If Cha is your dump Stat.....

[DMOE]

We have no comeliness Stat in the NWN nights engine....As such, Cha needs to represent a balance between characters attractiveness and 'people’ skills.  10 in NWN Stats is considered as average as I understand it...so with the above balance that would be pretty average looking and pretty average people skills.

I wonder how many people have Cha as their dump Stat...say 10 or lower and have amazingly attractive PC’s who also have great people skills?

Now...I’m sure some of you are saying....”what’s the harm in that?” Well....not everyone uses Cha as their dump Stat...Some people actually do sit and think how they wish their character to be looks and people skill wise and actually put the points into their Cha to reflect that.  In fact....everyone should be doing that at character creation....The whole point is that you can’t necessarily get all your Stats exactly how you’d want them so you do have to sacrifice some things.  If you’re playing your Cha 10 character as amazingly beautiful cause you wanted more Str or Con say....where’s your sacrifice?  The person putting their Cha at say 14 has made theirs.

Now remember it is all about balance...I have seen a Cha 8 character who was played as very good looking....Their IC people skills were terrible, I mean really terrible...It was some very excellent RP on the part of the player who was actually very sociable to be such an anti-social character all the time.

Take my own Cleric of Mist for example....She has Cha 12 and the following in her bio “She may be considered stunning by many but her eyes are what draw you to her, they seem to swirl, shifting with her mood much as the sea would in a storm but within them is a coldness that may detract from her beauty”....Anyone who has met her will agree she is NOT a people person...She is blunt, rude, judgemental and those are often her nicer traits!!! As such, I play her as being slightly more attractive than Cha 12 because her people skills are lower than those of Cha 12.....Obviously those are my perceptions of Cha 12 but most people can apply enough common sense so we are all pretty much working on the same page.

So have a thought when creating your character, requesting a description change and obviously RPing your character as to what the balance is between your characters attractiveness and people skills and if you want to be good at both...actually put the points into Cha to reflect that rather than getting yourself a 'freebie’ and using it as a dump Stat.

[kenty191]

Karn has a charisma of 19 unmodified...

[Pen N Popper]

I largely agree that CHA is probably the most abused since it has the least impact on game mechanics of combat for many.  However, should the differences between a 10 CHA and a 14 CHA fighter be reflected during RP?  How often?  Should the 14 CHA always take charge over the 10 CHA?  How can we self-police that?  Should the GMs police it?

Personally, I think the following would go a long way:

• No CHA may be set below 10 on the character creation page, including dwarves and halforcs.

- OR -

• A new widget is added to our inventory that will query the CHA of the targeted PC.

Basically, let's just all agree either that CHA is our dump stat (with a minimum of 10), or let's give ourselves someway to "see" the other persons leadership/beauty OOCly.

*uses widget and attempts to make FORT check as the "stunning" 8 CHA woman in the slinky dress walks past*

[DMOE]

Firstly...Cha covers a wide range of people skills including leadership.

To me...this means you could have Cha 14 and not be a strong leader, but instead just really likable.  People would be more inclined to follow your suggestions but you don't push yourself to be a 'leader'.  Equally so you can be Cha 10, a very strong leader and not necessarily that likable but respected for your leadership qualities.  I'm sure anyone here in the forces or Ex-forces will tell you that very few Sargent's come across as 'likable' but they are respected as leaders, generally

Why can't we simply trust people to RP their stats?  Why do we need another rule or another widget?

Yes it can be hard to Rp a lower cha than you say naturally have...But isn't that part of the challenge?

I personally not only look at a new characters Stats in relation to what I think will suit them but also to what I think I can play!!!

[Kindo]

I personally go almost entirely for personal strength and social skills when I think about Charisma as a character attribute. I have two characters, both of them have 8 points Charisma. I imagine them both to be about, or just under, average in "attractiveness" (honestly, we all have different taste, so it's wrong to say that anyone with high charisma would be considered "gorgeous" by all), and I would answer that if anyone ever queried me about my characters' appearance, but their social skills are horrendous and they are not at all motivational leaders. I think Charisma as a social stat, rather than physical appearance stat, is much more interesting, and thus, I play it like that. Attractiveness through words and character, rather than flesh, is the way to go.

Karn has a charisma of 19 unmodified...

Hotness overload!

[Acacea]

It's both physical and mental simply because one's physical attractiveness affects how others react to him, whether it's conscious or not. Look at all the men who date the hot retarded chicks with the people skills of toads. That's comeliness affecting charisma score, right there. It's not all of it, and I would say 'less' of it than force of personality, but it definitely is involved. There are a lot of threads on it though so I'll stop there.

