Even if it is "only" 3 below average he still has the magnetism and people skills of a troll. Hopefully the int keeps him from interacting. I think 7 is handicapped, just not the worst possable handicap.
Many gamers/geeks/engineers also have the magnetism and people skills of a troll. High Int and low charisma are quite prevalent. A local electronics company that employs 5000+ people (over 10,000 before the economy tanked) has an inhouse joke about how most of the people working there have zero social skills. - Gauss
Cross-species charisma comparisons aren't very useful. There are lizards with charisma scores of twelve. Do you ask players with 12 Cha how they plan to make it in the game with the people skills of a lizard? What is valid - and avoids constantly creating rp busts when the allegedly trollish pc routinely does better on social checks than average pcs - is to look at the actual ramifications of the scores, which say that 7 and 10 are barely distinguishable. You can say that 7 means "troll-level" on a pc, if you're willing to break immersion by introducing fluff/crunch discrepancies just because you dislike that tiny differences in raw stats don't mean as much as you wish they did.
There are different degrees of control, and if the DM wants to control the stats so much then he should have given them stat arrays of his own creation.
And no if he doesn't allow stat dumping then he didn't give them 25 point buy, he effectively* gave them 20 point buy.*for most builds for most classes.
Umm, no. I checked most of Treatmonks guides and he normally suggests a 8 in two stats , rarely a 7. So, that's a 21 pt buy even if you dump two stats, and most folks dump only one.
In any case, a 25 pt buy with "no dump stats" may be a 20 pt buy to some, but that's still mucho higher than the standard 15 pt buy. In order to get more than 25 pts by dumping starting from a 15, you have to have two 7's and a 9. And, altho a 7 in CHA will only hurt a few things, a 7 str will be difficult and a 9 wis will hurt also.
So, a 25pt buy with no dump stats is still generous.
I don't think anyone will claim that 19,14,14,9,7,7 is better than 19,14,14,12,10,10. For a wizard that's a net +2 to will saves & some critical skill checks and better carrying capacity.
First of all don't lie, Treantmonks guide always suggest at least one 7 (in some cases 2) and one 8. So yes a 25 point buy with no dumps is roughly the same with 20 point buy with dumps.
So now the bar is lowered right? Before we were talking with how generous the DM was with giving 25 point buy and now we are talking with how generous the DM is with giving 20 point buy.
Again if he wants to control what stats his players should have then he should do so cleanly and just tell them so, giving a player 25 point buy, not putting any rules on how to use them, and then punishing the player because he didn't like how the player made his character's stats is not mature.
There are different degrees of control, and if the DM wants to control the stats so much then he should have given them stat arrays of his own creation.
And no if he doesn't allow stat dumping then he didn't give them 25 point buy, he effectively* gave them 20 point buy.*for most builds for most classes.
Umm, no. I checked most of Treatmonks guides and he normally suggests a 8 in two stats , rarely a 7. So, that's a 21 pt buy even if you dump two stats, and most folks dump only one.
In any case, a 25 pt buy with "no dump stats" may be a 20 pt buy to some, but that's still mucho higher than the standard 15 pt buy. In order to get more than 25 pts by dumping starting from a 15, you have to have two 7's and a 9. And, altho a 7 in CHA will only hurt a few things, a 7 str will be difficult and a 9 wis will hurt also.
So, a 25pt buy with no dump stats is still generous.
I don't think anyone will claim that 19,14,14,9,7,7 is better than 19,14,14,12,10,10. For a wizard that's a net +2 to will saves & some critical skill checks and better carrying capacity.
That makes a lot of sense but the question is how much better.
Ok, this is way too long a thread.
Stats are (originally) rolled with 3d6. That gives equal chance (about 2%) for an 18 and a 3. That means that it is as comon having a 3 as an 18,
Let me pair this:
3-18
4-17
5-16
6-15
7-14
8-13
9-12
10-11
Having requirements to a character the actual people playing the game on a game night would not pass is really strange. And a little facist :-).
It is very likely that almost none reading this have all stats above 8. That does not a bad person make.
A local electronics company that employs 5000+ people (over 10,000 before the economy tanked) has an inhouse joke about how most of the people working there have zero social skills. - Gauss
Which is cool when amongst their peers, like a bunch of Dwarves down a mine.
The hassle comes when these guys go to 'practice some diplomacy and bluff' at the local tavern. The bouncers wont even let them in to some clubs, and once they get inside they will be the guys over at the corner booth mostly ignored. Of course there will be a few who do 'semi ok' because they at least are aware of social norms (Low Cha, but bought social skills to compensate past the 'first impression') but the rest are probably discounted as grognards.
Cross-species charisma comparisons aren't very useful. There are lizards with charisma scores of twelve. Do you ask players with 12 Cha how they plan to make it in the game with the people skills of a lizard? What is valid - and avoids constantly creating rp busts when the allegedly trollish pc routinely does better on social checks than average pcs - is to look at the actual ramifications of the scores, which say that 7 and 10 are barely distinguishable. You can say that 7 means "troll-level" on a pc, if you're willing to break immersion by introducing fluff/crunch discrepancies just because you dislike that tiny differences in raw stats don't mean as much as you wish they did.The stats mean what the gm says they mean. If he says a cha of 7 equates you with a troll, you should either accept that or not play.
