| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Charisma in Pathfinder is worthless without class features, feats, or traits to give it purpose more purpose. Once you get past level six, increasing your intelligence bonus lets you put a rank in all charisma skills to get the same effect as increasing charisma, while also boosting an even larger number of intelligence skills.
Some folks don't care for the resonance system. (I'm not one of them, but that won't stop me from setting up a discussion thread.) Setting aside proposed changes/fixes to the resonance system, what would you give charisma to make it more worthwhile?
Currently, charisma deals with the following without class/feat/trait help:
Social interactions, by way of skills.
Magic items, by way of skills.
Spell-like abilities.
Resolving conflicting charms/compulsions, or pushing the boundaries of what a charm will do.
Dealing with bound outsiders.
Plenty of stuff related to being undead and/or incorporeal.
Personally, I'm cool with resonance, but I'm curious to hear what other suggestions are.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Either "resonance" or "give equal weight to social interaction as you do combat". I'm fine with whichever.
Every Day should have 4-5 combats and 4-5 fancy parties to attend.
But in seriousness I prefer resonance to magic item slots.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just about anything except the resonance system as it appears to be so far.
Just about anything except the resonance system as it appears to be so far.
Scaling number of free ponies it is, then. But, more seriously, my hope for the thread is hearing some other suggestions out of curiosity. We've got a couple threads for "please not the resonance system".
Well, it needs to be something which doesn’t break how a whole host of things work. You could split off another save type, for example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This has been an issue since 2000 with 3.0 and in multiple thread discussions there has not been a consensus about how to increases Charisma relevance as far as I know. So, I'm all for giving Resonance a chance, so far I like it.
Either "resonance" or "give equal weight to social interaction as you do combat". I'm fine with whichever.
Every Day should have 4-5 combats and 4-5 fancy parties to attend.
But in seriousness I prefer resonance to magic item slots.
Thats scary because then you get threads like "I know a commoner only has a DC of x which means the GM and NPC should just do whatever my diplomancer wants."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Years ago I had an idea of replacing the current alignment system with a persona system, one where you picked individual personality traits based on your charisma. The system worked by giving you so many personality traits based on your charisma score, which included concepts like you're honest, or brave, or vengeful, or cowardly. It‘s a little complicated but playing your personality got you a small bonus, everything gave a bonus even the before mentioned cowardly, which gave you a bonus to beg for your life. Anyway its neat but a little involved since it required role-playing and the GM and other players judgement if it worked, by how entertained they were.
I'd also have charisma affect will save and wisdom affect a perception save.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think connecting CHA and magic items (or the ability to use them) is the worst idea ever per se, it's the way HOW resonance connects them that doesn't feel right.
It's a mixture of 'whenever you have the chance to add a point-based pool, DON't add a point-based pool' and 'this kind of change is very extreme and not in line at all with what came before'. I'm sure there a ways to make CHA mechanically more relevant and directly connected to magic items that doesn' fundamentally change the game and it's soul
Will Saves, I'd give Charisma Will Saves...
Hear me out: It used to be that Wisdom was only not a dump stat because of Perception and Will saves. If you don't care about hiding enemies, then it's literally just Will Saves. However, under the new system, Perception (Wisdom Based) is going to determine your initiative a good number of times rather than Dexterity (there's a ton of encounters where hiding beforehand is not a possibility).
Given this, if I get affected by a Charm Person, or someone channeling the negative power of their God. Does it make more sense that my common sense helps me avoid that, or that my strength of personality does? I'd totally have Charisma determine Will saves.
I'm totally fine with it being a dump stat, because you have to have some, but this alternative totally works for me. I actually wanted to implement Wis to Initiative too, in PF1
I don't think connecting CHA and magic items (or the ability to use them) is the worst idea ever per se, it's the way HOW resonance connects them that doesn't feel right.
It's a mixture of 'whenever you have the chance to add a point-based pool, DON't add a point-based pool' and 'this kind of change is very extreme and not in line at all with what came before'. I'm sure there a ways to make CHA mechanically more relevant and directly connected to magic items that doesn' fundamentally change the game and it's soul
This is a thread to make suggestions of those things that you're sure exist, rather than discuss what you don't like about resonance or how you'd fix it. (Or, for that matter, just say that resonance is fine.) There are a lot of those threads already.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a thread to make suggestions of those things that you're sure exist, rather than discuss what you don't like about resonance or how you'd fix it. (Or, for that matter, just say that resonance is fine.) There are a lot of those threads already.I don't think connecting CHA and magic items (or the ability to use them) is the worst idea ever per se, it's the way HOW resonance connects them that doesn't feel right.
