D&D 5E Charisma Conundrum

[Mistwell]

Dex is a weaker save than people usually claim. It's often lumped in as "one of the three strong saves" with Wis and Con. But that's not really the case. The Wis saves that you fail tend to be the worst possible things that can happen (you get controlled to make other PCs die). The Con saves you fail tend to be the second tier of worst possible things that can happen (you die - but at least you don't take your party down with you). The Dex saves you fail tend to be...just more hit point damage (you might go down, you might not, but you can be healed). And in a game where healing is so plentiful, it's just not as much an issue as Wis and Con saves you fail.

Same with initiative. Sure for some classes you really want to go first, like a control wizard. But for a lot of classes, sometimes going after the foes is actually a benefit. And there is no Delay action anymore in 5e. Using a Ready Action gets you less than taking your turn when it comes up. So if you wanted to go later in the round you really can't fully without a lower initiative anyway. So, high initiative is in some respects situational.

So now we're really down to attack and damage bonus - which is the same as Strength. And then a couple of good skills like Stealth - which again like Strength with Athletics. I really don't think Dex is the UBER stat so many people claim it is.

Same with Charisma. If I am given a choice between a higher Charisma or a higher Wisdom (for example) I will take Wisdom every time for the saves and perception check (which is an UBER skill) and Insight (which I found as useful as persuasion - because what the NPCs say is usually more important than what the PCs say to them).

Which really leaves it to a caster stat - which is fine, but it's not as desirable as Wisdom for a caster state. I'd say the rankings for the caster stat goes Wisdom first, then Charisma, then Intelligence.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Yeah, but again... how is that a problem?

That a modest or even 10-INT wizard is potentially viable is not a problem, in and of itself - it's actually kinda interesting, potentially - but it does illustrate that INT being a caster stat doesn't make INT "better" than if it weren't a caster stat, at all. (OTOH, it goes for all other casters, too - it's possible to picks spells known to avoid attacks and saves, and thus not need your caster stat that desperately - but you don't hear about 10 CHA bards nearly as much as 10 INT wizards...)

How powerful/valuable a stat is, in general, is most closely measured by how valuable it is to the classes that don't have features that key off it. (Or, as in the case of DEX v STR, can go with one of two stats.)

There's a reason why AD&D existed and was so popular and memorable even though every single Fighter PC had almost the exact same small number of game mechanical abilities and capabilities.

Sure, each of the fighters at a given table probably had a different set of items or a different super-cool magic item that defined them. Bob with the Helm of Brilliance was totally different from Bob with the Platemail of Etherealness from Bob with the Flaming Sword ("+1 Flametongue!") from Bob with the Hammer of Thunderbolts/Gauntlets of Ogre Power/Gridle of Giant Strength.

 

[Undrave]

I had a LOW CHA Blade Lock! With full investment in DEX and using the at-will Mage Armor invocation he had 16 DEX and spells that didn't need CHA like Armor of Agathys or Mirror Image.

Dex is a weaker save than people usually claim. It's often lumped in as "one of the three strong saves" with Wis and Con. But that's not really the case. The Wis saves that you fail tend to be the worst possible things that can happen (you get controlled to make other PCs die). The Con saves you fail tend to be the second tier of worst possible things that can happen (you die - but at least you don't take your party down with you). The Dex saves you fail tend to be...just more hit point damage (you might go down, you might not, but you can be healed). And in a game where healing is so plentiful, it's just not as much an issue as Wis and Con saves you fail.

DEX is a weaker save than CON or WIS, but DEX saves tend to be fairly common AND it also doubles as AC, so it's really a question of how often it comes into play to allow you to avoid damage.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Sure, each of the fighters at a given table probably had a different set of items or a different super-cool magic item that defined them. Bob with the Helm of Brilliance was totally different from Bob with the Platemail of Etherealness from Bob with the Flaming Sword ("+1 Flametongue!") from Bob with the Hammer of Thunderbolts/Gauntlets of Ogre Power/Gridle of Giant Strength.

Do you really play at tables where there is no character differentiation whatsoever except for the magic items they hold? If that's true... then your problem is much deeper than WotC not giving enough bennies for the INT stat.

 

[Ashrym]

Cha isn't the entire social pillar, sharing it with Wis (Insight). I also despise the fact that so many casters use Cha. Bard I'm good with, and it's the only one that absolutely deserves to use Cha. Paladin I can see, and Sorcerer I can grudgingly live with. Warlock drives me nuts, however since I feel it should be Wis or Int.

It's not that CHA is the entire social pillar so much is that tends to be where the active uses are in the social pillar. CHA, DEX, and STR see a lot of active checks for actions made by the PC's. INT, WIS, and CON are checks more often associated a use in reaction to something else.

