|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Malk_Content wrote: Doktor Weasel wrote: It strikes me as very odd to look at making a rule system simply as a make-work program for Charisma. I'm much more concerned about whether something makes sense and is fun or not than forcing artificial relevance to a stat. And making all classes powers dependent on charisma really doesn't make sense and frankly isn't fun in my mind. It's just a stat tax justified solely by the desire for a stat tax. A stat tax should at least have a better justification than the fact that the stat is irreverent to most people. I want to be clear I don't want a rule for rules sake and I don't want any stat to be a tax. What I want is for anytime I create a character for there to be a mechanical reason to want to advance all the stats and I then have to make a choice. Currently unless the character actively uses the stat, I only have to make that choice about 5 stats not 6. Having low charisma should not be anymore crippling than low strength, but it should mean something. Even strength is pushing it (now that bags of holding only have a monetary cost) so in PF2 when you get your 4 stat ups there isn't a choice, not really because there are two stats that are only relevant in any way if you aren of a class that wants it as high as possible.
Case in point, I'm level 5 and I suddenly find my character ends up doing a lot of the talking so I should get better at Diplomacy. Do I buff my Charisma and raise my bonus from +0 to +1 or do I raise my Intelligence and gain training in Diplomacy to raise my bonus from +0 to +5?
It absolutely should not be shoe horned in. Well said. The other thing I would like to add is there are certain classes {Sorcerers, and Bards} whom are forced {highly encouraged} though there class mechanics to have Cha as there main stat, meaning it cannot be ignored as a stat on a whole. To do so would merely be shifting the stat tax to these classes, and to anyone whom wishes to play a more Cha based character. Which itself isn't fun, knowing that the class/concept is gimped because of its main stat {similar to the feeling of every non Cha based class if Cha suddenly became important to activating its abilities.)
To bring up a PF1 example, a lot of people I saw playing Sorcerers would generally play the 'Sage' bloodline, because it switched out the Cha casting stat for Int. From a mechanical standpoint, having a Int casting stat was better then Cha, because Int innately gave the Character bonus skill points, while Cha innately gave nothing. From a roleplay standpoint, even if you were planning to play a Face based Sorcerer, it was still better to have Int, as those extra points would allow you to invest more into those face based skills, along with others to round out your character concept, and fully realise it, then a Cha based one, whom would fall behind, or have to leave certain face skills out.
To be fair, lots of changes to the system already make CHA more appealing. I can't stress enough how good intimidate is, and classes like the sorcerer now get so many more skills trained by default, plus auto training in the stuff you have to have for the basic class competency.
I do think CHA will need more, and like DMW I'm not sure what it is. But even without Resonance CHA has made big strides, and STR will too now that it can offset heavy armor speed penalties.
-----------Warning, long post, do not blame you if skip--------------
I did have a small radical idea, which will most likely be riddled with flaws, but here it goes=
To mirror one large point Doktor Weasel and others have made, which I agreed with, is any change to Cha as to be seen as an improvement as a whole, not a step back to allow a stat to take the place of something that already was. The other thing is its organic integration within the system, that the bonus itself did not just seem to come out of nowhere in order to bolster a stat. Resonance had good intentions, {and personally I did not mind it, but was definitely not in love with it} but among other things, it ran a foul with both of these.
Now lets look at what Cha has been traditionally used for, and what it represents. The main use has been {in its essence} the ability to shape, influence, and manipulate creatures. Now the skills do a fine job at representing this nature, however it has the problem of needing additional resources to make use of {ie proficiencies), while the bonus to certain skills is not unique to Cha {ie Str will improve Str based skills, Dex to Dex based skills, ever ability except Con does this). Now a possible solution would be to roll these Cha based skills into an innate character skill, such as what became of Perception. However, this could possibly limit its use {ie skill feats} and more importantly it could be seen as a constriction {ie even a lower Cha character can still be decent in Cha skills, if they are willing to pay there prof increases into them, more so after the changes to prof bonuses. In this system <assuming it would follow the same rules as Perception in the playtest> it would be more difficult to make these increases, {and adversely make a characters bad at these skills at higher levels} both limiting characters mechanically and conceptually.) Plus, it may be too broad of a scope to place its uses as just part of the character sheet.
However, Cha as also had another use in PF history, and that is in innate spellcasting. Now, we have seen this in the Sorcerer class, as there spellcasting comes from the innate magic in there blood, and many creatures whom naturally have spellcasting tend to use Cha as its stat. Going back to PF1 we have seen core races gain minor spellcasting abilities {namely those loveable Gnomes, though others gained it to} by having a high enough Charisma score, and that maybe the answer for the Charisma in PF2. Much like languages, races could have a list of certain minor spells/spell like abilities associated with their race, and characters when reaching stat millstones with Charisma can select one of them. This would give Cha a use, even in classes which do not traditionally use Charisma, but would not make it necessary, as its not taking away anything, instead its giving another option. It would also give Cha an innate use, while still grounding it within the lore of the world, and possibly expanding it.
