Characters made only for combat

[bwgwl]

an 8 Charisma really is only "slightly below average." notwithstanding all of the formulas and percentages others have already used on this thread, think of it this way:

an 8 gives a -1 penalty. a 10 is a +0. there's no way to be more charismatic than this guy and still be below average. there's no penalty in the game between a -1 and a +0. therefore, his charisma is only slightly below average -- and it's the slightest it can be and still be negative.

as to Doc M's original point, i don't think he's being all that unfair to the character. (and i am, according to Robin Laws' book, a Buttkicker player. i don't mind accepting the social penalties when i make a combat character.) he's only apply this for major, unique purchases, and the guy does have some other circumstance penalties (being an outlander, refusing to abide by local customs in removing armor and weapons, and such). just remember that most bookish, solitary wizards are also going to have low Charismas and no social skills!

 

[Illuminae]

Re: Re: Characters made only for combat

And it is a punishment- a low charisma does not mean you are an unlikable jerk that people are going to hold instant disdain for- and will go out of their way to screw in business deals.



Let him make the skill checks and succede or fail as per the rules.

I second, third and even dare to fourth this.



8 is not so low. Let the mighty "-1" decide the results.

The dice don´t cheat (usually).

 

[Black Omega]

Or a high level type might just kill the town guard. After all according to the DMG something like 80% of the people in a city are 1st level

Of course, in a city of 20,000 that means there are 4,000 above 1st level. If only 10 are above 15th level, that's no easy task for most groups.

I am pretty sure a 28 point buy fighter and his buddies can take out a small town or at least take out the towns merchants. I have had many groups that consider this appropriate behavior

Very likely. The group I GM for averages 10th level and they could wipe out about 90% of the villages in the Empire. They simply could not do so without reprecussions. No place exists in a vacuum.

Player "You worthless trash I saved your village insult me will you"

20 rounds later "So what did we get?"

DM "Sigh"

I'm lucky, I've never had to deal with this. But I've not run a world where this would be considered appropriate behavior, either.

Seriously though being a DM means keeping the game fun for everyone and if your actions make the game less fun for one or more players (in a significant way) than either you need to get rid of the players or change your actions

Ideally the game should be fun for everyone, agree totally. Communication helps in this area. I'm running a Rokugan game at the moment. My players know it's a very lawful empire, with a certain amount of paperwork and structure. They've done a good job behaving as they should. I seemed to enjoy the adventures I threw in where they could cut loose more.

I don't punish players (even for bad choices) instead I let them know what a better choice would be in advance and hold them to the consequences

I don't punish players at all, but characters I can be hell on. If someone makes a critical mistake based on some misunderstanding they might have, I try to clarify and make sure they understand what they are doing. But if my group decides then to massacre a village of Unicorn clan peasants, they won't be too surprised when they find they have a new group hunting them.

If you don't want players (and the chaos they cause) go write a book

Heh. I know that feeling. I've had to do some fancy footwork many times because my annoying players surprised me. Again. It's half the fun of GMing. I provide the framework of the game, but it's really fun sometimes to see how they mess up my carefully crafted storylines.

Lastly-- Please don't feel like I am snarling at anyone in particular, this advice is just general and anyway I could be wrong

No worries. GMing is not an exact science. I know I make mistakes at times. But trying to be fair and consistent helps.

 

[zyzzyr]

Hi Doc,

I would agree with the sentiment that this sort of stuff should be settled by skill checks, not GM decision.

I used to GM by the theory that the GM makes the decisions of the NPCs, and to tell the truth, it wasn't very popular. Not because they felt ripped off necessarily, but because it seemed like a guy with Cha 8 could apparently *never* get the good-looking girl, to quote a sentiment. And I think everyone knows a couple that evokes the response "What does *she* see in *him*?" or vice-versa.

It took me a while to get used to using skill checks, but it has proven extremely successful. Players don't get frustrated when you tell them to roll a Diplomacy check when they are inquiring about rooms, or negotiating prices. When you tell them that their arguments fail to convince the shopkeeper (be sure to give out circumstance bonuses if necessary!)

It really does make a difference, and the player that did this now accepts the fact that he's not the best person to be negotiating.

I'd also agree with the idea that Cha 8 is only slightly below average. The modifier is only 1 less than Cha 11. He's not a "lummox", he just says the wrong thing slightly more often than the average joe.

