Playing it up - bad idea?

[Jhamin]

As for the problems most people have with Cha, I think it has to do with the players and how they live in the real world.

Physical beauty is about as easy to quantify as Str or INT, so people tend to latch onto that.
People don't like the idea that they are influenced daily by the force of other's personalities. People like to think they are above all that, even though it constantly happens to all of us. People therefore often have trouble seeing characters behave in ways they think real people don't.

So CHA always gets equated to physical beauty.

 

[Celtavian]

re

I play a Sorcerer with a 29 Charisma (Magic augmented of course) who is a raving psychotic. When anyone questions the high charisma, I tell them that the force of his personality is such that many people believe his madness. I cannot personally pull off the persuasive manner in which he speaks as I do not have a 29 charisma. Just imagine an extremely persuasive madman with great force of personality.

Having a high charisma doesn't mean you have to be nice. It just means that when you are rude, people really take note (sounds like they have, good job). No listens to a rude person with a low Charisma because they don't have the force of personality to make rudeness noticeable. You are like the jerk at a party or social gathering who really knows how to get under people's skin and has the personality and verbal skills to make others look like fools in public.

I have no idea why people think having a high Charisma requires being polite, nice, or good looking. There are many ways to converse. Being rude, impolite, flippant, or megalomaniacal all require a high charisma as well. D&D may not take it into account, but you should be able to apply your Charisma as a negative social penalty if you wish. It takes just as much Charisma to be rude, impolite, flippant, or megalomaniacal well as it does to be persuasive or diplomatic.

 

[tarchon]

Charisma isn't about being liked; it's about presence and strength of character.
If you're mean and you have a 22 Charisma, your wrath is feared and people bend over backwards in order not to cross you. Some may tend to be perversely drawn to you and they almost seem to enjoy the abuse. You're Darth Vader.
If your character goes up to the barkeep and demands "Give me an ale, and none of your usual watery crap, jerkoff," the color drains form his face and the best ale in the house is rapidly produced with many apologies for any offense he might have caused.

 

[The Grackle]

You totally shouldn't be docked be CHA just b/c your character is a kind of a butch. I mean not all women have to be all femme-y all the time. Look at, say, Annie Lennox, she's kinda' butch but still...

...oh, wait. Lemme read this again...


Okay, disregard that. I agree with the chorus that CHA isn't about being nice or good-looking. I think of it as force of personality. Doctor Doom? Not very nice. Not a good-lookin guy- thus the mask. But he is a dictator beloved by his people, and very, very intimidating man. High Charisma.

I'll bet this is really about the other players being a little too sensitive. Even if it's totally in-character/role-played, it's still hard to take someone putting you down all the time. I don't think you should have to change your character's personality, but maybe try redirecting her venom at NPCs for awhile and have her ease up on the party. I'll bet if she sticks up for the team by shredding the egos of a few infidels with her razor sharp word-play, they won't complain a bit.

...and don't let him dock your CHA. That's dumb. Would you cut a wizards INT b/c the player kept doing stupid stuff?

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

A lot of people get side-tracked by the notion of charisma as sexual attractiveness. That said, they don't get that sexual/physical attractiveness is itself very much a variable thing. Well, I suppose that's easier to see with men than women, but let's run with it:

Hypersmurf's morbidly obese sorceror has to be physically/sexually attractive.

A lot of women seemed to think Bill Clinton was attractive and he was hardly svelte. I get the impression a lot of people think of Reuben Stoddard of American Idol as attractive. And, to put it politely, he's rather heavy. There are a lot of men who are certainly attractive to women but don't have the toned physique and airbrushed tan of your standard action hero movie star.

Men tend to be more visually oriented than women so it's no surprise that there aren't as many obvious examples of women radically outside the prescribed standards of beauty who are attractive. However, it's a well-known fact that cultural standards of beauty have exhibited a good deal of variation. While tanned skin is thought to be sexy at the moment, light skin was considered a sign of beauty in many cultures (including medieval Japan). While modern Americans value a certain topheaviness in women, those of the 20's admired small busts. Etc. Marilyn Monroe doesn't match the modern body type expectations. It's even clearer in the non-airbrushed and surgically altered coridoors of real-life. I'm sure most men have known women who they found extremely attractive despite (or perhaps because) they didn't fit the normal expectations of female beauty.

So, even if charisma is only thought of in terms of phyiscal/sexual attractiveness, there's room for a lot of variation.

Then again, as others have pointed out, that is hardly the only--or even the most important--quality of charisma. Charisma also betokens force of personality, leadership, and communication ability. I would venture a guess that very few posters on this board would have found FDR or Ronald Reagan physically attractive but many of us would have found them to be exceptionally inspiring leaders and communicators. In Star Trek, the Next Generation, I imagine a lot of people would rate Cmdr Ryker as more attractive than Piccard (certainly by generic standards of physical attractiveness apart from other considerations) but I doubt anyone would assign Ryker a higher charisma.

 

[tarchon]

Though, on the practical side, it is hard to play an obnoxious character for long, since players often can't maintain a distinction between the player and the PC all that well. I remember one time when I was DMing, I had an obnoxious NPC unicorn who kept hinting that one PC was a virgin - the player finally freaked out and told me to stop calling him a virgin. Sensitive topic, I guess.