There are a lot of ways we can juggle and balance the stat - like Kindo saying it's not so much that his character is hideous but rather his social skills that are at fault. Likewise a hideous general in command can hold an army together in the most dire of situations with a good charisma (and other stats too of course, otherwise he's all talk ).

It's when you start getting the "stunning woman with a winning smile" AS WELL as the "welcoming, inviting, likeable, alluring" equaling a total of 8 CHA that is the bad part. I could probably swing either way with a 10 at the expense of the other, but not both really. Hehe.

I'm not really ready to give up and have it be a universal dump stat though.

[Faldred]

At the risk of sounding immodest to quote myself... from my article Roleplaying Attributes (emphasis not in the original):

A "beautiful" person can have the Charisma of a stick, and an "ugly" person can rule an empire by sheer will. This is, of course, extreme, and human (or demi-human) nature leads us to naturally perceive those with what be believe to be positive physical traits as more charismatic, so it has some place.
 
But much more so than that, Charisma is the couter-point to Wisdom. Whereas the latter is about force of will focused inward on one's self, Charisma is about the ability to impose one's will on others, hence its inclusion as a "mental" ability. Leadership, to be slightly cynical, is about getting people to do what you think they should be doing, or, in other words, manipulating them. This is not necessarily a bad thing -- the Paladin may believe that she is showing people the True Path and helping them focus their energies. Of course, the same ability can be used by the dark side to dominate or (mentally) oppress others. In any case, the abilities come from some combination of physical appearance, force of personality, leadership skill, smooth talking, and apparent moral authority.

...

Charisma, from a role-playing standpoint, offers probably a wider set of options than Wisdom or intelligence do. A middle-of-the-road Charisma could be a slick-talking attractive person who just has no leadership skills or could just as well be an excellent managerial type who faints at the thought of public speaking.

The most important thing to remember is to roleplay your attributes!  If you have a low Charisma, play a low Charisma.  I list five factors to consider for Charisma -- if your ability score is below 10, then you'd better be, in general below average on most of those points, and anywhere you're above average should be offset by another trait (or two).

[kenty191]

I like to think of Karn (Cha 19) as appearing quite handsome and he does appear to have a way with the ladies (even if it doesn't serve him), and on the whole is quite friendly and likeable HOWEVER his wisdom is 8, his insightfulness is zero, and so, at times he will blunder in and say exactly the wrong thing, thereby countering his usual charm.

Karn can also try REALLY hard to be likeable, when facing royality for example, as he has in the past.

In contrast I think Elzhabehl (Cha 10) though not hideous, is certainly very serious looking, always wears a frown and generally looks rather annoyed making those around him reluctant to approach. However to go back to the leadership point, his high intelligence (19) makes many follow him, and he is very authoritarian and proud by his very nature, that is not to say he is a 'good' leader, just that he can lead.

A bit of an overall view there...

[LordCove]

Yup...agree with the above.

Sall ( Cha 10 ) ...not a dump stat in my book, I dont have one, but, if I was a little more wised up about NWN when I made him, I might have
Wouldn't now of course  

But...as some know. He is not totally sociable. He is not a great leader, or at least doesn't think he is, despite what some say. And of course....isn't the greatest looker...as his IG description kinda suggests " weary looking..and such.."

It is a shame there isn't more visible uses for Charisma ingame other than adding a few points to Persuasion and such ( despite the obvious for Sorcers/Bards and Clerics )

I would probably like to know if the supposed handsome and stalwart fighter leading and inspiring us into battle has 6 CHA or 16 CHA...I'd be able to RP whether I'd go along or not. You get an idea of someone's CHA ( roughly )..simply by looking at them....where as INT, WIS and other's you dont.

But...*shrugs*....what do I know  

A new widget is added to our inventory that will query the CHA of the targeted PC.  -  Pen n Popper

Although a fantastic idea, and I love it!... of course, creates a whole lot of work for the Teams which isn't totally necessary.

Maybe's instead a little note on our IG character description telling what Charisma is?

[magnusarin]

The thing is, none of the mental stats (int, wis, cha) are easy to RP and it's always easier to play these stats lower than higher. I don't think you can seperate these stats when discussing a character's personality.
My examples in game are this. My first character Trajan has 14 int and Wis but only 10 cha. He's got a decent diplomacy check but I've very rarely used it. When I role play Trajan hardly ever decides where a group is going to go and he never volunteers to lead anything unless no one else will do it. But that said he's a personable guy to his friends. He's fairly quick witted and perceptive offering insight and humor to a group but little leadership.
On the contrast is my paladin Orin who has 10 int 14 wis and 16 cha. He's an earnest guy who doesn't understand higher end jokes. He's not necessarily friendly, but he's polite, attractive and when he wants to be, very persuasive and he's a decision maker.