DEX in particular sees a lot of use in other mechanics. I'm not sure CHA does compared to STR just because 3 major spell casters use it when fighters, paladins, and barbarians also tend to use STR.

The actual CHA checks are more interesting than the STR checks, however. Look at what STR and athletics covers and then look at what CHA and the various CHA skills cover. Jumping, climbing, swimming, and forcing open a stuck door don't seem as pivotal as deceiving, intimidating, or persuading. That might be a player perception issue or a DM issue, but it's how I see those two ability scores in comparison.

Arcane casters are CHA for known, INT for prepared as a general rule. EK and AT are INT because they are specifically learning wizard spells. Changing the warlock makes him better at knowing things and weaker at intimidating, deceiving, or persuading people. That doesn't seem to follow the trope.

It makes more sense to change the bard to INT because bards are included with learned spellcasters (hence ritual casting), INT leads to supporting the bardic knowledge trope, and while they might be known for deceiving or persuading they are not particularly know for intimidation. That loses one concept for another so why bother.

sidenote: I guess if a person really wanted to mess with the bards then making them use WIS for spells on the cleric or druid list, INT for the spells on the wizard list, and CHA for every other spell on the bard list might split their focus.

That's gotta be pretty pacing-dependent.

Warlocks aren't as restricted by short rests as people think. One aspect of the class is. They have a fair bit of at-will ability compared to other spell casters. The trick is to not get sucked in to all those eldritch blast enhancements unless that's all you really want to do with your warlock. Agonizing blast is the only really important one.

Warlocks don't match up with a wizard or bard in versatility. The SLA's are just another type of warlock spam that helps cover spell slots regardless of resting so it's a question of EB's and SLA's vs variety. Pacing will matter more and more as other spell casters gain levels and slots.

Almost no one picks INT as a third good stat. If you'll lucky someone with a +2 Int race will pick a non-INT class and then shrug and put a 10 in INT so that bonus doesn't go to waste. An argument could be made a Rogue (Arcane Trickster aside) would like Investigation, but they'd be better served by investing in CON after they invest in DEX and CHA and just use Expertise to shore up their Investigation score...

Pffft…. I focus on skills and ability checks as a rogue and INT is still 5th in line for ability score priority. WIS beats it for perception and insight instead of just investigation, and WIS saves are a lot more common.

BTW, I don't disagree with what you said. I'm very much in agreement that INT is a low priority outside of using it for spellcasting or a flavor build for knowledge. Investigation on a character without expertise in investigation is the only other draw.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Do you really play at tables where there is no character differentiation except for the magic items they hold?

We were specifically talking differentiation /among Fighters, with the same numbers/.
But, no, not since the 80s.
OK, early 90s.

I took a break from D&D in the late 90s, and when I came back with 3.0, you had much greater character customization available, even just in the PH1, even for the poor fighter.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Warlocks aren't as restricted by short rests as people think. One aspect of the class is. They have a fair bit of at-will ability compared to other spell casters.

So they'll do great on long days, especially long days with lots of short rests, relative to the wizard. 5MWD, the wizard has more powerful top-level spells to nova with, and neither of them are likely to get down to their at-will baseline.
So, when comparing the two, Pacing matters, no?

 

[Mistwell]

I had a LOW CHA Blade Lock! With full investment in DEX and using the at-will Mage Armor invocation he had 16 DEX and spells that didn't need CHA like Armor of Agathys or Mirror Image.



DEX is a weaker save than CON or WIS, but DEX saves tend to be fairly common AND it also doubles as AC, so it's really a question of how often it comes into play to allow you to avoid damage.

It only "doubles as AC" if you're not wearing heavy armor, and it only counts up to a Dex 14 for medium armor. Which is meaningful, but again, not as powerful as "doubles for AC".

 

[Salthorae]

It only "doubles as AC" if you're not wearing heavy armor, and it only counts up to a Dex 14 for medium armor. Which is meaningful, but again, not as powerful as "doubles for AC".

I think for a majority of builds Dex is a huge component of their AC though. At least I know it is for any non-cleric spellcaster I make, or Monk, or Rogue, or Barbarian.

Only few builds I've seen dump Dex for Heavy armor. Pretty much fighters and clerics are the only ones I've seen take a low Dex to crawl into their heavy armors.

So I don't think it's not a significant component of Dex's "power" or "reputation" either.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It only "doubles as AC" if you're not wearing heavy armor, and it only counts up to a Dex 14 for medium armor. Which is meaningful, but again, not as powerful as "doubles for AC".

Heavy armor is not without disadvantages, so it's a little more nuanced than just 'doubles as AC.'