PDA

View Full Version : How should one roleplay reacting to extremely high CHA characters?



randomhero00
2010-10-16, 04:40 PM
Like say with charisma 22+, so inhuman levels of beauty and charm. How do you react to such? Reacting realistically almost seems game breaking to me. Anyone that cool and hot would just be fawned over instantly by everyone with a pulse. People with 18 cha in real life are already drooled over. Imagine someone with 30 charisma...

So far all the games I've been in charisma has sadly been pretty much ignored. I think its because they/we don't know how to properly roleplay it. Tips?

HunterOfJello
2010-10-16, 05:08 PM
It really depends on the character. This is usually a scenario played out on every television show ever created. There are all sorts of ways that characters could react.


The creepy rogue might try stealing some of her undergarments.

A barbarian might try to steal her away to make her his bride.

A handsome bard might try to woo her.

Any female character might become extremely jealous or fall for her too.

An evil spellcaster might cast a spell on her face to make it look uglier (either forever or just for a while.)

Zaydos
2010-10-16, 05:11 PM
Assuming 3.X 20th level humans can have 26 Charisma without magical aid so 22 is not superhuman (+3 for being venerable, +5 for level). Also Charisma !/= beauty. Nymph's have 18 Charisma but are supernaturally beautiful beyond the equal of any human.

Maryring
2010-10-16, 05:14 PM
Personally, I'd say that reaction to charisma is more dependant upon wisdom. High wisdom allows you to be less easily "knocked out" by high charisma. For example, a drop dead gorgeous woman could easily seduce half the town male population to eat from her hand, but the wise priest, or the insightful librarian would acknowledge her beauty, but not let themselves be used by it.

Dr.Epic
2010-10-16, 05:14 PM
Like say with charisma 22+, so inhuman levels of beauty and charm. How do you react to such? Reacting realistically almost seems game breaking to me. Anyone that cool and hot would just be fawned over instantly by everyone with a pulse. People with 18 cha in real life are already drooled over. Imagine someone with 30 charisma...

So far all the games I've been in charisma has sadly been pretty much ignored. I think its because they/we don't know how to properly roleplay it. Tips?

Cha doesn't equal physical beauty. It's a cool, convincing personality.

As to how one should react, it depends on what sort of emotion they should be trying to convey. If they trying to be intimidating (like the skill) then the person should be terrified. But in general people should be very interested, trusting, and delighted by them.

Fouredged Sword
2010-10-16, 05:18 PM
It's about control as well. A high cha character can disaper better than a normal person with the disguise skill. Basicly they can simply get away with more than your average person. People are slow to hate them, quick to like them, easy to fear them, and simple to manipulate. The player roleplays howerver they wish, other people are simply easier to control.

randomhero00
2010-10-16, 05:32 PM
Assuming 3.X 20th level humans can have 26 Charisma without magical aid so 22 is not superhuman (+3 for being venerable, +5 for level). Also Charisma !/= beauty. Nymph's have 18 Charisma but are supernaturally beautiful beyond the equal of any human.

by human I meant average human commoner. Also, don't forget items and tomes.

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 05:35 PM
Jealousy and envy are just as strong a reaction to high charisma as attraction. Even in the real world we have people who hate celebrities and political figures not because they're bad at their jobs but because of something totally nonsensical like how they look or who they're affiliated with.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 05:35 PM
by human I meant average human commoner.Being better than an average commoner doesn't (necessarily) mean inhuman levels of anything.

Zaydos
2010-10-16, 05:35 PM
My point though is that 22 Charisma isn't that amazing in a world where people can routinely obtain 26 or 37. And again Charisma !/= beauty. Charisma is that ability to convince people, to lead, and most importantly that spiritual essence that compels others (and in the case of Sorcerers reality) to bend to your will.

Valameer
2010-10-16, 05:43 PM
No, charisma does not equal beauty, but beauty is not the only thing that makes people stand out.

Whether randomhero meant beauty or not doesn't really matter: his point stands. People with high charisma (that aren't masking it somehow) should usually make people stop and take notice. Especially common npcs.

If [insert your favorite actor/musician] walked into a place you commonly frequent, they would get noticed. Some of them would get noticed even without their star power. If they need a pen - they get a pen! If they're short a dollar or two - oh well, that doesn't matter! People get star-struck whether they think they will or not.

Usually as a DM I try to look over people's int, wis and cha scores. I don't *really* care if they don't play to their int and wis very closely, that's not really up to me. But for playing up their charisma, the ball is in my court. So I have regular npcs take notice and act friendly.

PCs, well, that's up to them. I don't think you could tell a fellow player "My guy is really charming, your guy should be nicer to me." Well, I guess you could. It would be funny.

Also, charisma of up to 36 aside - even if that's possible, it's not common. Normal people *will* notice someone with over 20 charisma, if that person wants to be noticed. I'm sorry but people are shallow. They see a strong, confident, non-hideous person, and it draws their attention.

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 06:02 PM
Being better than an average commoner doesn't (necessarily) mean inhuman levels of anything.

An 18 is the upper limits of a human's ability. Anything higher than an 18 is literally superhuman.


My point though is that 22 Charisma isn't that amazing in a world where people can routinely obtain 26 or 37. And again Charisma !/= beauty. Charisma is that ability to convince people, to lead, and most importantly that spiritual essence that compels others (and in the case of Sorcerers reality) to bend to your will.

Only if "people can routinely" means less than one-tenth of one percent unless your game world is populated entirely by PC classed NPCs with crazy ridiculous stats or happens to be called Forgotten Realms.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 06:10 PM
An 18 is the upper limits of a human's ability.It's not, as has been demonstrated in this very thread.

Unless you, too, mean "average human commoner" when you say "human".

Fax Celestis
2010-10-16, 06:13 PM
An 18 is the upper limits of a human's ability. Anything higher than an 18 is literally superhuman.

...according to?

Zaydos
2010-10-16, 06:22 PM
An 18 is the upper limits of a human's ability. Anything higher than an 18 is literally superhuman.


Age modifiers. 21 is max for a 1st level commoner. And an average metropolis will have 20th level aristocrats or others with 20 to 23 + age + items or somewhere between 29 and 37. So it's not that rare.

Curmudgeon
2010-10-16, 06:25 PM
How to react? Mostly, you say little and observe intently. Think of those old newsreels with tens of thousands of Nazis standing in neat rows listening to Hitler speak.

DeltaEmil
2010-10-16, 06:32 PM
Charisma 22 only means that the creature has a +6 bonus to diplomacy, bluff, gather information, intimidate, disguise and whatever other social skill there is, making it easier for him or her to achieve the desired effect.
I'm not ever going to allow charisma, no matter how high or how low, to define itself as beauty and personality. These traits are something the player can decide for his or her character without having to max a stat. Having to roll with a negative modifier should be the only penalty for low ability scores.

It's up for the player to decide how his or her character looks like. It's up to the game moderator and the dice rolls how npcs react to a player character.

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 07:34 PM
Unless you, too, mean "average human commoner" when you say "human".

I mean the average NPC, not necessarily a commoner.


...according to?

According to the default character generation that has been used for the past 30 years. Obviously your mileage will vary if you use something that isn't 3d6 or 4d6 best 3. Anything higher than 18 is superhuman.


Age modifiers. 21 is max for a 1st level commoner. And an average metropolis will have 20th level aristocrats or others with 20 to 23 + age + items or somewhere between 29 and 37. So it's not that rare.

NPCs are built using the common array. Even the most elite NPC will have 15 charisma. With age modifiers, that puts him 18 + 4 more if he gained 20 levels, putting him at 22 but a level 20 character is pretty much superhuman.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 07:36 PM
NPCs are built using the common array. Even the most elite NPC will have 15 charisma. With age modifiers, that puts him 18 max.If he's level 3 or lower. NPCs do come in levels higher than that, though.

[Edit]: Also, "upper limit" is not something set by the average fella.

Zaydos
2010-10-16, 07:37 PM
NPCs are built using the common array. Even the most elite NPC will have 15 charisma. With age modifiers, that puts him 18 max.

With magic items, he'll have higher but that already proves my point about 18+ being superhuman.

Commoners and warriors are built on the average array, and most NPCs are built on the elite array and according to the DMG Lv 20 characters in NPC classes are not that uncommon, so that 23 + Items is fully possible, and if the DM decides to give the NPC better than the basic elite array (which is fully within human possibility) 26 + is possible.

Now 27 or higher is in fact super-human, anything less is not.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-10-16, 07:44 PM
If he's level 3 or lower.

A Human Paragon of third level can pick up a +2 to a stat. IMO, "superhuman" in terms of charisma comes after 24 Charisma - 18 base, +3 age, +1 from fourth level, +2 from human paragon. Everything afterward is just the ridiculousness that high levels introduce.

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 08:00 PM
If he's level 3 or lower. NPCs do come in levels higher than that, though.

[Edit]: Also, "upper limit" is not something set by the average fella.

I would definitely say someone 4th level and above is superhuman. The DMG backs that up.

"Most commoners never attain higher than 2nd or 3rd level in their whole lives."

"A typical blacksmith might only be 3rd level but the world's greatest blacksmith is probably a 20th level expert."


Commoners and warriors are built on the average array, and most NPCs are built on the elite array and according to the DMG Lv 20 characters in NPC classes are not that uncommon, so that 23 + Items is fully possible, and if the DM decides to give the NPC better than the basic elite array (which is fully within human possibility) 26 + is possible.

Now 27 or higher is in fact super-human, anything less is not.

Only elite NPCs are built using the elite array. Every monster is built on the average array so how does it make any sense that every non-monster NPC is built on the elite array, something that should be reserved for powerful characters or PCs because it equals the standard point buy!

In a metropolis you'll have four 16-20th level aristocrats, eight 10th level aristocrats, sixteen 5th level aristocrats, and (assuming a population of, lets say 26,000) 130 1st level aristocrats. Assuming all of them use the elite array and are max age (which is absolutely ridiculous), the 20th and 10th level aristocrats will have a score above 20, the 5th level aristocrats will have a score of 222, and everyone else will have a score of 18. The number of aristocrats with a charisma score above 18 in a city of 26,000 would make up .10769230769230768% of the population... definitely not common.

D&D's naturalism works when you step back and take a look at it.

Ormur
2010-10-16, 08:10 PM
Of course in reality people can't be relegated to 6 abilities, for which they roll 3d6 and change accordingly as they age. Reality is also not a level based RPG either and average people certainly don't reach 20 levels. Any sort of attempt at simulation of reality by D&D rules probably wouldn't allow but a tiny percentage to gain even the first level based stat increase, if any. Since we're comparing D&D characters with real people I think we can presume that anything that has the equivalent of over 20 in Charisma is very, very rare in the real world.

For people with such a high charisma I imagine they are the sort of people that are always surrounded by friends, seemingly effortlessly advance in any social hierarchy and can captivate audiences, dominate conversations and almost hypnotize people with their presence. I suppose it can manifest in many ways, the outrageous rock star that thrills fans with their antics and coolness, the politician that always says the right thing to people and looks like he genuinely cares about each and everyone, the preacher that arouses passion in the audience and inspires fanatic devotion.

It must also depend on other mental stats and, to use the D&D simplification, alignment. Someone might seem very charming at first glance but lack any substance or maybe even be a complete sociopath. On the other hand he could really be the nicest guy there is.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 08:21 PM
The number of aristocrats with a charisma score above 18 in a city of 26,000 would make up .10769230769230768% of the population... definitely not common.No one is claiming it to be common, people were just pointing out that 18 isn't the upper limit of human charisma.

Godskook
2010-10-16, 08:22 PM
Charisma is like social lube. It makes interacting with people *EASIER* not *EFFORT-LESS*. Kinda like how coupons make shopping *CHEAP* not *FREE*. Charisma only gets you so far, and among some, not far at all. Hell, some of the most 'popular' people in the world only have 12 or 14 Cha, relying on several lucky crits to get them the rest of the way to where they are.

A good example of someone with a really high charisma is Rayne Summers from LICD. He's probably written with a 20+ Cha, and it shows. However, he still makes enemies and lacks the intelligence or wisdom to maintain anything resembling a long-term relationship with a woman.

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 08:24 PM
No one is claiming it to be common, people were just pointing out that 18 isn't the upper limit of human charisma.

It is the upper limit of human charisma. I just pointed out that, using D&D's standard assumptions for world building, no average human could ever have a natural score above 18. If the limit of human charisma is 18, then achieving anything higher than that is superhuman. A 4th level character, magic spells, enchanted items, or being a paragon are most certainly grounds for calling a character superhuman.

I also made a mistake in my math above. The highest level aristocrat is 1d4 + community value so you'll only ever see a 16th level aristocrat.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 08:27 PM
It is the upper limit of human charisma.No it bloody well isn't. Your very own numbers show 1-in-1000 to go above it. If you can go higher with perfectly mundane means, then it's not the limit.

What scores an average human has has nothing to do with it.

SurlySeraph
2010-10-16, 08:33 PM
16th level means 4 stat increases. 15 Cha + 3 (Venerable) +4 (stat increases) makes 22 fully possible for a normal human. I really don't see why you're continuing to say that 18 is the human max.

The_Admiral
2010-10-16, 08:34 PM
It's about control as well. A high cha character can disaper better than a normal person with the disguise skill. Basicly they can simply get away with more than your average person. People are slow to hate them, quick to like them, easy to fear them, and simple to manipulate. The player roleplays howerver they wish, other people are simply easier to control.

Ah Mary Sue (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue)

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 08:44 PM
No it bloody well isn't. Your very own numbers show 1-in-1000 to go above it. If you can go higher with perfectly mundane means, then it's not the limit.

What scores an average human has has nothing to do with it.

There seems to be some confusion here so let me rephrase it.

An 18 score is the natural maximum for a human. Using RAW, there's no way for a human to achieve a 19 outside of reaching the 4th level (which the DMG describes as being extraordinary from a world building standpoint), magic, or some weird template. I'm not saying humans can't achieve higher than 18, I'm saying that achieving more than 18 literally makes you superhuman by the default world building rules. A human with 19 charisma is superhuman.