 

[Particle_Man]

Charisma, in the game, (aside from sorceror spells) affects how one influences others. It means that you are better at the "nice" manipulations, (like Diplomacy, Animal Handling, Gather Information, and Perform), at the "lying" manipulations, (like Bluff, Disguise, and Use Magic Device), and the "mean" manipulations, (like Intimidate, and I suppose Turning Undead checks, now that I think about it)). A character with 22 Charisma should be able to use all of those three methods, and be damned good at them.

Now, people who are attractive (by the standards of the society) often have an "aura" effect of being believed more. I think there was a statistical study done once showing juries giving less convictions, and judges lighter sentences, to attactive (according to standards of that society) than unattractive (according to standards of that society) defendants. So if your character is attractive, then that "aura" effect should contibute too all three avenues of influencing people (but here you need the DM to have NPC's play this up, and it would be nice if PC's played this up, but since PC's are player controlled, they are effectively immune to many "social skill checks" and thus don't have to - this is part of what is causing problems in game, I imagine).

So your character can be Nice when she wants to be, a Liar when she wants to be, or Mean when she wants to be. Whatever it takes to manipulate others' reactions to get her way. You would likely instinctively know which to use, and when. Since PC's are not going to play ball on you being Mean, try being Nice or Lying to them. Be Mean to those NPC's that are best affected by you being Mean, Nice to those best affected by you being Nice, and, frankly, Lie to those best affected by Lies. Since Bluff is a class skill for Sorcerors, if you are playing a Sorceror, maybe you should switch from the Mean route to the Lying route, since you can back that up with class skill ranks, as well as natural ability.

Now "being a B*tch" wouldn't quite fit the high chr mold. That particular description is given to beings of low charisma, trying to get their way and failing. One can be Mean without being "B*tchy". Dr. Doom is MEAN (and charismatic, albeit he considers himself so ugly that he covers his face in a metal mask), but few in the Marvel Universe would consider him to be "B*tchy". A drill Sargeant can be MEAN without being B*tchy.

So I think that the other players were wrong to characterize her as this and you should not think of your own character in this way. Don't play the character as B*tchy. Play her as Commanding! (But if you do it right, with inspiring speeches, etc., you can pull this off using Diplomacy or Bluff too).

I think that you are right to talk with the DM about this, but ask him what he thinks a 22 chr character should act like (but point out that the intimidate score is in fact controlled by Chr). Once you have the DM on board, then the two of you can talk to the players and work out new ground rules (how they will react to you, what would be "over the top", etc.).

Another thing you can do with get the Leadership feat and use those followers as groupies to cheer you on, whatever you say.

High Chr. characters are a headache because, frankly, few players have the charisma to pull it off. You need to have the Dm (and ideally the other players) play ball a bit. The most extreme version of this that I heard of was a Gurps supers game where one guy, instead of super powers, just bought tons and tons and tons of charisma and called himself "Mr. Wonderful". The other players played along. Whatever Mr. Wonderful said, the others would chorus "That's SO TRUE!"

Another thing to ask is how you have allocated skill points to the Chr skills, if at all. That can influence how effective you character is along the 3 routes I have outlined. If your character is going the "Mean" route predominantly, you should put ranks in Intimidate. But with that high a chr, you can also lie fairly well and can be nice when you have to. A quick NPC check is to look at what you can do with a "take 10" in those skills, even if you have 0 ranks in them. That gives you a baseline on affecting NPC's and may give some pointers to the other PC's assuming they will play ball.

And of course, this is all IMHO, and YMMV.

Go get em, tiger!

 

[Incenjucar]

Personality cults tend to spring up around obnoxious people more than not, so it's not exactly hard to believe that you can be a pain in the arse and still have great Charisma. Recently met a gal who's downright unusual, wagged a switch blade in front of my face twice in our conversation, called me a pervert (as she sat closer to me, heh), and, as I was walking to her car, suddenly told me "I don't like humans all the sudden, so, bye."

Seriously.

Can't wait to see her again this weekend.

Also, considering people find my occassional threat to bite them endearing... like I said, obnoxious doesn't mean non-Charismatic. I got voted #1 bitch in Furcadia (don't look it up, it's the world's worst graphic chat room) several years ago because, while many people hated my guts, they couldn't help to have heard about me (and I mostly just sat around making idle threats and giving back rubs.. heh).

Heck, Hitler was a twisted, dorky-looking, cranky nit, and his Charisma is legendary, as much as we may despise him and hope that Pineapples are being shoved up his arse while he roasts in a tu-tu.

 

[Torm]

These were the same DMs who said a Paladin/Rogue was an impossible combination, because Rogues are thieves.

I guess they've never heard of ronins, then?

 

[Philip]

I don't know, but the whole issue seems rather stupid.

Does your DM ever dock INT when high Int PCs do stupid things?
Does your DM ever dock WIS when high Wis PCs act without common sense?

or even better:

Does your DM award additional CHA points when low Cha PCs act charismatic?
(same for Int or Wis)

If, as a player, you own mental 'scores' don't match with the mental ability scores written on your PCs sheet, you'd be hard-pressed to simulate them.

If your DM docks only Cha (and not Int and Wis) dependent on RP-ing, and does not award additional points in said scores for same RP-ing, he is clearly using a double standard.