How should a DM resolve a smooth-talking player with a weak Charisma score PC?
$begingroup$
This is an old problem, but one I am curious to find an answer to. I had created a character, Bard/Rogue, Half-Elf, super crazy Charisma score and skills with expertise, who was set up with all the works to handle any charismatic needs our party wished to partake of, such as talking our way out of crimes, jipping the barkeep on the amount owed on our tab, etc. I was excited to exercise this new character and his silver-tongued prowess. There was a problem, however.
One of our players is naturally a smooth talker, and his personality allows him to talk his way out of situations on the spot, and he does this in his daily life. However, his character had a 9 in Charisma, so a -1 modifier. His character overshadowed my character constantly when it came to these delicate situations.
Not speaking poorly about our DM, as I wouldn't know how to resolve this dilemma either, almost every situation that should have called for a Charisma check with his character was resolved by his own natural ability to charm, sweet-talk, and work his way out of nearly every situation, not his PC's, without ever needing to roll a Charisma check.
Granted, some of these he did have to roll for a check, and lost some and won some, and again, it's the DM's call. I'm just curious if there is a better way of resolving a situation such as this.
dnd-5e problem-players attributes
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is an old problem, but one I am curious to find an answer to. I had created a character, Bard/Rogue, Half-Elf, super crazy Charisma score and skills with expertise, who was set up with all the works to handle any charismatic needs our party wished to partake of, such as talking our way out of crimes, jipping the barkeep on the amount owed on our tab, etc. I was excited to exercise this new character and his silver-tongued prowess. There was a problem, however.
One of our players is naturally a smooth talker, and his personality allows him to talk his way out of situations on the spot, and he does this in his daily life. However, his character had a 9 in Charisma, so a -1 modifier. His character overshadowed my character constantly when it came to these delicate situations.
Not speaking poorly about our DM, as I wouldn't know how to resolve this dilemma either, almost every situation that should have called for a Charisma check with his character was resolved by his own natural ability to charm, sweet-talk, and work his way out of nearly every situation, not his PC's, without ever needing to roll a Charisma check.
Granted, some of these he did have to roll for a check, and lost some and won some, and again, it's the DM's call. I'm just curious if there is a better way of resolving a situation such as this.
dnd-5e problem-players attributes
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is an old problem, but one I am curious to find an answer to. I had created a character, Bard/Rogue, Half-Elf, super crazy Charisma score and skills with expertise, who was set up with all the works to handle any charismatic needs our party wished to partake of, such as talking our way out of crimes, jipping the barkeep on the amount owed on our tab, etc. I was excited to exercise this new character and his silver-tongued prowess. There was a problem, however.
One of our players is naturally a smooth talker, and his personality allows him to talk his way out of situations on the spot, and he does this in his daily life. However, his character had a 9 in Charisma, so a -1 modifier. His character overshadowed my character constantly when it came to these delicate situations.
Not speaking poorly about our DM, as I wouldn't know how to resolve this dilemma either, almost every situation that should have called for a Charisma check with his character was resolved by his own natural ability to charm, sweet-talk, and work his way out of nearly every situation, not his PC's, without ever needing to roll a Charisma check.
Granted, some of these he did have to roll for a check, and lost some and won some, and again, it's the DM's call. I'm just curious if there is a better way of resolving a situation such as this.
dnd-5e problem-players attributes
$endgroup$
This is an old problem, but one I am curious to find an answer to. I had created a character, Bard/Rogue, Half-Elf, super crazy Charisma score and skills with expertise, who was set up with all the works to handle any charismatic needs our party wished to partake of, such as talking our way out of crimes, jipping the barkeep on the amount owed on our tab, etc. I was excited to exercise this new character and his silver-tongued prowess. There was a problem, however.
One of our players is naturally a smooth talker, and his personality allows him to talk his way out of situations on the spot, and he does this in his daily life. However, his character had a 9 in Charisma, so a -1 modifier. His character overshadowed my character constantly when it came to these delicate situations.
Not speaking poorly about our DM, as I wouldn't know how to resolve this dilemma either, almost every situation that should have called for a Charisma check with his character was resolved by his own natural ability to charm, sweet-talk, and work his way out of nearly every situation, not his PC's, without ever needing to roll a Charisma check.