Now, if you made it these far, congrats. Even though the post is long, it is still at best a Raw idea, that if it were to be implemented {and again this is all speculatively assuming Charisma as no use now that Resonance is gone, which I do not think will be the case.} it would need a lot of work and balancing. {for example what spells to place in what race, how strong/weak should they be, should there use be limited and should Cha play a part in said uses, ect. EDIT= not to mention how it would after certain ancestry feat, and things like that ect.). And ultimately the idea may be itself too flawed to work, but, at least, I found it an interesting idea to the Charisma conundrum
Siro wrote: -----------Warning, long post, do not blame you if skip--------------
I did have a small radical idea, which will most likely be riddled with flaws, but here it goes=
To mirror one large point Doktor Weasel and others have made, which I agreed with, is any change to Cha as to be seen as an improvement as a whole, not a step back to allow a stat to take the place of something that already was. The other thing is its organic integration within the system, that the bonus itself did not just seem to come out of nowhere in order to bolster a stat. Resonance had good intentions, {and personally I did not mind it, but was definitely not in love with it} but among other things, it ran a foul with both of these.
Now lets look at what Cha has been traditionally used for, and what it represents. The main use has been {in its essence} the ability to shape, influence, and manipulate creatures. Now the skills do a fine job at representing this nature, however it has the problem of needing additional resources to make use of {ie proficiencies), while the bonus to certain skills is not unique to Cha {ie Str will improve Str based skills, Dex to Dex based skills, ever ability except Con does this). Now a possible solution would be to roll these Cha based skills into an innate character skill, such as what became of Perception. However, this could possibly limit its use {ie skill feats} and more importantly it could be seen as a constriction {ie even a lower Cha character can still be decent in Cha skills, if they are willing to pay there prof increases into them, more so after the changes to prof bonuses. In this system <assuming it would follow the same rules as Perception in the playtest> it would be more difficult to make these increases, {and adversely make a characters bad at these skills at higher levels} both limiting characters mechanically and conceptually.) Plus, it may be too broad of a scope to place its uses as just part of the character sheet.
However, Cha as also had another use in PF history, and...
We do have CHA based ancestral spells though. They are tied to ancestry feats. Any innate spellcasting is already tied to it. Unless you mean it should just be a part of the base racial package, but I'd disagree with that. Giving a base feature which will be dead to anyone who doesn't prioritize CHA is not a good idea. This is why they made Unburdened Optional instead of default, so that unarmored dwarves wouldn't have dead features. (It really should have been an ancestry feat, not a heritage, but I digress.)
I also don't think it really fixes the issue per se. It just continues to make CHA only useful if you already wanted CHA.
Watch CHA now be essentially in some sort of new buying/selling settlement rules that will how much you can buy/sell. It would probably be kinda complicated and require a table, but it would organically make every character consider CHA, even if just a bit.
I guess some sort of default Bargain Hunter type option that lets you buy and sell things at better rates based on CHA would make sense thematically? But it would be very fiddly and would only really call for one player in the party to have it, much like you probably only need one character with social skills now.
Captain Morgan wrote: Siro wrote: -----------Warning, long post, do not blame you if skip... We do have CHA based ancestral spells though. They are tied to ancestry feats. Any innate spellcasting is already tied to it. Unless you mean it should just be a part of the base racial package, but I'd disagree with that. Giving a base feature which will be dead to anyone who doesn't prioritize CHA is not a good idea. This is why they made Unburdened Optional instead of default, so that unarmored dwarves wouldn't have dead features. (It really should have been an ancestry feat, not a heritage, but I digress.)
I also don't think it really fixes the issue per se. It just continues to make CHA only useful if you already wanted CHA Yes, I was thinking of it as a sort of add on to the base racial package {similar to how a selection of bonus languages are part of the basic racial package for high Int, except without the restriction of being only at character creation, and the ability to get more then one the higher you increase Cha, although at what ratio to Cha would be one of those balancing things, especially because something would needed to be gained at stat 12, so even those not planning to go heavy into it would still get some benefit like the other stats.)
Which, I would not think would take away from the race itself, as all the races former abilities would stay the same they are. At least the way I am interpreting it, the 'bonus' as it were, comes from the innate feature of Charisma, with race only becoming involved in what small list you would select from {if you would prefer, you could also just remove race, and make the list come from a common pool. I was adding it both for flavour and to allow for more distinctiveness.} The possible impact {which was the reason for my edit and you mentioned} was on ancestry feats which gives you a cantrip, and how these may be muddled if there was another way to gain them {ie through Charisma}. However, these would still have a place because= 1) they would have a much larger list of spells to choose from, then what would be offered from Charisma 2) not everyone going to be a Charismatic character, but they still may want a certain cantrip, and so the feat would provide it and 3) even if you are Charismatic character, you may still want a cantrip, especially if it has a use that you want that you could not get through Charisma.
Another concern which you did bring up is it will only be useful for those already investing in Cha, basically an all or nothing. Now, I'm assuming {please let me know if I am off base} this is either because of how I linked it to bonus languages {and clarified a bit more in Paragraph 1} and/or because of Spell DC's. For that, while I will admit there are spells/effects that rely on DC, there are others which don't and so even lower Cha characters {and I assuming this imaginary limited list there would be a couple of effects like this)would be able to take advantage of it. Of course, I would not want it to be an auto pick {again where balancing would need to take place} but it would need to be useful enough to be considered.
As for dead base features, I'm a little bit confused? I might have some idea of what you mean, but I'm not confident enough to give an answer that may be based on a erroneous assumption on my part/ would want to understand a bit more encase I made a mistake,
So PF2 isn't trying to give you features you won't actually use. Dwarves used to ignore armor speed reductions by default, but that does nothing for a dwarf monk. For that class it is a dead feature to the monk. Therefore, they changed unburdened to an optional thing you can select, so dwarf monks don't feel like they are wasting a class feature.
