| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, for anyone who would rather just remove Charisma and Social Skills entirely in favor of improv? Go for it. That's your choice as a Player / GM.
But Charisma exists as an attribute that heavily influences social interaction. Claiming that it's too punishing if you're unskilled and lacking charisma... Well, that's sort of the point when you have a game reduced to core mechanics.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that there's a fundamental issue that people are glossing over here. Just because you're at a disadvantage in social situations doesn't mean that you shouldn't participate.
Maybe you made a bad impression to the local shopkeep and he's irritated at you. That sucks. Doesn't mean that he's not going to make a deal with you.
Attempting to gather information around town and not able to convince people to share what they know? That sucks but you can still go around town and listen in on conversations or just enjoy yourself and roleplay the attempt.
I'm not talking about characters that are stumbling over their words to the point that conversation is impossible here.
Just because someone can try to participate using the one stat (and related skills) they're allowed to participate with and fail doesn't mean that people have fun doing so.
When only one person needs to have the ability to do... essentially all of your examples, there is a great deal of inherent pressure to let the one character do everything in order to get the best results.
"Players will optimize the fun out of anything" and all that. This optimization is incredibly easy to come across.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that there's a fundamental issue that people are glossing over here. Just because you're at a disadvantage in social situations doesn't mean that you shouldn't participate.
It does if there are bad consequences to participating, or at least does pretty often.
Maybe you made a bad impression to the local shopkeep and he's irritated at you. That sucks. Doesn't mean that he's not going to make a deal with you.
Sure...but there are two options here:
1. The costs are unchanged, in which case there was no meaningful consequence to low Charisma here. This is the official version, and seems fine to me, but you seemed to be advocating making low Cha more punishing.
2. The cost is now higher (or would've been lower for the high Charisma guy succeeding). In which case, objectively, you should have just let the guy with higher Charisma do this instead. You are being punished for participating.
Attempting to gather information around town and not able to convince people to share what they know? That sucks but you can still go around town and listen in on conversations or just enjoy yourself and roleplay the attempt.
This sounds fine. This is also the official rules, though, and it sounded like you were advocating greater downsides than simply not succeeding.
I'm not talking about characters that are stumbling over their words to the point that conversation is impossible here.
If you're not advocating active penalties I'm honestly not sure how what you're talking about differs from the official rules.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like with the PF2 proficiency system and how skills work now, though, we have less pressure to "have high charisma" and more pressure to "continually invest in social skills."
Like a rogue with 12 Charisma who ends up legendary in deception and diplomacy who takes a bunch of useful skill feats to be good at combat will eventually outstrip a sorcerer who puts everything into Charisma if they leave those skills at trained and takes skill feats related to other things.
Like a 13th level character with legendary diplomacy and 12 charisma rolls a +22 to make an impression, a 13th level character with a 20 charisma and trained in diplomacy rolls a +18 to make an impression, and the former character through skill feats will be able to use skills in ways the latter cannot.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, Charisma influences these skills. Other stats also influence skills and things in addition to that. This is why Charisma is not at parity with other skills. Dropping any stats come with a trade off for any character, except for Charisma. Only certain types of characters need it.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like with the PF2 proficiency system and how skills work now, though, we have less pressure to "have high charisma" and more pressure to "continually invest in social skills."
Like a rogue with 12 Charisma who ends up legendary in deception and diplomacy who takes a bunch of useful skill feats to be good at combat will eventually outstrip a sorcerer who puts everything into Charisma if they leave those skills at trained and takes skill feats related to other things.
Like a 13th level character with legendary diplomacy and 12 charisma rolls a +22 to make an impression, a 13th level character with a 20 charisma and trained in diplomacy rolls a +18 to make an impression, and the former character through skill feats will be able to use skills in ways the latter cannot.
Trained with Cha 20 is actually a +20 here (Trained is Level +2, remember), but the basic point stands. And makes doing something with charisma other than saying 'it effects social skills' even more necessary.
