For anyone interested in calculating relative attractiveness, I do the average of your Constitution scores, and your Charisma scores, to generate a rating.
Constitution is used because, at least among humans, we are naturally attracted to healthy members of our species so as to better produce healthy offspring. Furthermore, during pregnancy, the higher our innate resilience, the more we preserve symmetrical body features, which are subconsciously tied to attractiveness in our minds.
Charisma represents the personality of the character being able to hold people's attention and prove themselves to be appealing.
There are also a few notes to consider however; typically, we few similar entities to ourselves as attractive (there are exceptions), so even though a Dragon has massive con and cha, it doesn't necessarily prove more attractive to us as a species.
Furthermore, personal taste factors in, so someone who favors muscular definition will probably add strength into the mix, or on top of it, while others may do the same for intelligence, dexterity or wisdom.
So in conclusion, if you want to claim you have an attractive character, consider Con for form, and Cha for personality.
As it stands, a few characters in a party (one or two) need any kind of points in charisma. These few max it, because it feeds their abilities. Everyone else uses charisma as a way to get more points to put in the other stats. Soooo, why not do as I described, remove every single reference to charisma in the game and let everyone choose their personality, appearance and whatever else as they wish? Slash 1 sixth of the point buy budget, making 20 PB into 17 PB, etc. Then decide if you want to keep the interpersonal skills or put them up as stuff solved only by roleplaying, or if the skills get based on int/wis instead. As for a feat, well, I thought since we have the Leadership feat, why not give other more substantial uses of charisma their own feats as well? For Sorcerers and Bards, you could give them one or two of these for free. There are things you could add if you wanted, but I wouldn't call it necessary.
Done this way, you can have your handsome martial artist. The combat monsters can call themselves supermodels (without having to compensate this through being disgustingly awkward to be around), people can follow their grizzled old sergeant into combat, and so on.
Why? We can already can and do have super fit and attractive 7 CHA martial artists with more DEX and CON in exchange for having little experience in the ways of interacting with other people. Why should anyone adopt some complicated thing when there is no upside to doing so? Everything you say suggests that the issue is that you just don't like dump stats. What's your plan for STR then? Going to cut it to, or are you going to increase martial/caster disparity by leaving it in?
Everything you say suggests that the issue is that you want a harmless stat to dump for no disadvantage - and then both ignore the non-rules consequence for doing so and use it as an excuse for behaving badly to others.
That's why.
If Paizo wanted "appearance" to mean "very memorable appearance" they should have said so. Of course people will equate "Appearance" with "attractiveness".
Now I know how the people feel who are say that spells with an evil subtype does not make sense, even though they know want Paizo intends when they add it to a spell.
As always in these threads, a LINK TO MY HOUSE RULES! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH~!
Hi Folks,
Just started playing Pathfinder last night. Using PCGen to create the character using just the Core Rules. I've got a human fighter - level 1 - and his misc modifier for Jump is -10. Scale armor gives you a -4 and heavy wooden shield is -2. I have a dex of 13 and am lightly encumbered so I'm not sure where the other -4 is coming from. Is this a PCGen issue or what am I missing?
Cheers,
GuyPs. We just completed a dnd4e campaign to level 30 and playing a level 1 again is a bit of a change. We had a TPK last night but really asked for it - since this was just a "get reacquainted with the system" session.
I think you're receiving double the acp from the armor for some reason.
This is the wrong thread for that, but as you're so new, that's okay. :)
Welcome to the boards!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Guy_tipton, your post is very much in the wrong place. You should start a thread on the advice board.
@ Syssil - a 7 Cha supermodel doesn't have to be disgusting to be around. They can just be mindnumbingly boring to be around. Style without substance.
But as best I can tell, what you've been describing isn't an issue with the system, but an issue with your players.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Constitution is used because, at least among humans, we are naturally attracted to healthy members of our species so as to better produce healthy offspring.
I think you're forgetting all about extreme corsetry, foot-binding, really pale skin, heroin-chic models, etc.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instinctive attraction to markers of health is combined with learned attraction to markers of high social status. Things like foot-binding and pale skin indicate that you don't have to work outside in the fields. Tans became popular when office jobs became common and the wealthy were those who could afford vacations in sunny places. Conversely things like symmetry, "good skin," and hip to waist ratio are more subtle health markers that are universally considered attractive across cultures.
