Should charismatic players have an advantage?

[Barastrondo]

Is D&D the rare game where learning how to play it means you're playing it wrong (each time you start a new PC)?

I say no, because much of the really valuable skills you learn for gaming aren't all those bullpucky "always take a 10' pole" "if there's a chandelier, swing from it" "hire henchmen if you want to survive" skills -- those are dependent on a given campaign's play style, and can actively impede you if you rely on them when playing in a campaign with a different style.

The really valuable skills you learn are social interaction skills: when to listen, when to talk, how to pay attention to genre conventions, broadening your knowledge base by reading more and watching more relevant documentaries, etc. Those are always useful. Skills like that will help you master the subterranean resource crawl and the highly social, intrigue-laden swashbuckler.

 

[Mort]

Whats the odds that a person with social skills wouldn't value their social ability and actual rate it high enough to not use it as a dump stat.

I bet there are some who might use it as a dump stat, betting that their social skill will make up the difference.

But the majority will probably rate it higher than that.

But how long will it take a player to figure out the DM plays physical stats and skills (athletics etc.) Normally but relies on "player skill" for social skills? I just think if you weight it like that it should at the very least be disclosed.

 

[prosfilaes]

Whats the odds that a person with social skills wouldn't value their social ability and actual rate it high enough to not use it as a dump stat.

I bet there are some who might use it as a dump stat, betting that their social skill will make up the difference.

But the majority will probably rate it higher than that.

That's avoiding the question; the question is what do you do when it happens?

Furthermore, is anyone that monotonous in building characters? I generally play intelligent characters, and when I make really dumb characters I play them really dumb, but I have a lot of clerics who had average Ints for mechanical reasons, and I don't think I've played them noticeably less intelligent then my wizards.

 

[Hussar]

I say no, because much of the really valuable skills you learn for gaming aren't all those bullpucky "always take a 10' pole" "if there's a chandelier, swing from it" "hire henchmen if you want to survive" skills -- those are dependent on a given campaign's play style, and can actively impede you if you rely on them when playing in a campaign with a different style.

The really valuable skills you learn are social interaction skills: when to listen, when to talk, how to pay attention to genre conventions, broadening your knowledge base by reading more and watching more relevant documentaries, etc. Those are always useful. Skills like that will help you master the subterranean resource crawl and the highly social, intrigue-laden swashbuckler.

This I could see. I suppose it also depends on how often you change DM's and your DM changes his or her style. The whole 10' pole thing might be a big advantage to a player if he is gaming that particular DM, but, won't really serve very well in the larger picture.

 

[Barastrondo]

This I could see. I suppose it also depends on how often you change DM's and your DM changes his or her style. The whole 10' pole thing might be a big advantage to a player if he is gaming that particular DM, but, won't really serve very well in the larger picture.

Exactly. It's a specialized skill, and to some extent the specialized skills can trip you up re: Mallus' question of "is it better to forget?" Depending on the context... maybe.

But the generalized skills that apply to most tables, the skills of adaptability and cooperation and flexible tactical skill, those things you're better off retaining. I tend to value them more as the sign of the skilled player myself, as opposed to, say, the sign of the skilled D&D dungeoncrawler or the sign of the skilled Vampire social backstabber.

 

[Desdichado]

If this is stated up front -then great, everyone knows what they're in for and probably likes it (that’s why their playing, after all).

But, if I didn't know this going in, made a negotiation heavy character (High Cha high diplomacy etc - sacrificing a bit of combat effectiveness and sacrificing other skills) this might be unfair, no?

No. The example given above is nonsensical. If you insult an NPC, they'll feel insulted, unless it's so subtle that they don't realize it. Believing that because you're a high CHA character you can get away with being a diva and hav everyone love you fails a basic cause and effect relationship that I'd argue anyone with enough of a modicum of social skills to successfully play D&D (without sucking the fun out of the room) should be expected to understand.

If you're going to put a higher number in CHA... sacrificing some combat ability to do so... then play a character who's actually got a modicum of CHA, if you can. That only seems sensible and logical to me.

Whats the odds that a person with social skills wouldn't value their social ability and actual rate it high enough to not use it as a dump stat.

IME, quite high.

I bet there are some who might use it as a dump stat, betting that their social skill will make up the difference.

But the majority will probably rate it higher than that.

I'd take that bet. I think you're wrong. CHA is a notably and obviously less useful ability in D&D. Anyone who's played it for any length of time starts to figure that out. Everyone in my group would have at least an average CHA in real life; some of them are honestly above average likeable. But unless they're playing sorcerers, all of them, almost without fail, end up making CHA the dump stat.

