| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is here to confront all the people making characters and content under the misconception of what the CHA stat is.
There
are
plenty
of
counterexamples
backing
me
here.
Think about going to a party. You could meet 10, 20 attractive people there, but some stand out. Some grab your attention and are easier to remember than others. Those are the ones which are both good-looking and have high charisma. The other ones are good-looking, but have low charisma.
Lots of intelligent undead have high Charisma. Y'know why? Because their presence fills the room, grabs and holds your attention, and they are memorable. It's not because they're good-looking, in fact Wights (with a CHA of 15) are flat out revolting. But wights are menacing and would have an almost tangible presence. Compare a wight (high CHA) to a zombie (low CHA). Zombies have zero personality, and can easily disappear among the furniture and wreckage. When you obliterate a zombie, you won't remember the details of their appearance... not as much as a wight, whose high CHA stat almost gave them an aura of soul-suffocating cold.
Nymphs have huge Charisma. Why? Not because they're pretty. It's because they have that aura, that certain something which can't be caught by any camera. You could be totally blind and thick-headed, and still feel their presence nearby, making the river seem to laugh, and the air sway through the trees like a tantric dance.
This does well for Outsiders, Clerics, Paladins and Sorcerers, who use CHA for mechanical advantage. That intangible presence is directly related to the power of their spirit and force of will. It's like CHA is the mental/spiritual equivalent to strength... like CHA:STR, INT:DEX, WIS:CON.
So for all you who say "this made up race is pretty. +4 CHA"... stop it. Just say they're pretty.
This usually happens because there is no core mechanic governing appearance.
This usually happens because there is no core mechanic governing appearance.
"Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance."
The problem is that charisma has always kind of sort of governed appearance. It is the sum total of a bunch of different but interconnected things, and that has always left a lot of ambiguity in the concept.
|
This usually happens because there is no core mechanic governing appearance."Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance."
The problem is that charisma has always kind of sort of governed appearance. It is the sum total of a bunch of different but interconnected things, and that has always left a lot of ambiguity in the concept.
Although appearance still means neither beautiful nor ugly. Luckily, the rulebooks gave no explanation as to whether a higher charisma is necessarily more beautiful, or vice versa.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This has been discussed a great deal on the boards. In the end it seems its up to you and your GM to work out your own interpretation. As mentioned above, appearance is part of charisma, but you have a mass of "ugly" creatures with high charisma's.
If you have a low charisma and your GM say's your character isn't attractive, put more into charisma. At the end of the day, nobody will argue you are unattractive if you have a high charisma...
I forgot to mention CHA-skills.
Intimidate, handle animal, diplomacy and use magic device are CHA skills.
Should being pretty help you intimidate a Cloaker?
Train a hawk to aid in the hunt?
Or negotiate with a Xorn?
Or activate a wand?
Obviously not. Humanoid standards for beauty would be lost on the vast majority of Hawks, Cloakers and Xorns, and a wand isn't alive and can't even see.
This has been discussed a great deal on the boards. In the end it seems its up to you and your GM to work out your own interpretation. As mentioned above, appearance is part of charisma, but you have a mass of "ugly" creatures with high charisma's.
If you have a low charisma and your GM say's your character isn't attractive, put more into charisma. At the end of the day, nobody will argue you are unattractive if you have a high charisma...
The answer to this is "my character is very good looking, but meek and forgettable."
This usually happens because there is no core mechanic governing appearance."Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance."
The problem is that charisma has always kind of sort of governed appearance. It is the sum total of a bunch of different but interconnected things, and that has always left a lot of ambiguity in the concept.
Saying that it governs appearance is not the same thing as saying that it measures beauty.
It measures appearance in as regards the creature's ability to stand out in a crowd. For example, pretty boys are a dime a dozen in Hollywood and, so, their charisma has little to do with their appearance. But comedians (Danny Devito, Roseanne Barr, Rhea Perlman, Lily Tomlin, Carrot Top, Jeff Foxworthy, Sam Kinison, Ron White, etc.) often deliberately go against the Hollywood stereotype and would stand out in a crowd based on their appearance.