Soooo, why not do as I described, remove every single reference to charisma in the game and let everyone choose their personality, appearance and whatever else as they wish? Slash 1 sixth of the point buy budget, making 20 PB into 17 PB, etc.
Why reduce the point buy?
Ability scores start at 10 (average) in PB. A player with 20 PB who doesn't want to dump Cha, but also doesn't think it's one of the character's strengths, will spend 0 points on Cha and end up with a 10 Cha and 20 points for other stats. By giving players a 17 PB after removing Cha, you're effectively requiring all players to buy a 13.
Which is really very costly for characters like maneuver monks that are extremely MAD and can't afford a 13 Cha even if they don't actually dump it to 7.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Everything you say suggests that the issue is that you want a harmless stat to dump for no disadvantage - and then both ignore the non-rules consequence for doing so and use it as an excuse for behaving badly to others.
That's why.
Everything you say suggest that you believe there is no disadvantage to dumping CHA. This is obviously wrong, because the penalties for dumping CHA are clearly listed in the system. Being less attractive is not one of them.
As it stands, a few characters in a party (one or two) need any kind of points in charisma. These few max it, because it feeds their abilities. Everyone else uses charisma as a way to get more points to put in the other stats. Soooo, why not do as I described, remove every single reference to charisma in the game and let everyone choose their personality, appearance and whatever else as they wish? Slash 1 sixth of the point buy budget, making 20 PB into 17 PB, etc....
For undead that have no Con, you use the same PB and assume you bought Con of 10. Why would you make people 'spend' more points on CHA than the creature that had a stat of 0 does!
I tend to use the d20pfsrd, but this is the first sentence about charisma:
Charisma (Cha)
Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.
Please read to the end of the sentence.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to use the d20pfsrd, but this is the first sentence about charisma:
Charisma (Cha)
Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.
Please read to the end of the sentence.
appearance, noun: outward aspect, characteristic
synonyms:
character
presence
presentation
attitude
bearing
demeanor
dress
expression
fashion
guise
manner
mannerism
Soooo, why not do as I described, remove every single reference to charisma in the game and let everyone choose their personality, appearance and whatever else as they wish? Slash 1 sixth of the point buy budget, making 20 PB into 17 PB, etc.Why reduce the point buy?
Ability scores start at 10 (average) in PB. A player with 20 PB who doesn't want to dump Cha, but also doesn't think it's one of the character's strengths, will spend 0 points on Cha and end up with a 10 Cha and 20 points for other stats. By giving players a 17 PB after removing Cha, you're effectively requiring all players to buy a 13.
Which is really very costly for characters like maneuver monks that are extremely MAD and can't afford a 13 Cha even if they don't actually dump it to 7.
Six stats. Each starts with one sixth of the points. Which works out as you say to a 13 in each. To remove one stat, means you remove one sixth of the points. The fact that charisma is a stat everyone can dump without penalty so long as someone has it only makes it clearer that the reasonable thing is to reduce the point buy. Since people dump it to 7 unless they are the face character, they actually get 7 points by my calculations to spend on combat stats. I don't see a reason for this.
Six stats. Each starts with one sixth of the points. Which works out as you say to a 13 in each. To remove one stat, means you remove one sixth of the points. The fact that charisma is a stat everyone can dump without penalty so long as someone has it doesn't change the fact that the reasonable thing is to reduce the point buy. Since people dump it to 7 unless they are the face character, they actually get 7 points by my calculations to spend on combat stats. I don't see a reason for this.Soooo, why not do as I described, remove every single reference to charisma in the game and let everyone choose their personality, appearance and whatever else as they wish? Slash 1 sixth of the point buy budget, making 20 PB into 17 PB, etc.Why reduce the point buy?
Ability scores start at 10 (average) in PB. A player with 20 PB who doesn't want to dump Cha, but also doesn't think it's one of the character's strengths, will spend 0 points on Cha and end up with a 10 Cha and 20 points for other stats. By giving players a 17 PB after removing Cha, you're effectively requiring all players to buy a 13.
Which is really very costly for characters like maneuver monks that are extremely MAD and can't afford a 13 Cha even if they don't actually dump it to 7.
Ah... No.
Why not? "Ah... No." isn't much of an argument.
