Oh yeah, cause Hitler was a real tank... :PIt sure wasn't diplomacy that stopped him.
Hah! Well played; I enjoyed that. :D
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Take your character sheet.
cross out charisma
cross out wisdom
add a new line: presence
Use presence for all the things charisma and wisdom were used for.
Tweak the point-buy system a bit.
Problem solved.
Also - Paladins are less MAD and Monks don't need to grunt anymore. Yeah!
If you are adventuring with the band of retards my character is hanging out with (and it's okay to say that, because my character is just as retarded) it's always handy to have somebody with good bluff and diplomacy to keep our heads off the chopping block.
Oh yeah, cause Hitler was a real tank... :PIt sure wasn't diplomacy that stopped him.
No, but perform (oratory) was what started the whole thing.
In our home game we have a rule that a players Charisma score effects a players personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.
Makes it a very valuable ability to have in many aspects of the game.
YMMV.
that sounds pretty much RAW though as my own spin, i would say the appearance portion is more about how you present yourself (social impressions) than it is what you look like. you can look like street rabble and provide a good impression, or you can be sinfully gorgeous and be overall insecure.
leave the description up to the player.
the reason a general beauty stat wouldn't be a good fit, is because different parts of the world have different standards of beauty. what may be attractive to one person might be completely abominable to another.
i had a PC (with tuesday tony) whose charisma went up after he was burned alive by the prince of Saamdi. the only thing differentiating him from Shishio Makoto was that we didn't have Steven Jay Blum to voice him. i even got bonus XP for doing a raspy in character voice to represent his badly charred vocal cords.
Funny that?that sounds pretty much RAW thoughIn our home game we have a rule that a players Charisma score effects a players personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.
Makes it a very valuable ability to have in many aspects of the game.
YMMV.
well, do your campaigns have universal standards of beauty?
or do you interpret the appearance part the way i do? (impressions, presentation, etc)
|
Funny that?that sounds pretty much RAW thoughIn our home game we have a rule that a players Charisma score effects a players personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.
Makes it a very valuable ability to have in many aspects of the game.
YMMV.
well, do your campaigns have universal standards of beauty?
or do you interpret the appearance part the way i do? (impressions, presentation, etc)
In an attempt to block this derail before it starts, the player can define their low charisma in whatever way they and the GM agree is reflective of a low charisma score. Pretty but socially awkward low charisma is just as viable as ugly bust charming high charisma.
But if you decide not to have it reflect, and therefore are going off book, it isn't surprising if you don't think it has value.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Charisma does not suck. I love the fact CHA is used for social skills, and is great for RPing.
Role playing a low charisma can be fun too. Short, blunt, and scathingly to the point never goes over well at parties but its damned funny to watch.
i never said anything about using Wis a dump stat, only using Cha as one.
Just because a character has low charisma, is more of a shy background sort of person, doesn't mean there isn't a lot of roleplaying in it for them. They can still have very obvious quirks and character traits. They can still talk a lot and whatnot. Charisma says nothing about the amount of roleplaying you can do, while it does affect how you play a character, but that's what all mental stats do, actually even physical stats can influence that.
A high charisma character who is, by personality and apperance, short, blunt, and scathingly to the point is damned funny to watch (see any of a number of Danny Devito characters). A player acting out of character can be funny, too, but I wouldn't calll it roleplaying.Charisma does not suck. I love the fact CHA is used for social skills, and is great for RPing.Role playing a low charisma can be fun too. Short, blunt, and scathingly to the point never goes over well at parties but its damned funny to watch.
Oh, so I'm doing it wrong then?
A person with a low charisma cheeses people off and makes a bad impression. Telling the Baroness that the dress makes her look like a 10 pound sausage in a 5 pound skin is a perfectly valid way of role playing that, as is standing off to the side in the party like a typical wall flower.
Charisma is a measure of your ability to be liked, not a measure of how cool your character is or your players ability to role play. You do not become a better role player because you've got a higher number on the sheet.
Take your character sheet.
cross out charisma
cross out wisdom
add a new line: presenceUse presence for all the things charisma and wisdom were used for.
Tweak the point-buy system a bit.Problem solved.
Also - Paladins are less MAD and Monks don't need to grunt anymore. Yeah!
How does this help Paladins, other than by giving them a better Will save and Perception? (Actually, they'll be doubling on this stat for Will saves if you do this.)
Charisma is your character's ability to make a social impression, not just be liked. That's why Intimidate as well as Diplomacy is based on it.