 

[Barastrondo]

I'd take that bet. I think you're wrong. CHA is a notably and obviously less useful ability in D&D. Anyone who's played it for any length of time starts to figure that out.

That's a true-by-campaign tradition (and also true-by-edition, as it's a lot more useful in 4e where they layered Will defense, skill challenges and a wider variety of Charisma-positive classes). In my experience it's far from universal. Anybody who's played D&D in a campaign that involves a decent amount of interaction with NPCs for politicking, intrigue or ally-building purposes for any length of time starts to figure out that you need at least someone in your party with good Charisma skills if you want to excel. And with only one CHA-positive person in the party, you're putting all your eggs in one basket. If it's a campaign that involves the players eventually establishing strongholds and becoming leaders, diplomacy's all the more likely to rear its head. I've seen several players walk into a campaign with the idea that Charisma is an effective dump stat, then rethink that philosophy as they watched social encounters with genuine stakes play out.

Now, the question is, do the majority of D&D players just not play in campaigns with a lot of social activity? Yeah, probably. If it's true that the majority of D&D players have never played other RPGs and are never inclined to, then maybe there's overlap there as well. I've never played with a D&D group that hadn't ever enjoyed another RPG, so I'm probably in the outlier category.

 

[Mort]

No. The example given above is nonsensical. If you insult an NPC, they'll feel insulted, unless it's so subtle that they don't realize it. Believing that because you're a high CHA character you can get away with being a diva and hav everyone love you fails a basic cause and effect relationship that I'd argue anyone with enough of a modicum of social skills to successfully play D&D (without sucking the fun out of the room) should be expected to understand.

I'm not sure you quoted the right part of my post as nothing I said disagrees with the rest of your post.

That said, insulting someone and not having them take offense is exactly what some high CHA characters are very good at.

One of the people I work with has the knack of talking with people, insulting them straight to their face (saying things that if I said them would get me punched or worse) and yet having them laugh, feel comfortable and go away truly liking my co-worker. It's almost freaky to watch but it is certainly a knack and a skill.

 

[Desdichado]

In which case, I've seen, CHA as a powerful stat can actually start to get out of hand. In a relatively low level game I was in, one character, a swashbuckler classed guy, if I remember correctly, had engineered his character to have a monster Diplomacy bonus (in 3.5.) Maxed out CHA, maxed out ranks, synergy bonuses, skill focus, etc. He was routinely hitting a 30 or more on Diplomacy checks--at a crazy low level, like 3rd or 4th or something like that. It got to the point where it was difficult to find reasonable reasons why he should fail to charm anyone at all that he decided to make the attempt on.

But yeah, I think that game was probably an outlier in terms of what the PCs did and who they interacted with. For the most part, using your CHA (unless you're a sorcerer or bard, or maybe a paladin) is just a once in a while perk, not really a game-changer.

That said, for my current group, we actually think it's quite amusing when we're in these situations and nobody has a high CHA. Or the guy with the high CHA is arrogant and aloof, and doesn't care. Or whatever. We're one of those kinds of groups that thinks terible things, hijinks, and character flaws sending the game to the crapper is actually highly amusing to us as players. We don't personally identify with our characters to the point where we internalize bad things happening to them as if they were bad things happening to us. As such, we're actually a fairly inept adventuring group most of the time, but we wouldn't have it any other way, because it's highly entertaining to have a group made of up folks more like Cudgel the "Clever" than a highly efficient strike force. So we enjoy having a group of unlikeable people who are socially somewhat retrobate, and who make our patrons and clients somewhat uncomfortable to spend much time with.

 

[Desdichado]

I'm not sure you quoted the right part of my post as nothing I said disagrees with the rest of your post.

That said, insulting someone and not having them take offense is exactly what some high CHA characters are very good at.

One of the people I work with has the knack of talking with people, insulting them straight to their face (saying things that if I said them would get me punched or worse) and yet having them laugh, feel comfortable and go away truly liking my co-worker. It's almost freaky to watch but it is certainly a knack and a skill.

No, that's something different. Some things are not insulting if you have the knack for making them not insulting, sure. I know plenty of people like that. Heck, I like to think that I'm like that, at least in face to face situations (it occasionally gets lost in translation online). But in that case, it's often a question of knowing where your boundaries are. Knowing which buttons are OK to push and which are not.

I'm interpreting the example above as being a case where the PC said something that was insulting, and there's no other way around it. He didn't just say something that a non-charismatic person can't say because it would fall flat, he said something that was insulting. Full stop. And then the player used his high CHA as a get out of jail free card.

In real life, it doesn't really work that way.