I've never used accusations of building & burning a "Strawman" or pointing out that someone is committing a "Fallacy" on these boards.
Anyone care to inform me how or why this is bad form? I've never used them as codes for "stupid" or anything myself. I use the word stupid for stupid as it honestly seems easier.
I mean if someone is clearly burning a strawman or committing an easily identifiable fallacy is it not kosher to politely point it out?
It's not really that difficult of a concept nor should it be considered a pointed insult in of itself.
|
Apparently having a character who's socially awkward at first and so devotes lots of time/energy into overcoming that flaw and learning to be assertive and smooth (like every "ugly duckling" chick flick ever) is totally munchkin. ;)Also it can be frustrating when some further argue that a 7 charisma character should be able to be the party face...again, also argued on these here boards.With the proper skill and trait investment, it seems to get the job done fine. Working as intended.
Jusy like increasing jump and swim can make you really strong...wait...
Invest in ability boosting items and you can raise abilities, but skills are skills, not abilities. If you want a strong character, you put points in strength. Agile, dex. Hearty, con. Smart, int. Wise, wisdom. Charasmatic?
But people want to dump without dealing with effects from dumping a stat and handwave how it takes a full minute of interaction to change starting attitude...
Yes it is my fault for bringing it up, but major pet peeve.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've never used accusations of building & burning a "Strawman" or pointing out that someone is committing a "Fallacy" on these boards.
Anyone care to inform me how or why this is bad form? I've never used them as codes for "stupid" or anything myself.
I mean if someone is clearly burning a strawman or committing an easily identifiable fallacy is it not kosher to politely point it out?
It's not really that difficult of a concept nor should it be considered a pointed insult in of itself.
The issue is that the terms get used soooo much (usually incorrectly) that they no longer mean anything. Any legitimate use of the terms will get lost in the noise.
But people want to dump without dealing with effects from dumping a stat and handwave how it takes a full minute of interaction to change starting attitude...
Starting Attitude... Maybe this is just a stupid question, I don't know, but does every single social interaction have to have a "Starting Attitude"? I just don't think so, rather I think that's DM code for "you dumped CHA, so now I'm going to screw you over every chance I get."
For me, when there is a "Starting Attitude", it means something important is about to happen. And if something is important, I think we're probably gonna give it a minute.
|
|
Well, by default everyone has a Starting Attitude.
However, there are no rules for determining what that attitude is. It's pretty much DM Fiat based on the situation.
Ciretose things low Cha characters should automatically move the Starting Attitude towards the negative end and high Cha characters should automatically move it towards the positive end.
This means that a penalty to Diplomacy is worsened by increasing the DC rolled against, and a bonus to Diplomacy is bettered by lowering the DC rolled against.
I prefer not to double-dip it. Especially since Charisma is how noticeable you are and not how likable you are.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, by default everyone has a Starting Attitude.
Does the bartender really give a flip about your CHA? Really? 'Cause I think it's a total waste of time for the DM to give the low-CHA crap via the kind of NPC. It's truly petty and vindictive.
You want the guards at the gate to give the low-CHA PC some crap, well, okay... But again, they're really just NPC's who are doing their job, so why go overboard? Let the player have his "minute" already. And don't handwave things just because you don't like CHA-dumping.
|
However, there are no rules for determining what that attitude is. It's pretty much DM Fiat based on the situation.
Generally roll with: Current local situation, race relations, cultural values, PC reputation, a thousand other outside factors, maybe a touch of CHA depending on the person.
Just feels more organic, personally.
|
|
Does the bartender really give a flip about your CHA? Really? 'Cause I think it's a total waste of time for the DM to give the low-CHA crap via the kind of NPC. It's truly petty and vindictive.
I'm not the one advocating it, so you'll get no argument from me. ;) I'm just saying that everyone starts out with some kind of opinion of you, even if it's 'meh'.
Well it would certainly affect MY starting attitude! :D
|
|
I also think diplomacy isn't charisma, it is how well you can negotiate with people to get them to work with you. Lots of diplomats dislike each other personally, but have shared goals.
A player should have leeway in deciding how charisma manifests, but negative charisma should have at least some negative manifestation.
No other stat can be replaced by skills, charisma is no different.
A player should have leeway in deciding how charisma manifests, but negative charisma should have at least some negative manifestation.
It does - it's a -2 to CHA-based skills and certain other mechanics. It can come into play in certain social interactions as well.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
A player should have leeway in deciding how charisma manifests, but negative charisma should have at least some negative manifestation.
No other stat can be replaced by skills, charisma is no different.
Ah, okay, so players are trying to say that since they have ranks in Diplomacy, they no longer take penalties to Bluff, Disguise, Intimidate, or Handle Animal?
Or maybe you have players trying to get their net Diplomacy modifier not to include the -2 CHA penalty, and instead just start from 0 once they start putting ranks in?
