D&D General The Charisma Conundrum

[ezo]

Ok, so I haven't read all the responses and I am just throwing in my thoughts:

So all NPCs react badly to Doug's character, and when the rolls come up, he makes minuses for himself by his bad style of role play. And he has no interest in talking about it...or anything...and refuses to change.

You can't make minuses for yourself when you play or role-play. Only the DM can impose penalties. And you should not impose penalties for his "bad style of role play". He's trying, right? That's the important part.

So....today....the other three players(not Doug or his sister) come to me after the game to talk about this. They want me to just "let Doug be the Face". So that when role playing, no matter what Doug says "for real", all NPCs act like his character is the Greatest Guy of All Time...and he never gets a minus to a roll.

Again, he should never get a penalty for playing. He is not his character. This is a game, not a play or movie, Doug doesn't have to be a first-rate actor or even mediocre. Let him role-play, and then *let him roll play".

The character is making the Charisma checks with a roll, not the player with a role.

I said no. I require players to put at least a little effort into role playing or just play the dull robotic way. As soon as a player starts to role play, I hold them to the high standard.

He is putting forth a little effort, though. You really don't have the right to "hold him to the high standard". He's not a professional, he's there to have fun playing a game with everyone.

And this is the Question as Old as the Game: what to do about the players that won't....or can't play the character they "want to be"? If the player "wants to be" something...does the DM alter game reality to make it so? Or not?

You aren't altering "game reality". Again, a player is not his character. The player can just tell you what they want the PC to do, and then roll. For example, suppose he wants to convince some guards on a patrol to tell him some information they normally wouldn't. The player can say, "My character approaches the guards and says something pursausive to convince them to tell me what we need to know." You respond, "Ok, roll a Charisma (Persuasion) check." The player rolls, you check versus whatever the DC you decided should be.

Players should never have to "role-play". If they choose to, you shouldn't penalize them if they can't do it well. You let the rolls decide if you find the "role" is insufficient.

If a player with a Low Charisma Score "wants" to play a Faceman, do you as the DM "just make it happen"? I'm not a fan....and worse I think it's harmful. Sure Doug could mumble something and I could have NPCs go all "wow" and I could completely prop Doug up as a False Faceman. And sure he will "feel good" for a few seconds. But it won't be real. He will KNOW he just mumbled some random words.....and he will KNOW I just "made the NPCs fo all 'wow' " just because he wanted me too. So he "wants to play a Faceman", but the only way he can do it is a completely false way. And I don't think that is good or healthy.

The player doesn't have a Charisma score, the PC does. In this case, it sounds like the PC has a good Charisma score?

You don't have to let Doug just mumble and have the NPCs go all "wow", you let the dice decide how the NPCs react. If Doug's PC has CHA 16, with expertise in Persausion at +8 (say 9th level) for a total of +11; then rolls a 15 for a 26 total, that will likley beat any DC you set.

Which means Doug's PC does what he is supposed to do, be the Faceman. Doug doesn't have to be an engaging, suave player to have his PC be the Faceman--all he needs to do is tell you what he wants his PC to do or say, and let the dice roll where they may.

 

[LordEntrails]

I'm going to jump on the bandwagon and beat down the OP some. Not because I don't like him at all, but because I think they are not acting in the spirit of the game. As other's have said, we don't make a player be able to walk a tight rope and if they can't then we penalize their character.

So all NPCs react badly to Doug's character, and when the rolls come up, he makes minuses for himself by his bad style of role play. And he has no interest in talking about it...or anything...and refuses to change.

Makes minuses for himself...? wtf? No he doesn't. The DM assigns these minuses based upon their own prejudices and preferences.

I said no. I require players to put at least a little effort into role playing or just play the dull robotic way. As soon as a player starts to role play, I hold them to the high standard.

Wuh? Yea, you should just tell the players that you are not the right DM for them because, well reasons.

If I remember right, this is not the first group you've run a game for that you have come to us with this time of issue. i.e. the players don't do what you want the way you want so you feel as DM that you have to penalize the characters.

This does not make OP a bad person, in no way am I implying such. It just means that it seems more likely that perhaps you should not be offering to 'help' so many groups by running games for them. Perhaps your efforts could go more into teaching others how to DM and develop their own style, not copy yours.

 

[Eyes of Nine]

I don't agree with the OP's perspective, but it feels like the posts so far are being a bit attack mode on them. Certainly not a good way to persuade them. I'd give you all negative modifiers on your Persuasion rolls tbh

 

[Sword of Spirit]

So with spring nearly upon us, lots of local games are breaking up. One, the DM just decided to dump the game and walk away. Her last act was to kill all the PCs and end the game.

I had to stop reading and comment on this. There is no need to make new characters and justify anything with a soft reboot, unless thats's what the players want to do.

