Again another example of CHA as dump stat

[DarkMaster]

I wouldn't necessarily replace it with anything, because the system is based around, and it'd be more trouble than it's worth - too many classes depend on it for special abilities and spellcasting. I just don't believe in making people jump through hoops for the sake of a flawed game mechanic.

Still, my idea of a better system is one where Charismatic is an advantage and Uncharismatic a flaw. Or, if we're still sticking to d20, a system in which you take, for example, a feat called Born Leader that gives you a +4 bonus on all social skills related to leading people, one called Master Merchant gives you a +4 bonus on checks relating to using social skills in doing business, etc.

This, because I don't believe (if we're sticking to real life examples) that the idea of having a "golden boy" who's charismatic and as a result good at seduction, diplomacy, threatening people, bluffing in combat, cheating at cards, dancing, singing, playing an instrument, and using magical devices makes any sense whatsoever.
The world's best violin player is not also the greates ladies' man of all time, and a big hollywood star with a million dollar smile doesn't necessarily have what it takes to lead soldiers into combat any better than the next guy. Your invisible professor might be the center of attention when surrounded by colleagues in his field, instead of teaching undergrads because he has to.

We're stuck with this crappy system mainly because in 2E, charisma did almost nothing, so instead of saying "what's the best way of fixing this ability system?" the 3.0 designers said (it seems to me): "We want to keep the same six stats for the sake of continuity - how can we make Charisma as important mechanically as some of the other stats?"

Not to mention that your examples continue to be absolute caricatures and exaggerations of what it means to have a Charisma of 8 or 20. A 20 means you can convince someone black is white? Get serious, he has the same skill modifier as a 1st level character with maxed ranks and 12 Cha - in other words, nothing special. Someone with an 8 charisma can't stay in business? It's gonna hit the mousy Indian guy who barely speaks a word of English that I've been buying coffee from every morning for the last few years really hard when I tell him he's destined for failure. :\

Well that's why skills are for, the score ability represent an affinity, but to excel you still need training and practice, So yes the violin master probably spends all his skill point on perform violin and not on diplomacy, resulting in someone not very good at diplomacy. The Violin master could also have CHA 6 and still the skill could be at +15 , but if he would have 18 CHA the skill it would be at +21 because is capable of giving more with the same amount of training. Both have 17 ranks of practice and both are very good at it, the difference being in the magnetism projected by the player.

I should have stated that the sorcerer has +20 bluff, and why do you say that the mousy Indian has 8 charisma because he doesn't speak english.

I agree that Intelligence and wisdom will also affect your business, If you are smart and wise you will choose a good location and do smart deals allowing you to lower your prices and maybe to hire someone at the counter with a high charisma.

The reason why I started this thread is actually to complain about WotC they create character that don't make sense according to their rule set. The fact that the guy has 6 Charisma would not be so bad if he was compensating with a lot of ranks in various social skills. But in the example the Dwarf is supposed to be a great leader and they didn't invest a single point in the abilities that defines great leader.(no point in the skills and in the point build ,since dwarf have -2 CHA). There are supposed to teach us how to play and come up with incoherent build like that.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

What, you probably don't know half of my University teachers, some of them were extremely Intelligent, but when it was time to teach a class or animate a gala (they were not nuerotic either)

They could walk in a room full of people and at the end nobody would remember they were there

A friend of mine's fiance/husband was like that -- he had attended numerous events with my friends and I, and no one could ever remember his name. A total lack of personality.

 

[mmu1]

Certainly, giving extra APs for high Cha will benefit paladins, sorcerers and bards more than characters of other classes. But remember, a high score in Cha is a high score that isn't going to another, perhaps more generally useful ability score.

What score would that be for Sorcerers and Bards? In both cases, Charisma is the most important score they have if they're played conventionally. For Paladins, it's a slightly better argument, but aside from STR and CON, there's nothing more "generally useful" for them than Charisma.

Your idea would be fine if everyone in your game only played fighters, and there really were no mechanical reasons for having a good score in Charisma, but with 3 of the core classes having Charisma as one of their most important abilities, and another one (clerics) also needing it for one of their core abilities, it's not (IMO) a logical solution at all.

 

[Hardhead]

What score would that be for Sorcerers and Bards? In both cases, Charisma is the most important score they have if they're played conventionally. For Paladins, it's a slightly better argument, but aside from STR and CON, there's nothing more "generally useful" for them than Charisma.

Your idea would be fine if everyone in your game only played fighters, and there really were no mechanical reasons for having a good score in Charisma, but with 3 of the core classes having Charisma as one of their most important abilities, and another one (clerics) also needing it for one of their core abilities, it's not (IMO) a logical solution at all.

But, that's not a problem, because everyone agrees that sorcerers, paladins, and bards are weak classes. Part of that reason is they're having to raise their CHA score, a score that has no ancillary benefit. By the same argument you make, there should be no "extra" benefit to wisdom (like raising your WILL save) because some classes already need a high wisdom. Or a high INT shouldn't give you extra skill points, because wizards already need a high INT.

Pretty much every stat gives an extra beanie for being high, besided whatever a class actually needs it for - except charisma. That's one of the major reasons those three classes are so weak.

 

[DarkMaster]

What score would that be for Sorcerers and Bards? In both cases, Charisma is the most important score they have if they're played conventionally. For Paladins, it's a slightly better argument, but aside from STR and CON, there's nothing more "generally useful" for them than Charisma.

Your idea would be fine if everyone in your game only played fighters, and there really were no mechanical reasons for having a good score in Charisma, but with 3 of the core classes having Charisma as one of their most important abilities, and another one (clerics) also needing it for one of their core abilities, it's not (IMO) a logical solution at all.

