| Gnomezrule |
Well stern and rude would still be options. One can have poor mannors and still be morally good. Though I certainly see your point that LN favors stern and that CN favors rude. I would suggest that LG may be so meek as to be functionally debilitating. They have trouble speaking up, when they do it comes out poorly.
| thenovalord |
thx for quick replies
my AP in set in Mendev, 4th crusade as background. Hoping there are a noble group quietly slipping into the area
meek, is good, except when riled (Green Mile?)
one of the main challenges is to stay on the right track. It could be therefore that a low cha type is a jerk/ snob/ righteous pain / zealot as mentioned above
players sortng out pcs and running on the 3rd april, so gladly listen and take on board all suggestions!
for the most part i imagine a fairly high cha party....just wonder how a loose cannon type will affect them
Helaman
|
Why would you want to dump your charisma so low? If you ever need to socially interact on your own, you are all but guaranteed to make a hash of it...
But have no fear stranger - for a mere 50 gold I can give you this tome called 'How to Make Friends and Influence People' - its been called a 'Master Work'... and if you have time to bone up on my 5 Keys and 12 Tips before your social engagement it will surely help.
| RunawayFreak |
LG could go in lots of different directions with CHA 7. Humorless, uninventive, set in his ways...
Meek was also a good one. I don't see why a LG could not be stern, or rude. I don't think that's an alignment thing.
Or somebody who is not the type to inspire others, but fails to see himself in any other role than the Leader/Authority. People who overestimate themselves like this can be annoying, but in an acceptable way, since the other players should have plenty of ways to work around it. This type is also known as Every Manager I've Ever Had.
I think every option is fine, as long as it doesn't get annoying Out of Character.
Also, don't do that to your CHA. ;)
| Ferio |
Great example of a (in my opinion) Lawful Good video game character that is really annoying:
Cranky Kong (when he's an old man... Er Monkey)
Helps Donkey Kong by giving hints and helping to save the island, but is a douche telling them how much better he could be at saving the world if he wasn't such an old man(Monkey).
Take out the old man(Monkey) comment and bam, you got a character.
Howie23
|
I know her in real life. She's opinionated, judgmental, delivers opinions without concern to the fact that no one cares about what she has to say and is generally difficult to be around. She has a good heart and thinks she knows what is right for everyone. She picks up on social clues just fine, and knows when she doesn't fit in. She avoids situations that challenge her deep entrenched views, put pulls no punches when confronted with something she doesn't like.
| RunawayFreak |
That is why I put the apostrophes there. I am sorry, english is not my native language ;).
I wholeheartedly agree with you.
But I know there are people who feel like low CHA should have consequences beside lower rolls on certain skills. Like a low CON also makes my character easier to kill, DEX also influences armor etc.
So I know there are people looking for ways to make low CHA have a bigger influence on the game. That is what I assumed the OP intended, asking for character traits that would make social contact harder on his character as a way to represent that.
| thenovalord |
good discussion, thanks
By rude i meant, as mentioned, percieved to be rude, say the wrong thing, possibley without bad intent
even though the PCS heart may be in the right place, they may be awkward to be around. As the whole party will hopefully be L/N/G i look forward to seeing how the 16 CHA players handle those less high on the social scale!
| zagnabbit |
You could go simple.
*Spits when they talk.
*Stong personal odor.
*Poorly translated body language ( tends to stare or glare, fails to make eye contact, constantly scratching themselves as a nervous tick)
The LG may be perfectly normal but abrupt and outwardly judgmental and disapproving. This is pretty off putting in real life. Caustic honesty is easy to play.
| Tels |
Well, one option would be that you have a problem with the brain/mouth filter. People might call you brutally honest, but you just don't see the need to tell a white lie to cover things up.
Another option is something I witnessed in church a lot when I grew up. People gossiping about someone without naming them. Like, "Not naming any names, but when people do this and this (obviously describing someone without naming them)" then they describe their opinion about them. Or making use of the phrase "no offense" then offending the person. It could still tie into the brutally honest aspect, especially the 'no offense' phrase as a lot of honest people use that phrase to tell an unpleasant truth about someone.
