Something I'm not quite understanding about the will save...
- Thread starter Tsyr
- Start date
Kae'Yoss
First Post
mmu1 said:
You want characters with low charisma that can nonetheless sway other's opinion with their words (and body language, and whatever) alone. That just won't work.
No, but I expect them to play the characters they've rolled. And they've rolled a charisma value, so they have to stick to that. If it's low, they're not supposed to discuss the donkey's legs away, only to persuade him to a stroll afterwards!
You're mistaken. Charisma is some incredible amalgam of force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness. If you don't agree with that, you're playing the wrong game, for this is exactly what the PHB has to say about charisma.
Of course it has! Because his charisma is part of his personality.
With low charisma, you may be shy, or arrogant, or rude, or have a weak character (not the PC's we play in D&D).
A character with low charisma might still be good in one or more of these things, but if so, he's even worse at the rest!
And playing a character with low charisma as if he were the most polite and confident person there is, is bad roleplaying.
Of which charisma is a part, if not the greatest.
Which is mirrored in his skills, in the case of conversations, that's Diplomacy (key ability score: charisma.....)
So, are smarter characters the one who will be more confrontational, or the dumber ones?
Really, this is so wrong! Intelligence has about nothing to do with your conversational skills. I've seen very intelligent people starting to stutter before an audiance. I've seen people that are quite smart that were in hell on every date (if they could get one).
I'm not talking about speaking like an idiot. I'm talking about not being able to choose quite the right words to make the other do what you want (and that can well be not attacking you).
In D&D 3e (unless you house-rule it), "Diplomacy includes etiquette, social grace, tact, subtlety, and a way with words."
I'm not saying that a character without ranks in Diplomacy and without a bonus for high charisma can't talk to people properly.
But I'm saying that a character without ranks in Diplomacy and with a penalty for low charisma will screw things up once in a while. Because they can even get negative results in a diplomacy check. And THAT will make you "talk like an idiot with a psychotic streak", or at least make you so rude that the other one takes offence.
BTW: I was not talking about casual conversation at all in my example. It was a situation where you need a high result on your diplomacy check to get the people friendly or at least indifferent (so that you can make casual conversation). And a character with a negative modifier in his diplomacy is less likely to get that right, and the others's behavior will likely not change (or even change to the worse). If you play THAT situation as if you were the best orator in the world, you deserve every point of XP penalty you get for it (unless the DM ignores skills like Diplomacy and accepts it when people say that their Cha 7 character has an open and polite personality)
Quite the contrary: it's just one mor example of how many people tend to ignore parts of the rules (namely, the functions of Charisma and Diplomacy) in order to create a dumb stat ("Hey, my character has Cha 5 and will never take a single rank in diplomacy, but that's nothing to do with his personality. I'll play him like a openminded, strongwilled, very charismatic, oooops, very good speaker I wanted to say, person!")
KaeYoss:
No, I want characters with low Charisma to be able to say what their players want them to say - it's as simple as that.
I also have no intention of making my players tie their entire personality to a single STATISTIC, vastly oversimplyfing role-playing interaction. If their characters have a low Charisma, they'll definitely be penalized, but I'm certainly not going to stop them from trying to get around it with persistent, clever or creative role-playing.
NOWHERE did I say that just because the low-charisma barbarian can try to be polite, he'll automatically be successful. I even gave examples of how his speech might come out, which you chose to ignore and instead spout nonsense about what characters I must choose to play.
Again, even if you force your players to play one-dimensional characters, whose social interactions are dictated almost exclusively by one ability, you don't get to put words into their characters mouth, and flat out decide what they're saying.
No, I want characters with low Charisma to be able to say what their players want them to say - it's as simple as that.
I also have no intention of making my players tie their entire personality to a single STATISTIC, vastly oversimplyfing role-playing interaction. If their characters have a low Charisma, they'll definitely be penalized, but I'm certainly not going to stop them from trying to get around it with persistent, clever or creative role-playing.
NOWHERE did I say that just because the low-charisma barbarian can try to be polite, he'll automatically be successful. I even gave examples of how his speech might come out, which you chose to ignore and instead spout nonsense about what characters I must choose to play.
