D&D 5E How does that Fighter, Barbarian or Rogue become king? Bring on the Feat

[ECMO3]

Is there something like a Charismatic warlord in 5e?

It is any normal, regular fighter who has a 16 charisma, Commanding Presence and the Skill Expert feat instead of a 16 Constitution, Great Weapon Fighting and Great Weapon master.

 

[FrogReaver]

Fortunately, only when the DM calls for checks might low scores become an issue. If you role-play your PC as smart, wise, and a strong ruler, you might never be asked to roll for a check.

Why would someone roleplay and 8 int, 8 cha, 8 wis Fighter as a smart, wise and strong ruler?

 

[DND_Reborn]

Why would someone roleplay and 8 int, 8 cha, 8 wis Fighter as a smart, wise and strong ruler?

Because some DMs don't bother enforcing limits on PCs when their scores would otherwise justify it.

Not saying I agree with it, but it happens.

 

[Stalker0]

This is where media narratives clash with mechanics. When you think of Conan, he is the true exception. He's super strength, and pretty darn tough, AND not too dumb, AND super charismatic. He's the protagonist after all.

The issue is that dnd has a charisma stat, and as long as people do point buy, your going to have to trade off combat power for social power. Only way to truly play the Conan type is to roll stats, get super lucky, and then make your highly competent fighter that also has amazing charisma.

 

[FrogReaver]

Because some DMs don't bother enforcing limits on PCs when their scores would otherwise justify it.

Not saying I agree with it, but it happens.

Is the reason most people don't play smart, charming, wise fighters with 8 int, 8 cha, 8 wis because the DM enforces limits? Or is it because they don't want to do that and so they choose not to?

 

[lingual]

I base some of my medieval "generals" on Romance of the Three Kingdoms, based on China c. 180 AD to around 200 AD. There were many generals during this civil war, but I think you could break them into three groups:

1) The scholars. Ur-Example Zhuge Liang. He probably wasn't even proficient with any weapons or armor. Other people in this category included Liu Bei (scholar/manipulator, clearly prioritized Int/Cha but could do some fighting) and Cao Cao (ditto, but probably higher level). Two of the three kingdom leaders (Cao Cao and Liu Bei) definitely fell into this category.

2) The brutes. Examples included Lu Bu (you've probably heard of him), Dian Wei and Xu Chu. The first and last were dumb (Xu Chu was nicknamed Tiger Fool for a reason). The latter two were bodyguards who were occasionally used as battlefield assassins. Not that "sneak up and kill someone" variety but "walk toward their champion and take their head" variety. Dian Wei did have a lot of brains, and even Xu Chu supposedly had Wisdom.

3) The Tiger Generals. These people were good at combat, most were reasonable generals (eg Guan Yu) and they had to be charismatic enough to lead people into life-risking combat. None of the kingdoms had more than four or five such generals. Doing a Tiger General is hard in the rules. Not even 4e could handle it.

Sounds like Zhuge Liang didn't dump his brain stats. It is very possible to have a wise, charismatic fighter. Maybe Zhuge Liang raised his mental stats and took skill prodigy instead of just taking Sentinel, GWF, and maxing Strength/Con. Could plain martials use some mechanics to boost their Charisma/fame? Sure, I can buy that. It'll help the tables that call for Insight and Persuasion checks at every chance. But I always thought that's the extra feats were for. So they can become more well-rounded as they level up.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Is the reason people don't play smart, charming, wise fighters with 8 int, 8 cha, 8 wis because the DM enforces limits? Or is it because they don't want to do that and so they choose not to?

Honestly, I've encountered all three:

DM doesn't enforce/ player doesn't enforce - the scores don't really matter.
DM does enforce - player can't do things, but get upset about it, instead of owning their choices.
Player choose to enforce - scores are honestly represented and DM doesn't need to intervene.

 

[FrogReaver]

Honestly, I've encountered all three:

DM doesn't enforce/ player doesn't enforce - the scores don't really matter.

I think usually this happens when players have a certain idea about what a stat means and the other player/DM have different ideas.

DM does enforce - player can't do things, but get upset about it, instead of owning their choices.

I think this usually happens when the player in question and the DM have different ideas about what an 8 int or whatever score means and how it 'should' be roleplayed.

Player choose to enforce - scores are honestly represented and DM doesn't need to intervene.

This is what I see most often.

I won't say it doesn't happen but most players really just want to roleplay their PC and so they self police. IMO, if it looks like they are not it's almost always just a difference of opinion about what stats mean and how they should be roleplayed. There's 1,000,000+ ways to play an idiot afterall

 

[steeldragons]

You need to say the right thing at the right time. You need to make the right decisions.

Sooooo, not really familiar with real life kings/rulers, then? Pick a point in history...ANY age or culture's history.

You take over the neighboring territory. You call yourself king. Some magical/religious person says, "Ya, sure [don't kill me], you're king." And now if someone wants to say you're NOT king, they had better be able to kill you before you kill them...and then you're king of THEIR land, too!

 

[overgeeked]

And it happened in real life too.

That’s how all lords and kings and emperors gained power. They murdered everyone who stood in their way. Leaders worrying about being charismatic is a relatively new thing, historically speaking. Being the biggest and the toughest (and/or having the most money) was all that mattered. If you managed to kill the ruler, you’re now in charge. In older editions you simply started attracting followers at certain levels. It needn’t be more complicated than that.