a charisma 14 brunette I'm more likely to choose the redhead anyway. On the other hand, a 14 brunette vs a 5 redhead... no contest, brunette all the way (especially if they're dressed goth).
Of course, this is all in the original post, but you are just wanting to argue and pretend to be obtuse, because you don't want to admit you are cherry picking which words you read in a post and then twisting them as much as you can to get a rise out of people. I'm going to try a new tact though, I'm going to be polite and answer your questions as if you really meant them and were really curious.
|
|
Wrong, and you know it.If the Elf had started out at indifferent, then the charisma may or may not have affected them to unfriendly. It all depends on how close to unfriendly they were to start with. In the example I gave, it was obvious that the elf was predisposed to dislike the dwarf, so anything that was negative was given more weight.
So if the NPC is likely to change his starting attitude, the Cha score can change it. Thus, a negative score may change the attitude down, while a positive score may change it up.
Which translates to 'negative Cha may add 5 to the DC while positive Cha may subtract 5 from the DC'. Which increases the penalty/bonus they already get.
Dwarf asks for help politely : Indifferent
Dwarf has a CHA of 5 : UnfriendlyHe went from indifferent (where he would theoretically start before any circumstance modifiers) and moved to unfriendly purely due to charisma.
So logic dictates that a CHA of 5 would drop your starting attitude to unfriendly before circumstance modifiers.
Wrong, and you know it.
If the Elf had started out at indifferent, then the charisma may or may not have affected them to unfriendly. It all depends on how close to unfriendly they were to start with. In the example I gave, it was obvious that the elf was predisposed to dislike the dwarf, so anything that was negative was given more weight.
If the elf had started out with a fetish for dwarves instead, then the low cha might have sent it down to indifferent. I have a fetish for redheads, that doesn't mean that because a 400 lb redhead comes in the room I'm going to be attracted to them. It means that if I had a choice between a cha 10 redhead and a charisma 14 brunette I'm more likely to choose the redhead anyway. On the other hand, a 14 brunette vs a 5 redhead... no contest, brunette all the way (especially if they're dressed goth).
Of course, this is all in the original post, but you are just wanting to argue and pretend to be obtuse, because you don't want to admit you are cherry picking which words you read in a post and then twisting them as much as you can to get a rise out of people. I'm going to try a new tact though, I'm going to be polite and answer your questions as if you really meant them and were really curious.
You are once again adding modifiers to say I'm wrong, which doesn't make sense considering what I said hasn't factored in modifiers yet because those are DM adjudicated and variable between DM. WITHOUT modifiers of any kind you are assumed to start indifferent. According to your post indifferent moved to unfriendly because he had a 5 cha. So by that reasoning strangers the same race as your character start unfriendly if you have a 5 CHA.
I give up. You guys win. Delete CHARISMA from the game. It has no use, it has nothing to do with anything, handle it however you want. I'm seriously done with this this time.
Someone already inclined to dislike someone for another reason should never take CHA into account, got it, that's your argument, that's it, I give up, you win.
ToZ? You probably don't want to play in my games after all. I go by the book, and the book has Charisma in it, and says it governs a bunch of things you and Ashiel and Shadow don't want it to influence. In my game, if you dump any stat down to 5, it's going to cause you problems both Roleplaying and Rollplaying. I don't run video games where people respond by rote script according to programs set up to control them. An innkeeper that doesn't like dwarves is going to look for any reason to dislike one. A merchant that likes redheads is going to forgive more than one that hates them.
You guys don't want Charisma to be taken into account for anything other than starting skill mods. That's fine, I give up talking about it. It's useless, I've tried everything, and it's like talking to a brick wall with blinders on.
I give up. You guys win. Delete CHARISMA from the game. It has no use, it has nothing to do with anything, handle it however you want. I'm seriously done with this this time.
Someone already inclined to dislike someone for another reason should never take CHA into account, got it, that's your argument, that's it, I give up, you win.
ToZ? You probably don't want to play in my games after all. I go by the book, and the book has Charisma in it, and says it governs a bunch of things you and Ashiel and Shadow don't want it to influence. In my game, if you dump any stat down to 5, it's going to cause you problems both Roleplaying and Rollplaying. I don't run video games where people respond by rote script according to programs set up to control them. An innkeeper that doesn't like dwarves is going to look for any reason to dislike one. A merchant that likes redheads is going to forgive more than one that hates them.
You guys don't want Charisma to be taken into account for anything other than starting skill mods. That's fine, I give up talking about it. It's useless, I've tried everything, and it's like talking to a brick wall with blinders on.
Those DM controlled modifiers have nothing to do with CHA at all and are in place whether you ignore CHA or not, so I don't see why you keep posting them.