It's a mixture of 'whenever you have the chance to add a point-based pool, DON't add a point-based pool' and 'this kind of change is very extreme and not in line at all with what came before'. I'm sure there a ways to make CHA mechanically more relevant and directly connected to magic items that doesn' fundamentally change the game and it's soul
the thread is called 'IF NOT RESONANCE, WHAT WOULD YOU GIVE CHARISMA?', and as I wrote, I'd still connect it mechanically to magic items, just not in that way.
suggestion: CHA modifier + 1/2 level as amount of magic items you can use or wear, would still tie it to magic items and would not fundentally change the way the game is played. it is, to me, more a question of HOW then WHAT. I'm almost fine with WHAT, it is, to me, the HOW that needs improvement.
You can also have resonance exist and instead be the power pool for magic item crafting.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd use Charisma to determine the DC of saving throws for magic items, instead of having magic items default to the minimum possible DC which never increases.
So if you have a wand of fireball, the DC would be something like: 10 + caster level + Cha for casters, and 1/2 character level + Cha for non-casters.
For non spell trigger items, like a flaming sword which can also shoot a fireball, the DC could be 10 + character level + Cha
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a thread to make suggestions of those things that you're sure exist, rather than discuss what you don't like about resonance or how you'd fix it. (Or, for that matter, just say that resonance is fine.) There are a lot of those threads already.I don't think connecting CHA and magic items (or the ability to use them) is the worst idea ever per se, it's the way HOW resonance connects them that doesn't feel right.
It's a mixture of 'whenever you have the chance to add a point-based pool, DON't add a point-based pool' and 'this kind of change is very extreme and not in line at all with what came before'. I'm sure there a ways to make CHA mechanically more relevant and directly connected to magic items that doesn' fundamentally change the game and it's soulthe thread is called 'IF NOT RESONANCE, WHAT WOULD YOU GIVE CHARISMA?', and as I wrote, I'd still connect it mechanically to magic items, just not in that way.
suggestion: CHA modifier + 1/2 level as amount of magic items you can use or wear, would still tie it to magic items and would not fundentally change the way the game is played. it is, to me, more a question of HOW then WHAT. I'm almost fine with WHAT, it is, to me, the HOW that needs improvement.
Oh, I see. I apologize, I misread your initial post.
|
I don't think connecting CHA and magic items (or the ability to use them) is the worst idea ever per se, it's the way HOW resonance connects them that doesn't feel right.
It's a mixture of 'whenever you have the chance to add a point-based pool, DON't add a point-based pool' and 'this kind of change is very extreme and not in line at all with what came before'. I'm sure there a ways to make CHA mechanically more relevant and directly connected to magic items that doesn' fundamentally change the game and it's soul
I think this could work if they decided to re-do wands. Instead of charges, they could be limited to a number of uses per day (say, x + CHA). Characters with higher CHA would get more uses out of wands, whereas those who dumped CHA would suck as wand-wielders.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In all of my games there have been some pretty significant social challenges, and as such no one I play with dumps charisma without a compelling reason. A bonus to Int does not beat ranks + Cha in social skills.
That being said, I can definitely understand why some people would like to throw Charisma a bone. Really combat heavy games can often just ignore it.
To that end, I think it would be appropriate to buff social skills for combat. Really make it easy to use bluff and intimidate checks offensively. Hell, a diplomacy check to remove a shaken condition? That'd be pretty neat.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
then again, resonance seems to be Paizo's answer to problems, my group and I just don't have:
-We always have at least one player who plays the dedicated healer and no one has to be bullied in that role. on the contrary, the characters for our next campaign were already built and we will play with three out of six characters with dedication to healing... so: no wand spamming.
-None of us uses CHA as a dump stat, sometimes it might be the lowest stat, but nothing as ridiculous as Cha 7 or something like that. but we don't use point buy, we roll, we have no need to dump our stats that way.
-While we might use the Big 6, I don't think I've ever seen a character having all six of them. When there's a chance to get an item that's cooler or has more flavour, we usually go with the item that has more flavour, unless it is significantly worse.
