D&D General half-orcs and bad Charisma

[DammitVictor]

But if I were going to include such a thing, I would only have it be a factor in initial impressions/disposition at the beginning of an encounter.

Oh, I am 110% in favor of including fantasy racism with my fantasy races. Things like the AD&D racial preference chart, or early Shadowrun's random NPC racism generator table are great worldbuilding... as long as they're sensible, and consistent, and the setting doesn't bend itself over backwards and tie itself in a knot to claim that it's justified.

My problem here isn't with racial/racist social interaction penalties. My problem is in translating "normal people from normal races think they're ugly" into a racial penalty to other Charisma-based mechanics... like Intimidate and Handle Animal or Warlock spellcasting or other things that don't have anything to do with their subjective physical appearance or their social standing with the other peoples of the world.

Dwarves and Thri-Kreen and other races get a penalty to those things because they have difficulty expressing/asserting themselves, because they have a harder time projecting themselves into the world. That's just... not orcs. Hobgoblins, maybe, but not goblins or bugbears. Ogres, definitely, but not gnolls. Lizardfolk, but not kobolds or yuan-ti.

I've got myself what you might call a proclivity for the other other other green meat, but that doesn't mean that elves and gnomes suddenly lose four points of Charisma when I'm looking at them. Harder to steal my heart, but just as easy to steal my horse.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Oh, I am 110% in favor of including fantasy racism with my fantasy races. Things like the AD&D racial preference chart, or early Shadowrun's random NPC racism generator table are great worldbuilding... as long as they're sensible, and consistent, and the setting doesn't bend itself over backwards and tie itself in a knot to claim that it's justified.

My problem here isn't with racial/racist social interaction penalties. My problem is in translating "normal people from normal races think they're ugly" into a racial penalty to other Charisma-based mechanics... like Intimidate and Handle Animal or Warlock spellcasting or other things that don't have anything to do with their subjective physical appearance or their social standing with the other peoples of the world.

Dwarves and Thri-Kreen and other races get a penalty to those things because they have difficulty expressing/asserting themselves, because they have a harder time projecting themselves into the world. That's just... not orcs. Hobgoblins, maybe, but not goblins or bugbears. Ogres, definitely, but not gnolls. Lizardfolk, but not kobolds or yuan-ti.

I've got myself what you might call a proclivity for the other other other green meat, but that doesn't mean that elves and gnomes suddenly lose four points of Charisma when I'm looking at them. Harder to steal my heart, but just as easy to steal my horse.

That all makes sense to me. I pretty much feel the same way. Sorry for the confusion earlier.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

What if the penalties appear somewhere other than race, you know, like the bonuses do?

In general, for ability scores, I still think penalties are inferior to other design options to achieve similar effects. That is, I think the concept (albeit not necessarily the execution) of abilities like Powerful Build are the better method. Carrots are more effective than sticks, and an opportunity cost is often more than enough to shape player behavior.

And playing against type is kinda meaningless if there's no downside to it. And before you say that it can be role-played, remember that RP penalties are deeply subjective and a poor way to balance anything, because they can't be strictly enforced.

Why?

Why can't "you did not get a bonus" be sufficient? That's an opportunity cost, which is (as stated) plenty to discourage player behavior.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In general, for ability scores, I still think penalties are inferior to other design options to achieve similar effects. That is, I think the concept (albeit not necessarily the execution) of abilities like Powerful Build are the better method. Carrots are more effective than sticks, and an opportunity cost is often more than enough to shape player behavior.


Why?

Why can't "you did not get a bonus" be sufficient? That's an opportunity cost, which is (as stated) plenty to discourage player behavior.

It isn't strong enough a discouragement in my opinion. Now, that is a personal preference.

 

[Andvari]

Don't forget this handsome half-orc from Pool of Radiance.

 

[Larnievc]

Good people, that is, the ones that are innocent as regards to killing others, would have high Morale, while Evil people would have psychiatric issues, which would lower their Charisma ...

I think you might be confusing morals with morale.

 

[le Redoutable]

I am opposing High Morale Rating with depression ( or is it losing face, honor debt or the like )

 

[le Redoutable]

There are several types of intelligence in the real life. You can be good for a thing but bad for other. For example using fictional

in fact, you can combine Int with the five other stats ( so, effectively there are several types of Int )

 

[nevin]

most of the "other" types of intelligence translate more into wisdom than intelligence.

 

[le Redoutable]

... which corrobores Cha ---> Willpower

6 Orator -- Cha ===> (W)illpower
5 Warrior - Str ===> (M)orale Rating
4 Thinker - Wis ===> (E)mpathy
3 Acrobat - Dex ===> (S)kill and Swiftness
2 Yoghin -- Con ===> (C)hi
1 Creator - Int ===> (I)ntuition

( with a little bit of luck lol )