If a DM says that a falchion is a 30-foot cube of steel, then I guess it is; I was thinking that there might be some in the audience who would reconsider their punishing houserules/misunderstandings in light of how the game actually works.
A local electronics company that employs 5000+ people (over 10,000 before the economy tanked) has an inhouse joke about how most of the people working there have zero social skills. - GaussWhich is cool when amongst their peers, like a bunch of Dwarves down a mine.
The hassle comes when these guys go to 'practice some diplomacy and bluff' at the local tavern. The bouncers wont even let them in to some clubs, and once they get inside they will be the guys over at the corner booth mostly ignored. Of course there will be a few who do 'semi ok' because they at least are aware of social norms (Low Cha, but bought social skills to compensate past the 'first impression') but the rest are probably discounted as grognards.
True, but I see very little difference between Mr. Uber Geek and Mr. Uber Wizard on this score. Both are in jobs where intelligence is more prized than charisma and charisma is often in short supply. - Gauss
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Even if it is "only" 3 below average he still has the magnetism and people skills of a troll. Hopefully the int keeps him from interacting. I think 7 is handicapped, just not the worst possable handicap.
One-sixth of human NPCs in Golarion have 8 CHA. So one-sixth of the human population of the world is a mere 1 point from troll-hood?
Relatedly, every single human on the planet has an 8 somewhere. So are you saying that the entire population of the planet is 1 point away from "handicapped" status?
Because unless you're talking about a special homebrew world of your own creation, you have to either say that everyone on the planet is borderline handicapped, or accept that a 7 doesn't mean what you think it means.
Those are your choices. Choose carefully.
Even if it is "only" 3 below average he still has the magnetism and people skills of a troll. Hopefully the int keeps him from interacting. I think 7 is handicapped, just not the worst possable handicap.One-sixth of human NPCs in Golarion have 8 CHA. So one-sixth of the human population of the world is a mere 1 point from troll-hood?
Relatedly, every single human on the planet has an 8 somewhere. So are you saying that the entire population of the planet is 1 point away from "handicapped" status?
Because unless you're talking about a special homebrew world of your own creation, you have to either say that everyone on the planet is borderline handicapped, or accept that a 7 doesn't mean what you think it means.
Those are your choices. Choose carefully.
Maybe trolls are a lot more charismatic than everyone thinks...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Maybe trolls are a lot more charismatic than everyone thinks...
They have 6 CHA.
FUN FACT: I've played in a Pathfinder Society scenario where there's a troll NPC. He's sort of a pseudo-crimelord type of character and you have to diplomacize your way past him and bribe him into letting you use the local ferry. Didn't seem very handicapped to me.
Even if it is "only" 3 below average he still has the magnetism and people skills of a troll. Hopefully the int keeps him from interacting. I think 7 is handicapped, just not the worst possable handicap.One-sixth of human NPCs in Golarion have 8 CHA. So one-sixth of the human population of the world is a mere 1 point from troll-hood?
Relatedly, every single human on the planet has an 8 somewhere. So are you saying that the entire population of the planet is 1 point away from "handicapped" status?
Because unless you're talking about a special homebrew world of your own creation, you have to either say that everyone on the planet is borderline handicapped, or accept that a 7 doesn't mean what you think it means.
Those are your choices. Choose carefully.
That's not true. Our campaign is run out of Sandpoint, and none of my PC's have a 8 anywhere. Are you going to tell me that my DM can set his campaign in Golarion? Or the OP here, he sets his campaign in Golarion, you mean he can't do it? And I have seen NPC from Golarion without a single dump stat. Of course, they may well have "bought off" those.
And also, even those 15 pts is standard if PFS, there's no rule any stat has to be a Dump stat.
Sure, the standard arrays include a 8. But you know that means- no one in Golarion has anything less than a 8 either.
Even if it is "only" 3 below average he still has the magnetism and people skills of a troll. Hopefully the int keeps him from interacting. I think 7 is handicapped, just not the worst possable handicap.One-sixth of human NPCs in Golarion have 8 CHA. So one-sixth of the human population of the world is a mere 1 point from troll-hood?
Relatedly, every single human on the planet has an 8 somewhere. So are you saying that the entire population of the planet is 1 point away from "handicapped" status?
Because unless you're talking about a special homebrew world of your own creation, you have to either say that everyone on the planet is borderline handicapped, or accept that a 7 doesn't mean what you think it means.
Those are your choices. Choose carefully.
That's not true. Our campaign is run out of Sandpoint, and none of my PC's have a 8 anywhere. Are you going to tell me that my DM can set his campaign in Golarion? Or the OP here, he sets his campaign in Golarion, you mean he can't do it? And I have seen NPC from Golarion without a single dump stat. Of course, they may well have "bought off" those.
And also, even those 15 pts is standard if PFS, there's no rule any stat has to be a Dump stat.