-I personally don't get the absurd hatred for body slots
so, I admit, I don't really GET the so-called problems, Resonance tries to fix, so whatever my ideas are to connect CHA mechanically to magic items, feel free to ignore them
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the problem is inherent in the ability score system, and requires more then a simple patch or swap to fix.
The underlying issue with charisma is that it is the "social stat." People who don't like social interactions dump it, and they play games where social interactions aren't a big part, so charisma is worthless to their play style. People who like social interactions want to roleplay the interactions. In games where social interactions are a big part, dice are set aside to make way for roleplay. So even when charisma should be important for the game, it isn't, because we don't want dice rolling to replace roleplaying.
I think fixing the system requires an overhaul of the 6 ability scores. I would love to see a total rewrite of the ability score system, but sadly they are too much of a sacred cow to be changed that drastically. If we have to keep these 6 abilities, at least we can redefine them. Give each ability score a solid definition and use them consistently. Make charisma the magic stat, all magic is based on it, no exceptions. Make wisdom the mental defense stat. Intelligence the skills and knowledges stat. Make strength the physical offense stat, constitution the physical defense stat, and dexterity the physical manipulation stat. Or something, doesn't need to be those exact things, just something with definitive boundaries. Remove all the exceptions that let you use one ability instead of another. This would make each ability score important, let them (paizo) rebalance the system to give each stat weight, and make no stat subvertable.
I'd use Charisma to determine the DC of saving throws for magic items, instead of having magic items default to the minimum possible DC which never increases.
So if you have a wand of fireball, the DC would be something like: 10 + caster level + Cha for casters, and 1/2 character level + Cha for non-casters.
For non spell trigger items, like a flaming sword which can also shoot a fireball, the DC could be 10 + character level + Cha
I like that idea, that's pretty elegant
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since the play test rules are supposed to include something like hero points, one option would be to have a Charisma bear on the number of hero points a character gets.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since the play test rules are supposed to include something like hero points, one option would be to have a Charisma bear on the number of hero points a character gets.
That's a pretty fantastic idea actually. If part of charisma is the ability to project your will on the world, hero points are kind of the epitome of that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Charisma in Pathfinder is worthless without class features, feats, or traits to give it purpose more purpose.
I've never had an issue with cha as/is in PF1. As such, I'd give charisma the exact things it already has. I don't have the 'angst' some seem to have about some stats being 'better' or 'worse' than others as each had their uses and none where universally ignored: If anything , I'd like to see Con be something other than 'meat shielding' and saves as it's the only 'red headed stepchild' with not even a skill to work with.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Charisma in Pathfinder is worthless without class features, feats, or traits to give it purpose more purpose.I've never had an issue with cha as/is in PF1. As such, I'd give charisma the exact things it already has. I don't have the 'angst' some seem to have about some stats being 'better' or 'worse' than others as each had their uses and none where universally ignored: If anything , I'd like to see Con be something other than 'meat shielding' and saves as it's the only 'red headed stepchild' with not even a skill to work with.
Charisma ended up getting used for a whole bunch of different things because it didn't have as much of a base purpose. While I liked being able to get charisma for will saves, you could get it to pretty much every non-percentile roll in the game. "Worthless" is too strong, I'll admit.
I do wonder if "Charisma is keyed to resonance" means that UMD is no longer a skill, so anybody can just pick up a wand or a scroll and use it, provided they have resonance left. I think that would be a neat change.
UMD was one of those "it's so good you need it" skills, and we already got rid of one of those when Perception was made a non-skill.
Will Saves, I'd give Charisma Will Saves...
Hear me out: It used to be that Wisdom was only not a dump stat because of Perception and Will saves. If you don't care about hiding enemies, then it's literally just Will Saves. However, under the new system, Perception (Wisdom Based) is going to determine your initiative a good number of times rather than Dexterity (there's a ton of encounters where hiding beforehand is not a possibility).
Given this, if I get affected by a Charm Person, or someone channeling the negative power of their God. Does it make more sense that my common sense helps me avoid that, or that my strength of personality does? I'd totally have Charisma determine Will saves.
For Wisdom skills, I see Sense Motive get a lot of use, too, honestly.
Is that seriously how Initiative will work? That makes no sense. It used Dexterity because that's how quickly you react.