I tend to use the d20pfsrd, but this is the first sentence about charisma:
Charisma (Cha)
Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.
Please read to the end of the sentence.
appearance, noun: outward aspect, characteristic
synonyms:
character
presence
presentation
attitude
bearing
demeanor
dress
expression
fashion
guise
manner
mannerism
ap·pear·ance
əˈpirəns/noun
1.
the way that someone or something looks.
"I like the appearance of stripped antique pine"
synonyms: look(s), air, aspect, mien
"her disheveled appearance"
an impression given by someone or something, although this may be misleading.
plural noun: appearances
"she read it with every appearance of interest"
synonyms: impression, air, image, show, outward show; More
2.
an act of performing or participating in a public event.
"he is well-known for his television appearances"
~~
It amazes me how people really want to twist words to mean something they do not mean, I see this happen often on these messaging boards.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I tend to use the d20pfsrd, but this is the first sentence about charisma:
Charisma (Cha)
Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance.
Please read to the end of the sentence.
appearance, noun: outward aspect, characteristic
synonyms:
character
presence
presentation
attitude
bearing
demeanor
dress
expression
fashion
guise
manner
mannerism
ap·pear·ance
əˈpirəns/
noun
1.
the way that someone or something looks.
"I like the appearance of stripped antique pine"
synonyms: look(s), air, aspect, mien
"her disheveled appearance"
an impression given by someone or something, although this may be misleading.
plural noun: appearances
"she read it with every appearance of interest"
synonyms: impression, air, image, show, outward show; More
2.
an act of performing or participating in a public event.
"he is well-known for his television appearances"~~
It amazes me how people really want to twist words to mean something they do not mean, I see this happen often on these messaging boards.
It amazes me how people can focus in an a single aspect of a word and ignore the rest. Even in your own post, to says look(s), air, aspect, mien. Only 1/4 of YOU OWN EXPLANATION mentions looks. If there is twisting, it's you not me.
Why not? "Ah... No." isn't much of an argument.
I already explained in my post about undead and having a 0 CON. Giving out less PB than an undead gets is a... No.
So you are seriously saying that charisma is not a sixth of the point buy? Because undead? Heh, yeah. The ability to get another seven points (27 instead of 20, woo!) free of charge is VERY important to some people. These people will of course say anything to try to discredit the idea of removing charisma.
So what I'm getting from this is that Trimalchio and Sissyl have some pretty hot Aboliths in their universes.
In all seriousness if high charisma means sexiness for everyone then I'm pretty worried about all the high charisma monsters luring naive young adults for a night of fun, and by fun I mean devouring them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So you are seriously saying that charisma is not a sixth of the point buy? Because undead? Heh, yeah. The ability to get another seven points (27 instead of 20, woo!) free of charge is VERY important to some people. These people will of course say anything to try to discredit the idea of removing charisma.
I feel like Charisma is far too ingrained into the game to remove neatly.
It amazes me how people can focus in an a single aspect of a word and ignore the rest. Even in your own post, to says look(s), air, aspect, mien. Only 1/4 of YOU OWN EXPLANATION mentions looks. If there is twisting, it's you not me.
'Looks' is a part of appearance, to suggest it is isn't is just odd. Generally it is de-emphasized in games, and some tables throw it out completely, but the usual assumption is CHA represents, to some degree, the attractiveness of a character.
As a side note, are you familiar with how dictionaries work? The first definition is the most common, and each definition after that is various other usages that are increasingly less common. Dictionaries are also historical documents which put together the meaning of a word from common usage, drawing from literature, journalism, speech, etc.
I just googled, "define: appearance" but we can draw upon any dictionary, I am rather confident that every definition of appearance will include some aspect of 'looks', and also be the first definition of the word, IE when people use the word 'appearance' they almost universally mean to refer the way in which a person looks or, you know, appears.
So you are seriously saying that charisma is not a sixth of the point buy? Because undead? Heh, yeah. The ability to get another seven points (27 instead of 20, woo!) free of charge is VERY important to some people. These people will of course say anything to try to discredit the idea of removing charisma.I feel like Charisma is far too ingrained into the game to remove neatly.
