Should charismatic players have an advantage?

[Elf Witch]

I have a question on this, for Mort and other GMs. Say I want to play a charismatic barbarian Fighter, an REH-Conan type, in a game like 4e which strongly penalises investing resources away from core competency, which for Fighter is STR-based fighting ability. I'm prepared to roleplay the PC as fairly charismatic - eg I'll put effort into coming up with good one-liners.
How much resources should I have to invest in interpersonal skills before you'll let my words stand?

Is CHA 12 enough? Anything more than that will really start to hurt my combat effectiveness.
Intimidate training is not a problem - can I apply that skill to a wide range of situations? Do I need to invest in getting Diplomacy before I can talk suavely? What if I have Diplomacy training + CHA 10?

I don't play 4E so I can't answer that for that edition but for 3E which I play I say the minimum for delivering really charismatic speeches is a 12. Once in a while is okay even a low chr character can get a speech right that strikes a chord now and then. Anyone can roll a natural 20 on a diplomacy check which in my games makes it a 30 so even if a person has a chr in the minuses they are still giving an excellent speech.

I don't understand this being so hard to understand if a player wants to be a good fighter for example he needs to allocate resources to make it so. Just because he gives a great description of what he does in battle does not negate the fact that he has to roll a dice to hit.

I have the same issue with players who are really good at tactics and strategy playing a very low intelligent and wisdom character yet at the same time having brilliant tactical ideas all the time.

 

[Elf Witch]

Did his play of the Bard give pleasure to the rest of you? From your description it sounds like the stuttering player might not actually be low-CHA, despite his difficulty with expressing himself. I suspect he's actually a likeable fellow, and seeing him engage with the world successfully brought you some joy?

Edit: I guess I think of very low CHA in 1e terms, as being actually repulsive ('cat piss man'), whereas 3e describes it as force of personality, and gives high CHA to ghouls! So in 3e terms a person who is likeable but very shy might have low CHA.

Yes he did give us pleasure. I guess I don't get the highly charismatic player VS the low charismatic player who sounds like a basic jerk The first I would welcome to my game the second I would not play with.

Naturally charismatic people do have advantages as I said before they can convince the other players to follow their lead. They are more likely to get what they want from the DM who will be more willing to listen to them.

In social situations charismatic people stand ahead of people who are shy or surly.

But as I said I don't think they should get mechanical advantages that their build does not support just because of it.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I have a question on this, for Mort and other GMs. Say I want to play a charismatic barbarian Fighter, an REH-Conan type, in a game like 4e which strongly penalises investing resources away from core competency, which for Fighter is STR-based fighting ability. I'm prepared to roleplay the PC as fairly charismatic - eg I'll put effort into coming up with good one-liners.
How much resources should I have to invest in interpersonal skills before you'll let my words stand?

Is CHA 12 enough? Anything more than that will really start to hurt my combat effectiveness.
Intimidate training is not a problem - can I apply that skill to a wide range of situations? Do I need to invest in getting Diplomacy before I can talk suavely? What if I have Diplomacy training + CHA 10?

This mindset might apply to me, too. Let me ask you a question, first, though: does your objection lessen if stats are rolled? I don't use point-buy for stats, and never plan on it for my fantasy RPG. If you get lucky and roll well, feel free to RP that. If you roll low, you'll be expected to RP that. If you can't RP high stats, I'll make up for it by aiding you. If you can't RP low stats, I'll stop you from doing things, or make you roll to see if you're able to do it.

Side note: I wouldn't consider putting effort into coming up with good one-liners as RPing someone that's fairly charismatic, but that's just a play style preference. As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

So only the character sheet matters?

People will tend to put the most effort into things that are the most rewarding to do. Why should a highly intelligent, charismatic player share these traits with the group if they have no impact on play. Just kick back and phone in the roleplaying because it does not ultimately matter.

I like to reward players for giving it all they got, however much that happens to be.

Or, conversely, you actually have to *play* the character in front of you. *Shock and horror*

How is ignoring my character even remotely good roleplaying? It's like an actor, completely ignoring the personality of the character in the movie and inserting whatever the heck he feels like and then expecting to be rewarded for it.

Sorry, when Han Solo launches into Shakespeare because the actor happens to be an amateur Thespian, I'm calling shenanigans. Play the character in front of you. THAT'S good roleplay.