Sure, the standard arrays include a 8. But you know that means- no one in Golarion has anything less than a 8 either.
True except for the caeveat of negative charisma races.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's not true. Our campaign is run out of Sandpoint, and none of my PC's have a 8 anywhere.
What do the PCs have to do with anything I said?
Are you going to tell me that my DM can set his campaign in Golarion?
Huh? Are you perhaps typing hastily and getting ahead of your fingers? Because I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Or the OP here, he sets his campaign in Golarion, you mean he can't do it?
I'm saying nothing of the sort (at least, if I understand your question). People can set their campaigns wherever they want. Run a campaign with nothing but Advanced Full-Blooded Azlanti for all I care. Or just put minimums on your players' stats. I don't care. For the umpteenth time, I'm not telling anyone what restrictions they can or cannot add to their own games.
All I'm interested in talking about is what a sub-10 score in a stat actually means. Some people keep trying to argue that a 7-8 is monstrous ("RP like a troll") or some kind of crippling handicap.
And that is wrong.
If someone wants to make a custom campaign where the stats mean different things, fine. But if you're coming into a thread saying "this is what a low stat means" (instead of "this is what I've changed low stats to mean in my own game"), then you can be factually incorrect, and I'm calling out those who make such claims (and no one else).
And I have seen NPC from Golarion without a single dump stat. Of course, they may well have "bought off" those.
The existence of a few custom stat arrays has no bearing on what I'm talking about.
And also, even those 15 pts is standard if PFS, there's no rule any stat has to be a Dump stat.
No idea what you're getting at here.
Sure, the standard arrays include a 8. But you know that means- no one in Golarion has anything less than a 8 either.
Except for, you know, every single race with a racial penalty. One-third of dwarves have 7 CHA or less, and function just fine. One-third of elves have 7 CON or less, and aren't considered invalids. One-third of halflings and gnomes have 7 STR or less, and aren't considered cripples.
The claim (made by some in this thread) that an ability score that permeates entire races is crippling, a handicap, or monstrous flies in the face of how the Core Rules are built and represents either plain ignorance (not knowing that everyone has an 8 or worse) or pure stubbornness (not admitting that one's preferred belief doesn't match the facts).
And anything outside of that (such as whether or not it's appropriate to houserule your own ability score guidelines) is completely unrelated to anything I'm saying, so anyone who values being regarded as literate should avoid asking me to defend any stances I haven't taken.
It's not a "silly" houserule. Look, he gave them a 25 pt buy, but just doesn;t want anything below 10 (or is it a 8?). He gave them enough points to build anything, there's no need to dump a stat at all.
Yes, he should have told them "No dumping stats, nothing below a 10 (or8)".
But folks, let us not get into "I am doing this for RPing reasons". I really, REALLy doubt that his player, if told "OK you get a 25 pt buy. You can have a stat as low as you want, but you don;t gain back any points for buying below a 10" if anyone would thus dump CHA.
He's dumping CHA to boost CON, not for RPing reasons.
I love this point. I guarantee if there was no mechanical advantage to dumping stats no one do it for "role playing reasons". Which is why I say it becomes cheese on a point buy of 20 or greater. You've been given enough to make a highly effective character. Trying to bleed it until it bleeds the last drop is cheese. Again, below an 8 is my focus point.
Cheese is subjective. All a person can really truthfully claim is that "It is cheese in my game."
Saying "I will give you 5 more points" does not make dumping stats any more or cheesy.
Back to the subjective thing. A GM might run a game so difficult that the players feel the dumping is needed. Even if the GM doesn't the player might come from a group where a GM does run games like that.
In short circumstances are always a factor, which only backs up the fact that cheese is subjective.
edit:spelling.
I love this point. I guarantee if there was no mechanical advantage to dumping stats no one do it for "role playing reasons". Which is why I say it becomes cheese on a point buy of 20 or greater. You've been given enough to make a highly effective character. Trying to bleed it until it bleeds the last drop is cheese. Again, below an 8 is my focus point.
It's not a "silly" houserule. Look, he gave them a 25 pt buy, but just doesn;t want anything below 10 (or is it a 8?). He gave them enough points to build anything, there's no need to dump a stat at all.
Yes, he should have told them "No dumping stats, nothing below a 10 (or8)".
But folks, let us not get into "I am doing this for RPing reasons". I really, REALLy doubt that his player, if told "OK you get a 25 pt buy. You can have a stat as low as you want, but you don;t gain back any points for buying below a 10" if anyone would thus dump CHA.
He's dumping CHA to boost CON, not for RPing reasons.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. To me this is a "silly" house-rule to have and that's my personal opinion you can agree or disagree I don't care. I don't tell players how to make their characters, what races to play, or what classes to play. I may take a small stand on some alignments which I won't allow (i.e. no CE in a good heroic game) so that I don't have a serial killer in the group. If they want to min/max, that's fine with me. It really doesn't make that much of a difference in the games that I run. All this being said, again, it's the GM's prerogative to do whatever he/she wants to do at their own table and we can all (on the forums) agree or disagree with their decisions, but it's not us playing the game with them and in the end it really doesn't matter to us.
