To prevent Charisma from being a dump

[Psychic Robot]

Pretty much what MGuy said. If you want to harp on something, harp on the cross-classing skills rules and the fact that fighters get roughly one skill point per level.

[erik]

I am pretty sure we can harp on all those things and charisma as well. Just because one mechanic is dumb does not mean others are not dumb.

[RandomCasualty2]

Aside from the "D&D has always had 6 stats" argument, I honestly I can't see a good reason for keeping it.

[Username17]

Dračí Doupě has six stats, but it has Agility and not Constitution. Even within the context of having six stats, Constitution and Charisma are bad stats to have. Your three mental stats could be Intelligence, Perception, and Willpower, for example.

-Username17

[Koumei]

Int, Per and Wil are a lot better. Firstly because you will always get an argument over what is Int and what is Wis. Secondly it ditches Charisma and all the baggage associated with it. Thirdly because it means wise people can still be completely fucking blind.

And fourthly, because wise people don't go out there where they are likely to be stabbed and eaten. They stay home and have a nice cup of tea.

Also, what's the big deal with "fighters should get the girl"? Aside from the fact that the team as a whole are supposed to get the rewards and screentime, and "getting the girl" clearly puts the spotlight on someone as the main character, the great hero who scores in fiction is usually, if we have to resort to statting up characters from fiction, the rogue:

[*]King Arthur had a wife, but wasn't all awesome with the ladies. In some versions, his wife cheated on him, despite him being king. If being the king doesn't get you more sex than you can eat, you are just a failure.

[*]Lord of the Rings is a load of shit and we shouldn't ever use it as source material or a reference. But I'm going to anyway. Aragorn "gets the girl" and he's like 50% of all Rangers ever.

[*]Robin Hood is the other 50%. Seriously, when people picture rangers, half the time they seriously picture Robin Hood, complete with funny hat. That said, although he's clearly supposed to be a ranger, in D&D you'd represent him with a Rogue: kills people dead with his accurate archery (sneak attack), and is stealthy/sneaky, good at clambering about, disguising himself... he's cunning (a word associated with thieves), crazy like a fox! (sorry) and so on. Rogue. He not only got the girl, the People loved him and he led a bunch of guys even though he wasn't the strongest or the best fighter (Little John beat him that one time). So he was Mista Charisma.

[*]Captain Carrot is the closest the Discworld gets to having a Paladin. He isn't just friendly and nice, he doesn't just have Charisma, he has Krisma. His charismatic power practically is D&D Diplomancy, which is beyond "the fighter who apparently gets the girl".

[*]I wanted to mention something about Midkemia, but I can't remember anything.

[*]Oh snap, same goes for the David Eddings Trilogy. You know, the one where the reluctant hero uses a big blue gem to kill an evil god? Oh wait, actually, Sparhawk is MAIN CHARACTER and also... in theory a paladin, in practice a rogue (even by description), and he is known to be pretty good with the ladies. And then there's Silk, a rogue (again, his pals probably CALL him that), who hooks up with Velvet.

[*]Final Fantasy hero tends to be a Fighter or Fighter-Mage, and tends to get the girl. Except in 9, where he was a rogue and had more personality than the heroes of 7, 8 and 10 combined. And was lady-friendly despite his young age (it's okay, his interests were about his age). We're already way out of classic stuff by now, though, seeing as we're talking about vidya games.

[*]Presumably nobody got the girl in the Greek Epics, because women only appeared in the form of hideous monsters (note: nobody loses to a Medusa, you have to stare at her face. Ugly face, regular (uncovered) boobs.) and well, Ancient Greece, you know.

tl;dr, if you even have to make one class the one who "gets the girl" or is loved by all, which you don't, then it's actually the Rogue, or even a variant-fighter-but-obviously-NOT-straight-fighter (like Paladong or Ranger, which can be contrasted with actual FightyFightFighters in the setting), not the Fighter.

[erik]

Oooooh this thread just took a turn for the best.

I support the notion that rogues get laid.

Han Solo gets the girl, whereas the mystic knight gets the FU from the DM. "that chick you were into, yeah, she is your sister and she is gonna hook up with the guy who makes fun of you".

In wheel of time everyone hooks up so that is a bit different. Of course the ranger and fighter get the arguably most obnoxious pairings (her name is even Fail! He should have known better). The rogue fools around with various tail before landing an empress of the mightiest empire (presumably), and the unfair wizard fighter gets 3 wives... Arguably making him the most screwed.

[Caedrus]

So here's an issue you might want to discuss. Let's pretend we do something like, say, have 4 stats, throw out constitution, and roll Charisma into wisdom and get Willpower, or something. Then which characters are getting laid? The Rogue? Nope, the Rogue needs Dexterity. What stat is giving you the bonus to charming women? Willpower? Then what, is the Cleric the guy getting laid? Because that doesn't seem right.