Greenish
2010-10-16, 08:45 PM
I really don't see why you're continuing to say that 18 is the human max.Putting the carriage before the horse. He has decided that 18 is the human max (because it's the highest you can roll with 3d6), and anything above that must be superhuman.

When people pointed out aging modifiers, he switched to maintaining that 15 is the max base cha an NPC can have (because apparently 1st level PCs with 3d6 stat generation are superhuman).

When people pointed out bonus from levelling, he decided that over level 4 is superhuman.

When someone brought up human paragon, he decided it's superhuman.


Seeing a trend here? :smallamused:

Valameer
2010-10-16, 08:56 PM
Ah Mary Sue (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MarySue)

Does not follow. How is a character with high charisma equal to a perfectly disgusting self-insert character who can do no wrong?

Are you trying to say people shouldn't react this way to a character with high charisma, or do you instead have something against the characters themselves, who have high charisma?

22 cha nets you a +6 bonus on all social skills, including intimidate, so really, you could play it up however you want - from James Bond to Inara to Caesar to Dracula.

Note how you'd probably want to be any of the above character's friends, since they are so awesome. But none are Mary Sues. Except maybe Bond.

Also, the PHB lists a score of 18 as 'tremendous' as a guideline for us here. I don't want to say anything is 'the human limit' since humans are often superheroes in D&D, but you can imagine that if 36 charisma is 'double tremendous,' those people would have quite the incredible force of personality. :smallbiggrin:

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 08:57 PM
Putting the carriage before the horse. He has decided that 18 is the human max (because it's the highest you can roll with 3d6), and anything above that must be superhuman.

First off, don't put words in my mouth.

Second, the highest ability score a 1st level human can naturally have by RAW is 18. Period.


When people pointed out aging modifiers, he switched to maintaining that 15 is the max base cha an NPC can have (because apparently 1st level PCs with 3d6 stat generation are superhuman).

All NPCs are built using the standard array of 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10. Only special or elite NPCs are built using 15, 14, 13, 12, 10. If you use dice rolls to determine an NPCs abilities, you are almost always going to put them in the elite range.


When people pointed out bonus from levelling, he decided that over level 4 is superhuman.

The DMG, on multiple occasions (I quoted two) uses the 4th level as a cusp for being extraordinary.


When someone brought up human paragon, he decided it's superhuman.

Paragon (Noun): A model of excellence or perfection

Also, to quote Unearthed Arcana.

"Beyond that, they possess powers or capabilities that supersede those of normal members of their race." Emphasis mine.


Seeing a trend here? :smallamused:
A trend of poor reading comprehension?

Does nobody understand the definition of superhuman?

1: being above the human
2: exceeding normal human power, size, or capability

The normal human has a maximum score of 18. If you have above 18, you're above human. How is it that nobody understands this? Do people think that being a superhuman means you have to shoot lasers out of your eyes and fly?

Zaydos
2010-10-16, 09:08 PM
First off, don't put words in my mouth.

Second, the highest ability score a 1st level human can naturally have by RAW is 18. Period.

RAW it is 26 +5 from level up (which is a natural increase) and +3 from aging, or is age not natural now.


All NPCs are built using the standard array of 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10. Only special or elite NPCs are built using 15, 14, 13, 12, 10.

No NPCs are built using the standard array; characters with only NPC classes are built with the non-elite array or 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8. Typical NPC with PC classes are built with the elite array. Special or elite NPCs are built however the DM chooses.




The DMG, on multiple occasions (I quoted two) uses the 4th level as extraordinary abilities.

No it said the majority of commoners don't rise above 3rd level, that's not an extraordinary ability. A human bonus feat is an extraordinary ability; and note how every human gets those. Note also how a thorp (or any human community with at least 20 inhabitants) has on average at least 1 7th level character in it (check page 139 of the DMG) so it is not that rare.


Paragon (Noun): A model of excellence or perfection

Nothing superhuman though, the peak of human ability is just that the peak;
superhuman is above or beyond that.

superhuman
–adjective
1.
above or beyond what is human; having a higher nature or greater powers than humans have: a superhuman being.


A trend of poor reading comprehension?

No back tracking.

Edit: Your edit also shows you don't know the D&D usage of supersede which is to overwrite/replace and has nothing to do with being beyond human limits which is what superhuman does.

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 09:31 PM
Okay, let me break this down into simple figures.


RAW it is 26 +5 from level up (which is a natural increase) and +3 from aging, or is age not natural now.

1. A level 1 character will have a score between 3-18.

2. 3-18 is the normal human level.

3. Being above the human level is supernatural/human.


No NPCs are built using the standard array; characters with only NPC classes are built with the non-elite array or 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8. Typical NPC with PC classes are built with the elite array. Special or elite NPCs are built however the DM chooses.



Except where noted otherwise, each creature is assumed to have the standard array of ability scores before racial adjustments (all 11s and 10s).



Humanoid warriors are generally built with the nonelite array. Emphasis mine.



Advanced creatures are built using the elite array.

Typical NPCs are not elite. Where do you see the level 1 elf warrior having an elite array? Where do you see the level 1 dwarf warrior with the elite array? You may be confused by the example section in the DMG but I'll quote that for you



All PCs and all the NPCs described in this section are "elite," a cut above average. Emphasis mine. Please note that each example NPC happens to be 5th level or above.


No it said the majority of commoners don't rise above 3rd level, that's not an extraordinary ability. A human bonus feat is an extraordinary ability; and note how every human gets those. Note also how a thorp (or any human community with at least 20 inhabitants) has on average at least 1 7th level character in it (check page 139 of the DMG) so it is not that rare.

If the majority of people can't do it, it most certainly is extraordinary.

I must have missed the ruling saying feats are extraordinary abilities because my PHB sure doesn't say so. I hope you have a source to quote that isn't Sage Advice or some implied rule found in a splat book.

Also, commoners make up a small minority of the character classes as a whole. A high level commoner might not be rare, but every other class except the expert most certainly is rare. Seeing 2 out of 16 classes with a noticeable presence most certainly makes the classes as a whole rare.


Nothing superhuman though, the peak of human ability is just that the peak; superhuman is above or beyond that.



"Beyond that, they possess powers or capabilities that supersede those of normal members of their race."
Emphasis mine.


Edit: Your edit also shows you don't know the D&D usage of supersede which is to overwrite/replace and has nothing to do with being beyond human limits which is what superhuman does.

Please quote a source that gives the definition of supersede within the rulebooks, thank you.

Considering you must be a member of the race to qualify for a racial paragon, being of the paragon class most certainly doesn't supersede the race's benefits as you seem to imply.

Valameer
2010-10-16, 09:37 PM
Ok guys, chill a bit. I think we can settle this.

Not to put words in either of your mouths, but I'm about to possibly probably put words in both of your mouths. :smallsmile: Forgive me.

jmbrown must come from a background of older editions, where 18 was the highest you could possibly roll - no modifiers for high level or any of this non-sense, so, outside of arcane or divine intervention, 18 was the highest you could possibly naturally get, as a human.

I doubt he's arguing that you cannot go above 18 charisma in 3.5, just that, especially in his own games, 18 represents the peak of what the average, low brow human can possibly achieve. Possibly 21 including age; those charming elderly folk. :smallwink:

Characters that go beyond this limit in his games - correct me if I'm wrong - well, they're special. They are player characters or main antagonists. The movers and shakers of the world. Just like how James Bond charms his way past every member of the female sex (except M, later on). There is only one James Bond, though.

There is nothing wrong with him running his games this way. I don't think the rules are for or against him, it's all a matter of taste. Who really keeps track of those 20th level aristocrats and what their charisma score is, anyway? It could be 11, it could be 26. If he wants to say 26 is special, why not?

Now Zaydos seems to be troubled with using the term 'super-human' since, in 3.5 D&D 'super-human' is a very difficult line to draw. In fact, I would argue it's not even possible. Human wizards are capable of completely altering reality. Beyond that, humans have been known to ascend to God-hood. I don't know if they are no longer considered human at this point... but since they once were, you could argue that humans have St. Cuthbert-plus potential.

This being so, it is simply impossible to classify someone with terminology like 'super-human.'

So instead of saying super-human I move that we say something more like super-hero. Since no one disagrees that powerful characters in D&D are the equivalent of super-heroes. Gods, I hope no one disagrees...

What I don't get is why can't we be friends? :smallsmile:

jmbrown
2010-10-16, 09:53 PM
Yes, I do come from the older editions where 18 is the highest you can roll but nothing changes in 3e. 18 is still the highest you can normally roll. That's the "human natural" to me. If you're above 18, you're above the human natural. You're supernatural or superhuman.

I'm not saying 18 is the end of the road, I'm saying it's the peak for a natural human. If you're so amazing at what you do that you get a 19, congratulations you're superhuman. You can do things that a normal human can't do. Casting spells, having supernatural abilities, being enchanted by magic -- these are all supernatural things which put you above normal humans.

I don't see the big deal with calling a 70 year old superhuman. The fact that he began life with an 18 meant he was at the peak of normal humans. In his old years, he achieved knowledge/wisdom/force of personality that absolutely exceeds that of the normal human.

What's the big deal with calling a 4th level commoner superhuman? He began life with an 18 in strength. He spent years and years plowing fields to amass XP at a stupidly slow rate and god dammit he earned that 4th level! The fruits of labor is 19 strength, putting him above any normal human. Sure, any level 1 "elite" PC could take his head off but Farmer Big McLargeHuge is the talk of the town and a looker among commoners.

To tie this inane deviation back into the topic at hand, if you have over 18 charisma you're going to attract attention. It doesn't matter how hideous, beautiful, or timid you are, your very supernatural force of personality draws people to you like a magnet or drives them away.

Edit: And for the record, because of my start in AD&D I find "Gygaxian naturalism" to be paramount to good world building. I'm fascinated by the number crunching of "How many people have X ability scores, what is the average of Y people among X villagers." I loved the old adventure modules like The Village of Hommlet where every single person was statted out. I love the idea that nearly everyone in the world being a 0th-level character while the PCs are the only people who actually have levels. Using Zaydos' assumptions, if every non-PC had the elite array then majority of the population would be adventurers, not commoners.

3e has its own wonderful naturalism and it's quite possibly the last edition to assume these things now that 4e just tossed them out the window.

Brendan
2010-10-16, 09:55 PM
RAW it is 26 +5 from level up (which is a natural increase) and +3 from aging, or is age not natural now.


as I understand it, a level 1 human does not gain a +5 to a score due to leveling up. At first level. Without leveling.
What jmbrown was saying is that a level one human can have an 18 as a max score without magic or enhancements. Technically a 21 is possible with aging, and that works without the person being superhuman or having superhuman abilities.
Leveling up increases the max score by one every four levels to an end max of 26. However, I think we can agree that a 20th level NPC is above average when compared the normal person by a fair amount. They can backflip 30 ft into lava without being incinerated. They are super. They are human. They are superhuman.

Valameer
2010-10-16, 10:52 PM
What's the big deal with calling a 4th level commoner superhuman?

Nothing really, I just sensed that some people were reading it as "greater than possible human potential," and I felt you meant it as "greater than natural human potential."

I was trying to find a middle-ground terminology. But you're right, it doesn't really matter. 18 charisma means something just like 18 strength means something. People have expressed that they would like to portray their character with as much force of personality as they please, stats be darned.

I feel that this is kind of absurd, though, as I doubt people would let me play a strength 6 character like he was some kind of olympic weight lifter. I think characters should usually at least try to tip their hat towards their mental stats.

Knightofvictory
2010-10-17, 01:05 AM
To go back to the original question by the thread poster.... :smallsigh:

As a DM I have a lot of fun with this. When speaking to a party member of high Charisma (18+) have commoners address them as 'my lord' or 'my lady' while the 8 CHA fighter gets ignored or talked down to. Have questgivers or villains assume the high CHA member is the leader of the party. After the PCs gain some fame, have the townsfolk start cheering and giving gifts to the high CHA member, while treating the rest of the group as sidekicks and lackeys. In town everyone knows the name of Hero High Charisma! and his loyal followers

Main thing is, just as high Strength shines when making melee attacks, high Charisma makes influencing NPCs easier. Make sure to call for a diplomacy check whenever the group asks an NPC to do something for them. Even something as small as 'can I have a discount on my magic sword' or 'how about some healing potions to help us kill that cult'. Put NPCs into the game that can make the players tasks easier, but start off as indifferent unless diplomacied. The more social interaction you have, the more valuable charisma will be to players.

Callista
2010-10-17, 02:18 AM
If you assume that a stat rolled on 3d6 is roughly equal to the normal distribution you see in the real world, then you can extrapolate.

Since charisma is difficult to measure, I'm going to use IQ (INT) as an example. IQ is measured on a normal curve; and the rates at which you roll from 1-18 on 3d6 can be roughly matched up to IQs in the range of 60 to 140. That 60-to-140 range is pretty close to the range of what we'd consider "normal"--that is, an IQ score that is not out of the ordinary; relatively unremarkable, in the range of "really slow but can take care of themselves" to "really bright but not anywhere near Einstein yet". In real life, we've got people outside that range, and those people can be considered to be unusual. (Of course, real life people have many more stats than just six, so just about everybody can be considered unusual in one way or another. Also, INT and IQ aren't quite the same because INT can be trained and IQ stays relatively the same. But that's beside the point.)

Anyway, so if you want to use this normal-distribution idea to think about what you might see in your campaign world, you could look at the real-world distributions of various things like IQ (or height, or strength, or running speed, or whatever) and look at what we consider unusual. About 1 in 230 people, for example, will get an IQ score of more than 140. Those are the people who are more likely to end up as valedictorians in their high schools, going to graduate school, becoming professors or scientists, or doing other things that require a lot of academic talent. They're somewhat remarkable; but you wouldn't boggle in amazement to meet one. There are probably a lot of people at >140 here, just because this is a gaming forum and tabletop RPGs are just the kind of nerdy thing that attracts academically talented people.

So if you think about that concept, then charisma is kind of easy to think about. The people with more than 18 charisma are the people who do things that require about the same level of social talent as the academic talent that you'd need for becoming a college professor or a scientific researcher. These are the people who were the popular kids in high school; they can talk anybody into anything; it's very hard to say no to them. If you want a historical example, Martin Luther King Jr. could probably be modeled as someone with a very high Charisma score. (And note that he's not remembered by history for being pretty--but for being persuasive. Plus, epic Wisdom score too, most likely.)

18 is the highest score that a human can be born with; but a little practice, a little experience, and lots of people go higher than that. Dexterity? Look at Olympic gymnasts. Constitution? Marathon runners. Strength? Weight lifters. Wisdom? Famous philosophers--or amazing detectives. None of those people got there without practice. Their stats, at higher than the 18 they were born with, reflect that.

Gavinfoxx
2010-10-17, 02:25 AM
Level 6 Human Aristocrat. 3 Age Categories. Starts with an 18. Puts bonus into Charisma. This is the old beloved Duke that everyone adores, who has been putting on a smiling face and talking and getting his way all his life, with maxxed Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information, and Intimidate.

18+3+1 = 22, for a +6, on top of his 9 skill ranks, and his clothes that give a +2 masterwork bonus. So a +17 to social stuff to do with personal charisma. That's as high as I'd peg it before superhuman... He has a few of the skill focuses in social skills too, including Skill Focus Diplomacy, another skill focus in social stuff, maybe Negotiator. Probably not the feat that improves rushed diplomacy checks, though, and none of the more obscure ones, and probably not any of the diplomacy skill tricks, just because he's a specialist doesn't means he does all the fancy stuff an adventurer would do! He gets synergy from bluff, a synergy from Knowledge Nobility and Royalty, +2 for Sense Motive, So +28 to Diplomacy, let's say.

I'd put 22 for the base stat of charisma as the max before superhuman, while still being extraordinary, and +28 for the best check a non superhuman but still extraordinary diplomat can make, then! Because a.) Heroic classes are superhuman, that's kinda the point, I mean look at Cleric! and b.) classes above level 6 in general are superhuman, that's also kinda the point!

The_Admiral
2010-10-17, 02:33 AM
Does not follow. How is a character with high charisma equal to a perfectly disgusting self-insert character who can do no wrong?

Are you trying to say people shouldn't react this way to a character with high charisma, or do you instead have something against the characters themselves, who have high charisma?

22 cha nets you a +6 bonus on all social skills, including intimidate, so really, you could play it up however you want - from James Bond to Inara to Caesar to Dracula.

Note how you'd probably want to be any of the above character's friends, since they are so awesome. But none are Mary Sues. Except maybe Bond.

Also, the PHB lists a score of 18 as 'tremendous' as a guideline for us here. I don't want to say anything is 'the human limit' since humans are often superheroes in D&D, but you can imagine that if 36 charisma is 'double tremendous,' those people would have quite the incredible force of personality. :smallbiggrin:

I was talking about the initial reaction to mary sues

Greenish
2010-10-17, 04:20 AM
First off, don't put words in my mouth.I didn't. You yourself chose to use those words:
Yes, I do come from the older editions where 18 is the highest you can roll but nothing changes in 3e. 18 is still the highest you can normally roll. That's the "human natural" to me. If you're above 18, you're above the human natural.

Second, the highest ability score a 1st level human can naturally have by RAW is 18. Period.See, there we go again, defining aging as unnatural because it results in scores higher than what you've decided is the limit.
All NPCs are built using the standard array of 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10. Only special or elite NPCs are built using 15, 14, 13, 12, 10. If you use dice rolls to determine an NPCs abilities, you are almost always going to put them in the elite range.So what? The upper limit is not defined by average individuals.
The DMG, on multiple occasions (I quoted two) uses the 4th level as a cusp for being extraordinary.Extraordinary doesn't mean the same as superhuman. There are plenty of extraordinary people in real life (for example all the olympic athletes).
Paragon (Noun): A model of excellence or perfection

Also, to quote Unearthed Arcana.

"Beyond that, they possess powers or capabilities that supersede those of normal members of their race." Emphasis mine.Yes? So it says they're better than average members of their rage? That still doesn't mean superhuman.

Does nobody understand the definition of superhuman?

1: being above the human
2: exceeding normal human power, size, or capability

The normal human has a maximum score of 18.You keep insisting this despite being proven wrong several times over. Growing older is perfectly natural.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 04:29 AM
It's generally accepted that anything about 5th level is superhuman.

You can get 22 Charisma at 4th level with aging bonuses.

Therefore, 22 is not superhuman. Now, 23, on the other hand...

Alleine
2010-10-17, 04:46 AM
Apparently the matter of what qualifies as super human is extremely important. Really guys? Is it necessary to argue heatedly about something so trivial?


Anywho, someone with a high charisma doesn't necessarily attract all of everyone to them. Plenty of people(and I believe someone mentioned this already) will do the exact opposite and loathe a charismatic person, probably for the exact reasons other people love them. There will also be those, much like myself, who really don't care how pretty you talk and nice your hair is. You could have a charisma of 40 and I still wouldn't like you. Being a PC means your diplomacy checks won't work on me :smallwink:

In a high magic setting like DnD where adventuring is a common profession, lots of small towns might see several high cha people walk though every year. No matter how awesome it is, people will get used to it, maybe even expect it. And while yeah, they still have a high charisma and can bed any of the tavern wenches they want it's pretty much Business As Usual.

FelixG
2010-10-17, 04:51 AM
Depends on how the person is throwing their charisma around, if they are diplomancing or performing then the reaction to them will be pleasant and warm, if they are intimidating people will likely cower.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 04:53 AM
Apparently the matter of what qualifies as super human is extremely important. Really guys? Is it necessary to argue heatedly about something so trivial?

It is obviously incredibly important.

It is also important to note that Charisma doesn't have anything to do with physical attractiveness. Of course. Just look at ghasts (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/ghoul.htm). CHA 16! No one would say those things are pretty.

As for how people would react to someone with incredibly high Charisma... well. How did people react to Adolf Hitler? Genghis Kahn? Charlemagne? These are all great leaders with incredible Charisma.

Shademan
2010-10-17, 04:57 AM
to answer OP: however you think your character should.
I had a NE ranger bounty hunter with a profound disgust for pretty things, other creatures and for society in general. High CHA characters made him feel rather sick and stabby.
a 22+ CHA creature would likely inspire some stabbyness in him

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 04:58 AM
to answer OP: however you think your character should.
I had a NE ranger bounty hunter with a profound disgust for pretty things, other creatures and for society in general. High CHA characters made him feel rather sick and stabby.
a 22+ CHA creature would likely inspire some stabbyness in him

Charisma does not indicate prettyness.

I mean... Look at Winston Churchill. Was he attractive? **** no. Could he rally a crowd? Hell yes.

FelixG
2010-10-17, 04:59 AM
Charisma does not indicate prettyness.

I mean... Look at Winston Churchill. Was he attractive? **** no. Could he rally a crowd? Hell yes.

Dont forget Hitler, he was down right homely lookin and he min/maxed charisma :P

Greenish
2010-10-17, 05:01 AM
Apparently the matter of what qualifies as super human is extremely important. Really guys? Is it necessary to argue heatedly about something so trivial?I can only imagine how dull life would be if people only did things that are necessary.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 05:02 AM
Dont forget Hitler, he was down right homely lookin and he min/maxed charisma :P

Well, I didn't want to bring him up twice in two posts.