If you take charisma by itself Orin would be the more well liked with more friends and Trajan would be someone that unless he was your friend you'd probably never notice. But I think you need to look at your combination of mental stats.

In a similar vein, how does extreme intelligence get played? I'm a smart guy, but not 20 intelligence smart and there aren't a great deal of game mechanics that support it, especially with the lack of Knowledge skills like in PnP. You just have to trust people to play a character as they see fit. Been that way in DnD for about 30 years.

[Drizzlin]

I largely agree that CHA is probably the most abused since it has the least impact on game mechanics of combat for many.  However, should the differences between a 10 CHA and a 14 CHA fighter be reflected during RP?  How often?  Should the 14 CHA always take charge over the 10 CHA?  How can we self-police that?  Should the GMs police it?

Personally, I think the following would go a long way:

• No CHA may be set below 10 on the character creation page, including dwarves and halforcs.

- OR -

• A new widget is added to our inventory that will query the CHA of the targeted PC.

Basically, let's just all agree either that CHA is our dump stat (with a minimum of 10), or let's give ourselves someway to "see" the other persons leadership/beauty OOCly.

*uses widget and attempts to make FORT check as the "stunning" 8 CHA woman in the slinky dress walks past*

That is crazy, that would be like saying all elves MUST come in with a 20 dex because they recieve a +2 dex bonus. Half orcs are less charismatic and flat out ugly on the average. That is why they have a -2 to charisma. Now your arguement for all other pcs to be at there average of 10 can be justified, but to say that the negative modifiers for certain races should not be at their average is IMO wrong, because it is in fact their average scores.

IF you were to say that pcs should be required to have stats no lower than their racial averages, then you would have an argument, but once you start requiring every race to ignore their negatives had have 10 as their base average stats, then we can just get rid of every single race and all make humans.

[Pen N Popper]

True!  It would be unfair to those races.

[Interia_Discordius]

I personally don't think there should be a widget to measure character stats because of metagaming, plain and simple *shrug* You can go ahead with the argument of "Oh, but it's looks, right?" Sure, but then there's the mind vs. what you see element getting involved, and then the fact helms and such are part of it and...

Honestly, I think it has a better chance of getting messy than clarifying. Not to mention, for the newer roleplayers who just joined, oh my. Poor things.

I'd also like to point out... No one really rolls CHA checks, do they? I see DEX checks and reflex and the occasional INT, but no CHA...Instead of having widgets or the GMs to police us, why not just roll a CHA check when using the influence on someone else? That's technically how things work, right? Some girl described as pretty gets big, innocent eyes and begs for you to take her to Dregar and kill things for her...Rolls a CHA check...Ouch, that's low!

Okay, it can either be roleplayed out as a plain no, or you can think she's having a bad day and help out of sympathy Not every "beautiful" person is beautiful every day, anyhow!

Not everyone roleplays their stats correctly, and honestly, I think we should just let them do as they please. It's a character, it's a game... I think over-policing just takes out the fun factor. I get a touch irritable when people get nitpicky over my character, but hey, that's life.

The same argument of CHA can be used for DEX too...How many times do you see characters being described "graceful?" Honestly, I think the three stats (STR, DEX, CON) can also be a sort of backup against CHA, and CHA being more personality forward. STR could be your build, DEX your flow, and CON how you weigh against the bulk of muscles (STR).

*coughs*
I'm getting too in-depth.

[DMOE]

Not everyone roleplays their stats correctly, and honestly, I think we should just let them do as they please. It's a character, it's a game... I think over-policing just takes out the fun factor. I get a touch irritable when people get nitpicky over my character, but hey, that's life.

So you think it's perfectly fair if a player accepts they will have a weaker Str or Con say to ensure that they have the 'correct Cha' when another player states they are amazingly beautiful and have a Cha 10 or below so they can have the points elsewhere?

You think it's over-policing to suggest people act in a fair and reasonable manner to other people who do make the effort rather than take a freebie cause they can?

Yes, it is a game, and yes it is supposed to be fun....Doesn't mean you should abuse aspects of it though or that asking people to think about if they are doing that is removing that fun.  

Also how are people supposed to grow and learn as RP'ers if they don't try and RP their stats?

[miltonyorkcastle]

Since Faldred did it, I suppose I will, despite being at severe risk of having tomatoes thrown at me. Especially since my view of charisma is quite different than the "standard" view.