I've seen arguments for using Charisma for Will saves before, and there are certainly decent arguments in favour of it. I'm not sure if I'm for or against that idea.
The biggest problem is that Charisma has more useful skills tied to it than Wisdom does. Bluff, Diplomacy, and Intimidate in particular, but it's also tied to Disguise, Handle Animal, Performs, and formerly UMD (now Resonance instead).
Wisdom has Perception and Sense Motive for its useful skills, additionally being tied to Heal, Professions, and Survival. That's it. Take away Will saves, and Wisdom suddenly becomes an attractive dump stat.
I do wonder if "Charisma is keyed to resonance" means that UMD is no longer a skill, so anybody can just pick up a wand or a scroll and use it, provided they have resonance left. I think that would be a neat change.
UMD was one of those "it's so good you need it" skills, and we already got rid of one of those when Perception was made a non-skill.
Sounds like UMD is still in, from the Dev comments. I never really got the "so good you need it" thing, though. I've gone entire games with no more than one UMD roll for the group.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why do we need to make it so that every single character has to have every single attribute or be crippled?
Doing so just increases the much discussed caster martial disparity, because wizards still can dump str, dex, wis, and cha and be fine, but now fighter has to have Str, Dex, Con, Wis, Int, Cha or be absolutely crippled in at least one phase of the game?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with Nathanael. I'm not sure what the huge issue is with Charisma. It's been around since the age-old days of AD&D, has always been an largely ignored stat for many classes and I'm not sure why there needs to be some grand purpose to it now.
I mean MAD is bad enough for some classes as it is, now we're adding Charisma to every single class's list?
Not like I have a lot of control over this, it seems pretty clear it's a done deal, but it seems like a solution in search of a problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do we need to make it so that every single character has to have every single attribute or be crippled?
At that point, you might just as well set stats at 14 at creation and have every one level up every 5 levels and just take stat placement out of the picture: that way you don't have to worry about min/maxing and some stat outshining another a they are ALL identical... :P
Why do we need to make it so that every single character has to have every single attribute or be crippled?It that point, you might just as well set stats at 14 at creation and have every one level up every 5 levels and just take stat placement out of the picture: that way you don't have to worry about min/maxing and some stat outshining another a they are ALL identical... :P
Feats, skills, traits, gear, etc would like a word.
I know it's not the topic, but min/maxers are going to exist. I give them a year to math out the best stat lines for 2e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do wonder if "Charisma is keyed to resonance" means that UMD is no longer a skill, so anybody can just pick up a wand or a scroll and use it, provided they have resonance left. I think that would be a neat change.
UMD was one of those "it's so good you need it" skills, and we already got rid of one of those when Perception was made a non-skill.
My, we have come a long way since D&D 3.0, when "Use Magic Device" was an exclusive skill that most classes could neither use nor learn.
Why do we need to make it so that every single character has to have every single attribute or be crippled?It that point, you might just as well set stats at 14 at creation and have every one level up every 5 levels and just take stat placement out of the picture: that way you don't have to worry about min/maxing and some stat outshining another a they are ALL identical... :PFeats, skills, traits, gear, etc would like a word.
I know it's not the topic, but min/maxers are going to exist. I give them a year to math out the best stat lines for 2e.
"you don't have to worry about min/maxing" stats is what I meant. [I figured it was implied as all I talked about was stats]
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do we need to make it so that every single character has to have every single attribute or be crippled?
Doing so just increases the much discussed caster martial disparity, because wizards still can dump str, dex, wis, and cha and be fine, but now fighter has to have Str, Dex, Con, Wis, Int, Cha or be absolutely crippled in at least one phase of the game?
FWIW, I take it one of the reasons to be this.
A lot people feel that games are more fun when there are more interesting decisions to make. So when making choices between, say, different feats, or different rogue talents, or whatever, it's more fun when there a wider variety of interesting and mechanically reasonable choices to make.
Likewise, in a point-buy system, it's more fun when there are more interesting decisions to make regarding stat point allocation.
(For an extreme example of wouldn't be fun, suppose there was a class, the Monolith, that allowed you to use your Charisma stat bonus for saves, AC, initiative, attack and damage rolls, spell DCs, carrying capacity, skills, and so on. In this case stat point allocation doesn't involve interesting decisions: you should use all of your points to maximize Charisma, and ignore everything else.)