Because those are the only things I can think of that would be accurately described as trying to "replace" CHA with skills. So either it's one of those, or your real beef is something other than what you're saying.
|
|
Mikaze pretty much nailed it above. If 4 people walk in and one of them has a negative charisma, it is one of many factors the GM should consider. If someone in the party has a 7 charisma and someone else has an 16, if you don't factor it in you are punishing the character with 16 charisma if you don't factor it in.
Mikaze pretty much nailed it above. If 4 people walk in and one of them has a negative charisma, it is one of many factors the GM should consider. If someone in the party has a 7 charisma and someone else has an 16, if you don't factor it in you are punishing the character with 16 charisma if you don't factor it in.
How does walking into a room demand an assessment of CHA scores? 'Cause I'm just not seeing it, really. How does a the 7 CHA character have any bearing whatsoever on the 16 CHA character? I mean, is it just me, or doesn't everyone pretty much expect the low CHA guy to completely defer to the 16 CHA?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Generally roll with: Current local situation, race relations, cultural values, PC reputation, a thousand other outside factors, maybe a touch of CHA depending on the person.
Mikaze pretty much nailed it above. If 4 people walk in and one of them has a negative charisma, it is one of many factors the GM should consider. If someone in the party has a 7 charisma and someone else has an 16, if you don't factor it in you are punishing the character with 16 charisma if you don't factor it in.
I don't think you two are saying the same thing at all.
|
|
Regarding the discussion in general--
I've seen people on all sides of arguments on these boards *including me* being much too thin-skinned for anyone out here on the internet, taking offense when none should be taken; seeing personal insults even when none are there-- and mistaking vigorous argument on the issues and legitimate attacks on positions in arguments as personal attacks on themselves.
A little bit less reactivity to every last little thing might serve a lot of people here on these boards quite well. Might want to take a step back and realize that, for instance, when someone says "I think dropping Cha on every character is a rather munchkinish tactic"-- that IS an opinion on that particular part of character creation-- that's NOT the same thing as calling the player who does it a 'munchkin'. If you're here to discuss ideas on these boards-- sorry, not everyone is going to agree with you. If you can't separate the idea of someone disagreeing with your ideas from someone attacking you personally-- you're in the wrong place. If you have the same problem offline in person, you wouldn't be socially functional... so try to remember, just as you have to do in RL, that it's usually not personal (at least until you make it personal), and try not to go there.
The issue is that the terms get used soooo much (usually incorrectly) that they no longer mean anything. Any legitimate use of the terms will get lost in the noise.
Hmm? Well then the best we can hope for is a saying "I'm sorry, but I disagree with your use of that term and believe you're using it improperly. Here's a link to wikipedia on 'fallacies' and 'strawman'."
Though, I suppose that doesn't quite have a proper 'umphf' behind it. Isn't the whole bit technically a veiled dig at a specific group of posters and calling them obnoxious by misusing/overusing the term?
Or am I building a strawman?
Or is this just idle trolling?
I thought your theatrical response to shallowsoul was quite funny and spot on. Coffee nearly came out my nose. Good job, sir.
In real life, people with low charisma usually either have a mental disorder or are carrying a ton of emotional baggage that comes out in every interaction. It is RARE that the low charisma is just ignorance of manners, unless there is something accompanying it like a fear of people or going outside.
Upon what do you base this assessment?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
In real life, people with low charisma usually either have a mental disorder or are carrying a ton of emotional baggage that comes out in every interaction.
I hope by "low" you don't mean 7-8. Because 7 is the counterpart to 13. If 13 CHA is the opposite of a mental disorder, then I can't imagine what 16-18 would be.
Alitan, I have never dumped stats on a point buy build to gain more points to put in another attribute. However, I have taken racial penalties which dropped a score below 10. Since that race gave me bonuses in an attribute I valued, I suppose even choosing a race could be described as "munchkining" by some hard core anti-munchkin types.
[snipped for length]
So I still think it goes both ways.
Actually hadn't been thinking about racial mods... and wouldn't be nearly as critical of a sub-ten attribute that got there via race mod as I tend to be to the dumpstat syndrome.
On the original subject (and the body of your post, now snipped), I haven't had to deal with too many of either school (role/roll -- yeah, I know they aren't exclusive, but that seems to be the division we're operating with here) but I certainly take more ISSUE with the people telling me my character sucks because it hasn't been stripped-down and reassembled into a perfect build.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I thought your theatrical response to shallowsoul was quite funny and spot on. Coffee nearly came out my nose. Good job, sir.
I think that post of mine is getting misinterpreted a bit. Seems it came across as an attack (liked by some, not by others). I was trying to point out that his phrasing delivered the kind of condescension Adamantine Dragon was talking about, but wasn't trying to say he was doing it on purpose.
Just seizing the opportunity for an example, and being creative about it.