Granted, some of these he did have to roll for a check, and lost some and won some, and again, it's the DM's call. I'm just curious if there is a better way of resolving a situation such as this.
dnd-5e problem-players attributes
dnd-5e problem-players attributes
asked 1 hour ago
ArcemiusArcemius
2,18741759
2,18741759
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is a delicate thing to pull off as a GM, because it involves finessing the subtle aspects of a player's agency vs the rest of the imagined world.
The usual model of player agency is that the player has agency as far as their character and character actions are concerned, while the GM has agency for everything else in the world. It's a good model and very rarely needs to be more sophisticated than that. But that simple model pointedly ignores the character statistics, which I think are best conceived as an interface between the character and the rest of the world.
For physical stats (strength, or combat skill) this is obvious, easy, and uncontroversial: If a player tries to do something absurd, the GM need not even roll. If a player tries to do ordinary things that are out of his class, the GM can simply roll and the dice will enforce things.
The social or mental stats are tougher, but it is perfectly legitimate in my view for a GM to interpret the combination of a character's low charisma and a player's silver tongue as "That sounded better in your head than it did out loud." Or specifically, the player's words may sound great, but they are just as aspirational as the player of a low strength character resolving to break down a sturdy door. The character's words are filtered through low charisma and come out less effectively for whatever reason.
(This is directly inspired by the Amber DRPG concept of "good stuff" and "bad stuff" but I have found it works just as well in D&D type systems. I am quite sure other people have arrived at this approach without ever having seen Amber DRPG.)
There are several pitfalls:
First: It takes consistency. If, as a GM, you half-ass it, you will just confuse your players.
Second: It helps a great deal to explain this technique to the players the first few times it comes into play, and to remind them occasionally. If you don't, you can be perceived as a total flake of a GM, or worse, be perceived as playing favorites.
Third: It can be jarring or grating to players who aren't used to it, especially if they are in the habit of treating some of those stats as 'dump stats.' It also, to be fair, steps up real close to the agency boundary surrounding the characters, which is often very sensitive.
Fourth: The players may want to turn everything into a die roll, instead of letting the GM more flexibly and creatively apply his or her interpretations. Resist this; the GM is under no obligation to let the players call the shots for when dice are rolled.
Fifth: I shouldn't have to say this, and it is directed to the ghosts of my gaming past more than anything else, but-- resist also the urge to humiliate your players. A charisma of 9 or a penalty of 1 is not crippling. Even a stat that genuinely is crippling is often best glossed over rather than rubbing the player's nose in it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
From 5e SRD:
Charisma
Charisma measures your ability to interact effectively with others. It includes such factors as confidence and eloquence, and it can represent a charming or commanding personality.
You can say the sweetest laced words in the world, but if you say them condescendingly or without the presence to gain people's attention it wont amount to much.
As a DM I would have him define the mannerisms of his character to reflect why he has a 9 charisma. Does he say smooth things but mumbles them so no one can hear them? (Gordon Agrippa from Black Clover is an excellent example of this type of character)
Or does he say them in condescending ways? Much like how a high elf would talk to/about a dwarf. Characters with a 9 charisma have some sort of personality flaw that slightly detracts from their interpersonal skills. You can try having your DM implement a rule that you can dictate what your character says, but your Charisma roll reflects HOW he says it.
You can call a King a fool with a charisma roll of 20 and will think you a jester and laugh, but just try calling a King a terrific ruler with a charisma roll of 1! He will think you are trying to insult him in some way and have you arrested!
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139505%2fhow-should-a-dm-resolve-a-smooth-talking-player-with-a-weak-charisma-score-pc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is a delicate thing to pull off as a GM, because it involves finessing the subtle aspects of a player's agency vs the rest of the imagined world.
The usual model of player agency is that the player has agency as far as their character and character actions are concerned, while the GM has agency for everything else in the world. It's a good model and very rarely needs to be more sophisticated than that. But that simple model pointedly ignores the character statistics, which I think are best conceived as an interface between the character and the rest of the world.
