Does Charisma even make sense?

[Knaight]

I think it's a result of D&D being at the lower end in terms of number of basic attributes as regards RPGs (both TTRPG & CRPG), so it's hard to avoid lumping together characteristics that don't seem to have a lot in common. The only RPG I can remember that had less basic attributes than D&D is early DSA, which had Courage, Strength, Charisma, Intelligence and Dexterity.

I'd call it more middling than low - there's a lot of games with 4 or 5, not to mention Tristat (which has exactly as many as the name implies). There's going to be some amount of lumping regardless of how many are used, it's just a matter of figuring out how you want to do that for a particular game.

[Jay R]

I think it's a result of D&D being at the lower end in terms of number of basic attributes as regards RPGs (both TTRPG & CRPG), so it's hard to avoid lumping together characteristics that don't seem to have a lot in common. The only RPG I can remember that had less basic attributes than D&D is early DSA, which had Courage, Strength, Charisma, Intelligence and Dexterity.

TOON has Muscles, Zip, Smarts, and Chutzpah, which are close to Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence and Charisma.

Constitution is not needed in a game in which your character walks back onscreen three minutes after losing all hit points, falling down, and getting X's in their eyes. And Wisdom is clearly unnecessary and unwanted for a toon.

[Seharvepernfan]

Strength and Charisma are raw force. Intelligence and Dexterity are finesse, and can arguably do everything. Wisdom and Constitution are resistance.

That just screams humans, elves, and dwarves to me.

[cesius]

Charisma, as illustrated by Dr. Dinosaur.



Dr. Dinosaur is absolutely self-centered and so immune to attacks against his world view. He is the stable fulcrum upon which his actions leverage.



He doesn't always make good decisions, though, he never makes mistakes



For more delightful Dr. Dinosaur:

http://www.atomic-robo.com/atomicrobo/v8fcbd-cover

[vasilidor]

I always saw charisma score as a characters base capacity to deal with other people.

[SimonMoon6]

If you like the power/finesse/resistance (PFR) idea, you should look into nWoD. They have a total of 9 attributes, divided into 3 categories (mental/physical/social), all following the PFR system.

The same thing is true for Mayfair's DC Heroes RPG.

Dex/Str/Con
Int/Will/Mind
Influence/Aura/Spirit

And that's a good system if that is what is desired.

However, one of the big issues is making sure that each stat has something to do. In the DCH RPG, unfortunately "Mind" sort of doesn't do anything unless you're attacked by someone with mental powers. So, you have no way to tell even roughly how much Mind a fictional character has. (Technically, there is something about solving riddles, but it's a super obscure rule. And generally, the more "sane" someone is, the more Mind they are generally given, but the game has no way to connect sanity and Mind as game effects.)

But that's probably too much for D&D.

My issues with D&D's mental stats are that they started with "Wisdom is what clerics use", "Intelligence is what magic-users use," and "oh, yeah, charisma exists... we'll make paladins have lots of it." And that was pretty much it. However, while intelligence has obvious applications, "wisdom" is more nebulous, so it also helped with what would later be called Will saves. And then... they realized they forgot about perception. An issue of Dragon magazine (during the 1st edition days) suggested adding a Perception stat (and I did in my 1st edition games). So, when 3rd edition eventually came around, the game designers decided to add perception to the game... but unlike what Dragon suggested, they didn't just add a 7th stat. That would have been too radical. So, they just added it to an existing stat. And since intelligent people are typically the most perceptive people, they put perception abilities with... Wisdom? Okay, well, Wisdom doesn't do much of anything, so they were just throwing it a bone.

And so Wisdom (not Charisma) is the stat that makes no sense. It's a "will saves/perception/good at being a cleric" stat, none of which really goes together. So why is it all this stuff? Well, wisdom is the strength of your personality, so that's why it helps with Will saves. By the way, what is Charisma? It's the strength of your personality, which is why you can get people (and arcane forces, if you're a sorcerer) to do your bidding.