It is by far the easiest one to junk. Sorcerers, bards, paladins use it, so they can do wisdom or intelligence instead. Monsters get abilities on wisdom instead, undead use wisdom for Con when they need it. Leadership can be slightly changed. The skills can either be shifted to another stat or removed in favour of roleplaying Diplomacy and similar skill uses. Once this is done, what would be left? Nothing much and certainly nothing that can't be fixed when you get there.
Take a look at all the class guides linked to from the boards. Check what they say about charisma (excepting the cha-based classes of course). Then check every non-cha-based build suggested on these boards.
7 charisma is a thing, and I am tired of it, since it comes with not wanting to pay for that, PLUS acting like an a*+%#!! IN CHARACTER.
Take a look at all the class guides linked to from the boards. Check what they say about charisma (excepting the cha-based classes of course). Then check every non-cha-based build suggested on these boards.
7 charisma is a thing, and I am tired of it, since it comes with not wanting to pay for that, PLUS acting like an a*@&~*& IN CHARACTER.
Make your players roll for their stats and refuse any roll lower than 10. Problem solved.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are also a few notes to consider however; typically, we few similar entities to ourselves as attractive (there are exceptions), so even though a Dragon has massive con and cha, it doesn't necessarily prove more attractive to us as a species.
Then how do you explain all those half-dragons, huh???
7 charisma is a thing, and I am tired of it, since it comes with not wanting to pay for that, PLUS acting like an a$*&@#* IN CHARACTER.
I now understand where you're coming from. I still disagree with your stance on appearance but I understand where you're coming from.
The reason there are so many 7 charismas is because it's a do nothing stat. For classes who's abilities don't key off of it all it does is modify three skills. No one wants to spend valuable stats points on that and considering how much they gain for how little they give up it's hard to blame them.
Removing Charisma entirely as you suggested would be one solution and one worth exploring.
Another solution would be to make Charisma do more. A house rule I've used for awhile now is that you get CHA + 2 d4s/day to add to d20 rolls after you've made the roll but before the results are revealed. Fluff wise I consider it to be a representation of how much the universe likes you. Suddenly, like INT and WIS, CHA does something for everyone and is a less attractive dump. Yes, this is a buff to charisma based classes... but honestly I don't mind too much. I always felt bad for them having to invest so heavily in an otherwise crappy stat.
Regarding the problem of people playing 7 CHA characters like asshats I honestly believe that has to do with the players wanting to play asshats and using their stats as justification. In my experience people are going to play the personality type they feel like and find a way to justify it. Of course I could be wrong.
In any case this thread is about attractiveness and trying to balance a mechanical issue (charisma is too appealing as a dump stat) with a non mechanical penalty (your character must be ugly if you do this) is just no how I roll.
- Torger
*edit* BTW it's worked, I very rarely see fully dumped charisma characters at my table anymore.
Appearance, it's right there in the rules, and right there in the dictionary, can't help you beyond that buddy, sorry.
For players who dump CHA it actually shows something of a lack of system msatery. CHA is one of the more important stats in pathfinder for a few reasons.
Use magic device is the big one, at higher levels UMD is about as important a skill as perception and having a negative CHA can really hurt especially for classes that can't afford to put more than a few skill points into it.
Second is saves for anyone who qualifies for divine protection. Third, many class abilities go off of CHA, finally even skills a straight fighter might be interested using such as intimidate or bluff use CHA, sacrificing a feat to use STR for intimidate is rather painful, especially since STR is pretty much the worst stat from a mechanics perspective.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This again? There really needs to be a button for voting down a post and maybe even killing a thread.
As some have noted, Charisma in the game stands-in for BOTH physical beauty and power of personality.
The Core book says so. In actual words. That are printed in English.
For anyone interested in calculating relative attractiveness, I do the average of your Constitution scores, and your Charisma scores, to generate a rating.
While I understand your logic, by this system elves are statistically uglier than humans.
Just putting that out there.
- Torger
As some have noted, Charisma in the game stands-in for BOTH physical beauty and power of personality.
The Core book says so. In actual words. That are printed in English.
How do you reconcile this with the plethora of monsters (many noted upthread), who's descriptions (also written in English) and art call them out as hideously unattractive yet have remarkably high charisma scores?
Is it perhaps because the word used in the description (written in English) of the stat is appearance not attractiveness or beauty.
There are many ways to have a striking appearance (yay English) without being beautiful or attractive.
