Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BookTenTiger" data-source="post: 8900151" data-attributes="member: 6685541">I can't say I find your arguments persuasive...You chose mostly performers as examples, who are part of a modern advertising system that relies on physical beauty. However, a good performer can be a good actor without fitting to those standards (Danny Devito, say), and a poor performer can be poor actor while also meeting those standards.Historically, Winston Churchill and Abraham Lincoln were two politicians who were famously persuasive, and yet did not meet &quot;high beauty standards.&quot; Would you give them low Charisma?There is a whole area on the sheet for physical descriptions. You could write &quot;beautiful&quot; on there if you want.I think this actually weakens your argument. Since there are so many different kinds of people, no one beauty standards could actually fit... Whereas Strength and Constitution, etc, are more or less able to be universally measured. So Charisma, as a universal ability, has to be able to match all these different looking people. It makes more sense for Charisma to be an ability that measures your effectiveness in influencing others, rather than a physical characteristic.I cannot say that your own Charisma check to convince me worked! Famously, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I believe it should stay there. Allow each player to decide on the physical characteristics of their character. Just as how a Halfling can have high strength, allow an ugly character to have high charisma or a beautiful character to have low Charisma.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BookTenTiger, post: 8900151, member: 6685541"] I can't say I find your arguments persuasive... You chose mostly performers as examples, who are part of a modern advertising system that relies on physical beauty. However, a good performer can be a good actor without fitting to those standards (Danny Devito, say), and a poor performer can be poor actor while also meeting those standards. Historically, Winston Churchill and Abraham Lincoln were two politicians who were famously persuasive, and yet did not meet "high beauty standards." Would you give them low Charisma? There is a whole area on the sheet for physical descriptions. You could write "beautiful" on there if you want. I think this actually weakens your argument. Since there are so many different kinds of people, no one beauty standards could actually fit... Whereas Strength and Constitution, etc, are more or less able to be universally measured. So Charisma, as a universal ability, has to be able to match all these different looking people. It makes more sense for Charisma to be an ability that measures your effectiveness in influencing others, rather than a physical characteristic. I cannot say that your own Charisma check to convince me worked! Famously, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and I believe it should stay there. Allow each player to decide on the physical characteristics of their character. Just as how a Halfling can have high strength, allow an ugly character to have high charisma or a beautiful character to have low Charisma. [/QUOTE]

Verification