Shademan
2010-10-17, 05:04 AM
Charisma does not indicate prettyness.

I mean... Look at Winston Churchill. Was he attractive? **** no. Could he rally a crowd? Hell yes.

didnt say it did. tough I can see why you thought I did.

Alleine
2010-10-17, 05:15 AM
I can only imagine how dull life would be if people only did things that are necessary.

Right, thanks, that was exactly what I said.

I knew there were reasons I avoid arguments/commenting on them.


On topic...

Charisma measures a character’s force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness.

What's that Mr. SRD? Charisma is tied to physical attractiveness? Oh no! :smallwink:
Granted, this in no way means high cha = pretty. I just always think of this when people's immediate reaction is cha != pretty.

Shademan
2010-10-17, 05:25 AM
well... I'm surprised

Mordokai
2010-10-17, 05:46 AM
well... I'm surprised

Great, we get a sneak attack on you. I call first shot, that is, stab.

And yeah, I'm always surprised when people start claiming that charisma does not equal physical attractiveness, when the book itself cleary states that it in fact does. It's by no means the sole indicator of it, but it's one that can be very obvious. Abberations like Winston Churchill be damned :smalltongue:

PopcornMage
2010-10-17, 05:50 AM
I think characters should usually at least try to tip their hat towards their mental stats.

The problem with that is it's often a bit hard. Imagine the typical riddle/puzzle gambit. Is the stereotypical dumb barbarian's player supposed to sit out? Or just try to hack through the puzzle?

Wisdom...well, then we have problems of being Chaotic Annoying to consider.

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 07:48 AM
See, there we go again, defining aging as unnatural because it results in scores higher than what you've decided is the limit.
Please quote me where I said aging is unnatural.

p.s. I didn't.


So what? The upper limit is not defined by average individuals.

Yes, it is. There must be an average to be above it. How does this not make sense to you?


Extraordinary doesn't mean the same as superhuman. There are plenty of extraordinary people in real life (for example all the olympic athletes).

Yes, it does. Superhuman does not mean unnatural or inhuman. The definition of superhuman is literally "exceeding normal human power..." If an average human as a score of 10 and an extraordinary human has a score of 18, a superhuman has a score of 19 or higher.

There seems to be this misconception that being superhuman = inhuman or unnatural. If you have an intelligence of 18, you're an extraordinary human. Through aging, you acquire knowledge beyond the realm of normal humans. You're superhuman.

In real life we have human genetic altering. We have performance enhancing drugs and transhuman technology. We have the ability to naturally or artificially enhance a human. Superhuman can also mean what humans may evolve into in the future. Exceeding what's expected of humans can make you superhuman. Stop thinking that being superhuman instantly qualifies you to fly around or see through walls. For the last time, superhuman literally means to exceed the normal human. You're still human, just better than all other humans in your field.


You keep insisting this despite being proven wrong several times over. Growing older is perfectly natural.

Telling me I'm wrong but providing nothing to back your argument up isn't proving anything. Growing older is natural but you can achieve superhuman abilities through natural processes. Stimulants are natural. Surgery is natural. Supernatural != unnatural.

elonin
2010-10-17, 07:55 AM
Isn't charisma less about likability rather than being able to get your point across? I'm not about to say where I stand with Bill O'reilly, but some people really like his point of view and others hate it.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-10-17, 08:05 AM
Yes, it does. Superhuman does not mean unnatural or inhuman. The definition of superhuman is literally "exceeding normal human power..."
Wouldn't anything above 11 be superhuman, then?


If an average human as a score of 10 and an extraordinary human has a score of 18, a superhuman has a score of 19 or higher.
An extraordinary human has a score of 18. Another extraordinary human has a score of 17. Another extraordinary human has a score of 16. Does this mean that a score above 16 is superhuman?

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 09:01 AM
Wouldn't anything above 11 be superhuman, then? An extraordinary human has a score of 18. Another extraordinary human has a score of 17. Another extraordinary human has a score of 16. Does this mean that a score above 16 is superhuman?

No, above 11 you're extraordinary. Majority of NPCs are built using the standard array (11s and 10s). By D&D assumptions, they're the average. Warriors and elites are built using nonstandard and elite array. By D&D standard, they're above-average and extraordinary respectively. A human PC using the standard dice rolling methods or point buy will have a maximum score of 18. That's peak extraordinary.

Going above 18 is superhuman. No bog-standard level 1 NPC or PC will have a score above 18. Only through extraordinary means can you achieve above-human levels. You're superhuman.

That doesn't instantly negate your humanity. That doesn't make you unnatural. It means you achieved what no human can ever achieve without great training, amassing wisdom and knowledge over long years, or through magic. Superhuman.

I don't understand how anyone can be confused by this.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 09:04 AM
You're using definitions you've made up that don't exist in the actual game. Most people take "superhuman" to mean "above human" (its literal definition) - not just "above average human".

The hint is in the fact that we don't called Olympic athletes "superhuman". Even though that seems to be the definition you're using.

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 09:13 AM
You're using definitions you've made up that don't exist in the actual game. Most people take "superhuman" to mean "above human" (its literal definition) - not just "above average human".

The hint is in the fact that we don't called Olympic athletes "superhuman". Even though that seems to be the definition you're using.

And the other definition is "exceeding normal human." It doesn't apply to real life because real people aren't defined by points. We know that a normal human will have a score between 3-18. Anything above that is superhuman. It doesn't matter if it comes naturally or magically, it's superhuman.

I've backed up my claims using the world building assumptions made in the core rulebooks. No one has proven otherwise so this argument is finished.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 09:14 AM
And the other definition is "exceeding normal human." It doesn't apply to real life because real people aren't defined by points. We know that a normal human will have a score between 3-18. Anything above that is superhuman. It doesn't matter if it comes naturally or magically, it's superhuman.

And that's not a definition anyone other than you actually uses.

You can go on about your own definitions all you want, but if you fail to convey your meaning without having to explain what the words you used meant, there's a problem in how you communicate your ideas.

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 09:17 AM
And that's not a definition anyone other than you actually uses.

You can go on about your own definitions all you want, but if you fail to convey your meaning without having to explain what the words you used meant, there's a problem in how you communicate your ideas.

Unfortunately for those people, it is a definition. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/superhuman)

And some wikipedia for you. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superhuman)

Greenish
2010-10-17, 09:17 AM
We know that a normal human will have a score between 3-18.No, you have decided that that's normal human. We have pointed out that due to aging, levels and other miscellaneous stuff, the actual variation is wider, but you refuse to accept that because it doesn't fit to your preconceived definition.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 09:19 AM
Unfortunately for those people, it is a definition. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/superhuman)

And some wikipedia for you. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superhuman)

And yet no one seems to understand you. Hmm. I wonder why that could be?

Perhaps because the first definition is the one most commonly used, even if others exist?

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 09:22 AM
No, you have decided that that's normal human. We have pointed out that due to aging, levels and other miscellaneous stuff, the actual variation is wider, but you refuse to accept that because it doesn't fit to your preconceived definition.