So yes, this again.
- Torger
I'd just like to point out that I could make an Oracle with 7 dexterity and the only penalty I'd face is poor ranged attacks and bad acrobatics. Lunar Mystery has a revelation that substitutes DEX with CHA for AC and Reflex saves while Noble Scion lets me use CHA for initiative rolls.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For anyone interested in calculating relative attractiveness, I do the average of your Constitution scores, and your Charisma scores, to generate a rating.While I understand your logic, by this system elves are statistically uglier than humans.
Just putting that out there.
- Torger
Elves are statistically uglier than Dwarves with this setup.
How do you reconcile this with the plethora of monsters (many noted upthread), who's descriptions (also written in English) and art call them out as hideously unattractive yet have remarkably high charisma scores?Is it perhaps because the word used in the description (written in English) of the stat is appearance not attractiveness or beauty.
There are many ways to have a striking appearance (yay English) without being beautiful or attractive.
So yes, this again.
- Torger
As has been pointed out CHA describes many things, physical appearance is one of those things. Force of personality is another, undead use CHA in a different way:
"For undead creatures, Charisma is a measure of their unnatural “lifeforce.”"
incorporeal undead use CHA to add to their deflection bonus, the list goes on and on and on, it's amazing isn't it? Truly to think I can use CHA to describe all sorts of different qualities, and depending on context (yay context, for many context is what actually creates meaning, mean-ing[0]) it becomes clear which quality that is.
A part of CHA is appearance, sometimes other parts of CHA is the salient characteristic for a creature depending on context.
"Charisma measures a character's personality, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and appearance."
Charisma has, by my count, 4 salient qualities listed in the very first sentence of the rules about Charisma, appearance is the 4th. For me it is rather easy to reconcile creatures of horrific appearance and a high CHA, because CHA is not a monolithic attribute, it is "multi-faceted", which is awesome, especially for those who can appreciate nuance.
[0]: mean·ing
ˈmēniNG
noun
1.
what is meant by a word, text, concept, or action.
"the meaning of the word “supermarket”"
synonyms: definition, sense, explanation, denotation, connotation, interpretation, nuance
"the word has several different meanings"
implied or explicit significance.
"he gave me a look full of meaning"
synonyms: significance, sense, signification, import, gist, thrust, drift, implication, tenor, message, essence, substance, purport, intention More
important or worthwhile quality; purpose.
"this can lead to new meaning in the life of older people"
synonyms: value, validity, worth, consequence, account, use, usefulness, significance, point
"my life has no meaning"
adjective
adjective: meaning
1.
intended to communicate something that is not directly expressed.
"she gave Gabriel a meaning look"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Take a look at all the class guides linked to from the boards. Check what they say about charisma (excepting the cha-based classes of course). Then check every non-cha-based build suggested on these boards.
7 charisma is a thing, and I am tired of it, since it comes with not wanting to pay for that, PLUS acting like an a$&!@#@ IN CHARACTER.
You're still wrong. To counter your anecdotal evidence, I submit my own: I dislike dumping stats, never dump beyond one stat to an 8, and rarely even then. So, yeah, not universal, not by a long shot.
I happen to be playing in campaign right now with plenty of people acting like a$&!@#@'s in character, despite everyone having high charisma. And it's one of the best I've been in, with plenty great party interaction and roleplay. Everyone's having a grand old time. Because, unsurprisingly, being a fractious group does, in fact, have consequences. Such as not trusting another character enough to let them cast a buff spell on me, or doing something that the player knows is dumb, but doing it anyway because that's what the character would do.
intra-party conflict is not bad, as long as everyone is on board. From the sound of it, your players are acting like jerks despite it clearly not being okay, and trying to justify it with low charisma.
That's not the fault of charisma, anymore than people doing the same thing "because CN, lol" is the fault of the CN alignment. That's just your players (not the characters, the players) being a$&!@#@s
Charisma has, by my count, 4 salient qualities listed in the very first sentence of the rules about Charisma, appearance is the 4th. For me it is rather easy to reconcile creatures of horrific appearance and a high CHA, because CHA is not a monolithic attribute, it is "multi-faceted", which is awesome, especially for those who can appreciate nuance.
So by your own words then high Charisma does not directly equate to physical beauty and low Charisma does not directly equate to being ugly which has been the argument this whole time.