Again, even if you force your players to play one-dimensional characters, whose social interactions are dictated almost exclusively by one ability, you don't get to put words into their characters mouth, and flat out decide what they're saying.
mmu1 said:
What, you'd hate to play under a DM thatinsists you RP your CHARATER, as his/her/it's attributes truly indicate?
Look at the flip side; if someone who, IC, has an 18+ Charisma and, OOC, has a 6- charisma tells me, as a DM, "I ask the nearest village idiot where the d*mned tavern is" in an aburpt tone, well, I will presume, unless I'm told the character makes an especial effort to be rude, that the question is phrased more in keeping with an 18 charisma, than wth a 6 charisma.
Which is only fair and just; not every game would HAVE the equivalent of an 18 in all their mental attributes. Yet, they might want to play a character who DOES have a high score like that. The average-brained kid might want to play the egg-head superbrained wizard some day. Why should she be forbidden to?
Thus, if a low-charisma character's player acts all diplomatic ... I'msorry, it's actually easier to play your attribute DOWN, than to play it up. It's easier for a normally polite person to be rude, than for a rude b*st*rd to be polite. Thus, Charisma 6 half-orc? Well, you're not going to SAY "Excuse me, goodman, could you point me in the direction of a good tavern?" ... he's much more likely going to say "Hey, you! Where in the Nine Hells can a man get a decent drink in this stinking mudhole of a village?!"
Which is where the charisma stat comes in (or more aptly, the modifier). Unless someone says OOC that they're making an especial effort to be courteous/diplomatic, I assume they "take ten" on any interactions. Charisma 6, no ranks in diplomacy, and take 10? You get an 8, which ain't so hot. Charisma 18, 6 ranks in diplomacy, and take a 10? You get a 20, which IS a good result.
That would be more in line with a low-INT, average-CHA character simply not KNOWING the social protocols involved, and flubbing the "do you even know HOW to be suave andurbane" roll.
Failing a CHA roll doesn't mean you flub up a bit; it means you fail to be "likable" / "impressive" / whatever was the right angle to take. Asking for directions, you're trying to be polite and inoffensive. Failing that means, you're (at least mildly) rude and offensive.
Normal polite ocnversation? OFC not. But "pardon, good sir, woudl you be so kind as to ..." ... isn't NORMAL polite conversation. That's gentlemanly polite, and a Charisma of 8 just might have extreme difficulty pulling it off.
Were I the GM in question, and Krusk's player simply said "Hey, bub, where's th'latrine?" ... no adjustment needed. However "Pardon, good sir" ... that's not in form for a lower Charisma. At all.
Hence my own examples, comparing with a SIX charisma.
And too many people ignore a negative modifier altogether. IMO, that group outnumbers the over-emphasisers by at LEAST an order of magnitude.
mmu1 said:
And as long as those players RP a low-charisma character, that's exactly what happens. The moment Charisma (4) Thorg-the-barbarian opens his mouth,and sounds like Charisma (18) SOCRATES the orator ... the player is no longer RPing Thorg, at all.
Charisma is the attribute that determins how PERSUASIVE they are. When trying to persuade someone, yes, that SINGLE statistic goversn the results.
Rather like trying to bend an iron bar relies on the SINGLE statistic we call "strength".
Your one example (one!) was inappropriate; it would leave the person with, usually, just as favorable an impression of the speaker ... the character would just look a bit foolosh. Big deal, s/he still gets the help they needed.
Intelligence determines how smart someone is -- itlets them have a big vocabulary if the players wants the PC to have one.
Wisdom determines the PC's insight and intuition; with it (via Sense Motive), the character (and thus the player) can possibly determine which of several approaches to take.
...
But when it comes to TAKING an approach, charisma determines how WELL they do so. Flub that roll, and you flub the conversation/whatever. As Kae Yoss described, that can have fairly drastically-bad results.
Player abilities should never dictate character abilities. I know 90% of what would be needed to manufacture black powder firearms (the lock -- trigger and such -- is the only sticking point, and I -could- go with a matchlock instead of a flintlock; it's a simpler mechanism). Should, therefor, every character I play, be able to do the same?
How about know the basic principles of powered flight? Steam engines, internal combustion engines, ROCKET MOTORS ... ?
Keeping that sort ofplayer skill/ability/mental resource seperate from those of the hcaracter is NO different from charisma-related issues.