Your argument only works in a vacuum world where everyone is created at advanced levels or age. D&D says that the value of all PCs/NPCs before racial adjustments and other factors is 3-18. A normal human is 3-18. Above 18, natural or unnatural, you're superhuman by definition.

I've provided the DMG and MM to back up my argument. You've provided nothing.


And yet no one seems to understand you. Hmm. I wonder why that could be?

Perhaps because the first definition is the one most commonly used, even if others exist?

And by this argument we'd all be idiots because the english language has multiple meanings for all words.

Greenish
2010-10-17, 09:27 AM
Your argument only works in a vacuum world where everyone is created at advanced levels or age.No, it works in any world where people age and/or advance in levels.

D&D says that the value of all PCs/NPCs before racial adjustments and other factors is 3-18.Correct.

A normal human is 3-18. Above 18, natural or unnatural, you're superhuman by definition.Does not follow. A normal human can well have "other factors", of which there are several.

[Edit]:
And by this argument we'd all be idiots because the english language has multiple meanings for all words.That sounds like a valid observation. :smallwink:

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 09:28 AM
And by this argument we'd all be idiots because the english language has multiple meanings for all words.

Excuse me? :smallconfused: Thinking of the most commonly used definition makes someone an idiot now?

The fact remains that you had to explain yourself, thereby proving that you failed to communicate effectively. Can we both agree on that, at least?

Jan Mattys
2010-10-17, 09:40 AM
I can only imagine how dull life would be if people only did things that are necessary.

Totally dull indeed.
And Trolls would be extinct by now. :smallsigh:

cenghiz
2010-10-17, 09:40 AM
D&D stats should not be labeled that way. Why?

Let's assume there are two people who learn alchemy.. First one has INT 10 and the second one has INT 18.. The difference between them in alchemy? Only 4? Oh really? INT 18 is just, cleverer. Even int 28 is only +9.. Not that 'godly' intelligent.

Let two people use hammers. One has STR 10 and the other has STR 18. The difference? +4 damage? All right, it's fine but it's not 'that much'. Imagine being hit with a wrench at the leg by either a normal guy and then by a muscle freak. The damage difference is only 1d6 against 1d6+4? No.. One would leave a very black bruise, the other would shatter the bone.

Do not label stat levels.. Just examine the boni it gives and act accordingly. 22 CHA gives +6 bluff and +6 diplomacy.. That's all. That character can persuade you easily and lie to you with much more ease. A stronger force of personality but not Mr.UltimateCharm.

[mandatory response to every question]Also... a wizard would do it better... [/mandatory response to every question]

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 09:40 AM
No, it works in any world where people age and/or advance in levels.

Emphasis mine. Thank you for proving my point.

Please show me how a human can normally have a score above 18 at level 1. Saying that he's middle-aged means you advanced him in age. Saying he's a paragon already makes him super-normal as per the definition in Unearthed Arcana. Saying he has a bloodline or template or whatever already makes him superhuman.

Humans are not created superhuman. A level 20 aristocrat with 26 constitution got that way through advancement, not because he was born a 20th level aristocrat.


Excuse me? Thinking of the most commonly used definition makes someone an idiot now?

The fact remains that you had to explain yourself, thereby proving that you failed to communicate effectively. Can we both agree on that, at least?

There are multiple definitions for many words in the English dictionary.

Who are you to say which is common and which is not? I do not see an "archaic" descriptor by the second definition meaning it's just as viable as the first.


Let's assume there are two people who learn alchemy.. First one has INT 10 and the second one has INT 18.. The difference between them in alchemy? Only 4? Oh really? INT 18 is just, cleverer. Even int 28 is only +9.. Not that 'godly' intelligent.

Let two people use hammers. One has STR 10 and the other has STR 18. The difference? +4 damage? All right, it's fine but it's not 'that much'. Imagine being hit with a wrench at the leg by either a normal guy and then by a muscle freak. The damage difference is only 1d6 against 1d6+4? No.. One would leave a very black bruise, the other would shatter the bone.

The difference between intelligence 10 and intelligence 18 is 4 extra languages. The difference between strength 10 and 18 is disabling a commoner in one hit or knocking him unconscious and dying.

Jan Mattys
2010-10-17, 09:42 AM
Let two people use hammers. One has STR 10 and the other has STR 18. The difference? +4 damage? All right, it's fine but it's not 'that much'. Imagine being hit with a wrench at the leg by either a normal guy and then by a muscle freak. The damage difference is only 1d6 against 1d6+4? No.. One would leave a very black bruise, the other would shatter the bone.


Actually, the strenght difference between normal guy and Mr.Strong is sufficient in itself to kill a normal peasant outright. ^_^ So I wouldn't call it "not that much"

Just sayin' :smallbiggrin:

Greenish
2010-10-17, 09:44 AM
Please show me how a human can normally have a score above 18 at level 1. Saying that he's middle-aged means you advanced him in age.Yep. Now he sports 19 Cha. There, consider yourself shown.

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 09:47 AM
Yep. Now he sports 19 Cha. There, consider yourself shown.

And he's superhuman. He advanced from peak human ability to superhuman ability.

He wasn't born 35.

cenghiz
2010-10-17, 09:48 AM
Actually, the strenght difference between normal guy and Mr.Strong is sufficient in itself to kill a normal peasant outright. ^_^ So I wouldn't call it "not that much"

Just sayin' :smallbiggrin:

Hmm.. yey.. You're right.. Still, the 'only +4' always bugged me. Also being forced to rush only 5ft/s with a dex 22 character. Also dependency on items. Also dependency on magic. Also... Gah, I shut up now. I just hate D&D rules with passion, even though every now and then I still play it to relax.

Greenish
2010-10-17, 09:53 AM
And he's superhuman. He advanced from peak human ability to superhuman ability.Nah, he's just a pretty swell middle-aged dude. 18 rather obviously wasn't the peak.

He wasn't born 35.True but irrelevant. Aging is a perfectly normal process that doesn't turn anyone superhuman.


See, your whole argument is that any stat above 18 must be superhuman, therefore anyone who reaches that is superhuman. That's just circular logic.

jmbrown
2010-10-17, 09:59 AM
Nah, he's just a pretty swell middle-aged dude. 18 rather obviously wasn't the peak.
True but irrelevant. Aging is a perfectly normal process that doesn't turn anyone superhuman.


See, your whole argument is that any stat above 18 must be superhuman, therefore anyone who reaches that is superhuman. That's just circular logic.

How is that circular logic? I've said multiple times that you can achieve superhuman levels naturally or not. If you exceed 18 in a score, you're superhuman.

Again, I've already proved my point multiple times with quoted material. I'm done here. I'm moving all my talk about ingame naturalism to this topic (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172294).

satorian
2010-10-17, 10:40 AM
I assume part of this argument has to do with whether or not someone started playing before 3e. My gut tells me 18 is the human maximum, but is in large part because when I started playing, it very explicitly was. Now in 3.0 and later, the definition of what a human could reach and not begin to seem not just exceptional, not 1 in a million, but downright supernatural, is fuzzy. Aging rules, odd as they are, exist. An 80 year old who was born with 18 charisma will naturally have a charisma over 20 when he gets old. This will happen in most small towns with relative regularity and in big cities all the time.