And you've in no way addressed my point that the word appearance is not the same thing as physical beauty or attractiveness.
So frankly I have no clue what point you're even trying to make here.
- Torger
Elves are statistically uglier than Dwarves with this setup.For anyone interested in calculating relative attractiveness, I do the average of your Constitution scores, and your Charisma scores, to generate a rating.While I understand your logic, by this system elves are statistically uglier than humans.
Just putting that out there.
- Torger
and gnomes are statistically gorgeous.
- Torger
As always in these threads, a LINK TO MY HOUSE RULES! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH~!
Hooooouuuuussssse ruuuules~! :D
Charisma has, by my count, 4 salient qualities listed in the very first sentence of the rules about Charisma, appearance is the 4th. For me it is rather easy to reconcile creatures of horrific appearance and a high CHA, because CHA is not a monolithic attribute, it is "multi-faceted", which is awesome, especially for those who can appreciate nuance.So by your own words then high Charisma does not directly equate to physical beauty and low Charisma does not directly equate to being ugly which has been the argument this whole time.
And you've in no way addressed my point that the word appearance is not the same thing as physical beauty or attractiveness.
So frankly I have no clue what point you're even trying to make here.
- Torger
Torger, I'm going to assume(for the final time) you are honesty trying to understand me and are not trolling.
Please open a dictionary, as long as it is in English and published before 1950 I suspect it will be suitable. Look up the word "appearance", go ahead and write it down and post it in full here.
Appearance, by the common usage as reported by nearly every dictionary in the English language, does in fact refer to concepts such as "attractiveness". I'm am really mystified if you disagree with this point, and I'll just disengage if that is the case.
When you use the phrase, "directly equates", I suspect you are engaging in a logical fallacy, I'm not going to try and tutor you now but I highly recommend you study math and philosophy, these two general fields of knowledge will assist you in clarifying your thinking and will improve your life.
I merely am asserting that "looks" are a part of CHA, whether it be a small part or a big part, whether it is linear or exponential or proportionate to inverse square of some other factor I cannot say, all the rules say is that CHA reflects, in part, appearance. How you can disagree with this is again a mystery to me, the example you gave of a creature with horrific appearance having a high CHA is easily explained by reflecting that they could easily make up the deficiency of their appearance with the other qualities associated with CHA such as "personal magnetism". Perhaps you can link us to an example to focus your thoughts?
Please go and read the rules of the game you are playing, let me know where you are struggling to understand the rules as they are written because I would like to try and help you.
Elves are statistically uglier than Dwarves with this setup.For anyone interested in calculating relative attractiveness, I do the average of your Constitution scores, and your Charisma scores, to generate a rating.While I understand your logic, by this system elves are statistically uglier than humans.
Just putting that out there.
- Torger
and gnomes are statistically gorgeous.
- Torger
To be fair gnomes can have whatever color hair they wish for, so by my standards it's easier for a gnome to be quite attractive to me.
However this also applies to elves, half-elves, undines, aasimar, and tieflings.
And then there's the kitsune when half-shifted with fluffy tail...I'm getting off topic aren't I?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Torger, I'm going to assume(for the final time) you are honesty trying to understand me and are not trolling.
Please open a dictionary, as long as it is in English and published before 1950 I suspect it will be suitable. Look up the word "appearance", go ahead and write it down and post it in full here.
Appearance, by the common usage as reported by nearly every dictionary in the English language, does in fact refer to concepts such as "attractiveness". I'm am really mystified if you disagree with this point, and I'll just disengage if that is the case.
When you use the phrase, "directly equates", I suspect you are engaging in a logical fallacy, I'm not going to try and tutor you now but I highly recommend you study math and philosophy, these two general fields of knowledge will assist you in clarifying your thinking and will improve your life.
I merely am asserting that "looks" are a part of CHA, whether it be a small part or a big part, whether it is linear or exponential or proportionate to inverse square of some other factor I cannot say, all the rules say is that CHA reflects, in part, appearance. How you can disagree with this is again a mystery to me, the example you gave of a creature with horrific appearance having a high CHA is easily explained by reflecting that they could easily make up the deficiency of their appearance with the other qualities associated with CHA such as "personal magnetism". Perhaps you can link us to an example to focus your thoughts?