Mind if I use you as an example? :D
I was worried there for a minnit, but since you're holding me up as a good example, I guess it's OK. :)
See, this would be a perfect example of a REASONABLE and RESPECTFUL statement of his own preferences. Doesn't bash anyone. Just says "here's how I play". There's maybe a touch of bitterness behind a couple of lines, but all in all, pretty nice. So when I talk about "roleplayers" instigating fights, I am NOT talking about posts like Alitan's.
Conversely, if our friend Alitan here posts a build and asks for advice, and someone sees that he has no stats below 12 and says "you should probably dump your CHA and bring [STAT] up to X", that's also not an attack. (I sometimes get the impression that such statements are counted as attacks by certain parties.)
OK, am guilty, by now, of the above reaction...
Here's the kind of thing I'm talking about when I mention "roleplayers" throwing the first punch:
Original Poster: Here's a build for critique. I don't like having dump stats, so here's my array: (lists stats with nothing below 10)
...
I haven't spent as much time backthreading (you may have too much time on your hands, btw) but I'm willing to accept your research. I dunno, maybe the -le crowd is tired of being outperformed by the -ll crowd, so they stoop to messageboard ambushes? :)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The university study I conducted during my masters program.In real life, people with low charisma usually either have a mental disorder or are carrying a ton of emotional baggage that comes out in every interaction. It is RARE that the low charisma is just ignorance of manners, unless there is something accompanying it like a fear of people or going outside.Upon what do you base this assessment?
I want to go to the school where I can correlate Pathfinder ability scores to real-world deficiencies as part of a masters program.
The university study I conducted during my masters program.In real life, people with low charisma usually either have a mental disorder or are carrying a ton of emotional baggage that comes out in every interaction. It is RARE that the low charisma is just ignorance of manners, unless there is something accompanying it like a fear of people or going outside.Upon what do you base this assessment?
So what exactly does that mean?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
In real life, people with low charisma usually either have a mental disorder or are carrying a ton of emotional baggage that comes out in every interaction.I hope by "low" you don't mean 7-8. Because 7 is the counterpart to 13. If 13 CHA is the opposite of a mental disorder, then I can't imagine what 16-18 would be.You probably haven't met too many people with charisma actors that high. I'd put Kate Middleton at 16. Barak Obama might be up there, and partly because he is driven to be liked and praised, which is another kind of problem.
18 charismas are for sorcerers, and they are otherworldly.
And the average dwarf has 8 CHA. So the bulk of that race has a mental disorder?
I'm generally the same way. It might be a group game, but you're character doesn't ALWAYS have the other members of the group at his beck-and-call.I just Don't. Dump. Stats.
Which means I'm not as uber, perhaps, as the guy whose character can't hold a meaningful conversation (but can solo most encounters).
But I don't feel that high bonuses in one or two stats are worth the price paid in attribute penalties in half my attributes. Just a personal failing, judging by the eye-rolls from the optimaxed crowd.
Mind you, I do my freakin' best to optimize around my less-than-glowing attributes; I just have a mindset organized around minimizing my flaws, rather than maximizing my advantages.
^THIS!^
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I want to go to the school where I can correlate Pathfinder ability scores to real-world deficiencies as part of a masters program.The university study I conducted during my masters program.In real life, people with low charisma usually either have a mental disorder or are carrying a ton of emotional baggage that comes out in every interaction. It is RARE that the low charisma is just ignorance of manners, unless there is something accompanying it like a fear of people or going outside.Upon what do you base this assessment?People are so annoying sometimes.
"I think x."
"you stated your opinion in a factual way. I can't tell the difference between someone stating their feelings and a fact, so please show me your research."
Please note that you've quoted two different people in that quote-tunnel, and it's not quite clear to whom you're responding.
^THIS!^I'm generally the same way. It might be a group game, but you're character doesn't ALWAYS have the other members of the group at his beck-and-call.I just Don't. Dump. Stats.
Which means I'm not as uber, perhaps, as the guy whose character can't hold a meaningful conversation (but can solo most encounters).
But I don't feel that high bonuses in one or two stats are worth the price paid in attribute penalties in half my attributes. Just a personal failing, judging by the eye-rolls from the optimaxed crowd.
Mind you, I do my freakin' best to optimize around my less-than-glowing attributes; I just have a mindset organized around minimizing my flaws, rather than maximizing my advantages.
So if one player makes a low-CHA character, knowing full well that there is a "face" type character in the party, then the low-CHA player, aside from being guilty of stat dumping, is now also guilty of "using" the other PC to his advantage?
Is that what you're saying?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Well, at least you're consistent. I disagree with your assertions, but at least you're sticking to a rationale you've put thought into instead of arbitrarily punishing something you don't like. Gotta give you that.
EDIT: Ninja'd. This was about the dwarves.
Cranewings - so let me get this straight - you can post your opinion, as though it is fact, and when someone asks you "why?", it's annoying?