CHARISMA: Is it a dud score?

[Psion]

Wait a sec - you mean to say there are gamers that still roll attributes?!?

This exact issue is one of the primary reasons that I feel I could never go with point buy. I know that if your class is not dependant upon the attribute or you are a certain type of player (though curtailed to prevent flame war), charisma WILL be one of your two lowest stats 90% of the time. So at least by point buy, I get a little variety out of you... it might be an 10, 11, or 12 instead of an 8.

I just started using the Advanced GMs Guide which makes your roll your stats but gives you a number of dice according to your class. That one I really like because it really bucks trends (this often has nothing to do with charisma... the last party rogue generated has a higher strength than dexterity...) I like it a lot.

Spycraft 2.0 uses point buy as a default. But you know what -- that doesn't bother me, because the designers of spycraft make Charisma important to you no matter who you are. You see, charisma feeds into your gear and wealth. So it's not the easy decision that it is in D&D.

This gets me thinking about the possibility of a house rule wherein your charisma dictates the power of magic items you use. Hmmm...

 

[Eternalknight]

FWIW, my definition of 'dump stat' is putting yourlowest score (no matter what it is) into a stat. If I roll 18, 17, 16, 15, 14 and 13, and put 13 into Cha, then it's still dumping the lowest score into it.

Nothing in this thread has yet convinced me that most, though not all, people see Charisma as a dump stat. The arguments that certain classes don't necesarrliy need Cha aren't overall true; one of the best characters I have seen was a Fighter with high Cha and the Leadership feat. Even in this thread there has been talk about making Cha more useful, what with action points tied to Cha and Luck rolls based on it. I guess I just don't see the need to implement house rules to make Cha more useful. It may be because of the type of campaign I run or the way I DM, but I just don't see it.

Bare in mind I am not saying anyone else's opinion is wrong.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

That's an incredibly poor choice of dumpstat. Seeing as CHA influences one of the cleric's main powers (turn undead), that player has gimped his/herself, royally. Add to that the fact that they'll never get any followers for their religion, because they're so socially onerous.

No, it's a good one. Turn undead becomes really lame after a few levels. Furthermore, plenty of clerics don't try to convert people. There's little point in a world where everyone knows deities exist already.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

Charisma is the only stat that people cheat with. Hear me out on this one. Players will place a low stat in Charisma annd then not role play it out that way. And then DMs let them get away with this type of cheating. I've seen it plenty of times and games I've played and in conversations on these boards.

But it does depend on the type of game. If I run a heavy role playing game I as DM can make strength a useless stat. Or if I let player play dumb character smart, I can make Intelligence a useless stat.

Charisma is only a dud stat when the players cheat and the DMs allows them to get away with it. Or if the DM is just not a good DM and allows characters with negativbes that don't matter.

This is 100% true. I'm guilty of it myself. I am, however, taking steps to correct this in my newest game. 2 of the character have CHA 8 or below and I am going to make them 'pay' for that. Already the CHA 6 dwarf player is noticing he is being charged more at inns and taverns. Currently he is using big tips to curry favour but that won't last long. The CHA 8 fighter is probably wondering why, after having an excellent tryout for an NPC group as an archer, he wasn't invited to join their expedition. He'll eventually hear some gossip about how weaselly and illmannered they tought he was.

Even if players are't going to roleplay their low CHA stats properly I can, as DM, ensure that the world arounds them takes many of the things they say in the worst possible light.

 

[ARandomGod]

What do you think, generally speaking? Is it crap-tastic? Is it fantastic? My personal opinion is: it depends on the type of game you are playing. A heavily role-played game will probably feature lots of Charisma based skill checks, so it suddenly becomes important.

Your thoughts?

I think it's worthless. In any game where you're going to be making a lot of charisma based skill checks you're much, much better off putting point in intelligence so you'll have the extra skill points to make those checks with.

Unless you do something else with charisma, it's pretty near useless. Now, I've seen a number of house-rules on the subject.

1) Altering saving throws. Charima is now the Will saving throw stat (and reflex is on Wisdom, Dex gets none, it's strong enough already)

2) Buying/selling bonuses based on Charisma. Although this is usually charisma and skills, which makes charisma secondary to intelligence once again.

3) Non-combat NPC interactions. Low charisma people get ignored, or sometimes get more hostile reactions than higher charisma people.