Which is my point. Charisma is a very difficult thing to measure in the first place, and thus the combination of things that go into your charisma score is very ambiguous.
|
|
While this is a valid and compelling argument, Charisma is the only stat we've got for beauty, period. So if you're going so far as to say that beauty plays zero role in game mechanics, then it sounds like a fine houserule.
If, and this seems more likely, you're seeking to stat-dump Charisma and retain the benefit of an attractive appearance, then I cannot agree.
Imperfect system? Sure. This isn't Babes and Beauty Queens. But rules is rules, and you need SOME limit. Otherwise nobody is ever going to be ugly.
|
|
Well all mental characteristics are hard to play. Try playing an 18 intelligence, or wisdom...
Charisma is commonly a dump stat, which some people have a problem with and try and penalise. Beauty is subjective, so it is hard to say what is attractive or not. You could argue if your character is very attractive and meek, to many people they will not be forgettable.
I recall back in the day of a Comliness stat, when there was no point buy, strangely nobody ever had an ugly character unless they had specifically made it that way. It's a fantasy game we are playing and people want to be beautifull people.
Now there is point buy, and dump stats. People need the points for other stats, but the GM doesn't want every fighter that walks the land to have a charisma of 7, so as appearance is included in the description of charisma, they say you have a poor appearance.
I'm happy for characters to look how they want to. It's a fantasy game, I'm not there to make the game less fun. I can see where GM's who don't like optimised characters are comming from however.
As for the link to skills, well again you can argue the same point for wisdom. How is my willpower going to help me heal someone? Show me what herbs to eat in the wild or show me a sneaking rogue? Thats just game mechanics...
If you have a low charisma and your GM say's your character isn't attractive, put more into charisma. At the end of the day, nobody will argue you are unattractive if you have a high charisma...
This is pretty much how it works for our group. Charisma doesn't equal beauty, but it's a part of beauty. If you have low Charisma, you are mercilessly mocked by the rest of the group as being a horrendous ugly-pants. All protests to the contrary are ignored by everyone else. (And any suggestions that "I'm good looking, but not sociable/whatever", gets a few quizzical "Why? What's the point? What are you hoping to achieve by that meaningless distinction?" questions, then ignored again.)
|
For a time in AD&D (First Edition, that is) there was an optional stat called Comliness that WAS a score to detail looks. If I remember correctly, it was based on Charisma to some degree but it was its own score. I think it might have been detailed in Unearthed Arcana ...
Maybe those that are having an issue with this today could institute something like Comeliness in your games ...
So, Charisma boosts both beauty and intimidation? A player who wants a max intimidating Barbarian, must have a Barbarian that could appear on the cover of a romance novel?
Hey, it's the stereotypical RPG gamer who finds pretty girls intimidating, right? Maybe they're confusing their views with reality.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I began using Comeliness (COM) in my last game, and it evolved into an entire system of attraction for NPC's.
Everyone gets a COM score. PC's get best 3 of 4d6, reroll 1's. NPC's get 3d6, reroll 1's. COM is not in the point-buy, nor can it be changed with character advancement.
Everyone also gets two attractiveness scores, mental and physical. PA = sum of modifiers for (STR, DEX, CON, and COM). MA = sum of modifiers for (INT, WIS, CHA, and COM). Yes, looks matter in mental attraction because people are more open to listening to the beautiful. Yes, PC's are generally far more attractive than NPC's because they are superior specimens of humanity (or orcanity, or whatever).
For each NPC, we add an initial impression roll of 3d6 to the PA and MA. This means a tremendously attractive person can still rub somebody the wrong way for no particular reason, and an ugly person can still attract interest both mentally and physically. The GM has a table of all the PC's and NPC's and their mutual attractions, except for PC feelings for NPC's, because that's player-determined. Once the table is made, reference is quick and easy, and the GM can set their own thresholds for like/dislike or desire/revulsion. Adjust as you see fit for racial or species differences.
We typically use this for initial impressions and modify via the party's history for important NPC's. It can help bring PC's with low socials into the RP interaction because some NPC's are bound to like them preferentially and assertively pursue interaction, instead of leaving it all to the party's "Face." It's also easy to do with impromptu NPC's at the table with a couple of quick rolls.