And why the solutions I suggested a while back are all things other than skill usages.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
All of these discussions are making me think they made the right decision with leaving well enough alone, for now.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the essential problem is less with Charisma and more with the lack of parity between the 3 saving throw relevant attributes an the 3 attributes that don't increase saving throws.
Like if you aren't swinging a sword in combat, strength does very little for you. If you don't need more trained skills or languages intelligence does very little for you. It's not just a Charisma problem.
Perhaps we need more attributes, or different attributes. Perhaps we need skills to be tied to more than one attribute.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is reminding me that I really need a keyboard macro that just posts "I agree with everything Deadmanwalking said." It seems to be a theme. :P
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I usually just ignore the macro and write very lengthy posts on the same lines regardless, but yes, I also agree with everything DMW said. And I might try the Cha-based Will save myself...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the essential problem is less with Charisma and more with the lack of parity between the 3 saving throw relevant attributes an the 3 attributes that don't increase saving throws.
Like if you aren't swinging a sword in combat, strength does very little for you. If you don't need more trained skills or languages intelligence does very little for you. It's not just a Charisma problem.
It might be splitting hairs but I still think it's worth saying that charisma is in its own third tier of "never improve unless your character utilises it already. "
Like you hit 1/5/10/15/20 and are thinking about where to put your extra stat after buffing the three tier 1s. It's a choice between str and int unless you are already invested in cha.
A thing I kept running into in the playtest was with martial characters with a strength and heavy/medium armor focus, eventually I was going to hit the cap beyond which increasing dex did very little. So a level 10 or 15 stat boost kept coming down to "Int or Cha" and most of the time during the playtest I chose Charisma because of the whole resonance thing. Now, I think it depends on the character.
|
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is reminding me that I really need a keyboard macro that just posts "I agree with everything Deadmanwalking said." It seems to be a theme. :P
This thread is reminding me that I really need a keyboard macro that just posts "I agree with everything Deadmanwalking said." It seems to be a theme. :PI hear that, lol. XD There've been so many times that I read a thread and intend to weigh in (usually because I think someone is being silly) but then see that "DMW wuz here" and said basically the same thing I was going to but either better or close enough that I feel placing my own statement would be redundant. XD
I usually just ignore the macro and write very lengthy posts on the same lines regardless, but yes, I also agree with everything DMW said. And I might try the Cha-based Will save myself...
Wow guys, I'm touched. I try to be helpful and informative but it's always nice to know people generally approve of and agree with my posts.
And allowing either Wis or Cha on Will Saves is my longest standing and most successful House Rule. It results in a lot of concepts that are super fun being more mechanically viable (the Wis 6, Cha 14 Orc Barbarian Princess, for example). IME, it's enough of a boost for Charisma to outstrip Wisdom in popularity most parties...and let's be honest, doesn't low collective Wisdom better reflect the life choices of most PC groups? ;)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, when my players socially interact with anything, I demand they speak up, possibly in character. I know some of them aren't great at improvising dialogue yet, but I feel if they never try they'll never learn. My most experienced players are obscenely good at it and I regularly award them bonuses on the social checks they attempt. The other groups doesn't always succeed in playing up their characters, but they can make an attempt.
The same for any other roll - if you tell me how you're attacking the enemy and you make it entertaining for me and/or the group you're gonna get a bonus or a hero point, depending on the game rules. If you come up with a smart idea I'll try to make it work for you, at least partially.
This has to occur within the limits of the narrative - I won't allow you to craft gunpowder just because you the player know how it's made, not if you the character haven't discovered how the people in Alkenstar and their nearby dwarves do it.
But if you're doing a great job and the group is having more fun thanks to you I wanna show my support, one way or another.
And I'm always there to help out in suggesting ways you could make your character more fun - personality, themes, story arcs, cool stunts, whatever. Just as I always try to respect my players' comfort zones and give them the best time I can.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like with the PF2 proficiency system and how skills work now, though, we have less pressure to "have high charisma" and more pressure to "continually invest in social skills."
Like a rogue with 12 Charisma who ends up legendary in deception and diplomacy who takes a bunch of useful skill feats to be good at combat will eventually outstrip a sorcerer who puts everything into Charisma if they leave those skills at trained and takes skill feats related to other things.