Please go and read the rules of the game you are playing, let me know where you are struggling to understand the rules as they are written because I would like to try and help you.
Thanks so much for your condescending reply. Talking down to people is a great way to make them want to listen to you in any way </sarcasm>
But fine let's do this. According to dictionary.com which is good enough for me.
ap-pear-ance
[uh-peer-uh ns]
noun
1. the act or fact of appearing, as to the eye or mind or before the public:
"the unannounced appearance of dinner guests; the last appearance of Caruso inAïda; her first appearance at a stockholders' meeting."
2. the state, condition, manner, or style in which a person or object appears; outward look or aspect:
"a table of antique appearance; a man of noble appearance."
3. outward show or seeming; semblance:
"to avoid the appearance of coveting an honor."
4.Law. the coming into court of either party to a suit or action.
5. appearances, outward impressions, indications, or circumstances:
"By all appearances, he enjoyed himself."
6. Philosophy. the sensory, or phenomenal, aspect of existence to an observer.
7. Archaic. an apparition.
Definition #2 looks most applicable to the description of the charisma attribute. If you'd like to argue for one of the other defenitions feel free but I'll likely ignore you.
The argument being put forth by other people is that a higher value in an attribute that includes appearance, must be more physically attractive. While a lower value must be less physically attractive.
My contention is that's not the only metric by which one could assign a number to the word appearance (as defined above). Some people have an appearance which, while not physically attractive does engender trust and/or sympathy. Could it not be reasonable to think that is what the number measures and that a higher number equals more a more trustworthy appearance. Please feel free to point me to where the definition above contradicts this as a valid measurement of appearance.
So I say again, the word appearance does not directly equal physical beauty.
The hilarious thing is that after you boil down both of our arguments we're both saying the same thing. Which is this.
High charisma doesn't have to be hot and low charisma doesn't have to be fugly.
Honestly I have no idea why we're arguing about the definition of the word appearance.
- Torger
I'm glad we agree: CHA represents, in part, appearance; that is, all other things being equal, a higher CHA represents a 'better' or more 'advantageous' appearance.
Do the rules support an 'ugly' creature having a high CHA? Yes, yes they can.
If I made a character with a 7 CHA and the DM told me, "you're ugly", I would be perfectly content.
But could I argue, "perhaps my character looks plain or even somewhat attractive, but has a nasally voice, stutters haltingly, and dresses in smelly rags", yeah that also seems like a way to represent a 7 CHA. If I then went ahead and never stuttered, spoke in a fine voice, and dressed and groomed myself well, would I still be representing a 7 CHA if I didn't look somewhat grotesque? Seems less likely, I would expect a GM to step in and enforce some fluff to explain a -2 CHA modifier if the player was unwilling to do so.
I am not insisting that CHA DIRECTLY EQUATES to physical beauty, but without other guidelines if someone asks how 'attractive' someone else is the first go to stat is CHA. So when the title of the thread is, "CHARISMA IS NOT PHYSICAL BEAUTY" that is simply a false statement not supported and in fact directly contradicted by the rules of the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Copy-pastaing the short discussion Rynjin had with James Jacobs again.... AGAIN...
Copy-pastaing the short discussion I had with James Jacobs again:
So, Charisma. And by extension, all stats.
Do you see them as affecting EVERY aspect that is listed in the stat description, or just one, most, or somewhere in between?
Ex: By "RAW" (not really the right word but we'll roll with it), can you have a character who is very attractive, but abrasive, unpersuasive, very uncharismatic, and have that suffice for a low Cha character?
Likewise, can a character with high Dex also be a bit of a klutz, or a low Dex character have quick hands? Or a high Wis character be lacking in all common sense, but with great perceptive powers and so forth?
There seems to be some argument about this on a fairly regular basis, and while it doesn't really affect much, I'd like your input on the matter.
And apologies if this has been asked before. There are a LOT of posts in this thread. =p
Charisma affects every aspect in its stat description; that's why we included those things in that description.
You can have a hideous looking person with a high charisma, and a beautiful person who doesn't have a particularly powerful personality; in both cases their high charisma is going to inspire fans and followers. You see this all the time in movie stars. That said, physical appearance is really NOT determined or set in stone by Charisma... but honestly? A potent appearance (be it beauty or ugliness) is ENHANCED by a high Charisma. Two identical twins with identical appearances don't have exactly the same Charismas... and the one with the higher score will be regarded as the uglier/more beautiful of the two.