In PF1, many classes have fewer interesting point-buy choices to make because, in general, some stats are mechanically of little or no value for that class. For example, wizards can generally dump Str and Cha without hesitation, because they don't really do anything for wizards. On the other hand, wizards still hestitate to dump Wis, Con and Dex, because those still give wizards something they care about: better saves, more HP, higher AC and initiative, and so on.
Ideally, it would be nice to have all six attributes be like Wis, Con, Dex and Int: things which offer something of value for every class. That would make the decision of how to allocate one's point-buy more interesting, and more fun.
(To be clear: this wouldn't require characters who dump a stat to be "crippled" by this -- Int is still the most important stat for Wizards, for example -- but it would be nice for the decision to dump a stat to actually be an interesting one, that involves a trade off of some kind.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
(To be clear: this wouldn't require characters who dump a stat to be "crippled" by this -- Int is still the most important stat for Wizards, for example -- but it would be nice for the decision to dump a stat to actually be an interesting one, that involves a trade off of some kind.)
The problem is that the Wizard simply does not have to make meaningful choices as is, while other characters do.
Wizards are less dependant on items, very much so, so this is another stat that will hurt the Fighter more than the Wizard to dump stat.
Wizards don't need strength at all unless they are a gish type build, so they get a virtual free dump stat there.
Since they aren't in the front line they don't need as much dex or con either, though having one or the other be relatively high is certainly useful, but the reality is Wizards have 5 readily available dump stats, and melee characters effectively have one, which is gone now.
I definitely like the idea of tying CHA to magic items used by non-casters - though I think the Save DC mentioned earlier should be 10 + Spell level (rather than caster level) + Casting stat. And then non-casters could "fake it" and their save DC would be 10 + CHA. Though honestly, I mostly like this because it gives a lot of lower tier items a chance to be more useful - a first level wand is DC 11. This way, a character with a reason to be invested in CHA could reasonably make that DC 15+. Sorcerers would also be better with magic items, which fits my idea of their class much better than wizards being good with magic items - things "just work" for sorcerers.
EDIT: Maybe magic items should stay 10+ spell effect level + CHA.. DC 15 for a 20 CHA creature at upper levels is still rather low.
|
|
The overall big picture in my mind is looking over to the Spontaneous Casters. (If the Magic System still has the differing mechanics instead of a combined one like most other systems out there, including 5th ed)
We need to have Cha not be the go to stat for casters of the Spontaneous casting sort. On that same token, we also need Cha be a caster stat for one of the core classes that isn't the Sorcerer.
Since the play test rules are supposed to include something like hero points, one option would be to have a Charisma bear on the number of hero points a character gets.
Honestly, I was seriously thinking that was going to happen until we found out about Resonance. Now I'm not so sure.
Personally, I'd also go the Hero Points route, but without knowing what they do currently, I have no idea if that's a smart move or not
My vote would be to take a page from kirthfinder and split will saves into two different saves, Compulsions, charms and emotion type effects go to will saves which are now charisma based, and illusion, curse and false memory type effects go a new save called intuition and are wisdom based.
Well, honestly most of my PCs have atleast 14 CHA, but lets break down the "problem" with CHA and why it could receive a rebalance.
Starting with:
STR/DEX/CON are PC stats, simply put, the physical part of the character clearly is dissociated from the player. The smallest weakest person can play a huge muscle head and real life wont in anyway affect the game.
INT/WIS/CHA are player stats, simply put, here it is the player, not the PC, that matters. There is no way i can actually play a wizard INT 20, that simple, i do not have that much inteligence in real life to accomplish that, same way i cant "play" eistein in real life. My PC could have that in his sheet, but come the time to solve a pluzze, put up a plan...? Im not better than the fighter by my side, cause in real life im not better than him doesnt matter what my sheet says.
Now, WIS/INT give you ingame extra things to make up for this, be it extra skill points, higher will save... CHA, doesnt.
And in the case of CHA/WIS/INT, the rules dont say exactly what you can or cant do. You cant say a plan is to hard for a guy with INT 8 to come up with, you wont say the guy with CHA 8 cant have friends or be the leader, but you can see the book and see the guy with STR 8 cant move a said rock or you can look at your sheet and see that the guy with higher CON can run longer.