The book has no mechanical consequence on npc reactions in regards to CHA. If you go strictly by the book then you wouldn't use it the way your advocating, not to mention you treat CHA 5 like the opposite of CHA 40, Considering your starting reactions would cap at around 18-20.
Edit: If I get my stats up to 30 will you give me massive roleplaying benefits along with the rollplaying ones? (granted that isn't feasibly possible considering you couldn't possibly recreate the reaction to something so unheard of, and its not really a benefit to have everyone I meet paralyzed in awe...)
I give up. You guys win. Delete CHARISMA from the game. It has no use, it has nothing to do with anything, handle it however you want. I'm seriously done with this this time.
Someone already inclined to dislike someone for another reason should never take CHA into account, got it, that's your argument, that's it, I give up, you win.
ToZ? You probably don't want to play in my games after all. I go by the book, and the book has Charisma in it, and says it governs a bunch of things you and Ashiel and Shadow don't want it to influence. In my game, if you dump any stat down to 5, it's going to cause you problems both Roleplaying and Rollplaying. I don't run video games where people respond by rote script according to programs set up to control them. An innkeeper that doesn't like dwarves is going to look for any reason to dislike one. A merchant that likes redheads is going to forgive more than one that hates them.
You guys don't want Charisma to be taken into account for anything other than starting skill mods. That's fine, I give up talking about it. It's useless, I've tried everything, and it's like talking to a brick wall with blinders on.
Now who is deliberately misreading? My logic: It is not harder (DC-wise) for a Str 7 wizard to climb a wall than it is for a str 20 fighter. A DC 15 rope is a DC 15 rope for all. The difference will come in when they actually try to climb it, where one has a -2, and the other has +5, and can take 10.
The system adequately penalizes and reward stats as it is. I won't mind if someone favors talking to the Cha18 bard over the Cha8 fighter. Nor will I mind if you rule that the NPC distrusts outsiders, and drop them to unfriendly, but likes bards, and starts out indifferent towards him, making him the only one who can make requests without having to change his attitude. This is the RP bit I condone and applaud. Make people different and all that jazz. But nothing here has anything to do with charisma. That comes in when they interact.
Is this perfect? No. Is it fair? In my mind, yes. Is it an adequate portrayal of real life? Don't think I even care. This is a fantasy game where you play super-heroes.
Ciretose: What your reply tells me is that you have different initial reactions to cute girls than you do towards men. And that is fine. This is why I keep harping on about my system where you add a positive/negative adjective to their description that people might react to for every charisma modifier, in order to make it more relevant. But that is moving outside the existing mechanics, and a house rule.
Which is the mantra I keep repeating for those who are unhappy with what we have to work with. Embrace the dark side, disregard 500+ post threads about griefing :P
I give up. You guys win.
...
In my game, if you dump any stat down to 5, it's going to cause you problems both Roleplaying and Rollplaying.
Don't give up, tiger, there's plenty of skin on this dead horse, just gotta keep floggin' it! For what it's worth our group plays like yours so you can't lose, because that'd make both of us lose. Are we winners? To us, yes! *FIST BUMP* Are they winners? To them, yes! Er. No, sorry, I'm not gonna fist bump you guys coz your CHA is too low. Sorry, it's how I roll.
...
XD
I love CHA as a stat, to me it's about the only one I can roleplay realistically on every level. We don't carry swords and crossbows to our group unfort..er, I mean, because it's not safe. Yeah. :>
|
|
So, using my favorite theory of infinite multiverses...
Universe #1 has a character with a 10 Cha.
Universe #2 has the exact same character, but his Cha is 5.
Universe #3 has again the exact same character, but his Cha is 15 instead.
They all walk into their universe's respective identical taverns, populated with an innkeep who is exactly identical in all three universes.
Universe #1 has an Indifferent innkeep.
Does the innkeep of the other two universes remain Indifferent before Diplomacy checks are made? Or does U2's become Unfriendly, and U3's become Friendly?
I say that if it is the latter, the low Cha character is being doubly punished for his low Cha, while the high Cha character is being doubly rewarded for his high Cha.
Both are valid interpretations of Cha, as long as everyone at the table understands what is happening.
I just find the former to be a more fair and balanced option.
|
Dwarf asks for help politely : Indifferent
Dwarf has a CHA of 5 : UnfriendlyHe went from indifferent (where he would theoretically start before any circumstance modifiers) and moved to unfriendly purely due to charisma.
So logic dictates that a CHA of 5 would drop your starting attitude to unfriendly before circumstance modifiers.
I will say just this, because i hate when people do this.
Stop taking things out of context and twisting them so they benefit your argument. This is not court, and you are not defending a mass murderer.
Mdt said that the innkeeper was unfriendly to start with...the actions of the dwarf could have shifted the attitude to indifferent, but the way dwarf went about whatever he was doing made the innkeeper to stay unfriendly.
But, i guess discussing things on the internet is pointless...