Some of the players now use this for their own PC's impressions of NPC's, which has led to some interesting results. One PC had an astronomical physical attraction to a woman far above him who ended up being the villainess of the piece. He pursued a scandalous affair with her and finally saved her in the final battle. He is now attempting to redeem her. His wife is not pleased. But this silly little tool brought another entire level of interaction to the game and it continues to do so. And hey - isn't it all about fun?
Treppa, your close to the 1E Unearth arcana comeliness system, which I do admit I use in my games, though I have modified it a bit.
@Lincoln & Malignor: Do you also subscribe to the 6'10" 90lbs dude with Str18? Or the arthritic guy with dex16? Or the sickly, constantly coughing guy with con16?
If you want to play a person who is flawed and broken in the charisma department, put a damn negative there.
Treppa, your close to the 1E Unearth arcana comeliness system, which I do admit I use in my games, though I have modified it a bit.
Ah, never used UA, though our attractiveness thing is a real old-school d6 kind of method, isn't it? I'm finding myself liking D20 less and less because of the flat prob curve. But that's another discussion... ;)
|
The mind flayer has an average cha higher than any human. If cha is beauty, squid heads are hot. Cha may be striking, fair or hideous, not always simply beauty and some of the most charismatic are plainly average in looks. I say make it a trait thing, you are more or less average unless you have a trait that makes you particularly ugly or beautiful. And if you feel the need to default to hard numbers con is closer in many ways, healthy folks are more atractive than out of shape and sickly. Average of con and cha, or make a seventh stat and use them to modify it.
@Lincoln & Malignor: Do you also subscribe to the 6'10" 90lbs dude with Str18? Or the arthritic guy with dex16? Or the sickly, constantly coughing guy with con16?
If you want to play a person who is flawed and broken in the charisma department, put a damn negative there.
Answer: No.
George W. Bush Jr. has a high CHA, even though he looks like a monkey and has a hard time stringing a coherent sentence together.
Bill Gates would have a high CHA.
Someone who's a gifted salesperson, but horribly introverted, can have a high CHA.
A juggernaut with STR18 doesn't have to be lifting heavy things 24/7.
Treppa, your close to the 1E Unearth arcana comeliness system, which I do admit I use in my games, though I have modified it a bit.Ah, never used UA, though our attractiveness thing is a real old-school d6 kind of method, isn't it? I'm finding myself liking D20 less and less because of the flat prob curve. But that's another discussion... ;)
I fixed the curve, by rolling two dice (d8's, some times d10 by mistake) and having one die be positive the other negative. using a base 10 add the dice so it's 10+1d8-1d8, and if you charisma is high enough you get a +1 or a +2. If the charisma is between 10-13 it's +0, 9 and lower it goes down 1 or 2.
|
|
I'm happy for characters to look how they want to. It's a fantasy game, I'm not there to make the game less fun. I can see where GM's who don't like optimised characters are comming from however.
That can be carried too far, though. You, as representative of the rules and mechanics, ARE there to make certain things less fun. Ignoring the rules and just doing what you want can definitely be a blast, for the first few minutes at least. I think there's some wisdom reflected in the rules, and a GM needs to keep things from getting out of hand.
Popcorn, anyone?
I'll take some.
nom, nom, nom.
I also have a house rule that strength modifier can be used in place of charisma modifier for Intimidate, selected at character creation time.
I just had a thought I'm not sure was ever explored. Charisma is dictated in part by appearance.
This does not mean the appearance is always good.
Gregori.
Also, that guy from Austin Powers with the MOLE may have had high cha. Dude left an impression.
@Lincoln & Malignor: Do you also subscribe to the 6'10" 90lbs dude with Str18? Or the arthritic guy with dex16? Or the sickly, constantly coughing guy with con16?
If you want to play a person who is flawed and broken in the charisma department, put a damn negative there.
Yup. I have no idea what you're talking about.
I really am just hoping to see this thread degenerate into hostile nerds bickering for hours on the internet about the meaning of "charisma". The irony has aged like a fine wine. I think it gets better every time it comes up.