Actually the more I think about it the more I agree with you, Some character don't need charisma like some other don't need high strenght, or high wisdom they can bring a small bonus but would not really affect your character effectiveness. But I feel that everyone really needs Int, Dex and Con. If you want to have a fighter with no social skill then so be it. In the group I DM the two dwarf have 10 Charisma and let the rogue and the sorcerer do the social interaction, like the sorcerer let the dwarf Tank do the melee combat.

I should change the title of the thread, my point was just that WotC and a lot of people seems to ignore social skill and "role play" them like they say. And that removes their utility and weakens bard, rogue and sorcerer. It doesn't create an incentive to play a character focus on the social interaction because the fighter with 6 charisma with no social skills can do the same as a 14 level social bard by "role playing" he can do even better leads great armies

 

[DarkMaster]

But, that's not a problem, because everyone agrees that sorcerers, paladins, and bards are weak classes. Part of that reason is they're having to raise their CHA score, a score that has no ancillary benefit. By the same argument you make, there should be no "extra" benefit to wisdom (like raising your WILL save) because some classes already need a high wisdom. Or a high INT shouldn't give you extra skill points, because wizards already need a high INT.

Pretty much every stat gives an extra beanie for being high, besided whatever a class actually needs it for - except charisma. That's one of the major reasons those three classes are so weak.

Totally untrue, I cannot count how many times the rogue saved the party by gathering the right info, calming down powerfull foe, bargaining to get more magical items for the same amount of gold. CHA and social skills utility depends on the DM. In my Campaing a party without a social character is a dead party.

 

[mmu1]

But, that's not a problem, because everyone agrees that sorcerers, paladins, and bards are weak classes. Part of that reason is they're having to raise their CHA score, a score that has no ancillary benefit. By the same argument you make, there should be no "extra" benefit to wisdom (like raising your WILL save) because some classes already need a high wisdom. Or a high INT shouldn't give you extra skill points, because wizards already need a high INT.

Pretty much every stat gives an extra beanie for being high, besided whatever a class actually needs it for - except charisma. That's one of the major reasons those three classes are so weak.

Everyone agrees? I certainly don't. I think the Sorcerer is a boring class, but certainly not particularly weak, and Bards have gotten very respectable in 3.5. Paladins definitely suffer in a 25 point-buy game, but I've seen them hold their ground very well next to fighters in 32 point games.

And it's manifestly untrue that there are no "extra" benefits to Charisma... What do you call the bonuses to social skills and turning ability?

 

[Hardhead]

Totally untrue, I cannot count how many times the rogue saved the party by gathering the right info, calming down powerfull foe, bargaining to get more magical items for the same amount of gold. CHA and social skills utility depends on the DM. In my Campaing a party without a social character is a dead party.

Those are all skills. Every stat gives a bonus to their associated skills, as well as something else. EXCEPT CHARISMA.

This is the reason that it's a dump stat. If you don't care about charisma-based skills, and you don't rely on CHA for any class skills, it doesn't matter if it's low. That's not true for any other stat.

If you don't care about inteligence-based stats, and you don't need INT for any class abilities, you still need it for skill points.

If you don't care about wisdom-based skills and you don't need it for a class skill, you still need it for WILL saves.

It's the same for every stat. Every stat has something that you have to have. Making sure that social skills are required in a campaign really only means that one person needs a decent charisma. It doesn't solve the problem.

 

[Lamoni]

Those are all skills. Every stat gives a bonus to their associated skills, as well as something else. EXCEPT CHARISMA.

This is the reason that it's a dump stat. If you don't care about charisma-based skills, and you don't rely on CHA for any class skills, it doesn't matter if it's low. That's not true for any other stat.

If you don't care about inteligence-based stats, and you don't need INT for any class abilities, you still need it for skill points.

If you don't care about wisdom-based skills and you don't need it for a class skill, you still need it for WILL saves.

It's the same for every stat. Every stat has something that you have to have. Making sure that social skills are required in a campaign really only means that one person needs a decent charisma. It doesn't solve the problem.

I agree. Unfortunately there aren't any good fixes. You can try working within the rules and give a benefit to those that take a high charisma, but that doesn't really give any penalty to every other party member with a low charisma. I guess you could force the party to seperate and do their own individual diplomacy or gather information check, but that doesn't sound like a good solution.

I hate how charisma's best quality is for the diplomacy skill. (Of course it offers greater benefits to a few classes, but they aren't universal benefits) Unfortunately with this skill, it is too subjective. You can either just roll the dice, take the outcome and eliminate a lot of good role playing, or you can ignore the dice and have a lot of good role playing, but undermine the skill. Or you can do a combination of the two, but it is hard to find a happy medium. A player that rolls a 38 on a diplomacy check, but says some pretty offending things to the NPC makes it hard to judge what should be done. Or someone who is very wise and came up with the best compromise ever, but rolled a 5 when presenting it to the NPC to convince them. It is difficult and therefore I hate how that is the best thing that Charisma provides. Also, there is no need to have more than one person in the party excel at this.

How would the party do if only one person had an 18 Str and the other 3 had a Str of 8? They may end up doing well, but the people with an 8 str would notice some penalty associated with it.

The solutions I have heard were to remove charisma completely... that might work, but I like having that part of a character defined by more than just role playing. Or to offer another benefit that Charisma provides. This makes sense to me, but I am not sure I like the idea about action points... and everything that is suggested becomes a house rule.

That is one thing that I hope they change in 4th edition (No, I don't want 4th edition to come out any time soon). Unfortunately I don't have any good ideas for what exactly may be done.

 

[Felix]

Every stat gives a bonus to their associated skills, as well as something else. EXCEPT CHARISMA.

Initial reaction modifiers? It's not like any DMs I've played with actually use them, but I do think they're core, arn't they?