D&D (2024) Change in Charisma Description

[James Gasik]

I am simply trying to have the rules reflect the D&D universe. If you feel that beauty isn't appreciated, desired, admired, or even looked at in the D&D universe, then more power to you. But I believe anecdotally, more people believe it exists in that universe. So why not add one simple word to the already list of words that define charisma?

A Lich and a Night Hag, as examples, have 16 Charisma.

EDIT: actually, let me add to this. So D&D is, as noted, full of things that aren't attractive but have high Charisma. If we add "beauty" as a possible descriptor for Charisma, but note that one need not be pretty to have a high Charisma, would we also have to include the potential for low Charisma creatures to be very attractive?

That would bring us right back to where we are now.

Another wrinkle- let's say a character uses disguise self or a Disguise Kit to disguise themselves as an attractive person. Would they gain more Charisma as a result?

 

[Reynard]

A Lich and a Night Hag, as examples, have 16 Charisma.

Is this the start of a joke?

 

[Scott Christian]

I think any issue here is solved by just asking the players:

"Your character has high charisma... How does that manifest?"

"They are stunningly beautiful and know how to use it to manipulate people."

"They are plain looking, but have a powerful voice that can command armies."

"They are hunchbacked and pockmarked, but have an air of mystery that catches your attention and makes you pay attention to their quietest whisperings."

Or even just:

"They're an experienced traveler who is good with people."

Appearance can be a part of it, but doesn't need to be. Leave it up to the player instead of deciding for them.

I'm sorry, but this even further strengthens my argument. And the fact that so many people like this, simply means beauty should be a part of charisma's definition. I mean, literally, your bolded statement says it should be part of the definition. The part I italicized is "confidence" or "eloquence" or "leadership" - you know, the other words they use to define charisma in the PHB.

 

[BookTenTiger]

I'm sorry, but this even further strengthens my argument. And the fact that so many people like this, simply means beauty should be a part of charisma's definition. I mean, literally, your bolded statement says it should be part of the definition. The part I italicized is "confidence" or "eloquence" or "leadership" - you know, the other words they use to define charisma in the PHB.

But you ignored my three other examples which don't have beauty, one of which doesn't even mention appearance. Beauty is not charisma, it's surface.

 

[Scott Christian]

A Lich and a Night Hag, as examples, have 16 Charisma.

Because, as per its definition, they have "commanding personalities." I am not abdicating that it only be about beauty, I am merely stating that it should be part of the attribute's definition.

 

[Scott Christian]

But you ignored my three other examples which don't have beauty, one of which doesn't even mention appearance. Beauty is not charisma, it's surface.

I didn't ignore them, I said they are already included in the PHB's definition of charisma. Then, the first example you used literally uses beauty as the example. So you too must feel beauty is part of its definition. If you don't, why use that example?

 

[James Gasik]

Because, as per its definition, they have "commanding personalities." I am not abdicating that it only be about beauty, I am merely stating that it should be part of the attribute's definition.

I added an Edit to continue on this point, but I'll repost here for everyone's benefit.

So D&D is, as noted, full of things that aren't attractive but have high Charisma. If we add "beauty" as a possible descriptor for Charisma, but note that one need not be pretty to have a high Charisma, would we also have to include the potential for low Charisma creatures to be very attractive?

That would bring us right back to where we are now.

Another wrinkle- let's say a character uses disguise self or a Disguise Kit to disguise themselves as an attractive person. Would they gain more Charisma as a result?

 

[Incenjucar]

If appearance can dictate Charisma, then you should be able to use illusions, alter self, etc. to boost Charisma to max, and equally to drop it down to minimum.

 

[Vaalingrade]

And if Charisma dictate appearance, then you rob players of choosing what their character looks like.

I'm just not seeing anything this proposal does that's positive for the game.

 

[Scott Christian]

Another wrinkle- let's say a character uses disguise self or a Disguise Kit to disguise themselves as an attractive person. Would they gain more Charisma as a result?

If appearance can dictate Charisma, then you should be able to use illusions, alter self, etc. to boost Charisma to max, and equally to drop it down to minimum.

These are good situations to bring up. I think there is an easy solution, and that is to limit the charisma score one can use for alter self. And as they progress with the ability, maybe increasing it in level, then charisma increases as well.

So D&D is, as noted, full of things that aren't attractive but have high Charisma. If we add "beauty" as a possible descriptor for Charisma, but note that one need not be pretty to have a high Charisma, would we also have to include the potential for low Charisma creatures to be very attractive?

I don't see why you would need to add that. One can look at a monster from the monster manual and infer why their charisma score is the way it is. A high charisma would mean they are beautiful, commanding, eloquent, etc. whatever the definition is. There are no reasons to state why a charisma is low. No one says, "Why does this hill giant have such a low dexterity or low wisdom.