Like a 13th level character with legendary diplomacy and 12 charisma rolls a +22 to make an impression, a 13th level character with a 20 charisma and trained in diplomacy rolls a +18 to make an impression, and the former character through skill feats will be able to use skills in ways the latter cannot.
Trained with Cha 20 is actually a +20 here (Trained is Level +2, remember), but the basic point stands. And makes doing something with charisma other than saying 'it effects social skills' even more necessary.
And why the solutions I suggested a while back are all things other than skill usages.
Total agreement. Doubly so, as the posts above show that social situations and the use of social skills are adjudicated in many different ways in actual games.
BTW, also a proud member of the DMW's fan club here :-D
The answer must lie in Charisma for something that is NOT social skill.
I am considering houseruling that, when I have to select a random target in the party for something bad to happen, it will usually not be the high CHA character. Basically, a CHA = luck interpretation.
But that might be problematic when everyone as high CHA.
Maybe shortening the refocus time by CHA-mod minutes would work ?
All this should be in its own thread though.
Total agreement. Doubly so, as the posts above show that social situations and the use of social skills are adjudicated in many different ways in actual games.
BTW, also a proud member of the DMW's fan club here :-D
The answer must lie in Charisma for something that is NOT social skill.
I am considering houseruling that, when I have to select a random target in the party for something bad to happen, it will usually not be the high CHA character. Basically, a CHA = luck interpretation.
But that might be problematic when everyone as high CHA.
Maybe shortening the refocus time by CHA-mod minutes would work ?
All this should be in its own thread though.
So when something bad happens, it's never to Regina George and always to Janis Sarkisian... i.e. the popular people never experience any adversity, the outcasts and pariahs always get everything blowing up in their faces.
Way to reinforce a stereotype, Raven!...
I am considering houseruling that, when I have to select a random target in the party for something bad to happen, it will usually not be the high CHA character. Basically, a CHA = luck interpretation.
But that might be problematic when everyone as high CHA.
This "cha = luck" angle strikes me as another promising route to pursue.
One can think of the "add your Charisma modifier to the number of Hero Points you get every session" as basically another way of implementing this idea -- giving you extra attempts to re-roll failed saves or attacks, and so on.
(That would get around the worry you raise regarding parties in which everyone has a high Cha.)
If I don't do Charisma to will saves, Charisma modifying your Hero Points is a close second.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Total agreement. Doubly so, as the posts above show that social situations and the use of social skills are adjudicated in many different ways in actual games.BTW, also a proud member of the DMW's fan club here :-D
The answer must lie in Charisma for something that is NOT social skill.
I am considering houseruling that, when I have to select a random target in the party for something bad to happen, it will usually not be the high CHA character. Basically, a CHA = luck interpretation.
But that might be problematic when everyone as high CHA.
Maybe shortening the refocus time by CHA-mod minutes would work ?
All this should be in its own thread though.
Shortening the duration of the refocus activity would not work. It's basically the proverbial 10-minute break rather than an exact timespan. Many other activities (treat wounds, repair, spell swapping) also take 10 minutes. So what would your character do if they finish refocussing after 8 mintes?
Having bad things only happen to low-CHA characters is a bit comical, I think. Better go with the more-heropoints route if CHA should be luck. ...it reminds me so much of this song XD
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having bad things only happen to low-CHA characters is a bit comical, I think. Better go with the more-heropoints route if CHA should be luck. ...it reminds me so much of this song XD
Fantastic bit of musical theater there, masda XD - I'm actually teary-eyed...
And the GMG. Perhaps Mark & co. can manage to slip a Cha-to-Will-save option in there... I'd adopt it quicker than thought.
Without an official Holy Writ, though... I'm not against Wis-to-Will enough to propose the change to my players and fix the inevitable incoherences that would emerge in other rules bits all the time.
I'm fine either way. I would prefer official support for the former, but I can totally live with the latter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have no objection to using WIS for WILL, it's more a case to make CHA useful for something other that social skills. Since WIS has Perception, it seems it (WIS) could release WILL saves for use under CHA.