[Koumei]

See above: according to the stories, the Rogue should, so you could give it to them as an actual class feature. Because it's a game with many players, you actually share the spotlight, and they all take turns with the princess. If someone really wants seduction, you make it a selectable Feat type thing. Otherwise you just leave it as a thing that people can play out or whatever.

There, I said it. It's okay to MTP stuff like getting the girl.

[RobbyPants]

He stated he hated specific people getting to lay the women and be welcomed in town. A charisma score generally nets you ONLY a -1 to +4 blah blah blah to do that. IF you care about doing that stuff (which you don't need a high bonus at all to do it. You can achieve it by investing in spells (which charisma helps you get in some cases) or putting ranks in the skills. I'm saying that a measly -1 to +4 hardly aids you or hinders you from doing those very simple tasks which make Lago rage if he can't do with his fighter.

Yes, but what you said is you use Charisma (not Diplomacy) to be "more naturally accepted" or to get "a bonus to trying to seduce and trying to win favor". In the section you quoted from Lago, he was complaining about having to make the choice between Str/Dex/Whatever and Cha, where Cha just gives you in-universe acclaim, but no real mechanical boost. You basically trade effectiveness for free drinks at the bar, or whatever.

Now, I can agree with you that he also doesn't like Diplomacy from his initial post about "instantly winning over The Lord of Darkness with a smile". I was just going off of what you said and what you quoted.

[RobbyPants]

So here's an issue you might want to discuss. Let's pretend we do something like, say, have 4 stats, throw out constitution, and roll Charisma into wisdom and get Willpower, or something. Then which characters are getting laid? The Rogue? Nope, the Rogue needs Dexterity. What stat is giving you the bonus to charming women? Willpower? Then what, is the Cleric the guy getting laid? Because that doesn't seem right.

Simple: don't tie it to one of the four stats. Make a feat for it, or as Koumei suggested, make it a class feature.

[Koumei]

or as Koumei suggested, make it a class feature.

You can't go far wrong in life just following all my advice.

[Wyzzard]

Presumably nobody got the girl in the Greek Epics, because women only appeared in the form of hideous monsters (note: nobody loses to a Medusa, you have to stare at her face. Ugly face, regular (uncovered) boobs.) and well, Ancient Greece, you know.

Well, if anyone in the greek epics is a rogue, it's Odysseus; and he got all the women.

Take the Odyssey for example: It spans 10 years, and out of that time Odysseus only spends ~2 years actually trying to get home.
Out of all the remaining years, he spends 7 having more-or-less non-stop sex with Kalypso (a hot nymph), 1 fooling around with Circe (a hot sorceress), and also finds time for meeting a perky loli -to Odysseus' credit he doesn't actually Go There, eventhough Nausikaa (the loli) wants him to.


Though beyond Odysseus, I'll grant you that greek stories are mostly about women being raped by wizards and then punished because they were raped... Yeah, fucking ancient greeks.

[Username17]

Basically no heroes in stories are 3e Fighters, almost all are Rogues. Because heroes have to do shit like climb and sneak and open doors and lie to patrols and whatever - and the 3e D&D Fighter can only jump and swing a sword. The only heroes who are represented by D&D Fighters are computer game heroes - the ones where you just run around and stab goblins and don't talk or anything. Mario is a Fighter, so is Simon Belmont and the dude from Golden Axe.

-Username17

[violence in the media]

or as Koumei suggested, make it a class feature.

You can't go far wrong in life just following all my advice.

You really need your own "Ask Koumei" column somewhere. It'd be a hit.

[Koumei]

Wizzard: Odysseus is a total champion because of his exploits.

violence: tempting

Because heroes have to do shit like climb and sneak and open doors and lie to patrols and whatever

Not to mention use magic items/ancient relics/incredible lost technology, half the time without understanding it (I hear Rogues have some skill for that), and when a TV hero fights someone, often they make one decisive blow (Sneak Attack) or fight in "an annoying, unorthodox way" (that has Rogue written all over it).

Totally Rogues all over.

[Doom]

I always looked at Charisma as a necessary 'dump' stat, to handle the likelihood, when rolling 6 times, of getting at least one ugly low roll...you gotta put it somewhere, it was good to have one stat that can 'take it' without totally messing up your character.

Now that 'rolling up a character' is an anachronism, it's not particularly necessary, it seems.

[For Valor]

ooooh... Dump Con, too?

So what's the general consensus, then?

Str: Physical to-hit, damage (phys and range), HP, Fort
Dex: Ranged to-hit, Init, Rfx, AC
Wis/Wil/bleh: Will Saves
Int: Skill points

is that about right?

