CHA, huh, what is it good for?

[grufflehead]

Apologies to Edwin Starr for the thread title.

So, charisma - is it more trouble than it is worth? Many game systems don't have a CHA stat and handle how the PCs interact socially with the world in other ways, often more abstract. Others have no stat, but still have skills or abilities which handle specific types of interaction e.g. Persuasion, Fast Talking etc.

On one of my periodic forays onto the parts of the Paizo boards which don't involve play by post games, I constantly find myself having to get up, walk around and count to 20 when I see the word 'optimise' (the therapy seems to be paying off as the word 'viable' no longer causes me to twitch uncontrollably...). So I decided to actually read a thread or two instead of reaching for something to gouge my eyeballs out. This one as it happens.

Now the OP (and many of the contributors) make their points intelligently and articulately. They are absolutely correct to state that 'optimised' PCs do not necessarily equal min/maxed PCs, and that optimised PCs can be roleplayed very well. I still take issue at the sentiment that non-optimised PCs are a leech on the others and therefore somehow less worthy of play, but don't let me go off on another tangent.

The OP has gone further by asking people for character concepts which s/he will then stat up using Pathfinder point buy. To save you the trouble of reading the thread, see if you can spot the common thread:

- 'a dashing handsome sort of hero who can woo the fair maiden, talk his way out of trouble, and tell when someone's pulling his leg?' CHA 7

- 'a rather strange lad?' CHA 7

- 'educated in history and archeology, and possibly arcana, but found that he enjoyed exploring musty tombs and using his practical skills over poring over dry books at the university' CHA 7

- 'terrorizes the land to drive people from sarenrae's worship' CHA 7

- 'He's gruff and taciturn for the most part' CHA 7

'But how can this be?' I hear you ask. Surely this campaign world is full of wart-ridden, social lepers who drool constantly and are as likely to punch you as say hello? Apparently not. It appears these people only comprise the ones for whom CHA doesn't give a mechanical benefit in their class. And better still, all they need to do to overcome their deeply, deeply unpleasant traits is... put ranks in Diplomacy, because with enough of them, you're just as good as someone with an 18 CHA!

Now, to try and be fair, you could just as well say that the guy with DEX 7 can put lots of points into Stealth and be ninja-like, or someone with an INT 7 could be the world expert on botany because of all those ranks in Knowledge (Nature). Problem is, none of these optimisation threads would countenance a DEX 7 because it affects your initiative, and Ref save, and AC etc.

So, if it doesn't mechanically affect anything other than CHA based spellcasters ability to cast more complicated spells, unlike all 5 other stats in the game, why is it still there? It's just a dump stat, and so the point buy idea becomes corrupted because it is no longer '15 pts' when anyone but the bard or sorcerer actually gets 19 pts - 15 plus the 4 extra they get for lowering their CHA to 7 - with absolutely no in game consequences.

Is there a workable alternative to handle social interaction that would let us finally wave CHA goodbye?

 

[Chainsaw]

So, charisma - is it more trouble than it is worth?
....

Is there a workable alternative to handle social interaction that would let us finally wave CHA goodbye?

Probably, but the attributes are sacred cows that allow modern editions to ride on the fame of older editions, even though the rules are much, much different - so I don't see it going anywhere.

 

[Diamond Cross]

In early editions of D&D it helped with interactions as well as determining your followers.

In 3e it modified some of the skills.

But like it or not, I still view it as a much needed stat because, like it or not, there are some people out there who don't do a lot of roleplaying because they don't have the capacity for using very prosy speeches and are not very persuasive and just prefer to hack and slash their way out. Sometimes a roll is needed for these kinds of players, and that's what CHA is for.

 

[billd91]

So, if it doesn't mechanically affect anything other than CHA based spellcasters ability to cast more complicated spells, unlike all 5 other stats in the game, why is it still there? It's just a dump stat, and so the point buy idea becomes corrupted because it is no longer '15 pts' when anyone but the bard or sorcerer actually gets 19 pts - 15 plus the 4 extra they get for lowering their CHA to 7 - with absolutely no in game consequences.

Is there a workable alternative to handle social interaction that would let us finally wave CHA goodbye?