But I agree, having it official, even as an optional rule would be super.
Absolutely agree, it would give that extra usefulness to Cha that all other stats already have other than being used for skills. And yes, if official, even when optional, it assumes a whole new legitimacy, so let's cross fingers.
Not that without it being official it's worth s&~& XD I mean, every group can do whatever they want and homebrew and houserule to their hearts' content, goes without saying... just, if it's in the GMG, it means a lot. It will also have ready advice on how to fix discrepancies with the default Wis-to-Will, hopefully.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do like the idea of making the WILL save based on CHA instead of WIS.
Could I ask why you offer the choice of using either Wisdom or Charisma?
Basically, I try and make House Rules to make the game more fun, which includes fun for people who like Wisdom for what it does currently. Removing Will Saves from it and giving it nothing back feels punitive to, say, Druid players, and that's a good thing to avoid.
Additionally, I don't want to just replace the 'Charisma isn't good enough' problem with a 'Wisdom isn't good enough' problem. It's strongly debatable that, even with Perception, absent Will Saves Wisdom is just not quite as good as many other stats.
Doesn't this still encourage CHA to be the dump stat for those who don't need CHA to be a primary or secondary stat?
In my experience? No.
It's arguable, especially with Perception and how it works now that Wisdom remains better with the two both as options for Will Save, but it's not enough better any more for people to strongly favor one over the other on a mechanical level, instead picking one based on theme for the most part. Most of the PC groups I've run for using this rule have heavily favored Charisma over Wisdom since they like social skills.
It does strongly incentivize only having one of the two stats at a particularly high rating unless your Class incentivizes both (like Cleric) and thus results in Bards tending not to raise Wis and Druids not to raise Cha, while Fighters raise whichever of the two they like, but that tends to reflect fiction pretty well, and is generally fun, IMO.
|
|
When making Cha be useful outside of social situations, it would also be nice to let the other 5 stats be naturally useful in some way to social situations, or at least WIS and Int. Not such that they can replace Cha entirely, but in allowing characters with different stats to approach social encounters differently.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When making Cha be useful outside of social situations, it would also be nice to let the other 5 stats be naturally useful in some way to social situations, or at least WIS and Int. Not such that they can replace Cha entirely, but in allowing characters with different stats to approach social encounters differently.
Since Perception now covers Sense Motive, Wisdom is pretty relevant in social situations. Intelligence can be as well with a little GM effort, since allowing knowledge skills to do stuff, particularly Lore Skills, which are all Int-based, bear in mind, is a pretty reasonable thing to do.
You are, in fact, not.
Although wait, you said level-headed?
Forget I mentioned anything.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"can take large amounts of various social lubricants and remain vaguely level headed"
Gonna be honest, for a second there I forgot that euphemisms exist and pictured a shirtless barbarian oiling themselves up like they're getting ready for a photoshoot.
Which, to be fair, is certainly an example of a nonstandard approach to a social challenge.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That was how I always played Sajan back when he had sleeves but no shirt.
Hey, flexing your pecs must count at least for a small bonus.
Larger bonus if they're well-oiled... mmh...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And the GMG. Perhaps Mark & co. can manage to slip a Cha-to-Will-save option in there...
Yeah, I really I hope some optional rules for boosting Cha will appear in the GMG. But given Mark's comments above about wanting to avoid stat overlap and finding something completely new for Charisma, I suspect this (Cha-to-Will-save) won't be the direction they go.
What they seem to be looking for are options which allow Charisma to bear on some mechanical aspect of the game that (a) is of value/interest to almost all builds and (b) which hasn't already been claimed by some other stat.
This is hard to do in PF1 because most of the things that pretty much everyone cares about were already "claimed" by other stats. So doing something like Deadmanwalking suggested (which is to allow some stat overlap after all), or just making it Cha not Wis that boosts Will, is about as good as you're going to be able to do.