Uh-oh, there's this overlap. Force of Personality is two different stats, one which kind of makes sense (charisma) and one which doesn't (wisdom).

If I had the ability to redesign D&D's stats, here's what I'd do: (1) Dump Wisdom. It makes no sense. (2) Add a new ability score, "Perception". (3) Anything that used Wisdom for "force of personality" (Sorcerers, Paladins, Clerics, Will saves) will instead use Charisma. (4) Anything that used Wisdom for perception (various perception-related skills and monk's bonus to AC) would instead use Perception. Problem fixed.

Unless you want 9 stats so that you can have a version of DEX/STR/CON for both mental and social stats. Then, you still have more work to do.

[Thrudd]

The same thing is true for Mayfair's DC Heroes RPG.

Dex/Str/Con
Int/Will/Mind
Influence/Aura/Spirit

And that's a good system if that is what is desired.

However, one of the big issues is making sure that each stat has something to do. In the DCH RPG, unfortunately "Mind" sort of doesn't do anything unless you're attacked by someone with mental powers. So, you have no way to tell even roughly how much Mind a fictional character has. (Technically, there is something about solving riddles, but it's a super obscure rule. And generally, the more "sane" someone is, the more Mind they are generally given, but the game has no way to connect sanity and Mind as game effects.)

But that's probably too much for D&D.

My issues with D&D's mental stats are that they started with "Wisdom is what clerics use", "Intelligence is what magic-users use," and "oh, yeah, charisma exists... we'll make paladins have lots of it." And that was pretty much it. However, while intelligence has obvious applications, "wisdom" is more nebulous, so it also helped with what would later be called Will saves. And then... they realized they forgot about perception. An issue of Dragon magazine (during the 1st edition days) suggested adding a Perception stat (and I did in my 1st edition games). So, when 3rd edition eventually came around, the game designers decided to add perception to the game... but unlike what Dragon suggested, they didn't just add a 7th stat. That would have been too radical. So, they just added it to an existing stat. And since intelligent people are typically the most perceptive people, they put perception abilities with... Wisdom? Okay, well, Wisdom doesn't do much of anything, so they were just throwing it a bone.

And so Wisdom (not Charisma) is the stat that makes no sense. It's a "will saves/perception/good at being a cleric" stat, none of which really goes together. So why is it all this stuff? Well, wisdom is the strength of your personality, so that's why it helps with Will saves. By the way, what is Charisma? It's the strength of your personality, which is why you can get people (and arcane forces, if you're a sorcerer) to do your bidding.

Uh-oh, there's this overlap. Force of Personality is two different stats, one which kind of makes sense (charisma) and one which doesn't (wisdom).

If I had the ability to redesign D&D's stats, here's what I'd do: (1) Dump Wisdom. It makes no sense. (2) Add a new ability score, "Perception". (3) Anything that used Wisdom for "force of personality" (Sorcerers, Paladins, Clerics, Will saves) will instead use Charisma. (4) Anything that used Wisdom for perception (various perception-related skills and monk's bonus to AC) would instead use Perception. Problem fixed.

Unless you want 9 stats so that you can have a version of DEX/STR/CON for both mental and social stats. Then, you still have more work to do.

Exactly. D&D stats mostly don't make sense because later editions have given them a different purpose and meaning than what they were originally designed to do, or more accurately tacked-on new purposes instead of redesigning the system. D&D ability scores originally primarily describe "what class can you be", "do you get any extra HP", and "how many troops can you command". Every bit of detail added on top of that started breaking down the model, until you arrive where we are now, with stats that describe multiple unrelated things and no convincing way to make sense of the world this model describes.

[John Campbell]

Shadowrun draws direct equivalences between the physical and mental stats, to the extent that the mental stats replace the corresponding physical stats in the astral. If your astral form punches another astral form, it's your Charisma you do damage with, and their Willpower that they soak the damage with.