@Deyvantius you can't "guarantee" the mechanical advantages/disadvantages with stat dumping. I've personally dumped stats on my characters for role-play reasons alone. I've taken a lower dice roll purposefully to give my characters the concept that I wanted, so you really can't go around guaranteeing things like that, it's a wrong assumption to make because you really don't know how all other gamers play their characters and what they do to make them work.
I love this point. I guarantee if there was no mechanical advantage to dumping stats no one do it for "role playing reasons".
I've dumped stats every single time it fit the character concept I was playing whether or not it gave me an advantage. Sometimes you've got to gimp your character to fit your idea. Every single time in my experience it has been worth it.
I don't know if that is what his player is doing. Probably not. But I'd give him the benefit of the doubt first time and see how he role played it. If he fails to play up to that low charisma I might next campaign say something.
Fair enough. It was wrong of me to say "guarantee". It's probably more like 90+ percent. I've been gaming a long time and have never seen it. YMMV.
you can play a unassuming character without having 7 CHA.
Of course you can role play an unassuming character without killing cha. It is hard to mechanically play an unassuming character without dumping cha. Much like it is hard to play mechanically a fragile war genius without dumping con. If you don't dump it you become the party whiner. If you do you risk death. Its just a freaking game take a chance. Worst case scenario you reroll a new idea.
Dumping cha is almost as bad as dumping con depending on the dm. Con keeps you alive. Cha can keep you out of fights.
|
Even if it is "only" 3 below average he still has the magnetism and people skills of a troll. Hopefully the int keeps him from interacting. I think 7 is handicapped, just not the worst possable handicap.One-sixth of human NPCs in Golarion have 8 CHA. So one-sixth of the human population of the world is a mere 1 point from troll-hood?
Relatedly, every single human on the planet has an 8 somewhere. So are you saying that the entire population of the planet is 1 point away from "handicapped" status?
Because unless you're talking about a special homebrew world of your own creation, you have to either say that everyone on the planet is borderline handicapped, or accept that a 7 doesn't mean what you think it means.
Those are your choices. Choose carefully.
What rules set says every human must have an 8? The problem is we can look at strength and get raw numbers, mental stats we cannot. And yes they are borderline handicapped just like borderline retarded or functional autistic, same as a low dex character might compare to neuro-muscular problems at some level more than "just clumsy". Remember 7 is half way between average and minimal functional human ability
|
|
I love this point. I guarantee if there was no mechanical advantage to dumping stats no one do it for "role playing reasons".I've dumped stats every single time it fit the character concept I was playing whether or not it gave me an advantage. Sometimes you've got to gimp your character to fit your idea. Every single time in my experience it has been worth it.
I don't know if that is what his player is doing. Probably not. But I'd give him the benefit of the doubt first time and see how he role played it. If he fails to play up to that low charisma I might next campaign say something.
But you dump with reason, not just to get more power where you want it. Reminds me of the old Living City days where no fighter i ever saw had more than 8 in any mental stat and most were flat 6 in all, just to max out the physical
Cha might keep you out of fights, but not very well. The reason that people dump Cha and not Con is that -1 or -2 HP/Level is a much more dire drawback than -1 or -2 to social skill rolls even in campaigns with a heavy social aspect. Having 7 cha instead of 10 means that you're going to botch a barely perceptible number of additional charisma checks. Having 2 HP/level less than you otherwise would means that you're dramatically more likely to die.
Here's where I think people go wrong thinking about it:
1) Con is mostly for HP, plus Fort save and some relatively uncommon other checks.
2) Cha is for social checks, plus a little DC-setting and UMD.
3) Staying alive in combat is important.
4) Succeeding at social checks is important.
So far, so good. I don't think that anyone would disagree. Where people go wrong is when they go from those four pretty indisputable things to "Because 3 and 4 are both important, Con and Cha are both important." What's missing is point 5:
5) Even if the DM doesn't just let the party face handle everything, points in Cha have a much smaller effect on succeeding at social encounters than points in Con have at staying alive.
Essentially, when you look at stat points, feats, and skills, each has some competitive advantages against the others when it comes to succeeding at different things. A character that spends his stat points and feats on survivability and skill points on social stuff is going to be more effective at BOTH tasks than a character who spends his skill points on survivability and his stat points and feats on social stuff. Skill points spent on social stuff is a very efficient use of character options. Trying to spend skill points to increase your survivability in combat is not very efficient - you can do it a little, but you don't get much bang for your buck. Spending stat points to increase your social ability is very inefficient. Spending stat points to increase your survivability is very efficient.
Most people with any degree of system mastery sort of figure this out, even if they wouldn't articulate it that way, but it's why many people dump Cha and not Con - it's not that they don't care about social stuff, it's that putting points into Charisma is an inefficient way to get better at social stuff. It's similar to how just because someone puts points into diplomacy instead of climb, it doesn't mean that he doesn't care about combat, even though climb is a more combat-relevant skill. He just realizes that points in climb is not an efficient way to get better at combat, and points in diplomacy is an efficient way to get better at social stuff.