4) Combat NPC interactions - Someone with a high charisma is more likely to be noticed when he wants to, and less likely when he doesn't. So I ask the player, are you trying to be 'noticed' in this combat? A high charisma person is usually picked last as a target unless he's actively trying to be picked first. So when as a GM I semi-randomly pick someone as the target of the X spell, or the Lycanthrope's ire, or whatever, the high Cha person is normally not it.

But, as for pure RAW rules? It's a dump stat for anyone who isn't using it as a casting stat (I include turn attempts and laying on hands as casting for this criteria). Unless... of course ... you're trying the old "I have charimsma higher than GOD, and I can talk anyone into anything at any time" character concept. Which I generally Nix because I like my NPC's to be real. You can't talk them into something against their nature, even if you ARE a God. I don't care what your charisma is.

 

[ARandomGod]

But leaving class out of it is missing the point of why it is a dump stat.

Because it doesn't DO anything, really. If you want charisma based skills, it's still wasteful to put a high score in charimsa, you should be putting that into intelligence. That's where you can make your skills shine through.

Now it's pretty much a certainty that at least one charatcer in the party and maybe half of them will have high charisma, even in the most dungeon crawly of campaigns.

I rarely see anyone with a decent charisma. Generally even clerics don't raise it very much (of course we don't have clerics). Only favored souls and sorcs have it (we have no bards, I've never seen anyone try to play one). Well, my brother does on occasion try to play the charismatic rogue, and style is more important than function. But even he admits that charimsa is really a poor choice in general.

 

[The Shaman]

If you want charisma based skills, it's still wasteful to put a high score in charimsa, you should be putting that into intelligence. That's where you can make your skills shine through.

A character's skill ranks are limited to level + 3, so more skill points don't really make a difference in actual ability - they add diversity to a character's repertoire, but the character with the higher CHA bonus and equal skill ranks in say Diplomacy and Bluff to the higher INT character will still perform better over time.

 

[Henry]

...it's still wasteful to put a high score in charimsa, you should be putting that into intelligence. That's where you can make your skills shine through.

Yeah, but then it's wasteful for a Fighter to have a High STR, when more levels make him hit better and with more damage, too. In the scheme of things, CHA is slightly less useful than the other stats, but only marginally so.

 

[ARandomGod]

no, its my experience. I've never seen anyone play acyively against a low int or wis the way many do cha. Most enjoy roleplain low mental stats aside from cha, ime.

Heh. On occasion I enjoy playing a low charisma. Especially in a campaign I'm currently playing in. I've got a charisma of 8, and a custom feat (we're playing planescape) that has a downside of -2 to all diplomacy.

Playing alongside the Warlock with the highest charisma possible, the best charisma boosting items his money can buy, full skill points in charisma skills... and the invocation that grants him an additional +6 to those rolls.

He's incredibly charming, couth, deceptive, manipulative. And I'm a rude forthright a$$ who just out and out says whatever.

I and the GM enjoy it because it helps "balance" out the interactions. Sure, there's this silver-tounged devil, then there's also this other git in his group who's calling him a silver-tounged devil! Sure, he may be convincing, but with my low charima, I can generally convince people that HE's convincing! (Especially to the detriment of the party). Of course, that character is quite insane to 'normal' society (A Signer, from Planescape, if that means anything to you). Interestingly enough however, he only uses this 'ability' when I deem it useful to him. or to the party. Yes, sometimes I do consider it useful to the party that the charismatic person not always get his way.

A character's skill ranks are limited to level + 3, so more skill points don't really make a difference in actual ability - they add diversity to a character's repertoire, but the character with the higher CHA bonus and equal skill ranks in say Diplomacy and Bluff to the higher INT character will still perform better over time.

Of course, for someone who's nothing BUT charisma based skills, a high charimsa is mandatory. But for a general character, he's going to want to put those skill points in many things. Having more skill points makes it more likely that he'll have the skills to always be at max skill in diplomacy/bluff while still maintaining a healthy balance of other skills.

 

[Henry]

As another suggestion, it would be perfectly within bounds to have damaging spells do extra damage per CHA, in much the same way that STR lets weapons do extra - if CHA is "a character’s force of personality", and "represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting", then it makes sense that you would be able to force yourself on others. Plus, the small amount of damage this adds is not gamebreaking, and peters out compared to all other bonuses as the user's level increases; however, all of a sudden you've got mages and clerics thinking harder about their "dump stat." I've often heard that "WIS is to CHA as CON is to STR" so it makes sense, in a way.