But PF2 has a number of new mechanical features that are "unclaimed" which one could link Cha to, such as (drawing from various suggestions people have made):
- ● # of hero points,
- ● # of magic item slots,
- ● # of focus points,
- ● time to regain focus during a short rest, or how much focus is regained,
- ● the DC of Aid Another checks, and how much these checks help,
- ● and so on.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the combined INT+CHA mod to determine bonus languages is least disruptive way to increase CHA value,
although INT still remains ahead since putting boosts into would still net bonus languages AND skill proficiency.
(which IMHO is even better reason to institute this change, since it's such minimal gesture to CHA value not being ignorable)
Using CHA mod for Overcharge (Wand) checks seems beneficial without disrupting core assumptions too much,
although I worry about auto success for higher level high CHA chars, who don't need huge boost to CHA value anyways.
Nat1 Auto-Fail for Overcharge, and Wand repair time precluding using it next day during adventure, seem adequate to reign that in.
It's not really a benefit/potential loss for "no investment" characters, but Eldritch Heritage was significant CHA value potential.
Now in 2E there will be similar Multiclass routes with all Casters, allowing to grab Focus powers and pool using different stats
which might seemingly replace need for Eldritch Heritage if you can grab Bloodline Focus powers via Multiclassing route,
which doesn't give CHA any special potential there VS INT or WIS based Wizard/Cleric/Druid Focus powers.
Sort of indicating the continued niche for "Eldritch Heritage" Feat line granting CHA-based Focus pool and Bloodline Focus powers.
WITHOUT Class Feat "Tax" of Multiclass Feat, possibly needing General or just Skill Feat to qualify?
(Sorceror Multiclass would still be one route, but it would be more if you also want to pick up other Sorc stuff too)
The Class Feat Powers themselves would still be picked up via Class Feats, it would just be matter of the "Feat Tax" to qualify.
General Feat "Eldritch Heritage" might even be "cheap" way to get CHA based Focus pool option, even if not interested in BL Focus powers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thinking about "choice of (best of) WIS or CHA" I really can't get behind it, it just disrupts fundmentals regardless of whether CHA might have been just as or more qualified to define WILL Saves.
CHA-maxed Sorcerors, Bards, or Oracles, don't need any more benefit from CHA. They certainly get as much as Fighters etc do out of STR, anybody focused on investing into single stat can get enough out of it if Class enables that stat focus in first place. WIS being strong stat for WILL Saves etc is strength of Clerics, but their Class abilities are also split with CHA making them MAD in addition to normal passive stat demands e.g. DEX, CHA, STR for bulk/movement etc, so just giving same benefit to Sorcs etc who aren't so MAD isn't good idea IMHO... They don't have problem putting 4x stat boosts into DEX,CON,WIS+CHA which are all good value to them.
This just gets back to "problem" with CHA not being on "high end" but on low end, what is unavoidable for people not putting any special investment into it. But even such characters should still see play difference if their Ancestry gives them +2 CHA or -2 CHA. I don't focusing on making it completely equal with the strongest passive stats (DEX, CON, WIS) is the end-all-be-all, really all that's needed is it being attractive to choose for your 4-stat-boost at least some of the time, not even every single stat-boost.
Providing the option of getting extra languages via CHA bonus actually seems perfectly viable. With languages being both a social and an intellectual construct.
I guess rather than saying INT + CHA, I would at first be more inclined to say use the higher of the two bonuses.
Or another alternative would be that you could make it where you have to pay for both Written and Spoken languages separately. With INT you have to have already bough the written version of the language before you can buy it's spoken or signed versions. With CHA you have to pay for an interactive version (spoken or signed) version before you can buy it as written. Since before you had to have a +2 INT to get a language in the playtest, having to pay 2 bonus slots to get both seems like it could work, especially since investment in CHA could boost it too.
Another interesting option, since Charisma is often expressed as willpower, would be 'allow the option' of CHA to be used for all First attempts at WILL saves. However, any re-rolls or followup saves would need to be made using WILL based on WIS. Similar to the idea that if you fail your Will Save for fear or otherwise. You've convinced yourself you have a valid reason to be fearful. It would be your perception and wisdom that would let you see the internal inconsistency, not your sheer not wanting to be afraid, because now you are convinced that you want to be afraid.