I played games where i had CHA 7, which means i trashed so my PC could put half decent stats in 4 other places i needed. Guess who ended up playing a half antisocial PC that still ended up the leader of group and all NPCs by necessity... yeap, the CHA 7 PC, even if i was the lowest in the entire party.
Why? Simple role play, one thing led to another even while my PC wasnt super friendly and there we have it, i didnt make a single CHA roll.
Honestly, this isnt even something uncommon for me to see. I wonder in how many times a CHA 7 guy is frowned upon all the time, ignored... I bet very few.
CHA should have mechanic rules, even if they are all social, there should be presented issues by clearly dumping it. Ofc some will say that is represented in the skills, but here is the thing, skills also arent often rolled at all. It isnt like the game says you can only make friends by using diplomacy rolls.
(To be clear: this wouldn't require characters who dump a stat to be "crippled" by this -- Int is still the most important stat for Wizards, for example -- but it would be nice for the decision to dump a stat to actually be an interesting one, that involves a trade off of some kind.)
The problem is that the Wizard simply does not have to make meaningful choices as is, while other characters do.
Wizards are less dependant on items, very much so, so this is another stat that will hurt the Fighter more than the Wizard to dump stat.
Wizards don't need strength at all unless they are a gish type build, so they get a virtual free dump stat there.
Since they aren't in the front line they don't need as much dex or con either, though having one or the other be relatively high is certainly useful, but the reality is Wizards have 5 readily available dump stats, and melee characters effectively have one, which is gone now.
Point by point:
Fighters are more dependent on weapons/armor than wizards, but while we don't know the full details we do know weapons and armor will have work arounds to make sure they aren't counted the same way as activated items.
I agree wizards can usually dump STR, but that's largely because most of us don't sweat carrying capacity as much as we should. 7 STR leaves very little room for magical equipment. Hopefully this new bulk system will be easier to use, and therefore more likely to be enforced.
Fighters have larger hit dice, can wear heavy armor, and have a good base fortitude save. A fighter that trades out armor training can leave dex at 12 and still have great AC. If a wizard fails dumps dex or con, when they do get attacked it will HURT. Like, a threatening level of damage to the fighter could one shot the wizard. Also, wizards usually benefit more for having higher initiative or acting in the surprise round.
I feel like the MAD issue is distinct from the issue of CHA being less useful than it should be. Also, the worst offenders for MAD, IMO, are the classes that already want charisma like Paladins, Swashbucklers, or melee bards and such. Also monks who tend to be the least gear dependent class in the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The boot. Charisma in D&D/PF is just a bizarre adjunct contributor to social skills like bluff or diplomancy [currently: skill ranks + class skill bonus + chr modifier]. A charismatic person just has those skills maxed out, call it a day.
'naturally charismatic' is just background flavor, or something like a feat.
Solved.
What is charisma exactly?
Physical beauty is part of it, certainly. Also a well modulated voice; one that can cut through other people's talking and be heard, without shouting.
Probably it also has to do with things like making the right amount of eye contact, a firm hand shake (but not too firm).
It would be the appearance of sincereness, even if one is not sincere.
I think that "force of personality" is an illusion, "presence" just a word to describe the attributes I've listed above.
That being the case, it's weird, and artificial to have things like the sorcerer with charisma is it's casting stat.
People want to make rules to up value charisma. I think that's a step in the wrong direction. Better to design the classes so they are not so dependant on attributes.
Up the BAB score for martials, increase the spell save DCs for casters. Reduce the point buy drastically so that the now powerful classes don't get overly strong due to too high attribute scores. I'm thinking a 6 point buy with a 1/1 buy rate. That way someone could still have a 16 if desired.
Have classes and feats designed so that even a score of 10 could be effective. So, built in AC bonuses, Save bonuses, class ability boosts, as well as good feats to enable increases in problem areas. For instance if a wizard did spend all 6 points on intelligence, they could get a feat to be better at diplomacy, or carrying capacity, or AC, or whatever. Limited by the number of available feats, of course.
The boot. Charisma in D&D/PF is just a bizarre adjunct contributor to social skills like bluff or diplomancy [currently: skill ranks + class skill bonus + chr modifier]. A charismatic person just has those skills maxed out, call it a day.
'naturally charismatic' is just background flavor, or something like a feat.
Solved.
That might honestly be the best for game mechanics, but it won't happen because it makes PF no longer tied to the D&D roots and people would resent that.