Anywho, in reply to a post by Dib Monkey, I explain my view. Here's his post:

"I'm playing a character with a charisma of 6, but I've taken skills in persuade, bluff and intimidate to reflect on oratry skills and a general striving to better communication.

I am almost always polite, without trying to influence others (if anything I am a little too polite, showing my inability to speak naturally) I am rarely outspoken unless through genuine dislike of another chracter's action and attempts at humour are often clumsy (although with int 14 I allow for some wit)

In an average interaction with a group this may not come through, as being polite is all that is necessary and generally accepted during a game. Is this acceptable, or even with cha skills should I be playing it differently?

(I have spent some time thinking about this so no quick judgments, I'd like some critical advice)"

And here's my reply. Strangely, mine was the only reply.

"There is lots of commentary to be found on what it means to have low/high charisma within this forum alone. That being said, and without having interacted much with the character, I'd wager that what you've described above is entirely within the realm of correctly playing the attribute.

My bit of reasoning is based on the notion that Charisma represents force of personality. It's what makes a person stand out (why it's associated with beauty) and pressure others (why high charisma can lend to leadership). Everyone's got some, but like any other attribute, some have more than others. Having a low charisma isn't saying that you can't pressure people, or that you don't on occasion stand out, it's saying that you stand out less often, are less likely to pressure people, than someone with an above average charisma. It does not represent an ability to pressure people or stand out, but rather a propensity to. This is the main reason charisma as an attribute often gets muddled and people argue its affects. The other attributes all represent ability (hence the name, ability attribute). Strength represents how much you can lift; Intelligence represents how well you employ logic, your level of cognition; but Charisma doesn't represent how pretty you are, but rather the likelyhood that you choose to use that beauty to a certain end. There are beautiful people who don't often stand out, just as there are ugly people that do.

From what I read above, your choice to play your character as very polite falls directly in line with how a more or less uncharismatic character might act, because it's a choice, whether deliberate or natural to the character, that means the character stands out from the crowd less, and isn't interested in pressuring the crowd.

The fact that your character has skills designed to pressure people (persuade, intimidate, etc.) represents not only that you can, but that you might be halfway decent at pressuring people. However, your character's low charisma means that you seldom employ those skills, that ability to sway someone. And that's exactly how you play your character.

Hope this helps.
-milty"

Right, so extrapolating from what I previously said, Charisma, as I view it, does not actually represent either beauty or people skills. Beauty is beauty, and people skills are people skills. Charisma is a whole other cookie. Charisma is a matter of your character's desire to use his/her beauty and/or people skills to get what they want. Really, that's what all the stats are about. Your best stats determine what you use to get what you want. G'ork has a high strength, so he smashes things to get what he wants. Malor has a high intelligence, so he outwits things to get what he wants. Granted, that is a gross oversimplification of how it works, but you get the picture.

Charisma is the same thing. Kali has a high charisma, so she uses a winning smile and her stunning red hair to get what she wants. Now, what about some other lovely young woman with stunning red hair and a winning smile that prefers to smash things to get what she wants? Naturally, she would have a low charisma, but still be pretty (this line I think most people here agree with). On the flip side of that, what if there was a particularly ugly woman who preferred to use her excellent people skills to get what she wants. She would have a high charisma, but still be ugly. And finally, what if we have a stunning woman, gorgeous even, who also is trained fully in the arts of persuasion and diplomacy... but actually relies on her quickness and speed to get what she wants. In this case, she has people skills, she has beauty, yet she still has a low charisma. Why? Because she isn't interested in using the skills or her beauty to get what she wants. She can draw a knife and stab you with it before you can blink, and she prefers that method to batting her eyes or playing the diplomat.

Now, this doesn't mean that she'll never use her beauty or people skills to get what she wants; her low charisma means she prefers not to. This is just like if you rely on a high strength but on occasion you turn to your wits to win a battle when you realize strength alone might not accomplish the task. Again, this is a gross simplification of all that goes on in a complicated, well rounded person, but it's a foundation for understanding the stats.... in my most humble opinion.....

[Acacea]

Most characters -are- graceful, though. That's very rarely a matter of not playing stats correctly - few characters use Dex as a dump stat. Meaning it's usually 10+. It's the non-used mental attributes that are typically used as an 8.