Also, I think level 20 experts or nobles are exceedingly rare. In a world I would write, they would probably not even exist. Nevertheleess, there would be at least a few level 6-10 blacksmiths and nobles. Some of those would be born with an 18 in a stat. some of those would spend their ability points on the stat with the 18. And many of those would get old. I have to realize that, much as I don't like it, 18 is no longer the human maximum. Interestingly, human mental skills seem to reach higher above 18 than physical. You don't get younger.

Thus, quibbles over the definition of superhuman aside, much as old-school I would like to think so, 18 is not human maximum like it used to be.

This, of course, is because the aging rules are stupid. They do, however, exist.

Godless_Paladin
2010-10-17, 01:56 PM
See: Henry Kissinger (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KavorkaMan).

Zaydos
2010-10-17, 02:20 PM
Dead-Lifting: falls under the D&D rules for lift off the ground; the world record is over 950 lbs without aid of any suit, just raw muscle. PHB says that's a 22. So no 22 Strength isn't superhuman, it's peak. That actually implies that 16th level ability scores aren't superhuman. Whether 20th could be called that can be argued, but that still puts mental stats below 25 as within human limits. And even take people who had max Charisma ever and people weren't just drooling over them, actually to obtain their power they had to use Intelligence and Wisdom as well look at major leaders like Roosevelt, Washington, Churchill, Julius Caesar, or Hitler; all of them are famed for their charisma but it didn't make everyone who ever met them love them are do whatever they wanted.

Also even in 2e it was possible to get above 18 via aging, but only in Int (+2) and Wisdom (+3). It also only gave a -4 Str, -3 Dex and Con. Not sure if similar rules existed in Basic don't have the books and didn't care to look them up as a 7 year old. Note also 2e defined 19-20 Int as Supra-Genius; not Superhuman, simply beyond Genius level. Seeing as how there have been real people defined as super geniuses, that implies that even in 2e the max human ability was not always 18 (and that the fluff writers actually bothered to read the rules). Also 18/00 can lift 960 lbs in dead lift, only 15 pounds less than the current world record.

Gavinfoxx
2010-10-17, 02:48 PM
So what do you all think of my post that (I just edited it) establishes 22 charisma as the maximum 'extraordinary but not superhuman charisma', and a +28 diplomacy check as the maximum 'extraordinary but not superhuman at diplomacy' check that a human specialist that is not heroic can make?

Valameer
2010-10-17, 03:04 PM
On attempting to portray your mental stats:

The problem with that is it's often a bit hard. Imagine the typical riddle/puzzle gambit. Is the stereotypical dumb barbarian's player supposed to sit out? Or just try to hack through the puzzle?

Not at all, which is why I simply said 'tip of your hat.' Those of you without hats may simply 'nod.' That's also acceptable. :smallwink:

So, when your barbarian's player solves the puzzle, the barbarian goes "Ugh! This is boring! Give it here!" and miraculously lucks out - or - the barbarian's player could whisper the answer to the wizard's player, and the wizard figures it out.

I'm not saying "do this," so much as "it's appreciated." :smallsmile:

On the rest of the thread:

Lyceios makes a diplomacy check [1d20+3] [4]
Reaction Unfriendly changes to Hostile!

...

...crap, natural 1! :smallsigh:

Callista
2010-10-17, 03:07 PM
re. 19-20 being "supra genius"--that's actually surprisingly accurate. Match the INT and IQ frequency distributions and you get INT 18 = IQ 140. 145, the level generally defined as "genius", is three standard deviations from average.

Scarey Nerd
2010-10-17, 03:16 PM
I'm going to make two points, please don't ask me for references or proof because I am too tired to trawl through sourcebooks right now. However, please don't take that to mean that I'm just saying it without evidence to prove an imaginary point.

1. By RAW, if a stat is 26 or above, you are superhuman. It has been generally established that 22 is attainable by a commoner with good rolls, so they are extraordinary but not superhuman by RAW.

2. Charisma is defined as "Force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness." All of these things play a part, and no one aspect of it is the main one. Insane Derro get +6 to charisma, and they're ugly as sin, gibbering madmen, but they're so intimidating that they're charismatic in their own way.

Edit: Re-read my post, it sounds a tad rude/confrontational :smalleek: Didn't mean it to.

Knaight
2010-10-17, 03:33 PM
An 18 is the upper limits of a human's ability. Anything higher than an 18 is literally superhuman.

The definition of superhuman is irrelevant. Upper limits of a human's ability means that anything that goes beyond that limit is no longer human. If humans can go beyond that limit, then it is not the upper limit of a humans ability. It doesn't matter if that potential is almost never fulfilled, it is there.

Skorj
2010-10-17, 04:23 PM
The result of high Charisma is influence. This is not necessarily a positive initial reaction, or even long term reaction, if you're not the target of that influence.

Consider a radio talk show / cable network personality who most people either love or love to hate. Half of those who listen are convinced he's the smart person who all smart people agree with, and the other half are just as sure that he's a conniving idiot who fools stupid people with his obvious lies. That's high charisma at work - these guys make people care what they have to say. This is not the same as changing peoples minds (as can be seen by the fact that which camp one puts a given personality in correlates strongly with what one already believes).

That's the best way to roleplay interaction with a high CHA character. Love him or hate him, you hear him out, you think about what he's saying. Consider that in medieval times (and it's still somewhat true today) that power at court was largely measured by how likely you were to get the King to listen to you in the first place, and you can extend this to how a diplomancer should really work.

Your mission: "tell the king that a huge invading army is just around the corner and he needs to call up his own army". Your opposition: 27 beaurocrats who hear this sort of thing every day from people wanting money or influence or just to see the King. High charisma (and related skills) means you win this challange, that even a beaurocracy takes you seriously and allows you to influence the power structure. Normal charisma means you see nothing but obstacles.

Charisma isn't about whether someone would offer to buy you a free drink in a bar, but about whether you can get what you want . NPCs can roleplay accordingly.

Fax Celestis
2010-10-17, 08:31 PM
There seems to be some confusion here so let me rephrase it.

An 18 score is the natural maximum for a human. Using RAW, there's no way for a human to achieve a 19 outside of reaching the 4th level (which the DMG describes as being extraordinary from a world building standpoint), magic, or some weird template. I'm not saying humans can't achieve higher than 18, I'm saying that achieving more than 18 literally makes you superhuman by the default world building rules. A human with 19 charisma is superhuman.

I roll an 18.

I age to Venerable. I have a 21.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 08:38 PM
I roll an 18.

I age to Venerable. I have a 21.

We've done this already Fax.

Fax Celestis
2010-10-17, 08:39 PM
We've done this already Fax.

I know. I realized after I posted that there was another page to read.

Yuki Akuma
2010-10-17, 08:41 PM
I know. I realized after I posted that there was another page to read.

*pats*

If it makes you feel better, he still didn't get convinced.

Fax Celestis
2010-10-17, 08:46 PM
*pats*

If it makes you feel better, he still didn't get convinced.

Makes no sense, since it seems like the argument being used is "he wasn't born venerable". OF COURSE HE WASN'T. But aging doesn't make you level, it just makes you older and wiser (and more charismatic and smarter).