Designer Explanation of why Charisma for Sorcerers and Warlocks (&Bards&Paladins)

[KorvinStarmast]

I had stopped my Dragon Magazine subscription well before 3e came out, so I never read the various editorials and commentary on the classes that were new, and had new mechanics, when 3e came out.

I am trying to explain to someone the "why" of the designer decisions for using Charisma for both the Warlock and sorcerer, and would like to refer to what the 3e's design team had to say about it.

WoTC shut down their forum a while back, and I may just be searching incorrectly on their site but I don't see any articles for that version.

Do any of you know which Dragon Mag issue, or maybe a link to a web archive, that has a comment or explanation from the 3e designers (Monte Cook?) on why that ability score was chosen for those spell casters? I suspect that an upgrade to my search-fu is needed, but I may also be looking in the wrong place.

[OldTrees1]

Paladin (Wis) and Sorcerer (Cha) predate 3rd edition. They inherited the older reasons (Divine is Wisdom and innate is Charisma)

Bards were a multiclass character in 2nd edition so converting it to a single class resulted in some changes (like allowing their charm to power their charms)

Warlock were the only one of those 4 that were introduced in 3rd edition. Since Warlocks use spell-like abilities (a kind of innate magic granted to them by their patron who has innate magic), they are powered by Charisma (that being the default for spell-like abilities).

[KorvinStarmast]

Paladin (Wis) and Sorcerer (Cha) predate 3rd edition.
I am aware that a Paladin predates 3e, I played with a paladin PC in OD&D+Greyhawk in the late 1970's.

Where did sorcerer come from in 2e? I don't recall seeing that class in the books I had. (FWIW, I am pretty sure the Sorcerer was introduced as a class in 3e. In OD&D you would call a 9th level MU a Sorcerer, but the class was Magic User. A Wizard was the name level for Magic User, at 11th level.

The question I am asking is why the spell casting ability for Paladins became Charisma rather than its original Wisdom, Bards from Int to Cha, and Sorcerers spell casting ability (Arcane) being Cha rather than Int as it was for Wizards. From the get go.
I do not recall Sorcerer as a class before 3e. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorcerer_(Dungeons_%26_Dragons))

They inherited the older reasons (Divine is Wisdom and innate is Charisma) That does not answer my question. I'm looking for what the devs have said, I can do the "in my opinion thing" just fine. :smallcool:


Bards were a multiclass character in 2nd edition so converting it to a single class resulted in some changes (like allowing their charm to power their charms) That is not correct. Bards were a multi class character in AD&D 1e, and were a sub class of Rogue in 2e.


Warlock were the only one of those 4 that were introduced in 3rd edition. Since Warlocks use spell-like abilities (a kind of innate magic granted to them by their patron who has innate magic), they are powered by Charisma (that being the default for spell-like abilities). Warlocks were introduced in The Complete Arcane splat book, not in the original 3e, as far as I've researched this. I have a plausible answer for "why charisma" for Warlocks from The Complete Arcane, but it isn't from a dev conceptual post, tweet, interview, whatever.

[OldTrees1]

Paladin (Wis) and Sorcerer (Cha) predate 3rd edition.
Where did sorcerer come from in 2e? The question I am asking is why the spell casting ability for Paladins became Charisma rather than its original Wisdom, Bards from Int to Cha, and Sorcerers spell casting ability being Cha from the get go. I do not recall Sorcerer as a class before 3e. What 2e splat book/supplement are you referring to?
That does not answer my question. I'm looking for what the devs have said, I can do the "in my opinion thing" just fine. :smallcool:


Bards were a multi class character in 1e, and were a sub class of rogue in 2e.

Warlocks were introduced in The Complete Arcane splat book, not in the original 3e, as far as I've researched this.

RE 3rd edition WISDOM Paladins:

Spells
Beginning at 4th level, a paladin gains the ability to cast a small number of divine spells, which are drawn from the paladin spell list. A paladin must choose and prepare her spells in advance.

To prepare or cast a spell, a paladin must have a Wisdom score equal to at least 10 + the spell level. The Difficulty Class for a saving throw against a paladin’s spell is 10 + the spell level + the paladin’s Wisdom modifier.

RE 3rd edition Warlock:
The 3rd edition splatbook Complete Arcane came out during 3.5 and is the first source on Warlocks. It also has plenty of information on the different kinds of arcane magic. If you need quotations, that is the place to start.

RE 2nd edition Sorcerers & Bards: Google fu gave me tertiary or later sources referencing the existence of AD&D Sorcerers (is there an AD&D splatbook called Tome of Magic?) and Bards. Clearly this is not up to the citation rigour you require.

