D&D 5E The Misrepresentation of Charisma

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[iserith]

I agree. This instance was not so much a group check as much as it was sympathetic effects.

For some reason, the image of a group charisma check conjures up a band of four bards performing. Three of the four bards perform well, but the fourth is not as skilled and causes the band to fail its check.

Yeah, that seems like a good place for a group check since they're all engaged in the same effort (again, provided the outcome is uncertain). But a group check in this case benefits the party because you only need 2 out of 4 bards to succeed at the check. The one character who is less skilled and fails his or her check is covered by the others.

 

[pdzoch]

Finally, I just find it easier and better to let players decide on what their character looks like.

Very much agree. I let the players imagine their character any way they want. Its their character, and the attractiveness trait does not come into play in the game.

When a player tells me her character is pretty - good. When a players tell me her character is <checks charisma score, sees an 14> pretty -- fine, but with an eye roll. When a player tells me her character is pretty <checks charisma score, sees an 8> but she is a bit of a jerk, has no confidence, is awkward, stutters, whatever and role plays that -- awesome.

 

[robus]

I just interpret physical attractiveness as basically a function of Constitution.

Want to seduce someone physically into wanting your body? Roll a Constitution (Persuasion) check.

That seems a bit of a stretch - for the non-speaking animal world Charisma is interpreted as their physical appearance (I guess it's really only a passive modifier?) - so to adapt that to PCs, I would say that passive Charisma is your attractiveness, active Charisma is your ability to persuade through words.

Of course that doesn't account for attractive people with terrible speaking skills or vice versa (Winston Churchill springs to mind in the latter case )

 

[Corpsetaker]

Charisma is force of personality, imo. Darth Vader has very high Charisma - people rush to do what he tells them. It's not because he is attractive, but he does look imposing as Hell and have a real aura of command.

Charisma can be represented in many ways.

Well it certainly isn't the fact that he could force choke you from several galaxies away.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Are group checks still a thing?

Yes. Not extremely prominent, but they were retained from 4e.

Unfortunately, it is too common a misunderstanding that Charisma equates to beauty, and that is simply not the case.

That has been a common misunderstanding, and, as giant a call-back to the glory days as 5e might intentionally be, I'm surprised to hear of anyone having that issue at this late date. Way back when, EGG trotted out an optional 'Comeliness' score to emphasize that CHA was not looks. CHA <> looks is as done a deal as THAC0 (or DISC0) being dead or female fighters not having a lower STR cap than male ones.

Just a head-shaker footnote from the game's goofy past.

But what of the other consequences not considered?
Is it really plausible that a leader of an adventuring group would have a low charisma?

There are different styles and strategies of leadership, yes. A leader might get by on knowledge & meticulous planning (INT) or delegation, insight, & emotional support (WIS).

So how is everyone actually roleplaying a low charisma character? ... Which leads to the flip side of the discussion. How many players are roleplaying an ugly character with a high charisma?

IMHX, and to my disappointment, gamers seem inclined to RP low-CHA characters as gruff and offensive, which gets across the 'not so good at social,' but doesn't really indicate the strength-of-personality issue. You can be very charismatic, and use that to offend and intimidate people rather than make them 'like' you, for instance. A low-CHA character might more properly come off as a non-entity or as lacking competence (actually just not expressing confidence).

Even more frustratingly, and perhaps this has something to do with nerd culture, I consistently see players portraying their high-CHA characters as insufferable jerks, like they're all kappa-eta-alpha* frat-boys or something.













*no offense if that's a real fraternity (no more offense than I intended to give to frats in general, that is), it's just the closest I could think of to C-H-A.

 

[Satyrn]

5e has done away with the gather information skill, these are now straight up charisma check. I'm not sure how I feel about that, but it's a big change.

You could call for a Charisma(Investigation) check. If you're a player, then at at least ask "hey, can I apply my Investigation skills to that Charisma check?"

 

[SmokingSkull]

For me Charisma represents one's persona, not in the avatar sense but in their actual personality, their individualism which shapes their ego and id. Eloquence and confidence may have factors but aren't necessarily as important, it's more of your very presence and how influential you are. For my character's Cha of 8 I represent it as him being very blunt, forceful, insensitive and mostly tactless when dealing with people. This is due to his isolated life as a hunter and nomad growing up, very few people live on the fringes and even fewer dare to travel there.

This shaped his outlook as bleak and aloof, disconnected and almost alien in how he perceives things. His time amongst more civil folk in the army shaped his attitude somewhat and made him more eloquent in how he speaks, but despite that he is still very direct and as such social niceties are not a currency he trades in. As for the party he is definitely more considerate of them, because they have more than earned his trust time after time. But everyone else? He wouldn't give them the time of day, and don't even get him started on politics! (Inside joke) This is just how I represent it so take it for what you will, my two copper nothing more.

 

[WarpedAcorn]

This is not an argument championing the value of Charisma as an ability score. Nor is this a full discussion on charisma. At best, it is a beginning. Instead, it is an argument for better consideration of what the Charisma score means, how it can be roleplayed, and how it affects the game above the superficial understanding of the ability (note the use of the word ability, not trait. Ability suggest something more actively employed than the latent nature of trait).

Its been an incredibly long time since I've heard anyone use Charisma as a reflection of physical beauty in D&D. Does that even still happen??? Plus, with almost 1/2 of the base classes utilizing Charisma as a Primary or Secondary stat (including arguably the most popular classes of Warlock and Paladin), its hard to find a group that truly finds the Cha ability to be a "dump stat".

Regarding the quote above, I use Charisma and Charisma-based abilities to determine how well the message is conveyed, but the message still matters. What I mean is that when Persuading, Intimidating, or Deceiving, as a DM I am setting the DC based on what the player is saying and doing. Their ability roll then determines how well they expressed themselves, how convincing they were, and how charismatic they were.

As for the leader having the highest Charisma...it makes sense, but doesn't always play out that way. Usually the "strongest" or most "decisive" character takes the leader roll, and the "Face" player is called up similarly to how your nimblest player is called up to open a lock.

 

[pdzoch]

For me Charisma represents one's persona, not in the avatar sense but in their actual personality, their individualism which shapes their ego and id. Eloquence and confidence may have factors but aren't necessarily as important, it's more of your very presence and how influential you are. For my character's Cha of 8 I represent it as him being very blunt, forceful, insensitive and mostly tactless when dealing with people. This is due to his isolated life as a hunter and nomad growing up, very few people live on the fringes and even fewer dare to travel there.

This shaped his outlook as bleak and aloof, disconnected and almost alien in how he perceives things. His time amongst more civil folk in the army shaped his attitude somewhat and made him more eloquent in how he speaks, but despite that he is still very direct and as such social niceties are not a currency he trades in. As for the party he is definitely more considerate of them, because they have more than earned his trust time after time. But everyone else? He wouldn't give them the time of day, and don't even get him started on politics! (Inside joke) This is just how I represent it so take it for what you will, my two copper nothing more.

I like this description of, for lack of a better word, relative charisma, which accounts for why a low charisma character would be part of a group with effective group dynamics. Sure, the guy is a jerk to everyone else, but he is a different person those his close compatriots, a very select group of people he permits to know his truer self. Two coppers well spent.