 

[Endur]

Everything is relative

I think it all depends.

For instance, Doc said that the combat character has an 8 chr and the wizard npcs will charge the combat character an extra 20%.

Well, what are the other characters like?

If most of the characters in the party have a 16+ chr and lots of diplomacy ranks, it would make sense that they are treated differently from a character with an 8 chr.

If most of the characters have a 10 chr and aren't paying a 20% penalty, well, the might still be reasonable if a character with a 12 chr gets a 20% discount.

Just remember that the min-maxed Barbarian with the low charisma is not always the only min-maxed character in the party. Your party might also have min-maxed Bards, Paladins, and Sorcerors, all of whom have high charismas for a reason.

 

[LostSoul]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad character, or bad role playing, or bad DM?

Trust the dice...

The best advice on the boards. Trust the dice. Dice let Players use their abilities.

edit: Something I posted about Star Wars years ago:

Cool Rules - A Philosophy.

Dice are Cool.

It's Cool to use dice in the game. That's the philosophy behind
all of the Cool Rules. Rolling dice means you've always got a chance, a shot at the impossible. It means you're never beyond getting taken down. It means Force and Character Points can be spent on anything. It means David CAN wallop Goliath.

It also means the player gets involved. If YOU are rolling to see your ship's speed, how much money you've got in your pocket, how much fuel is in your tank, how far away the nearest Rebel safeworld is, YOU are doing something. YOU are having an effect on the game world.

In this way, I think it makes for a better game - more drama, more
player participation, and more FUN.

 

[Ace]

quote: Ace
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am pretty sure a 28 point buy fighter and his buddies can take out a small town or at least take out the towns merchants. I have had many groups that consider this appropriate behavior
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Black Omega

Very likely. The group I GM for averages 10th level and they could wipe out about 90% of the villages in the Empire. They simply could not do so without reprecussions. No place exists in a vacuum.

True. The problem really only arises when the players don't value the characters they are playing anyway

Black Omega

I'm lucky, I've never had to deal with this. But I've not run a world where this would be considered appropriate behavior, either.

This is a very slight thread deviation but ....

For some reason my group (who is great in my Buffy game) was infurated by a Vision of Escaflowne/Pokethulu/Steampunk GURPS game I ran

The end result is after they captured the Kid Cultists (Azg, Misker and Brok) they commenced with the torturing

They don't usually do that sort of thing.

I got the impression it was retailion for bad puns, cuthuliod horrors (with a 3/4 phasing thingy) and a general game disatisfaction

Happy players don't screw around with game world most of time.

Still if I did what DocMoriartty was planning (make a minor hit on some prices) it wouldn't cause me problems.

My only complaint with the good Doctors post was his seeming resentment with the players choice of character. I look at it this way

Tell them what to expect up front

Set the up front limits

let them play what they like.

Keep the party harmonious

As GM I could care less what people play within those limits. In fact I relish the variety

 

[S'mon]

So why should the combat focused character be able to fudge social situations?

Here's a suggestion: let him put some skill points into Intimidate when he levels - then he can make Intimidate rolls to get better service. As he's a combat monster the DCs should be plausibly low.

 

[S'mon]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad character, or bad role playing, or bad DM?

When he goes to a wizard though to have a magic item created he is going to get hit with market value from the DMG plus 20% to offset the XP the wizard will spend. The fighter though seems to think he should get market value for items he sells and items he buys automatically.

You're a lot more generous than me - the PCs in my game typically sell magic items for around half of market value, more if they can find a good buyer, up to market value, typically. Buying stuff, they pay market value only if eg a cleric is buying potions or scrolls from his own temple, or a wizard from his own mage order. Otherwise twice MV is typical, up to x4 in some cases (dubious-looking Rogue type PCs buying spell from LG war-god's temple).

 

[Bagpuss]

The other thing that bothers me about this thread is the Fighter had a 8 to put somewhere, where else should he have put it?

Sticking in Charisma strikes me as reasonable choice.

Hmm stick in INT and get 1 skill point a level that would be fun.

Stick it in Wisdom and have an even weaker Will save, worse chance to spot and listen, useful skills for an adventurer.

Stick it in Dex and be useless at range and get hit more often, stick it in Con and have low hit points, just what you want as a front line fighter.

Perhaps DocM would have been happy if he put it in Strength?