At the same time, if you're going to tell the brutal truth, make sure to tell the truths about both good and bad things. Like, Jeffery is very clumsy and always reveals our presence, that his clumsiness played a part in Alex's death. But at the same time, he's a great healer and has saved your butt on many occassion.
| Lightbulb |
No need to punish low cha. The game isn't about punishing your players. It's about rewarding your players for contributing to the game positively. Anyone going out of their way to punish someone because they have a 7 cha isn't a good DM.
I agree.
They are "punished" (and I too use "s) by not being that good at Diplomacy, Bluff etc.
I think people just need to enforce the Social skill checks more.
My home game you have the same chance of influencing someone whether you are Cha 20 or Cha 5... :/
ciretose
|
Robespierre wrote:No need to punish low cha. The game isn't about punishing your players. It's about rewarding your players for contributing to the game positively. Anyone going out of their way to punish someone because they have a 7 cha isn't a good DM.I agree.
They are "punished" (and I too use "s) by not being that good at Diplomacy, Bluff etc.
I think people just need to enforce the Social skill checks more.
My home game you have the same chance of influencing someone whether you are Cha 20 or Cha 5... :/
That is your "Home game".
Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance. If those things have no effect on social interaction in your game, then YMM most definitely V from mine.
| Lightbulb |
@Lightbulb: out of sheer interest, why have charisma as a stat then, if it doesn't influence social interaction?
Exactly. I am a Cha 18 Sorcerer with max Diplomacy but every PC has an equal chance to speak. The Cha8 Fighter player tends to be the most talkative and the NPC's often react favourably.
This is fine per se but a little irritating since I am play by far the best 'face' character. In fact I specifically picked Sorcerer to be a 'face'. In the end it was not necessary. I could have influenced this just as much playing a Cha7 Wizard. As it happens I prefer Sorcerers so all is fine.
It is a bit frustrating at times though. On the other hand if I was the only one allowed to speak and influence people that wouldn't work to well either.
I guess basically our conversations are free form role playing rather than dice driven.
---
ciretose - you entirely miss my point, probably because I was unclear. I should have said "in the home game I play in" I am not the GM.
Basically my point is:
If you are Cha7 and try and use Diplomacy without any ranks don't expect to hit a DC25. Beyond that no further 'punishment' is needed.
If a low Cha character tries to influence someone's attitude or get some information out of someone then a GM could set a DC (say 20 or 25), maybe a bribe lowers it by 5 or more but there should still be a DC.
Sadly in the game I play in its just be down the the skill of the player (not the character as it should be) to make a convincing argument.
----
I think some people would argue that making a good speech is 'cheating' or 'wrong' for a Cha7 character. The player is not playing their character as they should because they must be 'dour and not talkative'.
I would not go quite so far.
If you have 15 ranks of Diplomacy and 7 Cha you are still as good as a Cha10 13 skill rank person. Also the -2 only makes up 10% of the modifier.
Stats are just what comes naturally. A stupid person (Int 5) can study Knowledge Skills are by level 3 will be just as good as an untrained 'normal' person (Int 10). By Level 10 they will be pretty knowledgeable. Not as knowledgeable as an equivalent level Wizard for example but they still know stuff.
In the same way a Str7 BAB 20 person is still +18 to hit and cannot be described as a poor swordsman. They are just weak but skilled.
-----
Basically you roleplay as you like but success depends on the skills and rolls. Skills having a far greater effect than attributes.
There is a fine line though because you do need to roleplay your stats a bit or its just odd that you make a great speech or plan only to have it fail which ruins the verisimilitude of the world. Int is the worst for this though as you have the Int5 Barbarian acting as master tactician - GM could potentially step in here...
Its tricky.
-----
On topic though: There is no set way a LG Cha 7 character should be played. I would go with quiet and reserved by bossy and opinionated would fit too.
A major point though which I don't think has been touched on yet is that it depends to a great extent on the Wis and Int also!
| Robespierre |
It seems as if people want to punish min maxers more so then cha dumpers. I'm fine with you dumping a stat, just have some reason for it. For example the current alchemist I'm thinking of whipping up is going to have a penalty to cha. He's going to have a penalty to cha because I see my alchemist as being someone that doesn't have a huge interest in people. Perhaps when he talks he lashes out at people for next to no reason. I do understand the pains of having a player that just dumps and doesn't roleplay it though.