The equivalences are:

Physical	Mental
Body	Willpower
Quickness	Intelligence
Strength	Charisma

Body is basically Constitution. Quickness is basically Dexterity. Willpower is not the same thing as Wisdom, and IMAO makes more sense as a stat than Wisdom.

[tedcahill2]

I guess I just don't see charisma as mental power like some of you.

To me, raw mental power is intelligence. Charisma sits more in the realm of social power to me.

[Rhedyn]

In my favorite RPG, Savage Worlds, there are 5 main stats; Agility, Vigor, Smarts, Spirit, and Strength

Charisma is a flat mod to social skills and is modified by edges and hindrances like being attractive, a Noble, ugly, or having a serious personally flaw.

Force of personality falls under spirit and skills like persuasion are linked to smarts.

I don't have a problem with charisma in D&D, but it's not like I need it either.

[LibraryOgre]

I guess I just don't see charisma as mental power like some of you.

To me, raw mental power is intelligence. Charisma sits more in the realm of social power to me.

And I think that's how it might have originally been envisioned, but I also think there's a lot to be said for viewing Charisma as mental strength. There's an elegance in the mirrored attribute system, at the very least.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I guess I just don't see charisma as mental power like some of you.

To me, raw mental power is intelligence. Charisma sits more in the realm of social power to me.

I've seen lots of absolutely brilliant shrinking violets. And a lot of people who can't remember or reason worth anything but are bulldozers who can push their will on anyone around them, even if it doesn't make sense if you think about it.

[John Campbell]

I guess I just don't see charisma as mental power like some of you.

To me, raw mental power is intelligence. Charisma sits more in the realm of social power to me.

Part of the problem here, I think, is that "power" is such a vague term. I mean, why isn't Willpower the raw mental power stat? It's even got "power" in the name.

But if you break them down into Resistance, Speed and Finesse, and Affecting Others, this is obviously Con/Body, Dex/Quickness, and Strength on the Physical side.

Mental Resistance is obviously Willpower (D&D's Wisdom has been kind of crammed into this role, but it's a bad fit).

Mental Speed and Finesse? What lets you figure things out faster, come up with more creative solutions, and think outside the box? Seems like Intelligence to me.

And Affecting Others? Charisma. Yeah, it's social power, but "Social" is Mental Strength. It's how you apply your mental abilities to affect the world around you.

[Wardog]

Honestly, I feel like Wisdom is the one that makes the least sense. It's perception, but also willpower, but also intuition. Those are all pretty distinct. Even Dexterity, another catch-all at least has consistent individual parts. And it doesn't involve being wise! That's Intelligence, if anything.

I've always felt the same.

IMO "Wisdom" is better thought of as the equivilent of "force sensetivity" in Star Wars.

It's essentially how attuned you are to the mystical forces of the universe, which is why it is the primary casting stat for divine spellcasters, the bonus stat for most monk abilities, protects you against mind control, and enhances your perception.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I've always felt the same.

IMO "Wisdom" is better thought of as the equivilent of "force sensetivity" in Star Wars.

It's essentially how attuned you are to the mystical forces of the universe, which is why it is the primary casting stat for divine spellcasters, the bonus stat for most monk abilities, protects you against mind control, and enhances your perception.

In 5e D&D at least, it's not just sensitivity to the mystical, it's sensitivity to what's going on around you. Things it governs:

* Saving throws, mostly against mind-affecting or non-physical control.
* Ability checks:

Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.

Wisdom Checks
A Wisdom check might reflect an effort to read body language, understand someone’s feelings, notice things about the environment, or care for an injured person.

Key skills: Animal Handling (calming animals and figuring out their motives), Insight (understanding intentions of others), Medicine (determining what's wrong, mostly), Perception (which only is noticing, not deducing from that evidence), Survival

Other things:
* Intuitive feelings about which course to follow
* Tell whether something is undead.

[Seto]

In simplified terms, the way I see it is: if the world is affecting your mind (noticing things, resisting mental assault), you're dealing with Wisdom. If you're using your mind to affect the world (dealing with other people, UMDing items), that's Charisma. And if you're looking at things stored inside your mind or happening inside your mind (knowing things, reasoning in abstract terms), Intelligence is what you want.