I'd just rewind to before the DM took out their personal issues on the PCs and start the campaign right there with them all still alive.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Oh goodness, another wonderful bloodtide post. I needed a good laugh - thank you blood!

 

[Morrus]

So with spring nearly upon us, lots of local games are breaking up. One, the DM just decided to dump the game and walk away. Her last act was to kill all the PCs and end the game. Well, the players were not so happy. They are half way through "Dragon Heist" and would like to finish it. DMs are scarce, so eventually they come to me. And I say yes.

In order to do a soft restart at my suggestion, they all make new characters that are family members of the killed PC, and we pick up the adventure.

So, this a group of five 20 somethings, four young women and one guy: Doug.

Doug is the classic shy, awkward, not social sort of guy....he got into D&D as one of the other players is his sister. So when they make new characters, Doug dives into making a bard character so he can be the "Face" of the party. I know this will not work out.....

And sure enough when the game starts, Doug's character stays way in the back and does not role play or interact with any NPCs. Other then his sister, he does not speak much to anyone at the table. So he is sure not playing the Faceman of the group.....but he "wants to". The most he does is when the adventure calls for something like a charisma check he will roll that.

So, over the course of the next three games...Doug comes out of his shell a bit. He make some very sad attempts to role play the Faceman, but as he has very little real life charisma, he does this very poorly.

So all NPCs react badly to Doug's character, and when the rolls come up, he makes minuses for himself by his bad style of role play. And he has no interest in talking about it...or anything...and refuses to change.

So....today....the other three players(not Doug or his sister) come to me after the game to talk about this. They want me to just "let Doug be the Face". So that when role playing, no matter what Doug says "for real", all NPCs act like his character is the Greatest Guy of All Time...and he never gets a minus to a roll.

I said no. I require players to put at least a little effort into role playing or just play the dull robotic way. As soon as a player starts to role play, I hold them to the high standard.

And this is the Question as Old as the Game: what to do about the players that won't....or can't play the character they "want to be"? If the player "wants to be" something...does the DM alter game reality to make it so? Or not?

If a player with a Low Charisma Score "wants" to play a Faceman, do you as the DM "just make it happen"? I'm not a fan....and worse I think it's harmful. Sure Doug could mumble something and I could have NPCs go all "wow" and I could completely prop Doug up as a False Faceman. And sure he will "feel good" for a few seconds. But it won't be real. He will KNOW he just mumbled some random words.....and he will KNOW I just "made the NPCs fo all 'wow' " just because he wanted me too. So he "wants to play a Faceman", but the only way he can do it is a completely false way. And I don't think that is good or healthy.

It goes without saying that when you play an ogre to challenge the players you lift a giant log above your head to prove you’re qualified. That’s just common sense.

But what if they meet a dragon? How do you justify not being able to fly and breathe fire to your players?

As an alternative, could I suggest being nice to your (clearly fictional) players?

 

[LordEntrails]

I don't agree with the OP's perspective, but it feels like the posts so far are being a bit attack mode on them. Certainly not a good way to persuade them. I'd give you all negative modifiers on your Persuasion rolls tbh

The more I think about it, and with the reminders of other's replies, gentle persuasion is not going to "work". "We" have been gentle and understanding with the OP many times before, but yet here were are again. I'm not so skeptical as others that the situation is fictional, but I think it's time for bluntness if the OP actually wants our help and not just validation. You know, tough love and all that.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't agree with the OP's perspective, but it feels like the posts so far are being a bit attack mode on them. Certainly not a good way to persuade them. I'd give you all negative modifiers on your Persuasion rolls tbh

While its not a great approach--as I just had reminded to me elsewhere--I have to point out there's some history of this poster bringing this sort of thing and laying it on the board like a dead fish.

 

[FrogReaver]

The more I think about it, and with the reminders of other's replies, gentle persuasion is not going to "work". "We" have been gentle and understanding with the OP many times before, but yet here were are again. I'm not so skeptical as others that the situation is fictional, but I think it's time for bluntness if the OP actually wants our help and not just validation. You know, tough love and all that.

Yep. You name it, we have tried it. Doesn't work.

*I don't think it's fictional either, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Bloodtide, I think you should stop offering to DM for groups where you already know that they have fundamental differences of playstyle. Given that you already know that your playstyle is controversial and has a very high rate of player attrition, it seems to me that you are setting up both yourself and your newly-adopted players for, at best, a subpar experience.

Given you continue to pass some pretty harsh judgment on perspectives that don't match yours--"bad style of roleplay", "I don't think that's good or healthy", "sure he will 'feel good' for a few seconds. But it won't be real"--it just doesn't seem productive or beneficial to anyone involved that you do this sort of thing.