I have to admit however, if you have a WIS penalty, I'd be inclined to apply it as well as the CHA Bonus. I don't necessarily think you should be allowed to massively dump the one to get an exceptional save via the others.
|
|
I don't want to start the Resonance debate again, but basically "what Arachnofiend said, but more politely".
Currently Charisma is the only stat that lacks a penalty for dumping it other than skill bonuses. That said, I do think the original implementation of Resonance made Charisma too important, where it hurt more than it should to dump it. I feel like dumping Charisma should be a drawback in the same way that dumping Dex or dumping Con is a drawback - you notice the drawback, it changes the way you play, but it doesn't cripple your character.
I mean, you start seeing a monster that throws out CHA Damage or Drain style effects and that CHA dumping is going to hurt :P
|
I mean, you start seeing a monster that throws out CHA Damage or Drain style effects and that CHA dumping is going to hurt :PI don't want to start the Resonance debate again, but basically "what Arachnofiend said, but more politely".
Currently Charisma is the only stat that lacks a penalty for dumping it other than skill bonuses. That said, I do think the original implementation of Resonance made Charisma too important, where it hurt more than it should to dump it. I feel like dumping Charisma should be a drawback in the same way that dumping Dex or dumping Con is a drawback - you notice the drawback, it changes the way you play, but it doesn't cripple your character.
Those aren't in 2e
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One also can't "dump" charisma in PF2. Lowest you can get is starting at 10 (8 for dwarves) and leaving it there.
|
|
I'd personally like to see the return of the PF1 style Trait System as optional.
Tie CHA to that, everyone starts with 2 Traits + CHA Modifier.
This helps ground Traits in what they were supposed to be in the first place, defining aspects of your character's history and personality. Sure that means uninvested Dwarves only get 1 Trait, and that Bards will end up with a TON of Traits, but thematically I think that fits.
Give a VERY close eye towards the kinds of minor bonuses that Traits can give this time around instead of publishing them all loosey-goosey whereby 2/3 of all Characters just choose the +1 Save of choice or +2 Init every time. Perhaps it would be a good way to reduce a single Uncommon "Gate" for stuff outside of the Ancestry or Archetype system too.
Thoughts? Has this idea already been crushed to a fine paste and sprinkled on Ancestral Weapons grave?
I'm not sure if "buy more backstory" is a desirable use of charisma. It seems like it would be better if it were for something going forward (like how many followers you can attract) than "what already happened to you" like traits.
|
|
Those aren't in 2eI mean, you start seeing a monster that throws out CHA Damage or Drain style effects and that CHA dumping is going to hurt :PI don't want to start the Resonance debate again, but basically "what Arachnofiend said, but more politely".
Currently Charisma is the only stat that lacks a penalty for dumping it other than skill bonuses. That said, I do think the original implementation of Resonance made Charisma too important, where it hurt more than it should to dump it. I feel like dumping Charisma should be a drawback in the same way that dumping Dex or dumping Con is a drawback - you notice the drawback, it changes the way you play, but it doesn't cripple your character.
I mean, they aren't atm but I would be surprised if there's never an attack of some sort that directly impacts your stats :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, they aren't atm but I would be surprised if there's never an attack of some sort that directly impacts your stats :PThose aren't in 2eI mean, you start seeing a monster that throws out CHA Damage or Drain style effects and that CHA dumping is going to hurt :PI don't want to start the Resonance debate again, but basically "what Arachnofiend said, but more politely".
Currently Charisma is the only stat that lacks a penalty for dumping it other than skill bonuses. That said, I do think the original implementation of Resonance made Charisma too important, where it hurt more than it should to dump it. I feel like dumping Charisma should be a drawback in the same way that dumping Dex or dumping Con is a drawback - you notice the drawback, it changes the way you play, but it doesn't cripple your character.
There are things that inflict status penalties to checks based off stats. What we don't have is something that punishes you if that stat hits 0, which is the only thing that made charisma drain scary to people who dump charisma. Otherwise you're just making them worse on skills they weren't going to use anyway.
It seems unlikely that we will see these abilities return, given how thoroughly they were replaced.