That's not true. Our campaign is run out of Sandpoint, and none of my PC's have a 8 anywhere.What do the PCs have to do with anything I said?
Are you going to tell me that my DM can set his campaign in Golarion?Huh? Are you perhaps typing hastily and getting ahead of your fingers? Because I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Or the OP here, he sets his campaign in Golarion, you mean he can't do it?I'm saying nothing of the sort (at least, if I understand your question). People can set their campaigns wherever they want.
And I have seen NPC from Golarion without a single dump stat. Of course, they may well have "bought off" those.The existence of a few custom stat arrays has no bearing on what I'm talking about.
Yes, I know the standard point array includes a 8. But your post sez that every single PC in Golarion thereby has the standard point array. That's not true. A campaign can be set in Golarion and not have the standard point array. Thus when you say: "One-sixth of human NPCs in Golarion have 8 CHA. So one-sixth of the human population of the world is a mere 1 point from troll-hood?
Relatedly, every single human on the planet has an 8 somewhere. So are you saying that the entire population of the planet is 1 point away from "handicapped" status?" that is false. Not every PC in Golarion has the standard point array. Many have a 20 pt array , some have a 25 pt build, other roll their stats. Not every single human is a NPC, either and the DM can assign whatever stats he wants to those NPC. Thus, not every single human is built on a std pt array, thereby it is not true that every single human on Golarion has a 8. I have a NPC. On Golarion. He has no stat less than a 10. He's proof right there.
Maybe 1/6 of 1st level human commoner's have a 8 in CHA. We don;t very often play those.
Your opinion of what a 7 or 8 means in a stat is your opinion. It's not RAW. The RAW only state what a 0 CHA means. Other than that, the RAW simply assigns numerical values.
I don't tell players how to make their characters, what races to play, or what classes to play.
So, a 100 point buy is OK? Straight 25's in all stats, maybe?
I'll bet you set some sort of limit on how to roll or a point buy.
Hey guys,
Im about to start gming a jade regent game and im running into a problem with a player.
He is planning to play a human wizard and wants me to ok dropping his cha score down 7.
If this was a splat game sure what ever but there is actual role playing and having the charisma of a badger just doesnt seem like a good idea.
I told him no and he wants to be pissy about it
so I asked him how he was planning to rp having the cha of a troll.
His response was that his character is very stoic.
I guess when I think of stoic it actually screams dang that guy have cha oozing out of him. The typical guy in the war movies that doesnt say anything and is a total bamf.
am I being a jerk for saying no when a big part of the jade regent is having a character that's somewhat likeable so the NPCs dont kick them out of the caravan?
Mm, I can see the arguments of a stoic being high or low charisma. Because being stoic and being in control is more tied to experience or high wisdom. They know what is going on, the truth, and they are keeping it together.
The badger line was great, and dnd used to be about playing a character with a low stat, so I wouldn't just cut him down immediately. Better than refusal is to ask a question and get people thinking. Get him to imagine someone with a 7 cha, how they would react, lower the opinion of others, be terrible at persuasion by default. Because if he wants to be a character without emotion or character, he just wants to be a bot. Which is great for mp com games, but not all that dnd can be.
Good luck!
I don't tell players how to make their characters, what races to play, or what classes to play.So, a 100 point buy is OK? Straight 25's in all stats, maybe?
I'll bet you set some sort of limit on how to roll or a point buy.
I want to play a mind flayer with a save versus mind blast of 101! Yaaay!
Cha might keep you out of fights, but not very well. The reason that people dump Cha and not Con is that -1 or -2 HP/Level is a much more dire drawback than -1 or -2 to social skill rolls even in campaigns with a heavy social aspect. Having 7 cha instead of 10 means that you're going to botch a barely perceptible number of additional charisma checks. Having 2 HP/level less than you otherwise would means that you're dramatically more likely to die.
Here's where I think people go wrong thinking about it:
1) Con is mostly for HP, plus Fort save and some relatively uncommon other checks.
2) Cha is for social checks, plus a little DC-setting and UMD.
3) Staying alive in combat is important.
4) Succeeding at social checks is important.So far, so good. I don't think that anyone would disagree. Where people go wrong is when they go from those four pretty indisputable things to "Because 3 and 4 are both important, Con and Cha are both important." What's missing is point 5:
5) Even if the DM doesn't just let the party face handle everything, points in Cha have a much smaller effect on succeeding at social encounters than points in Con have at staying alive.
Essentially, when you look at stat points, feats, and skills, each has some competitive advantages against the others when it comes to succeeding at different things. A character that spends his stat points and feats on survivability and skill points on social stuff is going to be more effective at BOTH tasks than a character who spends his skill points on survivability and his stat points and feats on social stuff. Skill points spent on social stuff is a very efficient use of character options. Trying to spend skill points to increase your survivability in combat is not very efficient - you can do it a little, but you don't get much bang for your buck. Spending stat points to increase your social ability is very inefficient. Spending stat points to increase your survivability is very efficient.
Most people with any degree of system...