[Koumei]

You could even have, given how much you're changing things here (see: making a new game from scratch), Int be used for non-physical attacks (ranged touch attacks, making "social attacks", whatever), and Will be some vague Magic Defence (AC for spells).

In other words, ATT, DEF, SP. ATT and SP. DEF

Yes, I'm seriously gunning for the Pokemon stat system.

[RobbyPants]

ooooh... Dump Con, too?

So what's the general consensus, then?

Str: Physical to-hit, damage (phys and range), HP, Fort
Dex: Ranged to-hit, Init, Rfx, AC
Wis/Wil/bleh: Will Saves
Int: Skill points

is that about right?

One other thing is you could get a defense (or two) per stat as well. So, Int could be given a defense against illusions, and perhaps other things you could think your way through.

[Vnonymous]

nobody gets the women

[TheFlatline]

I'd prefer dropping spot and search as skills, sense motive, and a few other things, rolling that and some other minor bonuses (including illusion defense) into Perception, and dumping Charisma altogether.

Nix dex bonus to initiative and let Perception take that over. as well.

So you have:

STR: Damage & To hit bonus
Dex: AC & Reflex save bonus
Con: Hit point & Fort save bonus
Int: Bonus arcane spells and skill points (and languages but who gives a fuck)
Wis: Divine spellcasting and Will save
Per: Spot/search/sense motive/etc & initiative bonus.

Now you could even ditch constitution and go with 5 stats. You wouldn't notice Con being gone too much, but you could keep it for the sake of the 6 stat block.

[Agrinja]

To raise another point of Charisma being stupid, why is the skill Bluff tied to it? If Charisma is some nebulous idea of being 'force of personality' or whatever, how does this help telling fibs? I'm seeing no connection between how accepted you are by personality, your strength of personality or whatever, to the ability to convincingly come up with falsehoods. Sounds more like intelligence to me, because if you've got a personality you can bounce bricks off of, but are about as sharp as a spherical lump of Crisco, you're still going to go "No Mr. Watchman sir, I didn't try and pick your pocket. Monkeys did it. That's the ticket! Monkeys!"

Granted social skill can help you come off a little more smooth on the delivery if you're intelligent enough to come up with something that passes muster, but if you're dumb you're still going to have a hard time getting a better reaction than a blank stare as they try and wrap their heads around the notion that you just said some dribble about monkeys, and said it so well you might actually believe it. So at this point you look at best like you've taken a few too many smacks to the ole skullhat.

Going a bit further, why is UMD Charisma based? Is your character so unholy delusional that they believe they can hurl fireballs so hard that they can convince magic items they can too? Magic is effectively some bullshit form of fancy technology. It's a mysterious force that some people work long and hard to be able to master it, and deliver it to the masses. Logically, activating it requires certain skills. Wizards and whatnot know this, and can use them. Yet when you UaMD, it's almost like you're trying to talk your television on.

Anyway, disregard me, sun's up and out, therefor I am Dazed.

[Prak]

• Captain Carrot is the closest the Discworld gets to having a Paladin. He isn't just friendly and nice, he doesn't just have Charisma, he has Krisma. His charismatic power practically is D&D Diplomancy, which is beyond "the fighter who apparently gets the girl".

Hell, more than that, he's so nice, the girl thinks he's too good to be true, and that she should just slink off in the night so no one can ever get hurt (as bad as they conceivably could, anyway) and his charisma keeps her around. He's so charismatic, you do the thing that's right for you, even when you think it's absolutely wrong.

Then which characters are getting laid? The Rogue? Nope, the Rogue needs Dexterity.

If you don't think dexterity is important in sex then you're doing something wrong. You can be big and strong and tough and have lots of stamina... but the rogue can do that thing with his tongue. and his fingers. and he doesn't literally rip the young lady's bodice off, he undoes it quickly, lays it aside and she doesn't need to go buy a new one. Oh, and there's this other thing he can do with his...

What stat is giving you the bonus to charming women? Willpower? Then what, is the Cleric the guy getting laid? Because that doesn't seem right.

This man got more pussy than you, I and probably the ten biggest "ladies men" of this forum would even know what to do with. combined. Hell, anyone of us could try and combine with him and we'd just bring him down.

Simple: don't tie it to one of the four stats. Make a feat for it, or as Koumei suggested, make it a class feature.

or, as she seemed to want to suggest, you find one that's cool with you and your buddies taking turns.

...and then you all knock each others' teeth out in the inevitable brawl over who pleases her more and the pretty girl of you party takes the party favour and shows her some new things...

[RobbyPants]

Is that Rasputin?

Edit
Just answered my own question by quoting the message and looking at the link URL. Yes. Yes it is Rasputin.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

Relevant Link