Its the ability to make the social impression that you want. Someone with a 10 cha blends into the background and makes no waves. A dwarf with a 5 cha makes a very large and very bad impression wherever they go.
+2 Constitution, +2 Wisdom, –2 Charisma: Dwarves are both tough and wise, but also a bit gruff.
A good roleplayer with a character with a low charisma is really good at playing a forgettable nebish who, when he most doesn't want to, makes faux pas.
Right, because there's only one true way to role play something.
How does this help Paladins, other than by giving them a better Will save and Perception? (Actually, they'll be doubling on this stat for Will saves if you do this.)Take your character sheet.
cross out charisma
cross out wisdom
add a new line: presenceUse presence for all the things charisma and wisdom were used for.
Tweak the point-buy system a bit.Problem solved.
Also - Paladins are less MAD and Monks don't need to grunt anymore. Yeah!
They may spend more points in Str or Con, not having to split betweem Cha and Wis.
Sorcerers and Bards will get better will saves also.
Cleric will have an easier time being the party face.
All in all, I don't think it would unbalance the game, as the skill points will still need to be spent, and a sorcerer or Bard will save won't be better than a cleric's.
Also, it would somewhat limit "abusive" dumping, for fear of a bad will save.
You may have to look closely at racial adjustments.
But I feel it would be simple enough to houserule this and that it would benefit the game.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you impose additional penalties on charisma wildly disproportionate to its actual mechanical effect - for example if you make Cha 7 characters make a bad impression everywhere they go, even though they'll roll at least as high as the Cha 10 guy almost half of the time, and an average person looking at the actual results of their rolls wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless they were being very careful about tracking them and had a very large dataset - you're effectively imposing additional out-of-rules advantages for having a higher charisma, potentially making it "worth it" as a stat. You can make any stat important for any character by ignoring the rules for how it affects things and instead imposing much larger penalties and bonuses. For example, you might not want casters to dump strength, so you might rule that a character with 7 strength is likely to utterly fail at any strength-based task he attempts, regardless of what the goshdurn "rules" suggest the actual penalties for having 7 strength should be.
If you impose additional penalties on charisma wildly disproportionate to its actual mechanical effect - for example if you make Cha 7 characters make a bad impression everywhere they go, even though they'll roll at least as high as the Cha 10 guy almost half of the time, and an average person looking at the actual results of their rolls wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless they were being very careful about tracking them and had a very large dataset - you're effectively imposing additional out-of-rules advantages for having a higher charisma, potentially making it "worth it" as a stat. You can make any stat important for any character by ignoring the rules for how it affects things and instead imposing much larger penalties and bonuses. For example, you might not want casters to dump strength, so you might rule that a character with 7 strength is likely to utterly fail at any strength-based task he attempts, regardless of what the goshdurn "rules" suggest the actual penalties for having 7 strength should be.
that is unfortunately what most of the people are proposing.
They may spend more points in Str or Con, not having to split betweem Cha and Wis.How does this help Paladins, other than by giving them a better Will save and Perception?
Also - Paladins are less MAD and Monks don't need to grunt anymore. Yeah!
Why does my Paladin need points in Wisdom?
Necropolitan is my favorite ice cream too.
I allow undead PCs as well. Currently, my players are playing super-heroes in a city where undeath is not tolerated. One of the characters is a ghoul that has the Civilized Ghoulishness feat, that passes as a human, living in a run down apartment at the back of an alleyway; in a slum; off the radar. Incidentally, she has a great Charisma. :P
Feint sucks.
It's a standard action that benefits one attack for YOU. In addition, it has to be done BEFORE your next turn, making attacks of opportunity the only choice for taking advantage of it without spending a feat.
If you take Improved Feint, it's still sucks, because it's still only one attack, and you still can't make a full attack.
I'd like the ability a lot more if it wasn't so expensive in the action economy, or if it at least aided allies (Like your party rogue.)
I like intimidate, but the shaken condition doesn't last very long at all. Good if you have nothing better to do.
Improved Feint is actually really good to get sneak attacks off if you can't get a good flank or use of Gang Up on. There's even a line of Two Weapon Fighting feats that make use of it. Greater Feint is nice for helping your allies, but admittedly makes the feat line a bit costly.