 

[Hussar]

I have a question on this, for Mort and other GMs. Say I want to play a charismatic barbarian Fighter, an REH-Conan type, in a game like 4e which strongly penalises investing resources away from core competency, which for Fighter is STR-based fighting ability. I'm prepared to roleplay the PC as fairly charismatic - eg I'll put effort into coming up with good one-liners.
How much resources should I have to invest in interpersonal skills before you'll let my words stand?

Is CHA 12 enough? Anything more than that will really start to hurt my combat effectiveness.
Intimidate training is not a problem - can I apply that skill to a wide range of situations? Do I need to invest in getting Diplomacy before I can talk suavely? What if I have Diplomacy training + CHA 10?

Umm, how hard is it to get Skill Training - Diplomacy. Right there that will allow you to be pretty decent at talking to anyone you like, even without the ability bonus.

Heck, in 4e, considering how difficult it is to get any sort of ability bonus of any real significance, Skill Training (and possibly Skill Focus) pretty much lets you be as urbane as you like. It's not like 3e where you're walking around with 24 Cha characters. It's bloody HARD to get a Cha that high. The difference between 10 and 18 is a lot less than the effect of Skill training and Skill focus.

So, to answer your question directly, I'd expect the urbane character to take Skill Training in Diplomacy in order to be fairly erudite and capable of convincing people of his point of view.

Without that, I'd say that natural talent doesn't actually get you very far, even with a very high Cha. Even an 18 Cha is still less than Skill Training.

 

[Barastrondo]

You clearly are challenging the players. You are setting a higher bar for better players, a lower bar for weaker players, so they are all challenged the same. Like I said, it's reminiscent of Harrison Bergeron.

Giving less talented people mechanical boosts to raise their overall effectiveness (especially in a game where the group as a whole benefits from every player being able to contribute) is not reminiscent of Harrison Bergeron. Harrison Bergeron is about handicapping every natural talent so it all falls down to the lowest common denominator. Allowing a less-than-charismatic player the ability to be just as effective in character via mechanics is not handicapping the more charismatic player -- unless the more charismatic player is such a sensitive soul that he feels oppressed by this concept of "fairness", in which case the handicap is entirely in his mind.

I voted that charismatic players should have an advantage in that they get invited to the game more often, because a table full of people who don't suck joy and energy out of the room is better gaming. But I'm not extending my vote to support the "it's Harrison Bergeron" "if everyone is special no one is" mentality. Players who can only feel special by comparing themselves favorably to other players are, in my experience, joy vacuums just as much as uncharismatic players are. I prefer not to encourage them.

 

[S'mon]

This mindset might apply to me, too. Let me ask you a question, first, though: does your objection lessen if stats are rolled?

It's definitely much less of an issue if stats are rolled in order, in that case having high CHA has no relation to whether or not I have high STR. It's still an issue if stats are rolled then assigned, so that putting a 16 into CHA negatively affects my chances to hit enemies with my sword.

I suspect Elf Witch's 3e game might resemble many non-D&D RPGs where interpersonal skills are valued equally to combat skills. And in 3e the higher-CHA classes are mostly weaker combatants. But in 4e D&D every PC gets equivalent combat skills. Then certain classes get high CHA & good interpersonal skills on top. Preventing the Fighter player from talking, while letting the Bard contribute equally in combat, seems unfair to me. It also prevents the 'charismatic warrior' concept from being an effective PC, despite this being a common fictional archetype.

 

[Mort]

I have a question on this, for Mort and other GMs. Say I want to play a charismatic barbarian Fighter, an REH-Conan type, in a game like 4e which strongly penalises investing resources away from core competency, which for Fighter is STR-based fighting ability. I'm prepared to roleplay the PC as fairly charismatic - eg I'll put effort into coming up with good one-liners.
How much resources should I have to invest in interpersonal skills before you'll let my words stand?

Is CHA 12 enough? Anything more than that will really start to hurt my combat effectiveness.
Intimidate training is not a problem - can I apply that skill to a wide range of situations? Do I need to invest in getting Diplomacy before I can talk suavely? What if I have Diplomacy training + CHA 10?

Conan is not a great example as he is charismatic AND strong AND dexterous AND has the best costitution ever etc. - maybe as a solo character - but wow would he be irritating in a party.