[Quertus]

If I had the ability to redesign D&D's stats, here's what I'd do: (1) Dump Wisdom. It makes no sense. (2) Add a new ability score, "Perception". (3) Anything that used Wisdom for "force of personality" (Sorcerers, Paladins, Clerics, Will saves) will instead use Charisma. (4) Anything that used Wisdom for perception (various perception-related skills and monk's bonus to AC) would instead use Perception. Problem fixed.

Unless you want 9 stats so that you can have a version of DEX/STR/CON for both mental and social stats. Then, you still have more work to do.

Would you have monks know how to avoid attacks based on how charismatic they are?

Exactly. D&D stats mostly don't make sense because later editions have given them a different purpose and meaning than what they were originally designed to do, or more accurately tacked-on new purposes instead of redesigning the system. D&D ability scores originally primarily describe "what class can you be", "do you get any extra HP", and "how many troops can you command". Every bit of detail added on top of that started breaking down the model, until you arrive where we are now, with stats that describe multiple unrelated things and no convincing way to make sense of the world this model describes.

I'm pretty sure Strength affected how hard you hit, Dexterity affected how likely you were to avoid blows. I can't say before 2e whether Intelligence affected the number of languages you knew, or your chances of comprehending a scrap of arcane lore. But these don't feel like "breaking the model" to me. Now, granted, shoehorning intimidate into strength or charisma, and perception into intelligence or wisdom, may have issues. But I think ours a bit of an exaggeration to say that everything broke the system.

I guess I just don't see charisma as mental power like some of you.

To me, raw mental power is intelligence. Charisma sits more in the realm of social power to me.

Same. In fact, IME, people who are good at convincing others are often rather... mentally deficient, especially in the realm of realizing when they are wrong. Charisma is, if anything, a force anti-multiplier (force divider?) to mental power.

And I think that's how it might have originally been envisioned, but I also think there's a lot to be said for viewing Charisma as mental strength. There's an elegance in the mirrored attribute system, at the very least.

Obviously, I disagree. Care to try to convince me of the merits of charisma as mental strength?

I've seen lots of absolutely brilliant shrinking violets. And a lot of people who can't remember or reason worth anything but are bulldozers who can push their will on anyone around them, even if it doesn't make sense if you think about it.

Same. And I've lived, if not at, then at least somewhere in proximity of both ends of that spectrum.

Part of the problem here, I think, is that "power" is such a vague term. I mean, why isn't Willpower the raw mental power stat? It's even got "power" in the name.

But if you break them down into Resistance, Speed and Finesse, and Affecting Others, this is obviously Con/Body, Dex/Quickness, and Strength on the Physical side.

Mental Resistance is obviously Willpower (D&D's Wisdom has been kind of crammed into this role, but it's a bad fit).

Mental Speed and Finesse? What lets you figure things out faster, come up with more creative solutions, and think outside the box? Seems like Intelligence to me.

And Affecting Others? Charisma. Yeah, it's social power, but "Social" is Mental Strength. It's how you apply your mental abilities to affect the world around you.

Personally, I apply my mental strength by writing code, solving algorithms, creating tactics and strategies.

When do I use charisma in determining a build order, or creating a TO character design? When do I use charisma solving a crossword puzzle or riddle or in Sudoku? When do I use charisma in calculating the effectiveness of a SoD spell, or weighing the design or tactical options for my Mech?

Charisma doesn't seem like mental strength from my experience.

[Kami2awa]

Tbh, all the stats are abstract or simplifications to a degree:

Strength: Doesn't differentiate between upper/lower body strength, body weight, and so on.
Dexterity: Encompasses fine manipulation, agility, contortionism, and reaction time.
Constitution: Encompasses resistance to many different diseases with very different effects, poisons, supernatural effects, endurance, breath holding...
Charisma: Attractiveness, force of personality, empathy, manipulation, acting ability, faith (in terms of powering Turn Undead).
Wisdom: Willpower, self-awareness, reasoning, faith (again)
Intelligence: Many, many different kinds, and also knowledge (and ability to actually apply it) plus linguistic ability.

