I see this too often on this site, someone needs help with the party leader or party face and the first thing that comes up is the class with the charisma. This might be obvious, but why?
In all our games, this has never been the rule. The person who leads or who is the 'face' is the person who wants to take that role.
|
Good topic. I like making a distinction between party leader and most persuasive person. They are often not one and the same especially if you consider the capricious nature that many of the high charisma class sometime encourage. I'm not saying sorcerers, bards, and oracle by definition are whimsical or chaotic but they can be. Just because you can sell books to a goblin doesn't mean you should be planning the missions or making the tough calls for the party. Then again I also like there to be an independent foil to the leader role to keep things dynamic.
|
The "Leader" Should be determined by the best leader in your player selection (person not PC). If someone who blindly stabs anything he disagrees with, has a 22 CHA. and an 8 STR., He shouldn't make party decisions, but if someone with a 5 CHA is clam, level-headed and makes good decisions, he shouldn't be the face, but should direct the party.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Face does not lead the A Team
But he is their face
Oddly enough, our Face does lead our A-Team. ....I think she also likes it when a plan comes together.....
The others can help out with Diplomacy and bluff checks as needed. But she takes both roles
There is some misunderstanding here. Who ever said the Face in my group had a high Charisma? I guess it is just assumed because that is what you are supposed to have. I don't know what her character stats are, but my guess is that CHA is not the highest. It is entirely likely that one of the other characters had a higher Charisma score but CHOSE not to be the Face.
We don't play by the same rules that you do. This was part of the question I asked. I am getting the impression that a lot of players here have the idea that the Face must have a high CHA.
The party 'face' basically has to have good scores in Diplomacy and Bluff, and also hopefully Sense Motive, though that might be covered by someone else.
Usually this means a character with a high CHA but also it usually means a character whose class gives them lots of skill ranks, and has the above skills in class.
Sorcerers will have a high CHA but rarely have enough skill ranks to build diplomacy up. The same goes for Oracles.
Rogues have the skill ranks and the skills in class, so they can make a decent party face, even if their CHA is only middling. Inquisitors are also an option.
Obviously, though, if you have a Bard in the party it really ought to be his job as he has a high CHA and lots of skill ranks.
|
|
Well the assumption is there because all of the mechanics that govern proactive social interactions are Charisma based, but if you can get the skills or role play your way through (thanks to an understanding DM) then do it however works for your group. Honestly I don't think most skills need to be maxed or astronomically high values to get the job done, but it will be easier for a character with the stat that represents force of personality. Also I hope most groups don't have a face role that does all the talking either since that seems like it would be terribly boring.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Our party has multiple faces. There's the Barbarian with Intimidate who plays bad cop, the Bard with high Diplomacy who plays good cop, and the Paladin who is an actual cop and not invited to questionings.
The face is the person who talks for the party.
Talking, and other social interaction, are governed by CHA.
Thus, it is natural for the highest CHA player to take the role of face (unless someone else is maxing out skills or happens to just be a better talker IRL).
You can play an inquisitor with an inquisition that switches some of these social skills like diplomacy and intimidate away from CHA and over to WIS. At higher levels though the ability bonus won't matter as much as skill ranks.
Our group: Leader - Myrmidarch/Scout(from 3.5)/ Arcane Archer build a high perception character
Cleric of Cayden Cailean on of the best Diplomacy rolls in the group but has also flubbed rather well at the worst of times
Inquisitor - hates elves, thinks they cause cancer. High WIS, High CON
Monk - Charisma so-so
Kobold Wizard as far as I know, his CHA was his dump stat
Witch GMNPC doesn't make diplomacy rolls
'thug monk' based out of AP book also a GMNPC doesn't make rolls
So the Magus built her character specifically for Perception. She got leader by default because of background. Some of the group role diplomacy. There isn't a specific Face. The characters are all 12th level and I just leveled to 13 (Monk) and I put a point into diplomacy so I can do a little more than suck at it.
We will see how things go in the next AP
You should also note that the party face can change based on circumstances. Sir Alchemy's comments about bad cop/good cop apply. But in different places, you might need different people to serve as party face. In our current campaign, if we need someone to talk to the elven nobility, we let our elven noble talk to them. But if it's farmfolk, we send out the farmboy-turned-sorcerer. If it's mercenaries, the half-orc fighter/sorcerer does the talking. And so on. Last campaign, it was usually our halfling shadowdancer, sometimes the paladin, sometimes the EK when we were on his home turf, and sometimes my cleric of Death when we needed people intimidated.
Neither party has a distinct leader. At best, the elven noble in our current game is the leader and maaaaaaaaayybe the shadowdancer or paladin in the last game.