I ran a Sargavan game, in which I explained before-hand that it would be heavy combat, but not to neglect the social skills or entirely dump charisma. Few players ignored the last part, only heard the first part.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, that's pretty common, I'll admit.
That's not true. Our campaign is run out of Sandpoint, and none of my PC's have a 8 anywhere.What do the PCs have to do with anything I said?
Are you going to tell me that my DM can set his campaign in Golarion?Huh? Are you perhaps typing hastily and getting ahead of your fingers? Because I'm not sure what you're getting at.
Or the OP here, he sets his campaign in Golarion, you mean he can't do it?I'm saying nothing of the sort (at least, if I understand your question). People can set their campaigns wherever they want.
And I have seen NPC from Golarion without a single dump stat. Of course, they may well have "bought off" those.The existence of a few custom stat arrays has no bearing on what I'm talking about.
Yes, I know the standard point array includes a 8. But your post sez that every single PC in Golarion thereby has the standard point array. That's not true. A campaign can be set in Golarion and not have the standard point array. Thus when you say: "One-sixth of human NPCs in Golarion have 8 CHA. So one-sixth of the human population of the world is a mere 1 point from troll-hood?
Relatedly, every single human on the planet has an 8 somewhere. So are you saying that the entire population of the planet is 1 point away from "handicapped" status?" that is false. Not every PC in Golarion has the standard point array. Many have a 20 pt array , some have a 25 pt build, other roll their stats. Not every single human is a NPC, either and the DM can assign whatever stats he wants to those NPC. Thus, not every single human is built on a std pt array, thereby it is not true that every single human on Golarion has a 8. I have a NPC. On Golarion. He has no stat less than a 10. He's proof right there.
Maybe 1/6 of 1st level human commoner's have a 8 in CHA. We don;t very often play those.
Your opinion of what a 7 or 8 means in a stat is your opinion. It's not RAW....
Disclaimer:Discussions on the board assumed standard rules or guidelines. Bringing house rules and GM Fiat in the situation skews things too much. The reason is that it is too hard to account for every house rule so when discussing facts house-rules don't have much weight. Right now facts are being discussed.
Carry on.
Disclaimer:Discussions on the board assumed standard rules or guidelines. Bringing house rules and GM Fiat in the situation skews things too much. The reason is that it is too hard to account for every house rule so when discussing facts house-rules don't have much weight. Right now facts are being discussed.
.
"Ability Scores
Each character has six ability scores that represent his character's most basic attributes. They are his raw talent and prowess. While a character rarely rolls a check using just an ability score, these scores, and the modifiers they create, affect nearly every aspect of a character's skills and abilities. Each ability score generally ranges from 3 to 18, although racial bonuses and penalties can alter this; an average ability score is 10.Generating Ability Scores
There are a number of different methods used to generate ability scores. Each of these methods gives a different level of flexibility and randomness to character generation.
Racial modifiers (adjustments made to your ability scores due to your character's race—see Races) are applied after the scores are generated.
Standard: Roll 4d6, discard the lowest die result, and add the three remaining results together. Record this total and repeat the process until six numbers are generated. Assign these totals to your ability scores as you see fit. This method is less random than Classic and tends to create characters with above-average ability scores.
Classic: Roll 3d6 and add the dice together. Record this total and repeat the process until you generate six numbers. Assign these results to your ability scores as you see fit. This method is quite random, and some characters will have clearly superior abilities. This randomness can be taken one step further, with the totals applied to specific ability scores in the order they are rolled. Characters generated using this method are difficult to fit to predetermined concepts, as their scores might not support given classes or personalities, and instead are best designed around their ability scores.
Heroic: Roll 2d6 and add 6 to the sum of the dice. Record this total and repeat the process until six numbers are generated. Assign these totals to your ability scores as you see fit. This is less random than the Standard method and generates characters with mostly above-average scores.
Dice Pool: Each character has a pool of 24d6 to assign to his statistics. Before the dice are rolled, the player selects the number of dice to roll for each score, with a minimum of 3d6 for each ability. Once the dice have been assigned, the player rolls each group and totals the result of the three highest dice. For more high-powered games, the GM should increase the total number of dice to 28. This method generates characters of a similar power to the Standard method.
Purchase: Each character receives a number of points to spend on increasing his basic attributes. In this method, all attributes start at a base of 10. A character can increase an individual score by spending some of his points. Likewise, he can gain more points to spend on other scores by decreasing one or more of his ability scores. No score can be reduced below 7 or raised above 18 using this method. See Table: Ability Score Costs for the costs of each score. After all the points are spent, apply any racial modifiers the character might have.
The number of points you have to spend using the purchase method depends on the type of campaign you are playing. The standard value for a character is 15 points. Average nonplayer characters (NPCs) are typically built using as few as 3 points. See Table: Ability Score Points for a number of possible point values depending on the style of campaign. The purchase method emphasizes player choice and creates equally balanced characters. This system is typically used for organized play events, such as the Pathfinder Society (visit paizo.com/pathfinderSociety for more details on this exciting campaign)."