All of these things could have their own stat! Reducing it to six means there is necessarily some generalisation and overlap present.

[hymer]

I'm pretty sure Strength affected how hard you hit

Actually, it affected how good you were at getting stuck doors unstuck, IIRC. Maybe how much loot you could carry. It had no effect on how hard you hit, or how well you hit from the beginning of D&D.

[Quertus]

Actually, it affected how good you were at getting stuck doors unstuck, IIRC. Maybe how much loot you could carry. It had no effect on how hard you hit, or how well you hit from the beginning of D&D.

Really? Huh. I haven't even looked at "1e", let alone my older stuff in so long, I'm not even sure it survived my last move(s). I guess my senility won this round.

[hamishspence]

Really? Huh. I haven't even looked at "1e", let alone my older stuff in so long, I'm not even sure it survived my last move(s). I guess my senility won this round.

"How much XP you get" was the main reason for having a high Strength in early D&D.

However, at some point in the BCEMI era, it got applied to Melee To Hit and Melee Damage.

[hymer]

I guess my senility won this round.

It's got reach, but it's weak in the clinches. My money's on you for the rematch.

[LibraryOgre]

Obviously, I disagree. Care to try to convince me of the merits of charisma as mental strength?

As I said, some of it goes down to elegance of design... a clear correspondence between the physical and mental attributes. It ties in to the traditional uses of the ability; your Charisma affects how you influence people... how they take you in the instant, through Reaction checks, and how you affect them long term, through loyalty modifiers and maximum number of henchmen.

It's tempting to view Intelligence as Mental Strength... the horsepower your mind can bring to bear on the problem. And, if you do that, you might recast Charisma as mental dexterity... the ability to adapt yourself to others, making you more appealing. But I don't think that works as well. Intelligence is not just horsepower, but also parallel processing. Intelligence is being able to integrate multiple discrete thoughts into a single whole... Charisma is being able to mash a single idea into the space you want it to fit in other's heads.

Actually, it affected how good you were at getting stuck doors unstuck, IIRC. Maybe how much loot you could carry. It had no effect on how hard you hit, or how well you hit from the beginning of D&D.

Perhaps I missed a specific reference, here, but AD&D strength WAS how hard you hit, as well as how accurately. A 17 strength would give you a +1 to hit and +1 to damage in melee combat, as well as a set chance to open stuck doors, or to bend bars or lift portcullises.

[Dimers]

TOON has Muscles, Zip, Smarts, and Chutzpah, which are close to Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence and Charisma.

Human-Occupied Landfill uses five traits -- Greymatta, Meat, Mouth, Feets, Nuts. Two charisma-related traits there.

[Lord Torath]

"How much XP you get" was the main reason for having a high Strength in early D&D.

However, at some point in the BCEMI era, it got applied to Melee To Hit and Melee Damage.

In 1980, the Moldvay Basic rulebook had bonuses or penalties to hit and damage (and opening doors) for Strength scores outside the 9-12 range. AD&D had their strength bonuses to hit and damage a year earlier.

[hymer]

Perhaps I missed a specific reference, here, but AD&D strength WAS how hard you hit, as well as how accurately. A 17 strength would give you a +1 to hit and +1 to damage in melee combat, as well as a set chance to open stuck doors, or to bend bars or lift portcullises.

Ah, young man, young man. Sit thee down, and let us longbeards tell ye of how it was in the olden days. Not this newfangled stuff with 'advanced' or 'editions'.

Truth be told, I never played anything that old, but it was indeed the case in the earliest D&D versions that ability scores mattered a lot less, inluding not having direct effect on fighting (except maybe constitution?). Though I think dex gave a bonus to hit with ranged weapons.