I removed a post and the replies to it. Do not use the word 'retarded' in that way.
So, Charisma boosts both beauty and intimidation?
It can, if that's what the player wants.
A player who wants a max intimidating Barbarian, must have a Barbarian that could appear on the cover of a romance novel?
Maybe? Sometimes? *shrug* Not if they don't want to.
Charisma is a charming personality, a motivational speaker, and engaging demenor, and a pleasent person. Martin Luther King Jr had a lot of Charisma, but so does Dane Cook. Charisma is everything but physical appearence, and that can be aquated to a combination of Str (for muscular build) and Con (for healthy and handsome / comely appearance).
Charisma is a charming personality, a motivational speaker, and engaging demenor, and a pleasent person. Martin Luther King Jr had a lot of Charisma, but so does Dane Cook.
Don't forget Hitler.
Godwinned AND relevant!
This thread is here to confront all the people making characters and content under the misconception of what the CHA stat is.
That's why I still cry the fact that tiefling went from +1 CHA under 2e AD&D to -2 CHA under 3rd edition.
Average human: CHA 10
Average demon: from CHA 11 (lowest dretch) to CHA 27 (Balor)
Average tiefling: CHA 8
:(
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oooh, are we starting in on alignment now?
Pass the popcorn, please.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see why Appearance needs a stat. Just let the player character look however they want to look as long as it's not out of hand. It doesn't have anymore of an effect on mechanics than background, which is how much the GM decides to put an emphasis on it.
|
|
This thread is here to confront all the people making characters and content under the misconception of what the CHA stat is.That's why I still cry the fact that tiefling went from +1 CHA under 2e AD&D to -2 CHA under 3rd edition.
Average human: CHA 10
Average demon: from CHA 11 (lowest dretch) to CHA 27 (Balor)
Average tiefling: CHA 8:(
Because emo kids lack confidence, general appeal and leadership ability
My group does a houseruled Comeliness score. d20 + CHA. To translate it, usually cut it in half and put it on a scale of 10 - y'know, the one everyone uses for attractiveness. It usually comes up when we think about it, and it might end in a laugh when the rogue who is semi-Face rolls low.
And then we forget about it unless someone wants to get a laugh.
In a world without daily bathing (not to be read in the epic announcer voice), what we perceive as attractive does not equate to what would be. What might be considered a 10 on that scale I mentioned earlier in a fantasy world might be a 5 or 6 in today's world, and that's being generous (honestly, think about meeting someone who hasn't bathed in two weeks, probably washes his clothes even less than that, and worked and sweated everyday since then). Magic and the like can change this, but not everyone has access to that.
Charisma is the only rules-supported ability score in the game that has anything to do with appearance. However, it seems like a lot of people arguing against that are acting as if the inclusion of attractiveness in charisma makes it charisma exclusive to attractiveness. That is, your examples of intimidating making less sense based off attractiveness is legit, but it's based off all of charisma, thus using the other aspects of it. This is akin to DEX being used for Armor Class (reactions and ability to dodge) and also being used for Stealth (skill and control over the body - i.e. not allowing unnecessary movement). Meaning that intimidate is based off parts of charisma that is not related to attractiveness. Any conditional modifiers that give bonuses or penalties to intimidate based on appearance specifically ARE.
I don't know if I explained that well. Probably not, I'm not very good at that.
|
|
I don't see why Appearance needs a stat. Just let the player character look however they want to look as long as it's not out of hand. It doesn't have anymore of an effect on mechanics than background, which is how much the GM decides to put an emphasis on it.
Because it WILL be used as a tool. "im hot so the guard will pay attention" or "im so ugly the intimidation has to work" will happen.
Because it WILL be used as a tool. "im hot so the guard will pay attention" or "im so ugly the intimidation has to work" will happen.
Works only as well as saying that because you're wearing black, you get bonuses to stealth. Which has more legitimacy. The guard could have different preferences than what the character is presenting, and just because someone is ugly doesn't mean they can intimidate the other character, they are more likely to just get attacked violently instead of scaring the other character if their charisma is that low.