Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="James Gasik" data-source="post: 8929618" data-attributes="member: 6877472">Again though, we can't say that your Strength is because you have upper body strength, but you skipped leg day.&nbsp; Because the ability score doesn't work that way.&nbsp; If you have a 14 Strength, your carry capacity is the same no matter what you say the source of your power is.&nbsp; You jump the same distance no matter how weak you say your legs are.&nbsp; You have the same +2 bonus to attack rolls that you do to climb cliffs.The Hag, by the way, has high Charisma because of how scary it is.&nbsp; This is how they justified things like this in 3e, and it remains true now.&nbsp; You are in awe of it because it is a terrifying creature.&nbsp; An adult red dragon has a 21 Charisma, and it's likely not because you find it physically attractive (no matter what some Bards and Sorcerers might say).&nbsp; Note this is greater than the 19 Charisma of a Nymph, a creature that is often said to be the pinnacle of physical perfection, a triumph of nature!Each ability score has the same functionality in the game.&nbsp; To describe yourself as being deficient in one quality of an ability score and greater in others is not supported by the rules of the game.&nbsp; To do so, you would need to break the ability scores apart into things like &quot;muscle&quot;, &quot;fitness&quot;, &quot;agility&quot;, &quot;precision&quot;, &quot;endurance&quot;, &quot;resilience&quot;, &quot;reasoning&quot;, &quot;memory&quot;, &quot;awareness&quot;, &quot;willpower&quot;, &quot;manipulation&quot;, &quot;appearance&quot;, and the like.Thus, if we add &quot;beauty&quot; to Charisma, then low Charisma characters cannot be good-looking and high Charisma characters must be, because you cannot break one aspect of Charisma away from another by the current rules.&nbsp; And races (species) and monsters will have to have the relation between their appearance and their Charisma scores re-evaluated.&nbsp; So this isn't &quot;one simple change&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="James Gasik, post: 8929618, member: 6877472"] Again though, we can't say that your Strength is because you have upper body strength, but you skipped leg day. Because the ability score doesn't work that way. If you have a 14 Strength, your carry capacity is the same no matter what you say the source of your power is. You jump the same distance no matter how weak you say your legs are. You have the same +2 bonus to attack rolls that you do to climb cliffs. The Hag, by the way, has high Charisma because of how scary it is. This is how they justified things like this in 3e, and it remains true now. You are in awe of it because it is a terrifying creature. An adult red dragon has a 21 Charisma, and it's likely not because you find it physically attractive (no matter what some Bards and Sorcerers might say). Note this is greater than the 19 Charisma of a Nymph, a creature that is often said to be the pinnacle of physical perfection, a triumph of nature! Each ability score has the same functionality in the game. To describe yourself as being deficient in one quality of an ability score and greater in others is not supported by the rules of the game. To do so, you would need to break the ability scores apart into things like "muscle", "fitness", "agility", "precision", "endurance", "resilience", "reasoning", "memory", "awareness", "willpower", "manipulation", "appearance", and the like. Thus, if we add "beauty" to Charisma, then low Charisma characters cannot be good-looking and high Charisma characters must be, because you cannot break one aspect of Charisma away from another by the current rules. And races (species) and monsters will have to have the relation between their appearance and their Charisma scores re-evaluated. So this isn't "one simple change". [/QUOTE]

Verification