Those are not houserules. It is perfectly Ok in PF to roll your stats. It's also Ok by the rules to assign a larger pt buy.
Not HOUSERULES.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stuff about how different PCs might be built
I think most people assume that the PCs actually being played are the only ones in the world at the time, and the bulk of the planet's population is NPCs. That's why standard arrays exist (which I've already cited, but you ignored).
The majority of the population has 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8. The heroic members of the NPC population have 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8.
Pointing out how easy it is for PCs to not have an 8 doesn't change that the standard assumption of NPCs includes one.
Pointing out that the GM can change things does not change the fact that the default includes an 8.
I'm only talking about the default scores, and what that implies about the definitions of high and low scores.
Yes, NPCs with other stats can exist. They would be customized though, because they're not using the standard arrays. The definition of just how bad a 7 really is can only rationally be based on the standard, not on custom stuff.
If you base interpretations on the standard, then you get a baseline of how things work. If you base interpretations on customized stuff, then you've created all your own definitions. Which again is fine for your own game but is useless in a discussion of the abstract.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What rules set says every human must have an 8?
That would be the Core Rules, actually:
Basic NPCs: The ability scores for a basic NPC are: 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8.
Heroic NPCs: The ability scores for a heroic NPC are: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8.
The rules are written with the assumption that having an 8 is an everyday occurrence.
As DrDeth is so fond of pointing out, custom NPCs can be made who don't have any 8's. But they're custom. Insofar as Core Rules are concerned, however, 8 is an everyday weakness. If an 8 is borderline handicapped, then every non-custom NPC is borderline handicapped. And if 8-to-7 is the threshold of being crippled, then one-sixth of non-custom NPCs with racial penalties is handicapped.
One-sixth. Really?
I find it easier to believe that people's perceptions of what a 7 means is wrong than that Golarion is full of invalids. Some people in this thread feel differently.
Actually there are more people without an 8 in charisma might actully end up having a 9 as their lowers stat once they take aging effects into account and then a ten if they get old but then there phyiscal ability scores start to suck. This is a nitpick though. If you have an old person with an 8 in a phyiscal ability score you could end up with a 5 str dex or con.
At that age most adventurers are retired or godly powerful high level killing machines though.
What rules set says every human must have an 8?That would be the Core Rules, actually:
Basic NPCs: The ability scores for a basic NPC are: 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, and 8.
Heroic NPCs: The ability scores for a heroic NPC are: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8.
The rules are written with the assumption that having an 8 is an everyday occurrence.
As DrDeth is so fond of pointing out, custom NPCs can be made who don't have any 8's. But they're custom. Insofar as Core Rules are concerned, however, 8 is an everyday weakness. If an 8 is borderline handicapped, then every non-custom NPC is borderline handicapped. And if 8-to-7 is the threshold of being crippled, then one-sixth of non-custom NPCs with racial penalties is handicapped.
One-sixth. Really?
I find it easier to believe that people's perceptions of what a 7 means is wrong than that Golarion is full of invalids. Some people in this thread feel differently.
Those scores are the most common. But they are not 100%. Not only is not 100% of the population NPCs, you left out this “Some NPCs might not fit into one of these categories and should have custom ability scores.”
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Those scores are the most common. But they are not 100%. Not only is not 100% of the population NPCs, you left out this “Some NPCs might not fit into one of these categories and should have custom ability scores.”
Yes, I know. If you would read my posts, you'd know I know that. I already said that yes, some NPCs will be custom. When I talk about "one-third of the population..." I'm talking on the global level. The handful of custom-statted NPCs in the world don't really throw that proportion off.
And as I've said for at least the fourth time now, custom NPCs don't determine what the different ability scores mean; normal NPCs do. Custom NPCs are exceptions. That's what "custom" means - made to be different.
The question is "How bad is a 7, anyway?" The answer I keep giving is "Well, since the rules make it clear that it's normal to have an 8 and not uncommon to have a 6 or 7, it couldn't be too bad."
And then your "rebuttal" keeps coming up as "But a custom NPC might not have an 8!"
...So what?
7 Cha in Jade Regent? So the starting relationship score with npcs is an amazing -2? He will probably be kicking himself over that one once he gets how the relationship subsystem (and the bonuses that come from it) work. Our 8 Cha inquisitor regretted the 8 immediately once he finally understood the subsystem.
Anyways, do you know anyone that you usually wish would just shut up and go away after they try to talk for a few minutes? That's a 7 Cha. The person is actually unpleasant to interact with if they don't have any special training/education to compensate for it.
I don't tell players how to make their characters, what races to play, or what classes to play.So, a 100 point buy is OK? Straight 25's in all stats, maybe?
I'll bet you set some sort of limit on how to roll or a point buy.
Wow you take things out of context pretty badly and like to warp what I say. That's fine, there are plenty of posters like you on the forums. I'll bite and give you the answer that you obviously didn't see from my other post and spell it out in layman's terms or simpler terms if you really need it.
Here you go:
The context was for the OP and his 25-point buy and my saying that I wouldn't limit how they spent their points with min/max. I don't care if any or all of my players min/max stat dump for a character whether it be for role-playing purposes or power gaming. If I want to run a more epic game, I'll allow 4d6 dropping lowest and re-rolling 1's.
