Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 8904894" data-attributes="member: 29398">Which is fine provided those players are willing to play the character as a boor, or anti-social, or offensive, or in some other manner that balances out those good looks and make the poor-overall Cha score make sense.&nbsp; I've seen this done, and done very well.But when your character's Cha score is 8 and you're playing it as if it's got James Bond-like levels of suave-ity and hotness (and expecting the same results) there's a major disconnect if not outright bad-faith play going on.Yes, and IMO this is also a problem.Indeed.&nbsp; It's nice, however, if the DM has backup from the rules-guidelines when saying that.&nbsp; That backup does not here exist, and a player who wants to root this argument in the reality we live in where good-looking people very often do get more advantages is (unfortunately) on to something.Which, given how 5e backgrounds work, is also a gray-ish area.&nbsp; Fortunately, starting-wealth rules/guidelines serve to nip this specific idea in the bud, but the nobility or family-wealth/influence angle can be played for advantage in many other ways.&nbsp; This is why I have it that one's past profession (which can include nobility) is either something chosen from a very basic (and boring) list or randomly rolled from a more extensive one.&nbsp; Family background is also subject to randomization if one is looking to gain advantage from it - you're free to choose that your family are peasant farmers but not free to choose they're wealthy merchants with contacts in every town up and down the coast; if that's what you want then we'll roll for it, and if the roll comes up as peasant farmers then that what you get.All this is somewhat intended to reflect the luck of the draw in what sort of lifestyle or social strata one is born into.I agree with this.&nbsp; Thing is, in some cases there's rules or guidelines in place to enforce this and in other places the DM is kinda left hanging.Agreed.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 8904894, member: 29398"] Which is fine provided those players are willing to play the character as a boor, or anti-social, or offensive, or in some other manner that balances out those good looks and make the poor-overall Cha score make sense. I've seen this done, and done very well. But when your character's Cha score is 8 and you're playing it as if it's got James Bond-like levels of suave-ity and hotness (and expecting the same results) there's a major disconnect if not outright bad-faith play going on. Yes, and IMO this is also a problem. Indeed. It's nice, however, if the DM has backup from the rules-guidelines when saying that. That backup does not here exist, and a player who wants to root this argument in the reality we live in where good-looking people very often do get more advantages is (unfortunately) on to something. Which, given how 5e backgrounds work, is also a gray-ish area. Fortunately, starting-wealth rules/guidelines serve to nip this specific idea in the bud, but the nobility or family-wealth/influence angle can be played for advantage in many other ways. This is why I have it that one's past profession (which can include nobility) is either something chosen from a very basic (and boring) list or randomly rolled from a more extensive one. Family background is also subject to randomization if one is looking to gain advantage from it - you're free to choose that your family are peasant farmers but not free to choose they're wealthy merchants with contacts in every town up and down the coast; if that's what you want then we'll roll for it, and if the roll comes up as peasant farmers then that what you get. All this is somewhat intended to reflect the luck of the draw in what sort of lifestyle or social strata one is born into. I agree with this. Thing is, in some cases there's rules or guidelines in place to enforce this and in other places the DM is kinda left hanging. Agreed. [/QUOTE]

Verification