For physical stats (strength, or combat skill) this is obvious, easy, and uncontroversial: If a player tries to do something absurd, the GM need not even roll. If a player tries to do ordinary things that are out of his class, the GM can simply roll and the dice will enforce things.
The social or mental stats are tougher, but it is perfectly legitimate in my view for a GM to interpret the combination of a character's low charisma and a player's silver tongue as "That sounded better in your head than it did out loud." Or specifically, the player's words may sound great, but they are just as aspirational as the player of a low strength character resolving to break down a sturdy door. The character's words are filtered through low charisma and come out less effectively for whatever reason.
(This is directly inspired by the Amber DRPG concept of "good stuff" and "bad stuff" but I have found it works just as well in D&D type systems. I am quite sure other people have arrived at this approach without ever having seen Amber DRPG.)
There are several pitfalls:
First: It takes consistency. If, as a GM, you half-ass it, you will just confuse your players.
Second: It helps a great deal to explain this technique to the players the first few times it comes into play, and to remind them occasionally. If you don't, you can be perceived as a total flake of a GM, or worse, be perceived as playing favorites.
Third: It can be jarring or grating to players who aren't used to it, especially if they are in the habit of treating some of those stats as 'dump stats.' It also, to be fair, steps up real close to the agency boundary surrounding the characters, which is often very sensitive.
Fourth: The players may want to turn everything into a die roll, instead of letting the GM more flexibly and creatively apply his or her interpretations. Resist this; the GM is under no obligation to let the players call the shots for when dice are rolled.
Fifth: I shouldn't have to say this, and it is directed to the ghosts of my gaming past more than anything else, but-- resist also the urge to humiliate your players. A charisma of 9 or a penalty of 1 is not crippling. Even a stat that genuinely is crippling is often best glossed over rather than rubbing the player's nose in it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a delicate thing to pull off as a GM, because it involves finessing the subtle aspects of a player's agency vs the rest of the imagined world.
The usual model of player agency is that the player has agency as far as their character and character actions are concerned, while the GM has agency for everything else in the world. It's a good model and very rarely needs to be more sophisticated than that. But that simple model pointedly ignores the character statistics, which I think are best conceived as an interface between the character and the rest of the world.
For physical stats (strength, or combat skill) this is obvious, easy, and uncontroversial: If a player tries to do something absurd, the GM need not even roll. If a player tries to do ordinary things that are out of his class, the GM can simply roll and the dice will enforce things.
The social or mental stats are tougher, but it is perfectly legitimate in my view for a GM to interpret the combination of a character's low charisma and a player's silver tongue as "That sounded better in your head than it did out loud." Or specifically, the player's words may sound great, but they are just as aspirational as the player of a low strength character resolving to break down a sturdy door. The character's words are filtered through low charisma and come out less effectively for whatever reason.
(This is directly inspired by the Amber DRPG concept of "good stuff" and "bad stuff" but I have found it works just as well in D&D type systems. I am quite sure other people have arrived at this approach without ever having seen Amber DRPG.)
There are several pitfalls:
First: It takes consistency. If, as a GM, you half-ass it, you will just confuse your players.
Second: It helps a great deal to explain this technique to the players the first few times it comes into play, and to remind them occasionally. If you don't, you can be perceived as a total flake of a GM, or worse, be perceived as playing favorites.
Third: It can be jarring or grating to players who aren't used to it, especially if they are in the habit of treating some of those stats as 'dump stats.' It also, to be fair, steps up real close to the agency boundary surrounding the characters, which is often very sensitive.
Fourth: The players may want to turn everything into a die roll, instead of letting the GM more flexibly and creatively apply his or her interpretations. Resist this; the GM is under no obligation to let the players call the shots for when dice are rolled.
Fifth: I shouldn't have to say this, and it is directed to the ghosts of my gaming past more than anything else, but-- resist also the urge to humiliate your players. A charisma of 9 or a penalty of 1 is not crippling. Even a stat that genuinely is crippling is often best glossed over rather than rubbing the player's nose in it.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This is a delicate thing to pull off as a GM, because it involves finessing the subtle aspects of a player's agency vs the rest of the imagined world.
The usual model of player agency is that the player has agency as far as their character and character actions are concerned, while the GM has agency for everything else in the world. It's a good model and very rarely needs to be more sophisticated than that. But that simple model pointedly ignores the character statistics, which I think are best conceived as an interface between the character and the rest of the world.
