Can charisma be something more than just dump stat?

[steenan]

IMO the "charisma as a dump stat" is an endemic D&D issue. Most games I played had no such problem or had much less of it. It was, generally, achieved in one of several ways, sometimes combined.

1. Social interactions as important or more important than combat. This also requires the social mechanics to be reasonably deep and interesting in play, so that it is not ignored in favor of pure storytelling. Games, that use mechanical descriptions of personality traits and make it possible to address them in a discussion with a measurable effect, shine here, but that part is not strictly necessary.

2. Basing some aspects of a character on player skill only, without any stats to describe them. Without social stats, they can't be dumped.

3. Choosing stats in such a way that each of them encompasses something each character works better with. When, for example, character stats correspond to four elements, charisma probably falls under Fire, along with physical power - and nearly every character needs one of these two.

4. Aiming for simulation (of genre or setting), not efficiency. When a game is not focused on challenges and makes failure as interesting as success, the question moves from "Is charisma or dexterity more useful?" to "Is playing a charismatic or dexterous character more interesting?".

 

[S'mon]

The importance of a stat is determined by its importance in common in-game activities.

If a game is mostly combat, and CHA has no effect in combat, it will be a dump stat.

In my 1e AD&D/OSRIC City State of the Invincible Overlord game, PCs spend much more time talking with NPCs than they do hacking NPCs to death. Talking often involves CHA checks to succeed at the PC's goals (I use d20 roll-under). Success generates XP. Therefore most players invest in a good CHA.

 

[S'mon]

A lot of people complain when you try and make "roleplaying" obey dice-roll mechanics. They feel that if they as a player make an excellent speech/argument, then that action should be valid in-game, regardless of the stats of their character.

My approach is that if the CHA 3 PC makes an excellent speech/argument, OK they made an excellent speech/argument, but they're still a slimy disgusting repulsive creature with BO, or whatever it is that makes their CHA so low, so they may not emotionally convince NPCs - the NPCs may ignore or mishear them - even if their argument is intellectually unassailable.

This happens IRL all the time.

I treat both CHA and roleplay ability as player resources. The player deploys that good-CHA resource wisely, in conjunction with good roleplay, to maximise the in-game effect. If you want your PC to be a beloved leader of men, you need a decent CHA, and your roleplay skills can help too.

 

[Sadrik]

Can charisma be something more than just dump stat

Yes, and you have to re-write the rules to make it more than a dump stat. Since you are your golden.

What you have to do is divvy up INT, WIS and CHA in a new way. Use INT for knowledge any skills or abilities that have to do with knowing something or figuring out something or understanding your perceptions is INT. Use WIS as the flip side of CON but for the mind and that is it so will save and perhaps concentration skill. Finally make CHA all social interaction and divine magic. Make the cleric, paladin and druid all based off of CHA. Then it becomes a STR, only used by classes who need it, but more universal in its divine magic approach.

 

[Aurumvorax]

Charisma was the most important ability score pre-3e because it determined how many hirelings you could hire, their loyalty, and henchmens. Even if the party wizard only had 9 intelligence, he could contribute to the party by using his excess money saved from not buying arms and equipment to purchase and manage hirelings.

If you want Charisma to have impact, then it needs to be used for an important aspect of the game. Combat is an important aspect of D&D therefor being able to pad your numbers with hired goons makes the game easier. 3e trivialized charisma by trying to make it a combat stat (increasing casting) but intelligence based casting was infinitely better because it also increased skill points and wisdom increased saving throws. Charisma as a casting stat was undesirable in this regard unless you wanted to cheese out diplomacy.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm gathering opinions on ideas how to improve charisma stat in custom made RPG systems.

It's very simple. Which is more rewarding? Fighting or talking. Which is more dangerous? Fighting or talking. If fighting is rewarding and not that dangerous, people dump charisma. If fighting results in PC deaths and very little reward, people prioritise the charisma based approaches.

Just give full exps to people who talk their way past opposition, and back it with some charisma based rolls...

 

[Ahnehnois]

I use an action point mechanic from UA, and made action points charisma-based. Is charisma still dumped sometimes? Sure, just like the five other stats. But it's no longer the universal dump stat for everyone who doesn't cast spells by it or use social skills. Charismatic people are heroic people who accomplish great feats. I find it an effective and logical solution.

 

[Diamond Cross]

I haven't read the whole thread so I don't know if this has been posted before.

In 3.5 Charisma is used to determine what level of magic spells you could cast. If you had a 15 Charisma you could cast 5th level spells. Paladins used it for healing and turning undead. Clerics used it for Turning. It was also used to modify several skills.

So at least in 3.5 it wasn't a dump stat.

 

[Celebrim]

Under my rules, charisma does all of the following for you:

1) Spells for Sorcerers, Shamans, Feyborne, and Bards.
2) Channel divine power for Clerics.
3) Base stat for most Champion class powers.
4) Base stat for a wide variaty of social skills: Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Empathy, Intimidate, Leadership and Performance.
5) Determines your bonus number of destiny points. Destiny points can be spent in a variaty of ways to mitigate the effects of bad dice rolls.
6) Basis of combat feats that focus on intimidation, aggression, trickery and providing leadership.

The basic problem with charisma is that if all it does is enhance social interaction, only one person in the party needs it. Everyone else can pull dark cloaks over their heads, stand back and let the party negotiator handle in of the tricky stuff while they play the part of the ugly nasty looking stupid looking henchmen (and in some cases, looks need not be decieving).

The secondary problem with charisma is that it depends on the GM to make charisma relevant. Too many DMs take the tact that what you are supposed to do is fight. If you don't fight, you aren't rewarded with XP. If you try diplomacy when you aren't supposed to, it inevitably fails to yield a meaningful result.

I basically think D20/D&D handles charisma all right. The basic problem is hard to overcome. The secondary problem can't be overcome by rule changes alone. The trick I think is not to focus on making it never a dump stat, but making it a stat that can be rewarding for players of every class so that it doesn't have to be a dump stat. The core of my approach to that is destiny/action points and a reasonably useful combat feat tree that depends on charisma. The secondary approach to that is to make the list of skills that end up as class skills for your character somewhat more flexible, so that it requires relatively little sacrifice to end up with social skills on your class list. It's not necessary, and probably not even desirable, to have a charisma based fighter be as effective as a strength based combat brute, all that is necessary is to provide ways for a fighter to get some advantage in combat out of high charisma to go along with the large out combat advantages he gains.

 

[smetzger]

Quick little way to make charisma a bit more important.
Whenever you would normally roll randomly to attack PCs, don't roll. Just attack the one with the lowest score.

Not a complete fix. But helps a little bit.