[KorvinStarmast]

RE 3rd edition WISDOM Paladins: OK, thanks, let's set the paladin aside. And the Bard, and get back to the WHY from the Devs regarding the Sorcerer's spell casting for arcane magic.
Wizards in 3.x are arcane casters of the generally Vancian model: prepare spells, need to prepare again from the book.
Sorcerers are new arcane casters, non prepared, Spontaneous, but why charisma rather than int? What did Cook and Williams have to say about that? (Or whichever 3e dev was the sorcerer primary dev ...)
Here's what I've got for the Warlock, page 5, complete arcane:

page 5

Unlike Sorcerers or Wizards, who approach arcane magic through the medium of spells, a warlock invokes powerful magic through nothing more than an effort of will. By harnessing his innate magical gift through fearsome determination and force of will, a warlock can perform feats of supernatural stealth, beguile the weak minded, or scour his foes with blasts of eldritch power.
It tells me what, not why, but with the description of Charisma from an interview with Skip Williams, I can probably make do with that.

[gkathellar]

Charisma in 3e was construed to mean force of personality, rather than just social ability. The general idea that was of innate casters and similar calling up their power essentially by mental reflex, and powering it with the strength of their persona.

It may help to think of Charisma as analogous to Strength. Innate magic doesn't run on acuity or awareness, but rather on sheer force of mental muscle.

This of course runs into some of Wisdom's conceptual space, so ... take it for what you will.

[Nifft]

It may help to think of Charisma as analogous to Strength. Innate magic doesn't run on acuity or awareness, but rather on sheer force of mental muscle.

This of course runs into some of Wisdom's conceptual space, so ... take it for what you will.

The "mental Str" analogy might mean Wisdom is your "mental Con".

That provides a good split between default offense vs. default defense, and the analogy holds up for social skills too (like Bluff vs. Sense Motive).

[KorvinStarmast]

Charisma in 3e was construed to mean force of personality, rather than just social ability. The general idea that was of innate casters and similar calling up their power essentially by mental reflex, and powering it with the strength of their persona.

It may help to think of Charisma as analogous to Strength. Innate magic doesn't run on acuity or awareness, but rather on sheer force of mental muscle. My problem isn't concept, I figured that out just fine when I opened the books back when I had them. What I was asking for was a reach back to dev commentary.

This whole deal was related to a decision to move away, in part, from Vancian magic because a lot of people/fans complained about it. The spontaneous casters, versus prepared casters from editions 2e and previous, was a significant design change in that edition. The decision to move to Charisma had a lot to do with the game mutating as well: the campaign based model was discarded by WoTC, so leadership skills were de-emphasized, and Charisma was given a new coat of paint, as it were. But we are drifting away from what I'm looking for.

Do you recall, for example, any article in Dragon Magazine (Issues 230-270ish, I'd guess, based on time frame) that discussed the why and wherefore of the decisions to build spontaneous casters?

[Darrin]

Do you recall, for example, any article in Dragon Magazine (Issues 230-270ish, I'd guess, based on time frame) that discussed the why and wherefore of the decisions to build spontaneous casters?

Dragon #273 had a preview of the Sorcerer as part of the Countdown to 3E (official 3E content launched with issue #274). I don't know if they discussed the design philosophy behind it, though.

[KorvinStarmast]

Dragon #273 had a preview of the Sorcerer as part of the Countdown to 3E (official 3E content launched with issue #274). I don't know if they discussed the design philosophy behind it, though.Many thanks, I'll try to see what I can find along those lines. I guessed wrong on vintage, and I am pretty I need to ask a few friends for favors is getting my hands on those issues.

[Remuko]

The "mental Str" analogy might mean Wisdom is your "mental Con".

That provides a good split between default offense vs. default defense, and the analogy holds up for social skills too (like Bluff vs. Sense Motive).

Which makes Int "mental Dex".

[gkathellar]

I uh ... tripped over a copy of the issue just now. Unfortunately, it doesn't provide any insight into what you're looking for - it's just matter-of-fact about being charisma based.

[Nifft]

Which makes Int "mental Dex".

One variant system I'd considered making was basically:

Str •*Dex • Con => Body-score (HP, Athletics)

Int •*Wis • Cha => Mind-score (magic)

Str • Cha => Stamina, Determination

Int • Dex => Wits, Initiative

Wis • Con => Willpower, Endurance


... so yeah.

[Sian]

Which makes Int "mental Dex".

Well ... given that it would probably fit quite well ...

[Zaq]

Honestly, Charisma as casting stat for Sorcerers makes more intuitive sense to me than Wisdom as casting stat for Clerics.

What aspect of it do you find particularly needing of explanation? There’s always going to be a level of arbitrariness when making fundamental mechanical decisions, but “innate magic = casts with force of personality” doesn’t seem like an unreasonable starting point to me.