Giving ancestries default spells is useless to anyone with low charisma or who doesn't want to use magic. It then becomes a dead feature just like unburdened was to dwarf monks. Also, while it makes sense for gnomes and elves, it doesn't make as much sense for all ancestries.
I don't think the issue right now is that charisma is too weak for characters who use charisma. Those characters can use it very well indeed. The issue, for me at least, is that there are drawbacks to dumping any other stat even if you on plan on using its skills. Dex hurts AC and reflex. Wisdom hurts will. Intelligence means less skills you are trained in.
Charisma really doesn't have anything like that. Am I making sense?
Captain Morgan wrote: So PF2 isn't trying to give you features you won't actually use. Dwarves used to ignore armor speed reductions by default, but that does nothing for a dwarf monk. For that class it is a dead feature to the monk. Therefore, they changed unburdened to an optional thing you can select, so dwarf monks don't feel like they are wasting a class feature.
Giving ancestries default spells is useless to anyone with low charisma or who doesn't want to use magic. It then becomes a dead feature just like unburdened was to dwarf monks. Also, while it makes sense for gnomes and elves, it doesn't make as much sense for all ancestries.
I don't think the issue right now is that charisma is too weak for characters who use charisma. Those characters can use it very well indeed. The issue, for me at least, is that there are drawbacks to dumping any other stat even if you on plan on using its skills. Dex hurts AC and reflex. Wisdom hurts will. Intelligence means less skills you are trained in.
Charisma really doesn't have anything like that. Am I making sense?
Alright, I see what you are saying. One of my problems with Charisma was it offered nothing by itself, even for those that specialized in it. For example, if in the Sorcerer class, you were to swap every instance of Cha for Int {including skills) and visa versa {to ensure the only difference was the innate bonus the key stat gives} the Int Sorcerer would be the mechanically more powerful class {assuming of course Cha does nothing with resonance being a thing of the past, which I don't believe is the case for the final product) Now, you have mentioned before, and I agree, the power of Intimidation, and while this certainly does help, it still carries inherent problems. You need to spend resources for it {ie prof, and prof increases, at the very least} in order to give Charisma purpose, something which no other ability as to do, from a mechanical standpoint. {ie especially in the official PF2, if you are untrained, no matter how high you Cha is, you are not intimidating anyone, and you would need to spend more resources to make sure its reliable as the levels go up, and so that you can qualify for its powerful skill feats such as Battle Cry and Scare to Death.} Which is a problem for both high and low Charisma characters alike, as low will receive no benefit, and high needs to use a decent amount of its limited resources in a specific skill in order for it to be of use.
As for there being no negative to dumping Charisma, well, that may be a ship that has sailed. From what little I heard of 2.0, Charisma played a part in how NPC’s would initially treat the character in a social setting to a certain extent, so a low Charisma would have a negative impact on this. But to introduce something new that could have a negative or limiting impact on a character, would be meant with great push back {see Resonance, Cha for Focus Points, ect), especially if its just seen as an artificial limitation, just to give another stat a purpose. Now this isn’t a great excuse, and it may mean Charisma needs something else in addition, and could be one of those flaws I had mentioned in the initial post. {EDIT= perhaps everyone gets a very small ability that is universal to everyone at a score of 10, but Idk, it may be to finicky.}
As for ancestries {and perhaps this is my fault for not explaining well}, is they would not get these magical abilities by default. In this imaginary and raw wording {only for the purposes of demonstrations, and the sprit of what it is} of what Charisma innate benefit would be=
"You gain one Charisma magical ability from your Ancestries list, per positive modifiers. You select which ability at the time of gaining that positive modifier."
Ancestry would only play a role in what list of minor magical abilities you could choose from, the feature itself coming from Charisma. In this, I don't think it would give you dead options, as most abilities would not interfere with other, and you would have enough choice that you would never have to pick dead option. Now, if you still believe this creates a problem in terms of dead features for ancestry {I would argue against this, but I think it would become an unproductive tangent/ get further away from the threads initial purpose, which we are already very close to anyways} you could simply switch out 'Ancestries list' for 'Charisma Power List' and just have a list of common minor magical abilities everyone could choose from. In either case, even if someone only had a 12 in Charisma, they would still gain a minor magical power, and perhaps like increased Bulk for Str, or a new Prof for Int, enough of a reason to think about even making a minor investment.
Now I do somewhat get your concern with the idea of a character not wanting to cast magic from a conceptual standpoint. Arguable this is a problem all ability scores have to some extent, for example my non violent cleric wants to increase his Strength so its easier for him to wear heavier armorer and drag injured people off the battlefield to heal them. However, in doing so he does improve his ability for violence. Now, the one difference is the cleric could just ignore that, by never swinging a weapon, and still gain the benefit he wanted, something which could not be said for Charisma {as ignoring the ability would ignore all innate benefit of it, something which I better understand you meant when you clarified) Which is kinda of the reason why after the initial posting {and to not just limit it to copying spells} I've slowly changed it to minor magical ability, which would allow for a larger scope. Of course they may be some spells in some from or another, however there would be a possibility to create magical abilities that would simply be seen as a natural part of that ancestry {ie kinda of like a Medusa stony gaze, while magical, is just a part of what it is. Of course, I would not suggest to make the Charisma abilities that powerful.) And other abilities could just be flavoured through non-magical means. {ie for a human, I was thinking a possible choose on the list was the ability to magically learn a Common language, representing the humans long history engaging with different cultures and races, awakening a language one of their ancestors knew form history past. The non magical way is "Hey I made some friends that talked this language, and they taught/I picked it up as I hanged out with them. And they liked and let me hanged out with them because I’m charismatic.”
As for the Ancestry, and those that don’t seem to go with the innate magicaal abilities, again you can use the non-magical option above, or just go with it’s a new edition, new rules, and magic is weird. {ie The Goblins, those adorable <almost as though magically endowed with a bonus to a stat which makes them so> little ankle bitters, whom also seem to listen to the little voice in there head to burn things, could probably justify some minor innate fire based magical abilities.)
As a minor benefit but could represent the part of Charisma that is confidence and self assurance it could be tied in some way to Hero Points? Like maybe when you spend Hero Points for a re-roll you get to add your Charisma mod to the roll as well? I could see myself investing in that over another point of Intelligence or Strength, but not all the time.
This wouldn't limit other characters but would still be a bonus.
What if everyone gets 10 resonance+charisma, and resonance is how you attune to magic items. Some use one resonance, some 2, crazy strong uses 3. Gives it a use without gimping characters without it, like any other stat based ability.
Then Bards, Sorcerers, and Champions would have it tied to their primary stat. The former are both spontaneous casters who would definitely benefit from the extra magic items, and a Champion would wield a Holy Avenger and whatnot without penalty
Yeah, when it originally found out people were going to be able to have a flat 10 magic items on them {although that mechanic hasn't been fully revealed/pieced together yet} I though Charisma was going to play a role in it. {similar to TheGoofy idea of the more Charisma the more magic items you would be able to equip.) But, that so far does not seem to be the case.
Hmm, the more I think about it, the more I think it may be better to wait and see what they have done with Charisma before speculating on how to improve it. We don't really know what will be the official solution, if Charisma will need improvement afterward, and we don't have all the info on the mechanics of PF2. {Kinda of like a blind man holding a piece of paper---he can tell it is paper, but until he is informed what written on it, he does not know what if anything should be changed about it.)
Still, one can theory craft, and Charisma as been the Pandora Box for improvement, even before PF1. {last 24 hours have found me wrapped up in it.) I guess its fun/belief its needed because of how important Charisma is to certain characters, and how little we know about it in a Resonance-less world, especially in comparison to the other ability scores. I do hope they reveal something soon.
So CHA needs to provide a substantial benefit that is not so good that low-CHA characters are just not viable in play and that is personal, so that we don't get the Face surrounded by their low-CHA buddies.
Bonus to number of items usable works.
I was also considering that if the GM has to randomly pick a PC as the target for something bad, low CHA will be picked first.
Kind of CHA equals luck
The Raven Black wrote: So CHA needs to provide a substantial benefit that is not so good that low-CHA characters are just not viable in play and that is personal, so that we don't get the Face surrounded by their low-CHA buddies.
Bonus to number of items usable works.
I was also considering that if the GM has to randomly pick a PC as the target for something bad, low CHA will be picked first.
Kind of CHA equals luck
Or maybe d20+charisma, otherwise one person gets picked on for everything
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
So one thing that I thought was interesting in the playtest is that given how wild shaping works now (it replaces your physical stats) it would seem like wild druids could dump strength entirely except for "how many times you can wild shape" is influenced by your StrMod.
So I wonder if "What to do with Charisma" couldn't be built into classes themselves via a series of feats that offer something appealing for the charismatic version of whatever class.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I could be wrong, but I genuinely believe they made strength the stat for wild shapes for 2 reasons
1) balance. Otherwise its better thanall other druid subclasses.
2) for the sake of the team. The team wrecker suddenly being the worst physical combatant because they ran out of wild shapes can probably cause major party dynamic issues. Linking it to Con could be a middle ground, but having all druids be fairly MAD while one is almost SAD is likely a factor.
And even for flavor, the wildest of druids being the most charming is a bit odd, but having them being physically strong enough to wrestle a tiger even when not being a tiger makes a certain degree of sense.
Though it does make me want to see a class like the Starfinder Operatve iin pf2, where each subclass is tied to a different Stat
TheGoofyGE3K wrote: I could be wrong, but I genuinely believe they made strength the stat for wild shapes for 2 reasons
1) balance. Otherwise its better thanall other druid subclasses.
2) for the sake of the team. The team wrecker suddenly being the worst physical combatant because they ran out of wild shapes can probably cause major party dynamic issues. Linking it to Con could be a middle ground, but having all druids be fairly MAD while one is almost SAD is likely a factor.
And even for flavor, the wildest of druids being the most charming is a bit odd, but having them being physically strong enough to wrestle a tiger even when not being a tiger makes a certain degree of sense.
Though it does make me want to see a class like the Starfinder Operatve iin pf2, where each subclass is tied to a different Stat
Yup. Also due to the historical connotations. Wild Shape {and most other transformations} in 3.5 replaced your physical stats with that of the from you took. You would still want a bit of natural Dex {for Ref saves AC and initiative when in your natural from, } and Con {both for FOrt in natural from, and because HP in general}. However, Strength became something you could dump because any situation your would need it, you could just become a strong animal {often times with more Strength then the Fighter, to the point you would be a better melee fighter then the melee fighter}. PF1 aimed to change this by making forms increase your stats instead of replacing them, both so you could not just take a form with ridiculous stats for a PC {and alternatively not to restrict design space when designing creatures}, and a Dump stat would still matter.
However, the Playtest version returns to replacing your stats to the from you take {not as directly, but practically for terms of Strength.) reintroducing the need to give a reason for these types of Druids to not dump Str. Having Str directly tied to how much you can change {especially because that from only lasts a min} gives a reason not to dump Str {and not to repeat the same mistakes of 3.5 that PF1 tried to correct}. Having a low score means you can not rely on that ability throughout the day {maybe only being able to use it once or twice at higher levels, with each use only lasting a min} so eventually your low Str Druid would have to face those challenges without use of a 'Strong' from. A higher Str Druid could rely on those forms, but at that point it solves the problem of them dumping Str.
Siro wrote:
However, the Playtest version returns to replacing your stats to the from you take {not as directly, but practically for terms of Strength.) reintroducing the need to give a reason for these types of Druids to not dump Str.
Which, at least in the playtest version, led to the problem that wild shape for a druid was essentially a trap at about level 8+.
You're just substantially better off multiclassing into some martial class (paladin being the standout in the playtest due to healing but that likely will change) and using whichever pointy stick you prefer.
That multiclass druid is a very good character. A decent fighter sort (not as good as a full martial, of course, but decent) with all that spell support as a bonus. But its just better off hitting with a weapon than wildshaping.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Maybe Charisma could help a character when he uses tactics to help the rest of the party during Exploration Mode. What I mean is, if the Ranger is giving a boost to Survival checks or the Rogue is helping in Stealth checks, they could add their CHA Bonus to 'whatever kind of boost' they usually give. Nothing mandatory but a good 'Leadership' bonus if present, so to speak.
Yeah I guess they made the forms somewhat weaker {by way of both class abilities and spells. The only one I somewhat heard was ok was the Barbarian Dragon transformation. to avoid what had happened in 3.5 {and because it would be difficult to implement PF1 version of stat bonuses, as a +1 bonus is equivalent to a LV14 item which you can only have one of.) It also didn't help that because forms would wear out there usefulness quite fast, as your normal from would become more powerful {even with auto heightening and/or the LV10 Druid item} you were on the from treadmill with spells or class feats, with general minimum and fleeting gains.
Also, yes on multiclassing {Druid with Monk multiclassing also made a pretty good combo.) This was the same for many classes, as multiclassing either could provide you with stronger abilities then what you class could, and/or was an easy way to gain something your class lacked. Now, I really liked the multiclass system in the playtest {and I didn't think I would} and hope/beleive classes will be improved to meet that in the finsihed product.
Ah, Resonance, how far we've come :p
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
The Wraith wrote: Maybe Charisma could help a character when he uses tactics to help the rest of the party during Exploration Mode. What I mean is, if the Ranger is giving a boost to Survival checks or the Rogue is helping in Stealth checks, they could add their CHA Bonus to 'whatever kind of boost' they usually give. Nothing mandatory but a good 'Leadership' bonus if present, so to speak. That's not a bad idea {would allow for a neg mod to mean something, wouldn't take away from what most people use a class from, and matches with the Charisma feel} Maybe even not limiting it to exploration mode {ie using it as part of the assist and aid action, or in downtime activates.)
Now, do you mean as a bonus to roll itself? {ie if the Cha 24 Bard aids the Ranger in Survival then the Ranger gets a +7 'Leadership' bonus on the survival roll.)
Or do you mean a bonus on the check to see if you can aid them? {I believe the 'Aid' DC is 15 to 20 in the relevant skill, to see if you can aid them.) So same example above except the Bard rolls to see if he can aid with a +7 'Leadership' bonus along with everything else, giving him a greatly increased chance both for success and critically success on the check, and give a bonus on the Survival check.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I mean as a bonus... to the bonus itself.
We know that a Ranger with high Survival can help his fellow companions to their Survival checks. The same with the Rogue with high Stealth who can help with their Stealt checks.
We still don't know HOW they help them effectively in the final version. Maybe they give them a flat bonus ? Maybe they give them their Proficiency Bonus ? Their Ability bonus ? A minimum value based on 'something' ? A maximum value not higher than their one ?
Charisma could give an additional boost to this bonus - maybe not giving a final roll higher than the roll the inspiring character could have made himself, which effectively would help more the less proficient members of the group (like Untrained people) but would be less effective to the more adept ones.
Of course, the official rules are already set by now, so this is a simple 'what if', so to speak.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ooh, that's clever I like it. The idea that high-Charisma characters are better at aid-another type actions works well in a lot of ways, not least of which is that it gives mechanical effect to low-Charisma characters not working well with others/being loners. :)
Just making aid 2+Cha might be too much for the higher modifiers but maybe capping it at an additional +2 from Cha would be enough. Give everyone a benefit for each boost in Cha up to 14 which is a good cut off for benefits from a secondary stat. Heavy armor Str tanks probably want at least Dex 14 to wear splint for example. Im a fan of this idea.
EDIT: or maybe a max dependent on how much better you are than them. Same proficiency 2+Cha max 2, one proficiency level higher 2+Cha max 4, two levels higher 2+Cha max 6, etc. As long as it isn't a whole modifier on top of an already specialized character it probably isn't going to be a big problem.
Not sure why we would be trying to cap Cha benefits when no other attribute has that?
Malk_Content wrote: Not sure why we would be trying to cap Cha benefits when no other attribute has that? The problem is that giving Cha modifier which can start at +4 and go up to +7 as a circumstance bonus to something is a way bigger than any other circumstance bonus in the game so just changing aid another to provide your Cha modifier as a bonus would be numerically overpowered.
Dex has a similar issue where if you added full dex on top of armor it would make the numbers for AC go outside of a reasonable range hence they implemented max dex for heavier armor.
So while I like the idea of Cha as a bonus to aid I think full modifier in all situations would be too much so there would need to be some sort of limit. That was the intent of the limits I suggested in my above theory crafting.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Although you are talking about giving the benefit to people who are not the best in the party at something, so they are not at the math ceiling yet, which does give a little more leeway.
MaxAstro wrote: Although you are talking about giving the benefit to people who are not the best in the party at something, so they are not at the math ceiling yet, which does give a little more leeway. Yah that was what my edit was trying to address but there are also two different effects here.
1. The aid another action for encounter mode that was present in the playtest which provided +2 (or +4 on a critical success) circumstance bonus. That is the one where I think full Cha modifier would be potentially too much. Adding a +7 Bonus to the party specialist would be a mathematical outlier.
Some sort of cap here which limits the bonus to 2/4 for equally trained characters but allows a bigger bonus for relatively less trained characters makes sense to me.
2. The as of yet undisclosed rules which enable a highly skilled character to aid a less skilled character in exploration mode. I also agree that Cha playing a role here would make sense but since I don't know the rules I can't theory-craft on that subject.
Its a good reason for capping that mechanic, but I don't think any attribute should have a capped mechanic. Charisma is useful up to 14 isn't much better than Charisma is useful up to 8. Not when every other stat is useful up to 26.
Bardarok wrote: The problem is that giving Cha modifier which can start at +4 and go up to +7 as a circumstance bonus to something is a way bigger than any other circumstance bonus in the game so just changing aid another to provide your Cha modifier as a bonus would be numerically overpowered.
Dex has a similar issue where if you added full dex on top of armor it would make the numbers for AC go outside of a reasonable range hence they implemented max dex for heavier armor.
So while I like the idea of Cha as a bonus to aid I think full modifier in all situations would be too much so there would need to be some sort of limit. That was the intent of the limits I suggested in my above theory crafting.
Yeah, that was the reason for my above question, as a possible +7 circumstance bonus can get out of hand. {and the reason if the bonus merely applied to the check to see if you could aid, as that bonus to the actual check max at +4, although it could also lead to a problem of level bonus by itself eventually being enough to pass and crit, making the Cha bonus redundant.)
Now, to be slightly counter to my point, and something which I think should also be considered in this theory crafting never the less is, under this version of Charisma bonus, there is already a in built limit. The bonuses applied for any other stat would still apply in most situations {ie you always have the bonus to bulk and melee with Str, bonus to AC and Ref saves with Dex ect. Unless something happens that would deny you the use of the stat completely, you would always be able to use it.) However, with Charisma, the bonus it gives you is purely dependant on if you have someone else to share it {ie to give the bonus). Now PF is generally a group activity, so I wouldn't say being alone is the norm, but it will happen on the odd occasion, to be at least a little limiting,
Malk_Content wrote: Its a good reason for capping that mechanic, but I don't think any attribute should have a capped mechanic. Charisma is useful up to 14 isn't much better than Charisma is useful up to 8. Not when every other stat is useful up to 26. If someone is going to max an attribute it's going to be because it is class related so I don't think worrying about bonuses all they way up to max is necessary for attribute balance. I think we want it to be competitive for that fourth stat boost for a character who doesn't use it as their casting stat.
I think a cap that grows with proficiency difference would achieve that.
Maybe to word it more simply your Aid Another bonus is 2+Cha up to a maximum of 2 + Your proficiency modifier with the skill - their proficiency modifier with the skill.
So if you are highly charismatic you are still better than others with aiding but you can't fundamentally break the math of what a character of your parties level would be able to do.
For example the Fancy Bard with 24 Cha is Cyrano de Bergerac-ing his way through aiding all the party with diplomacy checks. The bard is legendary with Diplomacy.
The Untrained Fighter gets a +9 bonus
The Trained Wizard gets a +8 Bonus
The Expert Cleric gets a +6
The Master Rogue gets a +4 Bonus
The Legendary Paladin gets a +2 Bonus
So the bonus is still pretty big for the less skilled PCs but not game breaking for the legendary ones.
All that might be too complicated of a rule set to really implement but that was my reasoning.
Siro wrote: Now, to be slightly counter to my point, and something which I think should also be considered in this theory crafting never the less is, under this version of Charisma bonus, there is already a in built limit. The bonuses applied for any other stat would still apply in most situations {ie you always have the bonus to bulk and melee with Str, bonus to AC and Ref saves with Dex ect. Unless something happens that would deny you the use of the stat completely, you would always be able to use it.) However, with Charisma, the bonus it gives you is purely dependant on if you have someone else to share it {ie to give the bonus). Now PF is generally a group activity, so I wouldn't say being alone is the norm, but it will happen on the odd occasion, to be at least a little limiting, True. Though on the other hand if it is a party of one then by necessity that character is making all of the social skill checks so they would still get a benefit from more Cha.
Bardarok wrote: Siro wrote: Now, to be slightly counter to my point, and something which I think should also be considered in this theory crafting never the less is, under this version of Charisma bonus, there is already a in built limit. The bonuses applied for any other stat would still apply in most situations {ie you always have the bonus to bulk and melee with Str, bonus to AC and Ref saves with Dex ect. Unless something happens that would deny you the use of the stat completely, you would always be able to use it.) However, with Charisma, the bonus it gives you is purely dependant on if you have someone else to share it {ie to give the bonus). Now PF is generally a group activity, so I wouldn't say being alone is the norm, but it will happen on the odd occasion, to be at least a little limiting, True. Though on the other hand if it is a party of one then by necessity that character is making all of the social skill checks so they would still get a benefit from more Cha. Yup on that. Though I was also thinking of in cases where face man gets separated from the party/when the bonus to social stats are N/A. {ie on there trek though the woods, the party meets a bear. The rest of the party runs one way, while the face man runs the other, and soon they lost each other.}
Siro wrote: ... I was also thinking of in cases where face man gets separated from the party/when the bonus to social stats are N/A. {ie on there trek though the woods, the party meets a bear. The rest of the party runs one way, while the face man runs the other, and soon they lost each other.} *Shrug*
Good devil's advocate. I got nothing.
Bardarok wrote: Siro wrote: ... I was also thinking of in cases where face man gets separated from the party/when the bonus to social stats are N/A. {ie on there trek though the woods, the party meets a bear. The rest of the party runs one way, while the face man runs the other, and soon they lost each other.} *Shrug*
Good devil's advocate. I got nothing. Nah, again its not situation that will come every session. PC's tend to stick together {for both there safety, and the GM sanity} and even when the party does decide to split up, they often implore the buddy system.
It just that I felt it should be mentioned situations can pop up that can sperate the group completely {From my experience, its not something which will happen often, but I don't think I was ever been involved in a long campaign without the separation scenario happening at least a half a dozen times, from botched retreat routes, to being captured, to a plan needing each character to be in sperate locations, ect.)
Though, what I do like about this bonus is how the high Cha character are encouraged and will be rewarded for interacting with as many people as they can, which seems to match with the feel of the ability for being social. This wouldn't just apply to PC's but NPC's {friends, mercenaries, fans ect}, so the social character would have a reason be leading a posse behind them. {ie a mechanic having a direct impact on RP, and RP having a direct impact on a mechanic.). It would also provide an out in the lone PC scenario, as the player could hire/gain a follower which they could then give the bonuses to.
Unfortunately now that we have found a rule that I like I need to devils advocate it myself. It's unlikely that they included this solution in the core rule book and unless the devs come in here, decide they love it and make it a last minute addition or stop the presses to put it in than this would be a homebrew rule and as such has a higher bar for inclusion which unfortunately it doesn't meet.
Aid is rarely going to be used in situations where the PC aiding has a higher proficiency bonus than the aided. So unless we allow Cha to break the normal cap than this could be an issue. The situations where this is likely to come up is Athletics, Acrobatics, and Stealth group checks in which case some sort of group aiding rule is going to be better (which we know they have some sort of thing in the works).
So my whole idea of capping the Cha modifier by proficiency difference isn't going to be worth the trouble of calculating for how rarely it would come up.
Full Cha modifier to aid is going to be too large a bonus but to address Malk's concern there should be a benefit for higher Cha. Maybe Aid another should provide a bonus of 1 + 1/2 Cha mod but that would make it an outlier in the system. No easy solutions that I am finding. Of course I think I have derailed the thread into Bardarok's homebrew musings so I think I'll bail on this and let other folks actually discuss resonance as was the OPs idea.
Yeah, {connecting it back to Resonance} I think Piazo realised they could not give Cha something new with in the current system {based off of PF1, which itself was based off of 3.5), as it would become to finicky, to situational, need its own ruleset, step on the toes of other abilities and classes, ect. {ie problems everyone has been running into with there suggestions.)
Which I think gave part to Resonance, something that was newly developed to help combat certain problems, and, at least on paper {though arguably not in practice.) not tied to any of the pervious systems. This would also allow Cha to be the modifier for Resonance without any of the pervious problems, of course assuming Resonance did not cause problems itself. Personally, I did not hate Resonance, but did not love it because it did have problems, and those problems were apparently enough to lead it to getting axed. However I do think Piazo solution for Cha will be something completely new to the game.
I said this once {and then went back into the conversation of theory crafting}, We just don't know enough about PF2 systems {including but not limited to Charisma after Resonance), which also makes speculation difficult, or even if we know it will be needed once PF2 comes out.
I think sadly Charisma likely has gotten nothing. Any other big changes have at least been alluded to, if not outright confirmed. There has been nothing on this topic so I think we'll just have Charisma being the only stat without any innate bonuses for another edition.
If hero points are still around, it would be interesting to potentially tie them to Charisma. Like, you start every session with hero points equal to your Cha modifier (minimum 1).
I am less worried about cha being a dump stat and more about the magic item economy regressing to the lowest common denominator (big stacks of every level 1 spell scrolls/wands of cure light wounds/etc.).
I find it interesting that the role of cha in the game's mechanics is getting more discussion here.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Well, at the very least there's no risk of stacks of wands of CLW, because wands don't work that way anymore.
Piles of scrolls might still be an issue, but I'm hopeful that Paizo has fixed the pricing on healing items so that people are encouraged to use the stronger items.
MaxAstro wrote: Well, at the very least there's no risk of stacks of wands of CLW, because wands don't work that way anymore.
Piles of scrolls might still be an issue, but I'm hopeful that Paizo has fixed the pricing on healing items so that people are encouraged to use the stronger items.
Well, then you risk the problem of parties buying full heals too early. Fixing that issue only with pricing is literally impossible. Ultimately, Paizo will have to put another system in place (such as limiting items by level or limiting the number of consumables you can carry) or or will just ignore the issue (which I think many people would prefer).
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Excaliburproxy wrote: MaxAstro wrote: Well, at the very least there's no risk of stacks of wands of CLW, because wands don't work that way anymore.
Piles of scrolls might still be an issue, but I'm hopeful that Paizo has fixed the pricing on healing items so that people are encouraged to use the stronger items.