As to a 100 point buy as you wanted to include into this conversation for some odd reason, I'd be willing to run a high level game where I'd allow something like that. If I did something like this, I'd just amp up the NPC's and DC's they'd be facing a bit so it wasn't a cake walk all the time, but with those kinds of stats they'd pretty much be super heroes and it could be a fun game for all at the table with that stated at the beginning of the campaign.
|
I think we have returned to a "what does a 7 mean" thread which has been visited a number of times. RAW its -2 to your roll. Interpretation varies considerably. Ultimately its up to your GM to play it as they see fit, I think posters will never actually agree on this.
I can imagine the frustration if you want your PC's to be balanced, but in my experience it rarely happens without laying down guidelines before generation.
As for NPC arrays, people have pointed out that your "average" NPC will have a score of 8 somewhere. If this is modified by race then you can have a 6. When age modifiers are added this can drop as low as zero, making the person dead or bedridden, which is not uncommon for venerable people. So in a society of typical NPC's you will see stats on simple commoners of level 1 from 18 (13 +2 race +3 age), to 0 (8 -2 race -6 age). Thats without considering heroic or custom builds.
I appreciate your comment on not dumping con DrDeth. As another poster pointed out, its hard to make it through in Pathfinder with a low physical stat, its a physically biased system. Even the races with a con penalty normally compensate by filling the stat with at least a 12 (such as Drow). I have justified my dumps in charisma and intelligence with "dodgy" roleplay reasons, but they have made more interesting characters in the long run. Normally I don't play with 25pt buys however. The extra 5 points only translate in to 2 or 3 points higher up the scale, 14 to 16 in dex for example, the point of initiative, AC, to hit, stealth, acrobatics, ride etc. will be more beneficial than getting rid of a -2 penalty to bluff, diplomacy, handle animal, intimidate, perform and UMD.
Unfortunately the point buy system encourages dipping to 7 for the extra 4 points so unless you specifically rule it out it is likely to be used. In the case of fighters, clerics and sorcerers, the extra -1 int penalty if dumped has a pretty negligable effect as a 7, 8 or 9 will still result in 1 skill point per level. As the village idiot in the Gamemastery guide has an int of 4 you are still a good way of idiotic, impaired or otherwise disabled.
7 Cha in Jade Regent? So the starting relationship score with npcs is an amazing -2? He will probably be kicking himself over that one once he gets how the relationship subsystem (and the bonuses that come from it) work. Our 8 Cha inquisitor regretted the 8 immediately once he finally understood the subsystem.
Good point. it is a shame that such a reputation subsystem is not a part of the core rules. The biggest problem with Charisma is that it doesn't mesh quite as much with the rest of the crunch for most of the classes. Mechanically propping the ability up would be just the sort of boost that it needs.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The thing that really bugs me about this thread is that it wouldn't even exist if the 7 was in Strength. It also wouldn't exist if the character was a sorcerer and the 7 was in, well, any other stat. I've seen barbarians with 3 Intelligence, and nobody even bats an eye, but as soon as you dump Charisma, somebody wants to complain about it like it's some sort of game breaking social disease. I'll really never understand the phenomena.
The thing that really bugs me about this thread is that it wouldn't even exist if the 7 was in Strength. It also wouldn't exist if the character was a sorcerer and the 7 was in, well, any other stat. I've seen barbarians with 3 Intelligence, and nobody even bats an eye, but as soon as you dump Charisma, somebody wants to complain about it like it's some sort of game breaking social disease. I'll really never understand the phenomena.
Oh, that's just because it's frequently agreed upon that Charisma is the least useful of the 6 abilities unless you're playing a class that is heavily dependent on it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is an iconic with a 6 in charisma, his name is Harsk. Harsk doesn't have the social issues that some GMs associate with a 7 in charisma. He isn't constantly talking, he isn't being super annoying. Npcs aren't constantly attacking or refusing service to him or his group. In fact Harsk is stoic...
High wis low charisma could be stoic as well but still understand what is going on but this is low wis as well.
disdains the taste of alcohol, and prefers to handle his battles at range rather than in melee. Yet few
dare to mock him for his choices, for if there’s anywhere that Harsk is dwarven, it is in his gruff and
off-putting attitude. Much of his anger stems from the slaughter of his brother’s warband. Harsk
came upon the band, slain to a man by giants, moments too late to save his brother. Harsk’s hatred
of giants has fueled him and shapes his life. He prefers strong tea over alcohol (to keep his senses
sharp), the wildlands of the surface world (where giants can be found), and the crossbow over the
axe (which allows him to start fights faster). His companions value his skill at combat even if they’re
somewhat afraid of him.
but as it says in his description they keep him around for his skills but he scares the crap out of all his allies.
We are talking about a character that his allies decided the best course of action was to shoot him out of a catapult at a dragon, even though ezren thier wizard keeps fly prepared.
sounds like a good way to get rid of a dragon and an off putting dwarf.