No in-game consequences? Of course there are in-game consequences. You have more difficulty with social interaction skills. Does there need to be more in-game consequences? I'd say no.

When it comes to in-game consequences, a lot depends on the DM, players, and style of campaign. If the game's a kick in the door and kill monsters style of campaign, frankly there isn't much of a penalty for a low Intelligence either. Non-physical stats (plus wisdom's defensive bonus on will saves) hardly matter much.

But make that a game with social interaction and include a DM who has the PCs roll for the results of their interactions and, yes, you've got consequences. Just as intended by the rules and they're fine consequences. It doesn't matter that skill ranks can be spent to compensate. That's totally appropriate. It means that the character has to invest harder in an area than they'd otherwise have to for the same results. That's a player learning to deal with the adversity of the stats they have and that's great.

If you're having a hard time dealing with PCs dumping their Charismas, I would suggest rolling your stats. Players may still put their lowest scores there, but at least they're not deliberately dumping specifically to raise their main stats higher.

 

[Crothian]

I think the biggest probelm with Charisma is DM's don't enforce a low charisma and players many times don't role play their charisma properly.

 

[grufflehead]

If you're having a hard time dealing with PCs dumping their Charismas, I would suggest rolling your stats. Players may still put their lowest scores there, but at least they're not deliberately dumping specifically to raise their main stats higher.

Don't follow your inital reply. Yes there should be consequences, then no there shouldn't be consequences?

I'm not having any problems with people doing it in my games. Should I run a game then anybody dumping stats will quickly find out the consequences, trust me. However, judging from the responses to the thread (and when things like this have come up in the PF forum here before) I'd say about 75% of the people apparently think a world of CHA 7 characters is perfectly fine.

More amusingly, when I made a couple of pointed comments about someone who was proudly getting ready to play a fighter with CHA, INT and WIS of 7, I got jumped all over for lecturing. Even got one of those smug wink smileys from someone which is the forum equivalent of the pat on the head and told to run along now.

 

[grufflehead]

I think the biggest probelm with Charisma is DM's don't enforce a low charisma and players many times don't role play their charisma properly.

This is what I'm saying - the gist of the optimising argument is you can have a low CHA, but add enough ranks in Diplomacy and you're on the after dinner speaking circuit.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

This is what I'm saying - the gist of the optimising argument is you can have a low CHA, but add enough ranks in Diplomacy and you're on the after dinner speaking circuit.

I've been playing in a game where the number of skill ranks you can gain in a given skill is limited by the ability score to which it is keyed: 7 Dex means you cap at 7 ranks in Tumble; 7 Cha means that you cap at 7 ranks in Diplomacy. Works well.

 

[redboxrazor]

Well, one way to deal with CHA is to look at how other systems handle social interaction. In GURPS, for instance, Charisma is an Advantage that has to be purchased (and can be purchased multiple times, stacking in each instance).

I suppose the closest equivalent to an Advantage in D&D/PF would be a feat. There's a decent starting point.

 

[howandwhy99]

Charisma doesn't affect character portrayal. It can be taken as a reference for PC personality. But the charisma stat defines how capable the character, not the player, is of communicating effectively in the game world. The higher the stat, the better the ability. Quality play by the player is not limited and he or she can engage with others to the best of their ability, but results for the PC's attempts are limited by stat.

In a similar vein, having a wisdom of 3 doesn't mean you should look for the first chance to headbutt a sword point to play well. Good play is measured in points and resources. Having good relations with NPCs are included in that.

So, if it doesn't mechanically affect anything other than CHA based spellcasters ability to cast more complicated spells, unlike all 5 other stats in the game, why is it still there? It's just a dump stat, and so the point buy idea becomes corrupted because it is no longer '15 pts' when anyone but the bard or sorcerer actually gets 19 pts - 15 plus the 4 extra they get for lowering their CHA to 7 - with absolutely no in game consequences.

Is there a workable alternative to handle social interaction that would let us finally wave CHA goodbye?

As mentioned in a previous post Charisma affects a number of things in previous editions. Not the least of which is empowering PCs to navigate the social maps of the world. These aren't included in the last 20 years of game design, so it has become a dump stat.

You could drop the stat, reinstate the older system, or create a new system of your own for testing player social ability. It's only worthless if the DM lets it be.