For physical stats (strength, or combat skill) this is obvious, easy, and uncontroversial: If a player tries to do something absurd, the GM need not even roll. If a player tries to do ordinary things that are out of his class, the GM can simply roll and the dice will enforce things.
The social or mental stats are tougher, but it is perfectly legitimate in my view for a GM to interpret the combination of a character's low charisma and a player's silver tongue as "That sounded better in your head than it did out loud." Or specifically, the player's words may sound great, but they are just as aspirational as the player of a low strength character resolving to break down a sturdy door. The character's words are filtered through low charisma and come out less effectively for whatever reason.
(This is directly inspired by the Amber DRPG concept of "good stuff" and "bad stuff" but I have found it works just as well in D&D type systems. I am quite sure other people have arrived at this approach without ever having seen Amber DRPG.)
There are several pitfalls:
First: It takes consistency. If, as a GM, you half-ass it, you will just confuse your players.
Second: It helps a great deal to explain this technique to the players the first few times it comes into play, and to remind them occasionally. If you don't, you can be perceived as a total flake of a GM, or worse, be perceived as playing favorites.
Third: It can be jarring or grating to players who aren't used to it, especially if they are in the habit of treating some of those stats as 'dump stats.' It also, to be fair, steps up real close to the agency boundary surrounding the characters, which is often very sensitive.
Fourth: The players may want to turn everything into a die roll, instead of letting the GM more flexibly and creatively apply his or her interpretations. Resist this; the GM is under no obligation to let the players call the shots for when dice are rolled.
Fifth: I shouldn't have to say this, and it is directed to the ghosts of my gaming past more than anything else, but-- resist also the urge to humiliate your players. A charisma of 9 or a penalty of 1 is not crippling. Even a stat that genuinely is crippling is often best glossed over rather than rubbing the player's nose in it.
$endgroup$
This is a delicate thing to pull off as a GM, because it involves finessing the subtle aspects of a player's agency vs the rest of the imagined world.
The usual model of player agency is that the player has agency as far as their character and character actions are concerned, while the GM has agency for everything else in the world. It's a good model and very rarely needs to be more sophisticated than that. But that simple model pointedly ignores the character statistics, which I think are best conceived as an interface between the character and the rest of the world.
For physical stats (strength, or combat skill) this is obvious, easy, and uncontroversial: If a player tries to do something absurd, the GM need not even roll. If a player tries to do ordinary things that are out of his class, the GM can simply roll and the dice will enforce things.
The social or mental stats are tougher, but it is perfectly legitimate in my view for a GM to interpret the combination of a character's low charisma and a player's silver tongue as "That sounded better in your head than it did out loud." Or specifically, the player's words may sound great, but they are just as aspirational as the player of a low strength character resolving to break down a sturdy door. The character's words are filtered through low charisma and come out less effectively for whatever reason.
(This is directly inspired by the Amber DRPG concept of "good stuff" and "bad stuff" but I have found it works just as well in D&D type systems. I am quite sure other people have arrived at this approach without ever having seen Amber DRPG.)
There are several pitfalls:
First: It takes consistency. If, as a GM, you half-ass it, you will just confuse your players.
Second: It helps a great deal to explain this technique to the players the first few times it comes into play, and to remind them occasionally. If you don't, you can be perceived as a total flake of a GM, or worse, be perceived as playing favorites.
Third: It can be jarring or grating to players who aren't used to it, especially if they are in the habit of treating some of those stats as 'dump stats.' It also, to be fair, steps up real close to the agency boundary surrounding the characters, which is often very sensitive.
Fourth: The players may want to turn everything into a die roll, instead of letting the GM more flexibly and creatively apply his or her interpretations. Resist this; the GM is under no obligation to let the players call the shots for when dice are rolled.
Fifth: I shouldn't have to say this, and it is directed to the ghosts of my gaming past more than anything else, but-- resist also the urge to humiliate your players. A charisma of 9 or a penalty of 1 is not crippling. Even a stat that genuinely is crippling is often best glossed over rather than rubbing the player's nose in it.
answered 35 mins ago
NovakNovak
16.8k52975
16.8k52975
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
From 5e SRD:
Charisma
Charisma measures your ability to interact effectively with others. It includes such factors as confidence and eloquence, and it can represent a charming or commanding personality.