You won't always get your full attack on, especially as you level up. With spells and other abilities that can negate AoO for movement, a person can simply move away from you much easier, causing you to have to chase them. Hell, if you are fighting a high Defense creature (High AC, DR, Regen, Lots of HP), they might not even care if you try to hit them and simply move away from you. So it is honestly a good idea to have other things to do instead of full attacking. I've seen feint used to incredibly good use by a friend that plays a lot of rogue characters.
You don't always have to spend every action trying to do damage or get a full attack on.
As for intimidate, you usually want to go for the Dazzling Display (I think that's it) line of feats which can do quite a bit for your party.
that is unfortunately what most of the people are proposing.Does your GM stop to roll every single interaction with every single NPC?
That sounds really slow.
not for every NPC, to save time in times where stress and distractions aren't a lethal issue. we just assume passive attitude (essentially take 10 on diplomacy) and passive perception/sense motive are generally used as well.
that is unfortunately what most of the people are proposing.Does your GM stop to roll every single interaction with every single NPC?
That sounds really slow.
From what I read with Diplomacy, you can only really use it once per 24 hours to adjust their attitude. As for asking them to do something, usually it's a one time deal if they are at least indifferent and not helpful. If the check fails, you can't really make one again. Of course, the PCs can always try to sweeten the deal later on with something...
|
|
not for every NPC, to save time in times where stress and distractions aren't a lethal issue. we just assume passive attitude (essentially take 10 on diplomacy) and passive perception/sense motive are generally used as well.
that is unfortunately what most of the people are proposing.Does your GM stop to roll every single interaction with every single NPC?
That sounds really slow.
So if they don't roll, what factors does the DM consider with regards to initial impressions, general impressions, etc...
Diplomacy takes time to use and isn't passive in the way perception or sense motive are. In fact, it says it is used to adjust, not create, initial impression.
If your GM isn't rolling, they are making best guesses with the information they have, taking all circumstances into account. Reasonably some of the factors they are considering (though certainly not all) would be the personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance of the players.
Correct?
general diplomacy rolls for dealing with the general public work too. when it's done for something important like rallying crowds or gathering information. taking 10 speeds things up too.
it takes a lot to encourage a roll, and charisma no matter how low, will never force it as long as it's a value achievable by the species in question. things that would encourage it are stuff like drastic differences that are blatantly obvious. if the tiefling binds her little bat wings beneath her corset and curls up her tail inside a long loose skirt, she should be fine. if the rainbow rakshasa walks around dressed provocatively in flashy colors undisguised and shows himself off, people are going to know and he would need a roll.
not for every NPC, to save time in times where stress and distractions aren't a lethal issue. we just assume passive attitude (essentially take 10 on diplomacy) and passive perception/sense motive are generally used as well.
that is unfortunately what most of the people are proposing.Does your GM stop to roll every single interaction with every single NPC?
That sounds really slow.
So if they don't roll, what factors does the DM consider with regards to initial impressions, general impressions, etc...
Diplomacy takes time to use and isn't passive in the way perception or sense motive are. In fact, it says it is used to adjust, not create, initial impression.
If your GM isn't rolling, they are making best guesses with the information they have, taking all circumstances into account. Reasonably some of the factors they are considering (though certainly not all) would be the personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance of the players.
Correct?
most of the time, a roll isn't needed unless something really drastic is happening, a dwarf with 5 charisma just isn't that drastic. weekly william sees a 5 charisma dwarf every campaign or few.
weekly william doesn't roll attitudes, he works based on the information he has, uaully defualting to indifferent. the passive diplomacy checks are for mundane things. like shopping that shouldn't take too much effort.
|
|
general diplomacy rolls for dealing with the general public work too. when it's done for something important like rallying crowds or gathering information. taking 10 speeds things up too.
Where exactly in the diplomacy skill does is say you can do this?
Diplomacy has three listed actions, none of which are passive:
Influence Attitude: Using Diplomacy to influence a creature’s attitude takes 1 minute of continuous interaction.
Make Request: Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request.
Gather Information: Using Diplomacy to gather information takes 1d4 hours of work, searching for rumors and informants.
If you are arguing Charisma doesn't effect what the text specifically says it effects, it seems counter intuitive to then argue diplomacy does things not listed as things it does.
general diplomacy rolls for dealing with the general public work too. when it's done for something important like rallying crowds or gathering information. taking 10 speeds things up too.
Where exactly in the diplomacy skill does is say you can do this?
Diplomacy has three listed actions, none of which are passive:
Influence Attitude: Using Diplomacy to influence a creature’s attitude takes 1 minute of continuous interaction.