And helms wouldn't subtract from your charisma score. Not unless your charisma is solely about looks, in which case it can't be very high anyway, and as well you're likely not going to be wearing a helm in the first place. In fact if one is a warrior type with decent charisma it may only add to the confident bearing he has about him or something. *shrugs*

And yes, people do roll Charisma checks. Seen it on and off quests. Not really common no, but I don't roll for a lot of things because I know for the most part what she is and is not capable of...sometimes I roll private checks to make sure there are no critical failures, but otherwise I rarely roll any ability checks. Sometimes a charisma on first meeting someone. A dex on juggling with her toes while standing on her hands. Whatever. Still.

How is that any different from such a widget? I'm not in favor of the tool as I don't think it's particularly useful, but I don't see any metagaming aspect to it as charisma is after all about how OUR characters are influenced by THEM. How is it metagaming to simply look at the number when seeing how far you're really going to allow your character to be taken in by the alluringly persuasive heartthrob tactic, when if their charisma is 8, they are the ones that are taking things out of character?

Again...not really for such a widget but I see little difference in me seeing you roll a charisma check with a negative modifier and noting you have 8 charisma, and me clicking an observe button and seeing that you have 8 charisma.

The very point that it -isn't- different from rolling a check is why I don't see the point in it...not fear of metagaming.

[Interia_Discordius]

I just think that the people who abuse are going to abuse and the people who RP it correctly are going to. Either way, it doesn't seem to make much of a difference outside of DM quests, as people follow the person who knows the terrain the most and beauty is covered by armor.

Like I said, when and if it makes a difference, a CHA check should be rolled. That way, the GMs don't have to do anything and we can police each other. The widget sounds like just another mess in the toolset, even if it's only one.

[Acacea]

Eh, frankly I just can't get along with the interpretation of an 'ability score' (note the word ability) being a "do I choose to use my ability" score. I completely understand the gist, it just don't jibe for me.

Could we say that someone has bulging muscles but chooses pacifism has low strength even if he can lift a car, simply because he -chooses- to use a different path? Someone that is light and quick that wishes she were as clever as the wizard and didn't have to resort to thievery and such to get what she wanted - eventually trying her hand at it: high int low dex because it's her choice, despite her previous stats sort of pointing the reverse?

Or is it only charisma that gets this "I choose therefore I am" mentality? Despite that some want to be the center of attention and try -and fail- to use looks or charm because they don't have any but rather don't have the wisdom to realize they're butt-ugly with the affability of a rabit goat?

It just seems to me like if charisma is charisma because you want it to be, that should go for other mental stats as well, and hey if not them why not them all? And then where would characters who took different paths than they wanted be? Technically they all would be what they wanted, because to want is to have the proper ability scores, it seems.

The choice of whether or not influence is used is just as often a matter of arbitrary choice or the wisdom/intelligence to know which tool is best for the occasion.

[ycleption]

As people have mentioned, part of the problem is that charisma represents too many things.
Th other part of the problem is that how a given character reacts to "charismatic" action is highly individualistic. Maybe I'm the jealous type and so am less affected by a beautiful person. Maybe I respect honestly and so am more swayed by utter tactlessness than by eloquent diplomatic speech. Maybe I'm insecure about my own personal strength, and so resent the force of personality others possess. A crowd in a tavern and a gathering of diplomats probably react very differently to the same "combination of physical appearance, force of personality, leadership skill, smooth talking, and apparent moral authority." In some specific places and situations, a low charisma character might even have a social advantage over a higher charisma character.
Unfortunately, the game doesn't recognize all of this. I think a widget would only exacerbate the problem, because people might feel they "should" react to people in a certain way, to the neglect of roleplaying.
I definitely agree with the original post that some people want to have the extra stat points without accepting the repercussions that should come with that, or make a token effort to represent low CHA without actually rping it (the character descriptions "stunningly beautiful, but with an icky aura"), but I don't think there is anyway to really control it, without imposing unrealistic limitations.

[DMOE]

I just think that the people who abuse are going to abuse and the people who RP it correctly are going to. Either way, it doesn't seem to make much of a difference outside of DM quests, as people follow the person who knows the terrain the most and beauty is covered by armor.

Like I said, when and if it makes a difference, a CHA check should be rolled. That way, the GMs don't have to do anything and we can police each other. The widget sounds like just another mess in the toolset, even if it's only one.

It makes a different the minute one player reads the character description of another player and therefore decides how their character will react to them....obviously not all choose to have character descriptions but a lot do and a lot of people read them to decide basic things about the character they are talking to.

As for people following the persons who knows the terrain the most....Gee thanks for deciding that all our time is spent on server simply 'bashing'

As Acacea stated...This does not happen with any other Stat in the same way it does with Cha and I see no reason why we shouldn't ask people not to abuse it...