Well, then you risk the problem of parties buying full heals too early. Fixing that issue only with pricing is literally impossible. Ultimately, Paizo will have to put another system in place (such as limiting items by level or limiting the number of consumables you can carry) or or will just ignore the issue (which I think many people would prefer). Just making consumables less accessible would be pretty good. Like no matter how much gold you have, you can't go to a store and get 50 scrolls. Even crafting them would take a ton of time from the campaign, and could be limited in some way too.
A more robust system for settlement economy and magic items can help mitigate the issue if the GM is diligent. Also helps make the game world more realistic.
Excaliburproxy wrote: MaxAstro wrote: Well, at the very least there's no risk of stacks of wands of CLW, because wands don't work that way anymore.
Piles of scrolls might still be an issue, but I'm hopeful that Paizo has fixed the pricing on healing items so that people are encouraged to use the stronger items.
Well, then you risk the problem of parties buying full heals too early. Fixing that issue only with pricing is literally impossible. Ultimately, Paizo will have to put another system in place (such as limiting items by level or limiting the number of consumables you can carry) or or will just ignore the issue (which I think many people would prefer). I dunno what the “cast a scroll above your level” DCs are like, but paying for a dodgy chance at a full heal is a little better. Any time you need a full heal, you don’t want “nothing” as a possibility. Doesn’t solve it completely, of course, and that doesn’t touch potions.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
ChibiNyan wrote: Excaliburproxy wrote: MaxAstro wrote: Well, at the very least there's no risk of stacks of wands of CLW, because wands don't work that way anymore.
Piles of scrolls might still be an issue, but I'm hopeful that Paizo has fixed the pricing on healing items so that people are encouraged to use the stronger items.
Well, then you risk the problem of parties buying full heals too early. Fixing that issue only with pricing is literally impossible. Ultimately, Paizo will have to put another system in place (such as limiting items by level or limiting the number of consumables you can carry) or or will just ignore the issue (which I think many people would prefer). Just making consumables less accessible would be pretty good. Like no matter how much gold you have, you can't go to a store and get 50 scrolls. Even crafting them would take a ton of time from the campaign, and could be limited in some way too.
A more robust system for settlement economy and magic items can help mitigate the issue if the GM is diligent. Also helps make the game world more realistic. Formalizing magic item markets into the game's core rules is certainly a way to handle the issue. Back on the playtest forum I argued for a more game-y/stylized system of wealth and loot (ala Spellbound Kingdoms).
QuidEst wrote: Excaliburproxy wrote: MaxAstro wrote: Well, at the very least there's no risk of stacks of wands of CLW, because wands don't work that way anymore.
Piles of scrolls might still be an issue, but I'm hopeful that Paizo has fixed the pricing on healing items so that people are encouraged to use the stronger items.
Well, then you risk the problem of parties buying full heals too early. Fixing that issue only with pricing is literally impossible. Ultimately, Paizo will have to put another system in place (such as limiting items by level or limiting the number of consumables you can carry) or or will just ignore the issue (which I think many people would prefer). I dunno what the “cast a scroll above your level” DCs are like, but paying for a dodgy chance at a full heal is a little better. Any time you need a full heal, you don’t want “nothing” as a possibility. Doesn’t solve it completely, of course, and that doesn’t touch potions. Giving magic items above your level a failure chance is sort of the half-measure version of banning magic equipment above your level. That would also address the issue, but I think Paizo would see a lot of push back on that.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
I don't think they would see much push-back for keeping a mechanic that was already in PF1e.
If they broadened it to also apply to potions, I suppose.
Maybe wand use/recharge is based on Charisma?
I did hear some theory crafting {actually in PF1} tying item DC to Charisma. So to use a PF playtest item, a 'Circlet of persuasion' Charm DC, instead of being a flat DC 31, would be a flat DC {lets just say 31, but item DC on whole sale would need to be adjusted} + Cha mod.
Now this would probably have some inherent flaws, which we may not even be able to fully see yet, because we, at best, have a poor vision of what PF2 is going to be, {ie we have a playtest, which, even if nothing had changed, we would still be missing a great deal} and the systems in place for it.
Another something would be to slightly increase the power of Charisma based classes, to make up for there main stat not providing. {Kinda of in the same vain of the Oracle and Summoner classes, which had some awesome abilities to make up for it. Although some, myself included, would argue these abilities went a bit to far, so I would say improvement, but not as far.}. This would not solve the problem in general, as it would still be a dump stat for everyone else, {ie the Fighter who wants to be the Charismatic leader, and such} but it would at least help the classes that would be most affected by Charisma not having any bonuses. Now, I would not want this to be the actual solution {again the Cha Fighter, even though he would most likely be weaker in general then the Fighter which improved his Con instead, should at least get a little something for it.) but, if nothing could be done, I would want at least a small consolation prize for those classes.
TheGoofyGE3K wrote: Maybe wand use/recharge is based on Charisma? I figure that could work. Perhaps a wand could be used once without rolling, but the next time you have to roll to use the wand, and the DCs subsequently go up and when you fail there is a refractory period during which your wand soaks up ambient magic or something.
Letting Charisma affect how many times you can use your wands before they recharge, or letting your wands recharge faster would be pretty attractive (and consistent with "UMD is a Cha skill" in PF1).
Although then we still have Cha being largely useless for most people, especially at level 1 and even after that being the only stat whose advantage requires the expenditure of additional character resources (in this case Wealth)
|