Make Request: Making a request of a creature takes 1 or more rounds of interaction, depending upon the complexity of the request.
Gather Information: Using Diplomacy to gather information takes 1d4 hours of work, searching for rumors and informants.
If you are arguing Charisma doesn't effect what the text specifically says it effects, it seems counter intuitive to then argue diplomacy does things not listed as things it does.
you are just taking 10 on mundane transactions and stuff anybody should be able to reasonably do. like shopping or getting directions to the nearest inn. for rallying a crowd or gathering an important piece of information, there would be a roll, and it would be a single roll for the whole crowd.
Rallying crowds goes under influence creature and make request.
shopping (and seduction as well as haggling) go under make request
a dwarf with a charisma of 5 (or similar case) is just not enough to change most people's attitudes. a night hag walking around in a human village would inspire plenty of negatives for the hag.
a diplomacy check doesn't even require verbal components.
Anything new here?
*shrug* iunno
Anything new here?Is there ever?
no these charisma threads never have anything new.
logically, you should roll a diplomacy check every time you go shopping, but usually this is handwaved to save time in most campaigns.
|
|
you are just taking 10 on mundane transactions and stuff anybody should be able to reasonably do. like shopping or getting directions to the nearest inn. for rallying a crowd or gathering an important piece of information, there would be a roll, and it would be a single roll for the whole crowd.
Rallying crowds goes under influence creature and make request.
shopping (and seduction as well as haggling) go under make request
a dwarf with a charisma of 5 (or similar case) is just not enough to change most people's attitudes. a night hag walking around in a human village would inspire plenty of negatives for the hag.
a diplomacy check doesn't even require verbal components.
And I ask again, where exactly in the diplomacy skill does is say you can do this? Or even that the skill is intended for these types of purposes.
The skill description for diplomacy is "You can use this skill to persuade others to agree with your arguments, to resolve differences, and to gather valuable information or rumors from people. This skill is also used to negotiate conflicts by using the proper etiquette and manners suitable to the problem."
Again, you seem to be saying Charisma shouldn't be used by the GM for exactly what it says it does, while at the same time saying diplomacy should be used specifically for things it doesn't say anywhere that it does.
you are just taking 10 on mundane transactions and stuff anybody should be able to reasonably do. like shopping or getting directions to the nearest inn. for rallying a crowd or gathering an important piece of information, there would be a roll, and it would be a single roll for the whole crowd.
Rallying crowds goes under influence creature and make request.
shopping (and seduction as well as haggling) go under make request
a dwarf with a charisma of 5 (or similar case) is just not enough to change most people's attitudes. a night hag walking around in a human village would inspire plenty of negatives for the hag.
a diplomacy check doesn't even require verbal components.
And I ask again, where exactly in the diplomacy skill does is say you can do this? Or even that the skill is intended for these types of purposes.
The skill description for diplomacy is "You can use this skill to persuade others to agree with your arguments, to resolve differences, and to gather valuable information or rumors from people. This skill is also used to negotiate conflicts by using the proper etiquette and manners suitable to the problem."
Again, you seem to be saying Charisma shouldn't be used by the GM for exactly what it says it does, while at the same time saying diplomacy should be used specifically for things it doesn't say anywhere that it does.
Charisma already affects the DC to influence an individual. this is how it affects starting attidudes. you don't need to double dip.
haggling is a conflict, seducing a barwench is simply making a request for her to share your bed with you for the night. Rallying a crowd is influencing attitudes of an entire crowd and making a mass request.
for the Cha 5 dwarf to influence the Cha 18 Gnome, he already has to roll 7 higher than a cha 18 human with the same diplomacy ranks in the same circumstance.
Anything new here?
The you're not role playing at all by having a low cha character stand out in any way shape or form argument is new.
The standard array is based on the notion that the general population rolls 3d6 six times for stats. That means 7 is a fairly normal human. 5 is something like Aspergers. Adventurers aren't allowed to have intolerable charisma when using point buy.
The only factor the GM should be taking account of in situations that don't require a check is "how much of a jerk is this NPC?"
Be careful with the analogy of low charisma to Aspergers. I've seen that made before on these forums and 9 times out of 10 it offends a lot of people.
a low charisma isn't going to freak out anywhere near as many people as a night hag, abberration, rhakshasa, or similar non normal humanoid creature. a vanara or catfolk would draw more attention than a 5 charisma dwarf or tiefling, or a 7 cha human.