Other stats don't really have this going on, really.
...
Sweet, thanks for the answer. I like this interpretation, if I'm reading this right. Cha determines your appearance, but not necessarily your attractiveness? Just how striking, memorable, "Wow factor"-y it is, whether it's anything special on its own or not?Correct. High Charisma certainly DRAMATICALLY increases the chances of a character being memorable in appearance (be that beauty or hideousness), but doesn't preclude something like the stereotyped "airhead" who's super beautiful but devoid of personality, or the village idiot who is super ugly but not particularly memorable because of a lack of significant personality. (Note that you CAN have an "airhead" or "village idiot" who DOES have a strong personalty!)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Six stats. Each starts with one sixth of the points. Which works out as you say to a 13 in each. To remove one stat, means you remove one sixth of the points. The fact that charisma is a stat everyone can dump without penalty so long as someone has it only makes it clearer that the reasonable thing is to reduce the point buy. Since people dump it to 7 unless they are the face character, they actually get 7 points by my calculations to spend on combat stats. I don't see a reason for this.
By taking 3 points to account for the loss of charisma, you're forcing the character to buy 13 Cha. How would you feel telling people that you don't allow characters with a lower than 13 Cha in your game? I would feel like it placed unfair constraints on the type of characters that would be feasible.
Pathfinder does not assume that characters will have 13s in everything. Pathfinder assumes that characters will have some higher stats, and some lower stats - even some below average stats. For example, the standard heroic array is 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8. This is a 20 PB with an even distribution of good to poor stats.
If you are given this array, or you roll it, the 8 has to go somewhere. This is easier to see and accept with rolled stats, where low stats just happen and you have to live with them.
With PB, you don't have to have low stats - unless you also want high stats. I, personally, would not have much fun playing a character with an array of 14, 13, 13, 13, 13, 13. Such characters simply do not have any notable strengths, and may be ineffective in their role compared to those with a slightly more varied array. (Note that I generally prefer better-balanced arrays and often assign flexible stat +2s to balance stats rather than increase my primary.)
Now, how would that affect the actual game? Some characters won't care, because they would do so anyway or because they're SAD and have other options for dump stats. But a monk who wants Combat Expertise will end up with something like Str 15, Dex 13, Con 12, Int 13, Wis 12. So your to-hit and damage at level 1 will be less than that of a hobgoblin warrior, and you have 9 HP and 12 AC. That's frankly terrible.
It sucks that Cha is the most frequent dump stat. It really sucks that a handful of builds are practically forced to dump Cha. But this is not the way to fix it.
If you don't like people dumping stats, then consider giving them an array similar to the heroic array, which limits the extent to which they can dump. Alternatively, tell them they don't get extra points for reducing stats below 10 - and then consider a higher point buy, since the standard heroic array assumes you'll actually have 22 points after dropping one stat to 8. Or, shift what stats do such that you can dump stats other than Cha. For example you can base your Will Save on Cha or Wis, whichever is higher, thus allowing fighters who want to be good leaders to put their 8 in Wis without worrying about what'll happen when they get hit by Charm Person. Or remove the Int 13 prerequisite from Combat Expertise so maneuver specialists can choose to have a low Int instead of low Cha.
Or just talk to your players about how playing a low Cha character is not an excuse to act like a jerk, and stop playing with anyone who uses character charisma, alignment, class, or anything else as an excuse to act like a jerk (in a way that makes things less fun for others).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everything you say suggests that the issue is that you want a harmless stat to dump for no disadvantage - and then both ignore the non-rules consequence for doing so and use it as an excuse for behaving badly to others.There are disadvantages. And you can use anything for an excuse to behave badly to others. I played a high Charisma character that was a real a&*&$$%, but due to his strong personality people tended to overlook his bad manners.
If Paizo wanted "appearance" to mean "very memorable appearance" they should have said so. Of course people will equate "Appearance" with "attractiveness".If Paizo wanted "appearance" to mean "attractiveness" they would have said so. They didn't. They specifically changed it from "physical attractiveness", so that people can equate it with whatever they like.
If the rules always said what they meant you would have a point, how since that is not the case then you don't.