Hopefully this gets to the root of the Should a Player with XYZ have an advantage threads.
The concern is, players who are really smart, wise or charismatic may have extra advantage over a player lacking that ability, despite both PCs having the same stats.
Inversely, a high XYZ player may have a PC with a low XYZ stat and may be portraying that PC wrong (being to smart for an INT 6 PC).
If the PC has higher stats than the player really does, the game sort of corrects for that. The GM uses more skill checks, etc to decide what happens, rather than taking what the player said literally. If the player proposes to do really dumb things, the GM might ask "Are you sure?" to act as a safety check.
But the other way around, a PC with average or poor stats where the player excels in these fuzzy areas INT, WIS and CHA is where the debate seems to lie.
Let's assume Wisdom would reflect a character doing or avoiding reckless activities like jumping before looking, or rushing into fights before assessing the threat.
If i'm wiser than my PC, are you going to force me to do unwise things? Make me roll for it?
If I mention that I'm not just going to jump into the pit without learning more, are you going to make me roll for that and make me go in if I fail, because that's what an unwise PC would do?
There have been known cases of players orderiing their PCs to their doom into pits because the players were unwise. So it is not an out of character idea.
But are you going to make my PC have to jump into the pit? Are you expectingg me to make my PC go into the pit, even though I know as a player that it is really stupid to do?
The same goes for Intelligence. Let's assume it covers the ability to solve problems and generate ideas.
If I am a really smart person and my PC has a low INT, are you going to limit what solutions I can make my PC do?
Am I going to have to roll for each solution I propose, to see if my PC can 'think' of it?
Are you going to make me gullibly believe obvious falsehoods?
Are you going to force my PC into bad squares while in combat, because he's dumb and failed an INT check?
Now let's look at Charisma. I know from real life that it is NOT a measure of how well you speak or dress. it is an ineffable quality that attracts people to you and makes them believe you. Generally it works or it doesn't. As such, you may generally like me and thus are more likely to agree with me on multiple proposals I give. Other people may still think I'm an ass. Consider the Steve Jobs example. A total ass as a manager, yet he could sell product. When dealing with prospective customers he was very charismatic. When dealing with his own engineers, he inspired some and turned others off and he was NOT charming while doing so.
Other folks look at Charisma as knowing the right ways of speech (right words, turn of phrase, etc) as well as knowing how to dress and act.
In either case, once again, ponder these questions:
If I am very charismatic and my PC is not, are you going to restrict the words I might say?
Are you going to force mannerisms and ways of speech on my PC?
Are you going to prevent me from saying something because my PC is not charasmatic enough to say it?
One thing I'm not including in this is the Reality Distortion Field. If I am wiser, smarter, more charismatic, you can bet as a player I am altering the GM's relationship with me as compared to other players (maybe on behalf of other players). I don't think you can even stop that, because it's a human interaction thing that may not even be detectable.
What is still on the table though, is how I portray my PC. What actions he takes or is allowed to take.
If I have a 6INT/WIS/CHA are there actions that you would not let me attempt (which might require a skill roll and resolve itself in failure...)
Are there actions you would force me to take (your PC is stupid, so he jumps into the pit...and dies).
Is there dialogue I can't have because you think my PC lacks the vocabulary or persuasiveness to assemble into a sentence?
The concern is, players who are really smart, wise or charismatic may have extra advantage over a player lacking that ability, despite both PCs having the same stats.
Inversely, a high XYZ player may have a PC with a low XYZ stat and may be portraying that PC wrong (being to smart for an INT 6 PC).
If the PC has higher stats than the player really does, the game sort of corrects for that. The GM uses more skill checks, etc to decide what happens, rather than taking what the player said literally. If the player proposes to do really dumb things, the GM might ask "Are you sure?" to act as a safety check.
But the other way around, a PC with average or poor stats where the player excels in these fuzzy areas INT, WIS and CHA is where the debate seems to lie.
Let's assume Wisdom would reflect a character doing or avoiding reckless activities like jumping before looking, or rushing into fights before assessing the threat.
If i'm wiser than my PC, are you going to force me to do unwise things? Make me roll for it?
If I mention that I'm not just going to jump into the pit without learning more, are you going to make me roll for that and make me go in if I fail, because that's what an unwise PC would do?
There have been known cases of players orderiing their PCs to their doom into pits because the players were unwise. So it is not an out of character idea.
But are you going to make my PC have to jump into the pit? Are you expectingg me to make my PC go into the pit, even though I know as a player that it is really stupid to do?
The same goes for Intelligence. Let's assume it covers the ability to solve problems and generate ideas.
If I am a really smart person and my PC has a low INT, are you going to limit what solutions I can make my PC do?
Am I going to have to roll for each solution I propose, to see if my PC can 'think' of it?
Are you going to make me gullibly believe obvious falsehoods?
Are you going to force my PC into bad squares while in combat, because he's dumb and failed an INT check?
Now let's look at Charisma. I know from real life that it is NOT a measure of how well you speak or dress. it is an ineffable quality that attracts people to you and makes them believe you. Generally it works or it doesn't. As such, you may generally like me and thus are more likely to agree with me on multiple proposals I give. Other people may still think I'm an ass. Consider the Steve Jobs example. A total ass as a manager, yet he could sell product. When dealing with prospective customers he was very charismatic. When dealing with his own engineers, he inspired some and turned others off and he was NOT charming while doing so.
Other folks look at Charisma as knowing the right ways of speech (right words, turn of phrase, etc) as well as knowing how to dress and act.
In either case, once again, ponder these questions:
If I am very charismatic and my PC is not, are you going to restrict the words I might say?
Are you going to force mannerisms and ways of speech on my PC?
Are you going to prevent me from saying something because my PC is not charasmatic enough to say it?
One thing I'm not including in this is the Reality Distortion Field. If I am wiser, smarter, more charismatic, you can bet as a player I am altering the GM's relationship with me as compared to other players (maybe on behalf of other players). I don't think you can even stop that, because it's a human interaction thing that may not even be detectable.
What is still on the table though, is how I portray my PC. What actions he takes or is allowed to take.
If I have a 6INT/WIS/CHA are there actions that you would not let me attempt (which might require a skill roll and resolve itself in failure...)
Are there actions you would force me to take (your PC is stupid, so he jumps into the pit...and dies).
Is there dialogue I can't have because you think my PC lacks the vocabulary or persuasiveness to assemble into a sentence?