But as to your point:

For me - as long as the player expresses the concept he wants I'll bend pretty far to let him do what he needs. In my current campaign (4e) I gave everyone 36 point buy 1 free extra trained skill to ensure their concept gets done properly and a few other extra things. So for your concept 36 point buy and training in 1 extra skill should ensure a decent charisma and training in Diplomacy and/or bluff to allow the concept to go through.

As for training + CHA 10 - well it means you know how to talk but are naturaly talented - the bonuses reflect that.

At the end of the day - I just don't want an end run (no investment but still expect to be an expert etc.) and what your describing seems like one.

 

[S'mon]

Or, conversely, you actually have to *play* the character in front of you.

Thinking about it, as DM I increasingly don't give a damn about what the character's mechanical stats are. RPG mechanics suck as character-defining. To me the 'character' is the character the player plays, what comes out of their mouth and to a lesser extent what is written on their rules-free 'background' sheet. Not the numbers.

This is a character:

Character Name: Bulwark Graven
Rank/Position/Concept: Sees himself as a protector of his race.
Sex: NA
Race: Altani Warforged
Homeland: Altanis
Age: Unknown (many thousands)
Height: 6'6"
Weight: 288lb
Colour of - Hair: - Eyes: - Skin: Rune-inscribed on top of his head; Eyes are blue and have a faint glow when in combat; The skin is a bronzed colouration, with a silver coating around the head, hands and feet. Appearance: Imposing, you might say statuesque.
Clothing: If not wearing armour, Bulwark does not wear clothing as he rejects the imposition of standard human social norms.
Demeanour: Driven

Motivations:
Bulwark constantly searches for any items or knowledge relating to the construction of warforged. I seek information about the nature of my construction, it is clear to me that warforged are superior to mortal races, perhaps the mortal races are much less than they once were?

Twenty years ago, while investigating the 'ruins of Narorich', Bulwark became separated from its other warforged companions. After searching the ruins for two weeks, I found all 5 friends, chopped into pieces and inscribed with
strange looking runes. Taking all the pieces of friends to the surface, Bulwark found an arcanist capable of viewing the moments of their death, from this discovering the name of the Orichalan-Warforged responsible for their death. Azm Zealot. Bulwark hopes to find the means to restore his companions, and to punish this crazed warforge.

This is just stats:

Bulwark Graven, level 5 - Steve
Warforged, Warlord
Build: Bravura Warlord
Warlord: Battlefront Leader
Commanding Presence: Bravura Presence
Background: Defender of the Oppressed (Streetwise class skill)

FINAL ABILITY SCORES
Str 20, Con 12, Dex 10, Int 14, Wis 10, Cha 14.

STARTING ABILITY SCORES
Str 17, Con 10, Dex 10, Int 13, Wis 10, Cha 14.


AC: 22 Fort: 19 Reflex: 17 Will: 17
HP: 44 Surges: 9 Surge Value: 11

TRAINED SKILLS
Athletics +10, Streetwise +9, Intimidate +11, History +9

UNTRAINED SKILLS
Acrobatics, Arcana +4, Bluff +4, Diplomacy +4, Dungeoneering +2, Endurance +3, Heal +2, Insight +2, Nature +2, Perception +2, Religion +4, Stealth, Thievery

FEATS
Level 1: Armored Warlord
Level 2: Axe Expertise
Level 4: Lend Strength

POWERS
Warlord at-will 1: Wolf Pack Tactics
Warlord at-will 1: Commander's Strike
Warlord encounter 1: Vengeance is Mine
Warlord daily 1: Bastion of Defense
Warlord utility 2: Shake It Off
Warlord encounter 3: No Gambit Is Wasted
Warlord daily 5: Stand the Fallen

ITEMS
Amulet of Protection +1, Magic Scale Armor +1, Magic Battleaxe +1, Heavy Shield, Distance Handaxe +1, Magic Greataxe +1, Climber's Kit, Sunrod (10), Thieves' Tools, Oil (1 pint) (5), Silk Rope (50 ft.) (2), Crowbar, Backpack (empty), Flint and Steel, Belt Pouch (empty), Potion of Healing (heroic tier) (2)

 

[S'mon]

Umm, how hard is it to get Skill Training - Diplomacy. Right there that will allow you to be pretty decent at talking to anyone you like, even without the ability bonus.

I'm a first level 4e non-human Fighter PC. I can take skill training - Diplomacy, or I can take Master of Arms and be +1 to hit with all weapons. I'm giving up combat effectiveness to be able to talk, in a game where various other classes get to talk for free.