Edit: Found a copy of the Basic Rules edited by Eric Holmes, and I ebelieve that's as old as it gets while still being called D&D. Dex did indeed affect missile attacks. 9-12 was neutral, above that +1 to hit, and below that -1. Con 18 gave +3hp per hit die. Prime requisites (you know, fighting man has strength, magic-user has int, etc.) affected XP by giving a bonus if it's high or a penalty if it's low. There's no mention I can find that strength affects to hit chance or damage dealt.

[hamishspence]

In 1980, the Moldvay Basic rulebook had bonuses or penalties to hit and damage (and opening doors) for Strength scores outside the 9-12 range.

My 1978 Holmes Basic rulebook didn't have them.

AD&D had their strength bonuses to hit and damage a year earlier.

Maybe it was the changeover from Holmes-era to "AD&D" that started the trend - with Moldvay Basic taking some design cues from AD&D 1st ed?

[Thrudd]

Str was "how good you are at fighting/being a fighter"(via bonuses to hit and damage) and also how much stuff you can carry and opening doors. Somewhat but not totally related things. It's the least problematic.

Dex was how good of a thief you are via bonuses to thief skills, which includes moving silent, hiding and climbing as well as finding and removing traps, hearing noises and reading scrolls. There are at least 3 different categories of things there. On top of that, it gives a bonus to defense and to missile weapon attacks. These are mostly unrelated things in terms of actual abilities required- D&D makes it all one thing because it's all "thief stuff" (Bilbo the burglar is good at throwing stuff, remember).

[Quertus]

As I said, some of it goes down to elegance of design... a clear correspondence between the physical and mental attributes. It ties in to the traditional uses of the ability; your Charisma affects how you influence people... how they take you in the instant, through Reaction checks, and how you affect them long term, through loyalty modifiers and maximum number of henchmen.

It's tempting to view Intelligence as Mental Strength... the horsepower your mind can bring to bear on the problem. And, if you do that, you might recast Charisma as mental dexterity... the ability to adapt yourself to others, making you more appealing. But I don't think that works as well. Intelligence is not just horsepower, but also parallel processing. Intelligence is being able to integrate multiple discrete thoughts into a single whole... Charisma is being able to mash a single idea into the space you want it to fit in other's heads.

So, I've been thinking about this. And, of course, being me, I'm looking at it as code.

To me, intelligence is the core of the code - how fast it runs, how complex the data it can process is, etc. What it can do.

Charisma is how pretty the interface is, how likely people are to accept it at a glance, and how likely they are to fall in love with it, and love it despite its faults.

But it's that last line of yours that gave me some pause. I couldn't quite figure out what to do with this notion of getting an idea to fit into others' heads.

I mean, yes, from a code standpoint, that's a matter of how robust and dynamic the interface is, to allow various programs to communicate with one another effectively.

But I finally realized that the real issue is focused around a single word: "mash".

Sure, there's the notion of trying to force an idea into someone's head. Prop up half a dozen supposedly respectable people on tv, have them use the exact same buzzwords over and over again, until it becomes part of everyone's thought process. It's a done thing, brute force insertion of ideas into the collective conscious.

But one on one, or even one on many, that's a bit harder. IME, the more common technique in such situations is to attempt to pair down the idea, modify the delivery to match the target audience. Make the idea relatable to the people you're talking to.

Someone who just keeps trying to eloquently shove an idea in where it doesn't go may have made their Charisma roll, but they failed something. From WoD, I'd say that they failed their Wits roll. Which then lets me tie communication into mental stats - specifically, mental agility. Whereas Charisma is social force.

However, if you're trying to force Charisma and Intelligence - two measures of force - into the roles of mental force and agility? Obviously, it's a tough call, and it's going to be a bad fit with some rough spots either way, but, as an introvert, I'm partial to keeping Intelligence internal power, and Charisma external agility. If you flip that to an extroverted stance, where what you care about is your impact on the outside world, I can see where the alternate casting would be appealing.

[Nifft]

Charisma doesn't make sense.

Charisma makes pretty.

Intelligence makes sense.