You can say the sweetest laced words in the world, but if you say them condescendingly or without the presence to gain people's attention it wont amount to much.
As a DM I would have him define the mannerisms of his character to reflect why he has a 9 charisma. Does he say smooth things but mumbles them so no one can hear them? (Gordon Agrippa from Black Clover is an excellent example of this type of character)
Or does he say them in condescending ways? Much like how a high elf would talk to/about a dwarf. Characters with a 9 charisma have some sort of personality flaw that slightly detracts from their interpersonal skills. You can try having your DM implement a rule that you can dictate what your character says, but your Charisma roll reflects HOW he says it.
You can call a King a fool with a charisma roll of 20 and will think you a jester and laugh, but just try calling a King a terrific ruler with a charisma roll of 1! He will think you are trying to insult him in some way and have you arrested!
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
From 5e SRD:
Charisma
Charisma measures your ability to interact effectively with others. It includes such factors as confidence and eloquence, and it can represent a charming or commanding personality.
You can say the sweetest laced words in the world, but if you say them condescendingly or without the presence to gain people's attention it wont amount to much.
As a DM I would have him define the mannerisms of his character to reflect why he has a 9 charisma. Does he say smooth things but mumbles them so no one can hear them? (Gordon Agrippa from Black Clover is an excellent example of this type of character)
Or does he say them in condescending ways? Much like how a high elf would talk to/about a dwarf. Characters with a 9 charisma have some sort of personality flaw that slightly detracts from their interpersonal skills. You can try having your DM implement a rule that you can dictate what your character says, but your Charisma roll reflects HOW he says it.
You can call a King a fool with a charisma roll of 20 and will think you a jester and laugh, but just try calling a King a terrific ruler with a charisma roll of 1! He will think you are trying to insult him in some way and have you arrested!
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
From 5e SRD:
Charisma
Charisma measures your ability to interact effectively with others. It includes such factors as confidence and eloquence, and it can represent a charming or commanding personality.
You can say the sweetest laced words in the world, but if you say them condescendingly or without the presence to gain people's attention it wont amount to much.
As a DM I would have him define the mannerisms of his character to reflect why he has a 9 charisma. Does he say smooth things but mumbles them so no one can hear them? (Gordon Agrippa from Black Clover is an excellent example of this type of character)
Or does he say them in condescending ways? Much like how a high elf would talk to/about a dwarf. Characters with a 9 charisma have some sort of personality flaw that slightly detracts from their interpersonal skills. You can try having your DM implement a rule that you can dictate what your character says, but your Charisma roll reflects HOW he says it.
You can call a King a fool with a charisma roll of 20 and will think you a jester and laugh, but just try calling a King a terrific ruler with a charisma roll of 1! He will think you are trying to insult him in some way and have you arrested!
$endgroup$
From 5e SRD:
Charisma
Charisma measures your ability to interact effectively with others. It includes such factors as confidence and eloquence, and it can represent a charming or commanding personality.
You can say the sweetest laced words in the world, but if you say them condescendingly or without the presence to gain people's attention it wont amount to much.
As a DM I would have him define the mannerisms of his character to reflect why he has a 9 charisma. Does he say smooth things but mumbles them so no one can hear them? (Gordon Agrippa from Black Clover is an excellent example of this type of character)
Or does he say them in condescending ways? Much like how a high elf would talk to/about a dwarf. Characters with a 9 charisma have some sort of personality flaw that slightly detracts from their interpersonal skills. You can try having your DM implement a rule that you can dictate what your character says, but your Charisma roll reflects HOW he says it.
You can call a King a fool with a charisma roll of 20 and will think you a jester and laugh, but just try calling a King a terrific ruler with a charisma roll of 1! He will think you are trying to insult him in some way and have you arrested!
answered 1 hour ago
SemadaSemada
3734
3734
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f139505%2fhow-should-a-dm-resolve-a-smooth-talking-player-with-a-weak-charisma-score-pc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown