The Problem with Charisma in D&D (Ep.

Professor Dungeonmaster answers common questions on the most common dump stat--charisma. What do you do when a character is charismatic but the player is introverted? Why doesn't charisma work the same way the strength? Should the DM and player act out every social encounter? Answers at last!
Thumbnail art: Anna Steinbauer at annasteinbauer.com
Patreon: / dungeoncraftyoutube
Dungeoncraft Facebook : / 1620296361377654
Music:
"Fury of the Dragon's Breath" by Peter Crowley
Bandcamp : petercrowley.ba...
By Kevin Macleod: "Ice Flow," et al. All tracks are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license (creativecommon...)

[@ghoulofmetal]

in my mind nat 20 is just the best possible outcome, not a supernatural miracle.

[@marshbordeaux4210]

Same here, based opinion

[@shinobidaniel_12]

A fair opinion, i just think the pc flashes gold during a nat 20 and then a maximum effort outcome happens

[@lichenlich]

True. The best possible outcome could be a miracle.

[@shinobidaniel_12]

@@lichenlich like a bard using lucky for a nat 20 to somehow charm a metallic dragon into letting the party each get a baby dragon

[@catharticreverie]

Yeah, a 20 doesn't mean you suddenly do the Jedi mind trick

[@countravencrest1500]

I am a super introveted person but i like to play charisma characters since that is what i would like to be in the real word . Since i started playing them i started super bad fumbleing lines sttutering ect ... But after a few months i improved a lot i helped me to be more charismatic IRL so thanks D&D you helped me a lot :) Sry for bad English :(

[@commandercaptain4664]

I love stories like yours! They truly encourage the hobby of roleplaying.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

I love hearing stories like this. May all your rolls be 20s!

[@NogardCodesmith]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 if they were, I would ask to inspect your dice.

[@krissydoll8213]

Aww, that's awesome. *sigh* I'm a bit shy but I want to find a group to play D&D with for the first time. Preferably face-to-face not online. And to be honest, I'm hoping it will also help me to open up a bit more. I already have D&D player's handbook, the D&D monster manual, character sheets, three sets of dice, and a dice tray. Sooo, I'm pretty much set.👍🏾 But I just know I'm going to be a bit nervous at first. 🤷🏾‍♀️

[@krissydoll8213]

@@mardonram8673 Thanks! Yeah, I just moved to the DFW area of texas so there should be a lot of game stores up here with D&D groups. Hope to find one soon!😊👍🏾

[@lyudmilapavlichenko7551]

In older editions NPCs had a status of friendly, neutral or hostile. Hostile creatures are immune to "sweet talk" although they might be persuaded to neutral. Enemies also had a morale stat.

[@stevevondoom4140]

the DMG may have something similar for 5e. renown

[@lyudmilapavlichenko7551]

@@stevevondoom4140 Unfortunately I've never played 5e or gotten to read the dmg. I do still play AD&D 2nd and 3.5 with a couple of my high school buddies. I'd like to get into 5e but my older friends don't want to learn a new system and all the 5e games in my area are kids.

[@stevevondoom4140]

@@lyudmilapavlichenko7551 as i look closer the renown rules are cited in DMG as "optional" , but do seem like the fix to this issue and similar to older versions tracking systems...

[@Yeldibus]

5e still has those, called Attitudes: hostile < unfriendly < indifferent < friendly < helpful The NPC's attitude towards you determines what DC a charisma check has to meet in order to achieve certain things - and of course many favors are not at all possible when the attitude is really bad.

[@EnterpriseC14]

Beyond the morale stat, I do like the status of NPCs, might make interaction organization bit easier for DMs.

[@meatbyproducts]

Often one bad interaction ruins years of contact. Worse than charisma is how DMs handle intelligence. They throw puzzles are their players and want them to get it on their real world int but their Wizard may have the int to laugh at the puzzle or their barbarian may not be able to understand the mechanics behind it. Int is the stat we treat the worst and charisma is the one people don't get.

[@joemama114]

Honestly I know the feeling. I've implemented something of a work around in the game I'm running, it is still hit and miss to be honest. Puzzles if done wrong have one large negative effect then the way is opened and you can progress further. A big fight, or some traps go off, or some bull shit magic beam that steals some of your items and teleports them to another place within the dungeon. Kind of dumb you can't do it all the time but it at least it has removed the hard road block which is ANNOYING. Quite often I set multiple DC's for a puzzle for example if it's a simple riddle, then a 15 wisdom check or like a 20-25 intelligence check. Riddles I think test your intuition more than your intelligence. If there's a puzzle like a where you shift tiles around there might be a dc 20 intelligence or wisdom check, or specifically a 25+ check for slight of hand. Your touch is so light you can slide the tiles and can just by feel move them around to their correct spot. You could even have a puzzle that could require multiple people or one person who's very nimble. A puzzle where there are buttons all spread out and you have to press them all in a short amount of time. A monk with fast speed and acrobatics could hit more than one button at a time or you could spread your team out and everyone presses a button each.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Hmmmm. THIS seems like a good topic for an episode of DungeonCraft!

[@rikardosilva1754]

I usually let my players do a INT check (like the idea roll in Call of Cthulhu) and explain what their character could understand of the puzzle, this makes the puzzles way easier to players with high int.

[@tl1326]

what i’ve seen is that the int stat determines what kind of hint the irl players get, the barbarian gets none and the wizard gets 1 or 2 hints

[@ShiningDarknes]

@@tl1326 I usually pass them a note with the steps on how to solve the puzzle up to a number of steps based on their result, it is then up to them to share that information with the party or try to figure out the rest and just solve it...but I also ask ahead of time if the players would like the chance to work it out for themselves for a few minutes. Don't give players a puzzle then get mad if it takes them forever to solve it with no hints is my philosophy. Is it important they solve it or is it perhaps better to just let them roll to see if their character can solve it even if they can't. After all, you are not your character.

[@Dyrnwyn]

If someone doesn't want to roleplay word-for-word a social interaction, I just tell them to give me the gist of what their character says. If it's a persuasion attempt, they need to give me their basic argument. If it's not completely obvious what the NPC response would be, then they can have a CHA check.

[@theodorehunter4765]

That's fine until you get the charismatic guy playing an 8 CHA character and roleplaying an 18 CHA.

[@Dyrnwyn]

@@theodorehunter4765 Yeah. This is why I'd rather do away with CHA and all social skills. Oh well. Maybe the character's low charisma has to do with something other than his speech. Maybe he's got chronic halitosis. Maybe he can't take his eyes off of boobs and bulges.

[@VosperCDN]

I'll do that - just get the player to outline the gist of their conversation and where they hope to go with the outcome.

[@devious3174]

@@theodorehunter4765 Why do I get the feeling that 18 CHA people aren't playing dnd...

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Good call. Thanks for sharing!

[@broke_af_games9661]

Prof. DM: "imagine a relationship scale... you don't just skip all the way to the end" Tinder: "uhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm" ------------------------------ I kid, I kid. I like the idea a lot and it makes good sense

[@VaSoapman]

Well I mean.... There are places in medieval times where people go just in the interest of skipping to the end.

[@angrytheclown801]

Bards and all the half breed monsters would like a word with him.

[@kijijideelz2232]

@@VaSoapman Don't need a charisma check for that one though haha

[@Harrowed2TheMind]

Thing is, there isn't all that much in the way of contraception and STD prevention especially in a medieval setting. Certainly, your characters might find magical/alchemical, etc. means of contraception, but that doesn't mean that you'll easily convince a stranger of its efficacy in the first conversation or that you'll change their perception of their culture and traditions overnight either, y'know...

[@menotu000]

@@kijijideelz2232 You do need a Comeliness check however. (See Unearthed Arcana for more information)

[@cameronlloyd9752]

There is a difference between role playing and speaking in character. (I've sen a couple channels cover that topic.) Although many players will be very uncomfortable or unable to speak convincingly in character, it is usually reasonable to expect someone to roleplay their character describing what they are attempting to do in the third person. "Ragnar is going to attempt to convince the prisoner that if he doesn't tell us where the hideout is, we'll hurt him very badly."

[@thumperpaul155]

We usually were a mix of both styles.

[@commandercaptain4664]

Depending on the group, narration is quicker and easier to follow, but acting is far more fulfilling and immersive. Personally, I would never act out a love scene, preferring to speak of it vicariously like a bit of gossip or like combat descriptions. I'm still torn about portraying more than one NPC at a time through acting or narration without sounding schizophrenic.

[@ShiningDarknes]

@@commandercaptain4664 If you are in a group that only meets once in a while for 4 hours at a time...narration RP tends to be the best solution if you want to get anything done. You can either spend 2 hours of real time discussing, at length the merits of a particular solution to a problem you character has devised but the mayor isn't quite on board with...or you can just say that is what you do, make a roll and get on with your lives.

[@commsnake]

I just want you to remember that Elvis asked President Nixon to make him a federal agent and he did. Crazy things happen.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

That's probably the best dissenting argument I have read. Lol.

[@commsnake]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 lol thanks! I agree with you completely though.

[@ftkinney]

Elvis was a College of Glamor Bard at a massive level.

[@carpma11]

I’m on board... now to just convince the players that a 20 can’t move mountains.

[@swaghauler8334]

YOU need to set the DC high enough that failure is not only possible but probable. I would set the move the mountain DC at around 35 or 40 on a D20 roll.

[@DjigitDaniel]

If they get finicky about the nat 20 thing tell them it requires five consecutive critical successes, a miracle equal to a Wish spell. ✅

[@TheVertigo007]

@@swaghauler8334 Why even let them roll? If there's no chance of success, the players don't get to roll. If you let the players roll, and even on a nat 20 you still tell them they fail, then the players just feel cheated.

[@swaghauler8334]

@@TheVertigo007 Some players simply WON'T accept that they cannot do something and will still feel cheated anyways. These are D&Ds "special snowflakes" and while they are rare, they do exist. The unachievable DC is something for those players to strive for.

[@Ragdefender]

Roll persuasion to see if you convince me. :-)

[@TonytheCapeGuy]

"I rolled 57 for stealth." "You are in the Matrix training ground. There is no terrain, you are alone, and people are watching you on a computer. They know where you are." "BUT MAH STEALTH CHECK! D:"

[@TarsonTalon]

"Fine. They had to do a brief double take of the computer screen before seeing where you were at, because they had an itch in their eye and looked away for a brief moment. They breath a sigh of relief that you didn't actually disappear." "Yus!" :D

[@Kartissa]

"I have the Hide in Plain Sight ability."

[@ShiningDarknes]

Stealth is one of those things where you either can or cannot be seen. Hide in plain sight might allow you to hide...but if where you are hiding is obvious and you don't move...well sorry but they are going to do the natural thing and just come over to where they last saw you or blast that square. Just because you can't be seen doesn't mean people can't know you are there. You can roll all you want, but tremorsense, blindsight/sense, and scent to name a few are all things that simply see right through stealth no matter how good you are at it. "I was hiding in an area of dim light which means I had concealment!" Yes, and the enemy has darkvison treating dim light like normal light so to them you are not in dim light at all you are just leaning against a wall like Kronk (my groups go-to for how dumb you look trying to hide there).

[@Kartissa]

@@ShiningDarknes *"Just because you can't be seen doesn't mean people can't know you are there."* As if moving wouldn't be the first thing I did after using Stealth.... *"tremorsense, blindsight/sense, and scent to name a few are all things that simply see right through stealth no matter how good you are at it."* Lurker in Darkness feat: Creatures using unusual forms of sensory perception such as blindsight, greensight or tremorsense cannot automatically foil your use of Stealth; such creatures must make a Perception check as normal. Granted, it's from the Psionics Bestiary by Dreamscarred Press, so you're free to disallow it, but we have the book, so we allow it in our games if you meet the prerequisites (Stealth 6 ranks). It also foils indirect detection, such as using Detect Magic to locate your magic items, but not powers that provide information about you instead of enhancing perception. As for scent, that's what the spice bomb was for....

[@ShiningDarknes]

@@Kartissa TL;DR: No, fuck that feat. Literally is nondetection in feat form AND fools powerful nonmagic senses with a low level/rank requirement in a common skill. But that spice bomb idea is exactly how you are supposed to deal with scent. That is precisely why dreamscarred is banned at my table, their books are full of stuff like that that just breaks the normal balance with zero effort (I am all for breaking shit with a lot of careful planning and exploitation, go nuts). That is way too low a level requirement for "Naw fuck you blindsight and tremorsense" two things that are very clearly designed to be hard for players to overcome/requires teamwork and/or planning if stealth is what they want to do. Silence more often that not fools blindsight since hearing is the most common form of it and flying or other means of not touching the ground while in the radius fools temorsense. Two things that require resource expenditure 95% of the time. So no, I don't think a third party feat that is clearly bullshit should be allowed. If it required like stealth 12...maybe but a 6th level character has no business being able to fool two powerful senses just by existing for a single feat investment. Alternatively requiring hide in plain sight as a prerequisite is another way I would call it balanced due to the very limited means of actually getting that ability permanently. "As if moving wouldn't be the first thing I did after using Stealth..." AOE my guy. "How far could they have gone from the last place I saw them?" Many a time I have foiled and have been foiled by such thinking. Actually no I just went and read the full description and no, fuck no. It ALSO fools indirect detection methods like detect magic to detect magic items on their person to find a location and that means it would ALSO somehow fools see invisibility/aura sight/arcane sight. No. Just no. That is all but a fucking nondetection in feat form. If the feat allowed you to hide from see in darkness, darkvision, and low-light vision in areas of at least dim light, yeah, all day stealth 6, I would allow it because at that point it is poor man's hide in plain sight but THIS. Naw you can miss me with that shit if you seriously just brought this monstrosity of a 3rd party feat to the table as your argument for "those senses aren't that hard to deal with." But yeah, that spice bomb thing? EXACTLY how you are supposed to deal with this sort of situation.

[@marksemple297]

him "this die has 20 sides, it's going to come up nat 20, 1 in 20 times" my d20s "hold our beers, we're gonna roll under 10 for the next 3 sessions"

[@purplelily2608]

I feel that...except for me it was every session except maybe the first few of a modual until it led to my characters death...cause she had already basically died 4 other times but this was the one time the cleric wasn't close by. Did not have as much fun that game. Sucks when everything you do fails every time.

[@VestedUTuber]

Ah, the Gambler's Fallacy...

[@goolabbolshevish1t651]

Reminds me of my first game as a kid. During character creation I got amazing rolls, ending up starting with great stats and rich. Proceeded to roll horribly after that for the next 2 sessions resulting in a character death after accidently maiming another player character.

[@yanderenejoyer]

When I DM, my npcs are gods of natural 20 When I play, I roll average. At some point, I nat 20'd on all attacks against one of my players for 3 sessions straight. And I roll in the open, so no fudging. I also did max damage on one of said crits.

[@Bowhunter328]

Sounds about right I roll so bad dm makes me use a digital dice roller

[@jasonuerkvitz3756]

Great video! Here's the thing, when I was a kid and I got my first Basic Rules set for D&D my understanding of what "role playing" was was this: if you're a fighter, your role in the game was to fight; if you were a mage, your role was to cast spells and do wizarding things; if you played a thief, your role was to find traps, pick pockets, etc--standard burglaring stuff; and if you played a cleric, guess what, your role was to heal and to pray for blessings to the party. So, when dungeoneering, each member of the party had a role to fulfill when dealing with threats and when exploring. Members had gear distributed amongst them for purposes of successfully surviving the various encounters, traps, obstacles, what have you. When dealing with people around town, you wouldn't send the thief to the church to ask for help from the local clergy, you would send the cleric. In taverns, the thief and the fighter would come into their element and handle things accordingly. The wizardly mage was typically more introverted and would be at the tower library reading up on some esoteric information necessary for team progress--this was down time stuff. All of this continued to be our typical practice as players even when we expanded into AD&D. It wasn't until 2nd ed, when I bumped into an older guy at a local game store, invited him to a session, and witnessed what his interpretation of role playing was that things changed. He took the game to a performance level, improvising scenes, using a funny voice--he played a dwarf named Norrin Ironhand--and essentially blowing our collective minds with his amazing acting. Suddenly, our embarrassment was stripped away when we saw this older cool guy, a retired soldier from the army, performing as his character. Dice were no longer a central aspect of how successful or terrible we were at any given thing. Now the game was about how well we could perform as our character. We all started to practice silly accents and incorporating anecdotal nuance to our everyday interactions. So, all this said, role playing doesn't necessary mean acting a part in an improvisational scenario with your DM. It can mean that, but it doesn't have to mean that. Role playing, as far as I can tell, meant what role does your character play in any given dungeon environment. Is he wizard? Yes, okay, then don't run into melee swinging a battle axe! Is he a fighter? Yes, okay, then hand that wand you found to the wizard and let him use it next time you run into a pack of gnolls. Anyway, I feel it's important to understand what the intended spirit behind the term initially was back in the early days, and what it morphed into later on. I love the ad-lib game play, but I don't believe it is ultimately necessary based on many of the points you make in this video here. Clearly, my friend who makes terrible decisions in everyday life because of his incredible naivete will likely have a tough time acting out and performing as his cleric who has a 20 Wisdom score. It's impossible. My other friend who has the dashing tiefling sorcerer might pull off a charming performance every once in a while, but is he really coming off as someone with a 20 Charisma score? Likely not. And my dumb ass doesn't come anywhere near my character's 18 Intelligence, but everyone has to suspend their disbelief and accept that the character I'm playing is brilliant. Yes, having a silly voice or accent for your character is fun, or back stories you sprinkle into moments of interaction to add to verisimilitude, but it shouldn't be a requirement or expectation. Maybe if it's a White Wolf game, or Mind's Eye Theater, where you're donning cape and top hat LARPing with the goth-kids after sunset, but otherwise, I don't think it was what was originally intended for D&D. But, am I glad it changed into something more performance based and improvisational? Most certainly! I love coming up with goofy voices and terrible accents. Why the hell not? I'm amongst friends. It's all good and worth the laughs.

[@commandercaptain4664]

You should try out a universal system. Your wizard will be pimp-slapping minions with a bastard sword faster than you can say "anahl nath rach ooth vas bethud dochiel dienve"!

[@jasonuerkvitz3756]

@@commandercaptain4664 LoL, even Merlin in _Excalibur_ avoided combat. ;p (And my 5e Wizard is a Bladesinger...)

[@The482075]

Charisma shouldn't automatically mean you're the most attractive person. Some individuals might find the socially confident person to be intimidating, slimy or untrustworthy. Someone who is too smooth or someone who is squeaky clean might ring alarm bells for some. Along comes the person with the charisma of a woodplank and somehow there are people who trust this dull person over the face. Simply because they find them non threatening.

[@King_Thulsa_Doom]

If Bon Scott and Lemmy Kilmister have taught me one thing, it's that you can be Roach-killing ugly and still be Charming and Charismatic as hell. The problem I have had with my charismatic party members, is that the players themselves are more often than not less eloquent than the characters they play as far as spoken words and performed actions go.

[@The482075]

@@King_Thulsa_Doom That is the challenge of playing characters with high mental stats. Playing characters with higher intelligence, wisdom and charisma than you is really hard. I'll give you an example. Stephen Hawking was someone who was astronomically intelligent. His conclusions, world view and insights were outside the bounds of a lay person. To think and behave intelligently you have to be intelligent. To think and behave wisely, you have to be wise. To think and behave in a charismatic way you have to be charismatic. High dice rolls cannot compensate for the chasm of a diffence in mental competency. I say this as a lay person, the intellectual heights of smart people is as beyond my reach as being able to run a mile in 4 minutes.

[@orlock20]

I believe in the 2nd edition, Adolf Hitler was mentioned as being average looking with a high charisma score. I would say charisma is the ability to read people and then present themselves in the best possible light according to the target. An ugly person with high charisma could be super funny, know how to wear the right clothing and makeup to look better or seem to be a leader and man of taste and action.

[@mikfhan]

Yeah, charisma is one of the mental abilities, not physical :) your appearance and body shape could of course provide some bonus or malus but it is mainly your personality and social skills. Even introverted characters could still have high social skills despite their preference for solitude or small social groups, but just tend to use them only when they absolutely HAVE to interact with people. Players don't have to BE strong to portray strong characters, so they shouldn't have to BE smart to portray smart characters either. Maybe a more distanced non-spoken roleplay with DM help is the best option here for us dumb/ineloquent/uncharming players :)

[@droe2570]

Charisma is not about physical attraction, it's about personality and social skills. At one point D&D added a new stat "comeliness" to represent physical beauty. Someone who is likable, easy to talk to, makes you feel comfortable, reads a room or reads others with whom he's having a conversation...these things represent charisma. "Confidence" and "charisma" are also two different things. So in your example with someone finding a socially confident person as intimidating, a person with high charisma would note that, and would "tone down" his gregariousness or whatever else to make that person feel comfortable. Your example of "too smooth" again is reflecting something that a charismatic person would notice. People who are charismatic are not necessarily "players", they can make gaffs, but they recover from them, laugh at themselves, can disarm people with a few words, etc.

[@sarahcb3142]

As a player I sometimes have the exact opposite problem. My character has high charisma but I had never planned for her to be the face of the group, so during character creation I didn't have her be proficient in persuasion. It turned out none of the other characters planned to be the face either and kept asking my character to handle every social encounter. Now I act in character and really get into it. If it's an important encounter I know is coming up I'll often write down an eloquent speech ahead of time. But I've had it before where charisma checks mess it all up. For example. We were talking to a group of beloved allies whose leader is the father of a fellow player's character. My character gives at least a minute long speech. She is stressing to them that there is a great evil brewing to the North of their lands that wants to eat their children and so we're going to pass through their territory to keep their people safe. Is there anyone here who would like to join us on our quest (to, you know, STOP THE MONSTERS FROM KILLING THEIR CHILDREN?!) Roll for Persuasion. ... Nat 1. DM Your trusted allies now think you're making it all up to steal their lands. Also they're going to kill you for your treachery if you say one more word and don't leave immediately. Yes, the father will throw away 24 years of loving player character. You rolled a nat 1. That's just how it goes. *Sigh* And this is why I hate leaving role play up to the dice. Because it doesn't matter then how good of an argument you make. If you didn't build your character to be the face then there's a good chance (usually 50/50 in our games) you will fail regardless of the role play.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Thank you for this insightful response. If we had money to hire writers, you’d be hired!

[@matthewmcgilberry9447]

ok i know im a late response, but as a DM i think the thats just how it goes is the wrong way to do it, a nat one just means you look suspicious or stumble on your words a lot. if they were trusted allies then they wouldnt kill you on sight for saying something dumb or wrong, they might be suspicious and maybe weaken the trust a little, but thats just my two cents.

[@haveswordwilltravel]

Regarding Charisma: I like the way the Prof, handles the Charisma checks. Having to make a series of checks along the way seems more believable. The example on bluffing your way past the guard to get to see the king/queen, was spot on. You just won’t be able to do it, unless you are a member of the royal family, or a high ranking court official, or a personal friend of the monarch. The charisma check might be able to keep you out of jail though. The guard might find your attempt amusing and laugh as he tells you to “get lost”. Of if you are someone important like a noble, he might be very respectful and polite in his refusal, but adamant nonetheless. If your charisma check and social standing are high enough, the guard might even summon his superior officer to deal with you. In my campaigns, a character with a high charisma has an edge in social situations. NPC’s will be predisposed to like the charismatic character, they’ll give them a monent to hear requests. Romantic interests might initially be interested, but furtherlrogress depends on what the player says and does. I would never allow a charisma check by one player to influence another. Same goes with insight for detecting lies or whatever. A player has control over what their character thinks and believes and only does what they do not want in the case of duress, or magical compulsion. Finally, I think the Paladin needs a high charisma score just so the NPC’s won’t roll their eyes when he starts telling people what they can’t do.

[@Barzarel]

Think it's kinda two sided to a degree imagine for instance if your a renowned bard or craft man of arts for instance, while you may not just walk up to guard make a charisma check and get. It may not be entirely unlikely that rumor may spread around your arrival and court may send someone out with formal invitation to appear before the court to display your skills or maybe perform a work of art, while if you have a really bad reputation it would probably go very differently.

[@sirellyn]

Good Paladins aren't preachy. Bad players are.

[@horserage]

Paladin needs a high charisma score because of the way they get power, the oath. They believe in the oath, so hard, they get divine power. The size of the soul of the pally is just so big, from all the CHA making it so, it just so happens to sponge up all the divine energy around it because they "believe" hard enough.

[@commandercaptain4664]

@@Barzarel Wouldn't either instance factor into the Charisma DC anyway? Celebrity = DC5, pariah = DC25, etc. If the reputation precedes a PC, this is when advantage/disadvantage comes into play.

[@anna-flora999]

Social engineering. Instead of saying "can I have an audience with the king?", say "i have an audience with the king." Or something like "I'm the new servant and [insert name of superior] ordered me to get X thing"

[@topomusicale5580]

When talking about a single roll (e.g., a Deception check), I think it is on the player to come up with the gist of the 'story' they are trying to sell, the roll covers how smoothly they convey that idea.

[@SenseiJae]

except it isn't, extend that to a "knowledge" check. Essentially you are asking the player to know something the character knows that just isn't possible. With charisma, a player may not be charismatic and therefore not know the right way to persuade their argument, therefore their 18 charisma character is being punished for deficiencies of the player.

[@Mokiefraggle]

@@SenseiJae I think what Topo Musicale is suggesting that the player not actually roleplay the entirety of what is going on, but rather just the broad strokes. "I'm going to try to convince the town guards I'm a traveling merchant," in conjunction with the roll, not "I am Joe Blow from the Merchant Caravan Lolcat, seeking dispensation to join the town's market from the Lord Mayor-- blah, blah!" followed by a roll that may come up short and waste a lot of thought and effort on the player's part for nothing. Short, brief, not reliant on being actually as charismatic as their PC, but also gives the DM something to chew on as to what those guards might do in response, rather than just "I make a deception check!" that just bypasses the roleplay entirely.

[@SenseiJae]

​@@Mokiefraggle if the player is not competent in roleplaying the situation (like an Autistic player trying to build a friendship*), you shouldn't force them into an uncomfortable situation. The point is to create a fun story. In the situation you provided, I would be perfectly okay with allowing the player to simply say: "I want to develop a friendship with the shop owner." I don't need them to role play that if they aren't comfortable doing so. I just have them roll and base the DC on their character's interactions and reputation. A sample, say I think the owner is amenable, I set the DC to 10: < 10 - the owner kindly thanks you for being so friendly, but doesn't have time to chit chat, he explains he is very busy. 10-14 - the owner offers to meet after work for a beer and discussion, and he will be generally interested in future conversation 15-19 - the owner finds your conversation humorous and time flies as you discuss topics of common interest, he offers to buy you a beer at a local pub and seems generally willing to talk about whatever you want. 20-24 - the owner is engrossed in your conversation, he invites you and the part to dinner at his house where he introduces you to his family. He invites you to visit whenever you are in town. 25+ - The owner is like a brother from another mother. He has his shop hand take over running the store while he shows you and your party around town. He invites you to stay the night and insists in helping you with whatever is within his means to accomplish your current mission and insists that you stay with him whenever you are in town. For socially awkward players this would fulfill their desire to feel popular and given them agency in the game without forcing them into a situation that they don't fully understand. Moreover you, as the dm, can use this as a teachable moment to design the interaction that might cause the outcome generated to help the player with situations outside of game. * as a note, I am autistic and I wasn't able to form viable relationships with others until I was 16. It took a LOT of hard work and I still have difficulty as an adult in certain situations.

[@cameronlloyd9752]

This is basically what I do. More detail of what they are doing and how, often helps. It is possible to say exactly the right thing to negate the need for a roll. Or appeal to a desire of the NPC that will lessen the difficulty. Or come up with a plausible enough story that the penalty for failure won't be as bad - merely not getting what you want, rather than provoking the anger of the NPC. Sometimes, giving more details makes things possible that would not be otherwise. Had an adventure where a character was scooped up and talking with a green dragon. If he'd said, "I want to persuade the dragon to let me go," I would have responded, "That's nice." Instead, he tried to persuade the dragon that he was in awe and wanted to give the dragon a great treasure he'd seen in the keep in exchange for his life. *That* allowed a roll. (The dragon thought this was unlikely but possible, and worth the entertainment to find out. It could always just flood the corridors with poison gas or tear open the walls if need be.)

[@SenseiJae]

@@cameronlloyd9752 See you illustrated the problem nicely there, you expected your player to be smarter than their character. The flipside is also a problem, if I have a super genius player, what prevents them from taking 3 wisdom and intelligence if they know they can talk their way out of any int/wis based scenario? You are breaking the rules by allowing a player to avoid the repercussions of their character creation choices.

[@PureElixir]

The way I use charisma, the player act and share what he wants to say. Depending on the NPC disposition, I increase or reduce the charisma DC if the player touch some sensitives subjects. This way, it is more of an informative way the player share the dialogue, then the roll represent how well it has been shared. For exemple: If the character knows the mother of the NPC is sick, and he stack dialogue sharing empathy for sick relative, and the NPC is sharing deep concerned about it, I will reduce the charisma DC based of the following subject, since there is an openness to the conversation. If the NPC prefer speaking to men or woman, or to elves or dwarves,, this goes all in the relevency of the DC that is then decided by the roll. Finally, my rule of thumb is to never accept a complete 180 degree of one's predisposition. A guard may never let someone pass through the gate, but he may, if he shares a good bond with a PC, share a moment and information where the character will be able to access more easily.

[@Egad]

I dont think Charisma should be handled any differently from the other ability scores. I've seen plenty of idiots play characters with high Intelligence or Wisdom. Weaklings play characters with high Strength and clumsy folks play with high Dexterity. You don't see them getting penalized for not roll playing up to their character's abilities. I agree with letting people explain what they are doing and roleplaying as far as they are comfortable doing so.

[@mandodelorian4668]

Besides Charisma's use for RP, I've always liked how B/X handles Charisma for Morale. It really makes it feel like a very valuable stat! Minions, Henchmen, Hirelings, etc. good stuff In that one!

[@Titan360]

If you are playing a megadungeon or other expedition game and using encumbrance, Charisma is more valuable than Strength if you want to carry stuff because you can hire more porters to carry stuff FOR you, letting you have more collective "strength" than the party fighter!

[@josephbradshaw6985]

Wait does 5e not use Charisma for this?

[@s-o-tariknomad6970]

no, hirelings aren’t really a mechanic in D&D5E. same for 4E too. product of it slowly moving away from its War Game roots I suppose.

[@josephbradshaw6985]

@@s-o-tariknomad6970 Yeah. I've only looked through the basic/essential sets of 5e. I kinda liked how in my Red Box it feels like your goal is to move up and become a leader of men. At which point Charisma is going to be a core stat, for influencing not just followers but also dealing with other rulers, chieftains of foreign hordes, the Count/Duke/King of the area, etc...

[@commandercaptain4664]

I wonder why the Advanced line abandoned that Basic section. It opens up roleplaying opportunity ("Thanks for saving me, Farmer Johan!") and easily covers up whatever discrepancy the party feels needs filling, like a PC dying mid-adventure or hiring an NPC cleric instead of forcing a player to play a healbot. Now 5E is finally bringing in Sidekick rules in their new Unearthed Arcana, so there's something.

[@keithvanboskirk7327]

I think DeathBringer is trying a charisma check to score a Bonesaw

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Love the Bonesaw!

[@otbaht]

i explain that a natural 20 means you get the best POSSIBLE result. To take the example of having the king give you the kingdom on a natural 20 what i might do is the king laughs and finds the player funny giving him a lower noble title and small patch of land to rule over.

[@hunterkarr]

Brilliant

[@Keyce0013]

I thought the result of a 20 in that case was the King laughs and lets them walk out of the throne room alive.

[@jackmalin2528]

Skill rols dont use the nat 20 rules. Its a 20 like a 19 is a 19, Nothing special about it

[@Keyce0013]

@@jackmalin2528 A 20 is still the best possible outcome though, since it's higher than all of the others. It doesn't matter if critical successes don't count, as per the rules. XD

[@jackmalin2528]

@@Keyce0013 it does in the since that somebody with a 10 modifier gets a 30 and someone with -2 gets a 18

[@steventurner6902]

I'm loving this channel. So many fabulous usable tips and valuable information on rule interpretations. Professor Dungeinmaster you are all flavors of awesome.

[@Goshin65]

Good stuff. I let players either talk in 1st person to the NPC, or else tell me "I'm trying to talk to him about X, I'm going to appeal to his greed to get Y" whichever they are more comfortable with. I pretty much know what the NPC wants or is motivated by, and what will get him moving.... not many checks unless their offer/approach is borderline.

[@jasonminer9871]

That was an incredible explanation of Charisma. Thank you for taking the time to do this as I feel like it really laid it out in a way most people understand and could agree would be a logical way in most situations to use it in a campaign.

[@terradraca]

"What do you do when a character is charismatic but the player is introverted?" That's nothing unique to charisma. As a DM, I have to role play beings of intellect way beyond myself.

[@sequoyahwright]

Speaking of Charisma, I appreciate the effort you put into your ensemble, Professor. The tie brings the shirt, vest, and seasoned features of the Professor together quite nicely. I give you a +1 to your Persuasion, Erudition, and Pontification Rolls for this encounter.

[@andrewsmith2880]

I don't let my players say "I con him!" Then drop a 20. As a general rule, I tell them not to roll unless I tell them to. I interpret their Charisma check as "How convincing" they are to the NPC. We role play the encounter and at key points during the conversation, I'll tell them to roll. It might be to determine whether or not they learn something on the famous rumor table or it might be for nothing. A decent Charisma means your words carry more weight or are more believable to an NPC. My players are seasoned enough that they'll actually roleplay according to their Charisma, which makes my job much easier. Even a character with a high Charisma can say something stupid or inappropriate and cause a negative effect on an NPC. So, there's always a roll if the conversation is important. If the Player role plays beyond his character's Charisma, I would never penalize them for that. I'd assume the NPC just didn't believe them or had some other reason for not being fooled. A PC with a high Charisma just has a better "chance" of affecting NPC reactions with his words.

[@DjigitDaniel]

Very well done, Professor. Thank you for the insight. Also, the plug at the end about you having published your own hack of D&D was a pleasant surprise. About time. 😉 Lastly, I ran a 2 hour session with your UDT and DMing principles last weekend for a 30th Birthday celebration culmination with resulted in a standing ovation. Cheers. 🍻 PS: Deathbringer is a gem. LOL

[@nagyzoli]

I am camp hybrid A+B. So camp "C". If a character wants to try talking to the NPC, I will always ask: what do you want to obtain? What is intend end result. Then based on his response, I decide the DC.. how difficulty I consider as a DM, that dialog choice is. Then I call for deception or persuasion based on what the choice is.

[@GeneralFarmer]

Wow, got a nice surprise. At first look at this dude, you would never think he could do such good impromtu character voices. immediate thumbs up within 30 secs of seeing this video! Well spoken and easy to listen to and follow. defiantly adding the channel to my driving playlist to listen to while trucking.

[@ghoulofmetal]

imagine having to do bench presses when doing an athletics check

[@missa2855]

would get roleplayers pretty stronk.

[@jacobstaten2366]

The weight would have to scale based on how much the character can typically lift vs how much the player can. If they can only do 1/3 the weight of the character, a 100lbs weight becomes 33lbs for the player.

[@mythrilsentinel1]

I do like the approach you take to introducing the NPCs, and how you interconnected them. Very useful. I would like to take this opportunity to mention that there are a lot more opportunities for roleplay than just social situations, however. As an example, I played a Ghostwise Rogue a few years ago, and used his trap-finding skill as a chance to roleplay. How do you roleplay a skill like this, you might wonder? Keep reading (adapted using 5e rules): "My rogue quietly takes a knee, and unrolls his kit, selecting first a hollow reed, and uses that on the 'usual' suspect places where someone might hide a magic sigil." (Perception Roll... no modifiers, no bonuses, or the like. Just the simple pleasure of roleplaying his actions) "From there (if a trap has been located) he employs a magnifying glass and other fine instruments useful in his disarming attempt, careful not to touch any sigils he may have located, to investigate any traps he may have found." (Investigation roll... again, no bonuses expected, other than those imposed by the DM) Success or failure is narrated by the DM, whom, if he is good at improv, will tie the description that you have provided into the result. You help the DM by keeping the immersion intact and by providing something that he can use as an aid to describe the results of your actions. Remember, it is not just the DM's job to maintain the suspension of disbelief. Players need to do their parts, too. Some players may not like this kind of roleplay, but those players are not in the game to roleplay... they are simply there to "Roll Play"

[@Bondanalloy]

i think you were coy at the end. yes we handle social encounters with one roll because most of these games 'are combat games' which of course we disagree with, but the amount of mechanical granularity around combat in D&D is much more dense than that of social or skill challenges. usually as written i think these are meant to be pass/fail because in social encounters you CAN rp back and forth which will take up some of the scene, whereas i combat the time is spent rolling or looking up abilities or moving into position. in your (our) style of game, this is different since combat is mercifully much quicker, so we have more time to focus on rp when such occasions present themselves.

[@FablesD20]

Great video, and very important topic because, you said it best, some players can and others can't roleplay for their own reasons. Our normal DM, Jarrett mixes it up depending on the scene, story, and stakes. His real world charisma is through the roof and can make almost any scene work. Our up and coming DM (Cmike) is diagnosed with ADHD and shows a lot of the social limitations of being autistic, thus he struggles with Charisma, Wisdom, and sometimes Intelligence RP. He's talked about the pros and cons of both camps that you mentioned here. He problebly puts far more hours into the subject than anyone else would. He's also talked about it should be like landing it a hit, so a Charisma DC or a investigation DC for a mystery works more like an AC & HP, he calls it, "Cumulative DC" The reward of victory comes from doing multiple "hits" and the rolls add up over time until they over come the high DC. He also said he tided "Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws" to "charisma, intelligence and wisdom" - to help him have mechanical options to "unlock" information but more importantly, guide him with clear social goals.

[@zaqcausey8514]

Default positions of npcs is simply amazing. Consistently giving us gold, Professor

[@zaqcausey8514]

Oh, and the scale of relationships is great too

[@MultiCommissar]

People with a "default" setting do not exist.

[@zaqcausey8514]

@@MultiCommissar thank you aspiring psycologist actually most people don't think about the way they will react to something they simply react innately

[@TheTkhhwilliams]

Great point Professor! Thinking of Rp/charisma situations like combat and having multiple fail/success states is a great idea Thanks for the great content!!

[@generalsci3831]

Sometimes I try to bridge the gap of the observed 'backwards' check and the role-play check. I have the player RP the conversation and then I'll stop and ask, "Was it your intention to deceive the NPC or are you trying to persuade them?" If I felt the conversation felt like a deception but the player responds with persuasion, I'll raise the DC because they were getting different results than indented. But, if both the player and I are on the same page of what it sounds like I'll leave the DC as is or lower it if I felt convinced of the intended effect.

[@pistolshr1mp]

The observation that compares charisma checks vs combat is brilliant! Thanks

[@amysakalov6915]

For an example of the Sliding Scale of relationships look at Exalted 3rd Edition's Intimacy system/mechanics. Characters in this version of Exalted all possess a number of Ties (the character's attachments to people, organizations, objects, places, and other concrete entities) and Principles (a character's beliefs and ideals) collectively referred to as their Intimacies which are then spread across three levels as Minor, Major, and Defining. Social maneuvering under this system means you can't just walk up and demand a king give up his crown as his position as king is likely a Defining Intimacy for the character. This means that in order for a character to get said king to give up his crown/position the character will either have to work to elevate some other conflicting Intimacy to a Defining level (whether an existing one or a new one that is created at a Minor level through social actions) or else work to degrade the existing Defining Intimacy of "I am the King" (for lack of better wording). This isn't a process that's a simple as 'roll a natural 20' or even 'get maximum possible bonus on check then roll 20'. It's a longer process of social actions and possibly manipulations which must be undertaken over a prolonged period as there's a requirement of time between being given an Intimacy, elevating an Intimacy, or degrading an Intimacy (basically a cooldown period).

[@jacobosborne972]

Thankyou for clearly explaining how I've been doing CHA checks wrong for a while now. Making the checks a process would encourage roleplay and make talking to NPCs way more realistic and fun which my friends/players enjoy more over combat. Stumbling onto your channel has been incredibly helpful so thankyou. Also I hate initiative order and the boredom I see in my players as they wait their turn. If you ever get a chance to do a follow-up video of you no-initiative games I would love to watch it. Thanks for this video!

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Thank you for watching & taking time to comment. Full disclosure: I’m back to d6 group initiative & I will have video explaining why soon. It’s already up on Patreon.

[@jacobosborne972]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 can't wait 👍

[@razorboy251]

Here's how I handle charisma and similar stats (in other systems) at my table: if the player is playing in character and saying something that the NPC would find convincing, believable, etc. then I don't ask for a roll - the player's character succeeds if success is possible (like with your guard at Buckingham Palace example - some things just aren't possible). If the player is not comfortable playing in character or is playing a much more charismatic and intelligent character than themselves, I will ask them for what they are generally trying to achieve and let them roll.

[@SenseiJae]

what if they bomb their charisma stat? Would you let a cha 3 character run persuasion based on the player's abilities?

[@hmcloud8487]

@@SenseiJae For starters, I would never let a player have a cha 3, reroll that shit xD Second, if the most awkward, unthreating stick of the mood told you to not kill a baby, would you still kill it? Some times there is something so obvious that it doesn´t need a roll. You don´t make 2 dex players to roll for tripping when they go down the stairs do you?

[@SenseiJae]

@@hmcloud8487 unless they were "taking 10 or 20", yes, I would.

[@irishthump73]

Very informative! Fully agree about the two main ways of handling CHA checks. You really need to find the happy medium for your group.

[@derkylos]

"I try to hit the orc with my sword" "Roll attack" "I try to convince the guard that I have an audience with the king" "Roll persuasion" Dice should come out to determine if an action succeds or fails when said action has story implications (no dex to tie shoelaces, please...unless tying them is essential to the next combat round...)

[@joemama114]

What about if I tie shoelaces one another persons feet?

[@postomnis6134]

Listen, if I want to turn my shoes into an emergency sling in the middle of a prison escape that’s my business not yours!

[@basildaoust2821]

I'm not 100% sure about your videos in general but I have to give you full credit on this one. Well done. I mean I'm the introvert at a table and talking my way in will not likely go well unless I'm actually being the target of a con in the first place. I did like how you gave the players a chance to get back in on a failure, I know many talk about how bad rolls make a quest better or good rolls at times open up many more options for you to get yourself killed :) So again excellent video.

[@JP-fm1oz]

In other words, dont confuse high charisma roll actions as The Force of a Jedi

[@sicantreis]

Really enjoy your careful thoughts on D&D =) charisma has always been a tough one, this video gives me new insight into how to do it better!

[@Billchu13]

My players were missing their Charisma scores when getting possessed by ghosts and trapped in soul jars. And that's just this month! Make your every game more Cthulhu by requiring more mental ability saves!

[@joseacevedo8314]

I never really understood charisma saves, is the character's personal magnetism and guile actually being attacked magically?

[@Billchu13]

@@joseacevedo8314 Definitely when you are getting possessed by a ghost (or in social situations like Among Us) You face the airlock- save or die

[@SenseiJae]

@@joseacevedo8314 would you tie "holding your emotions in check" to Wisdom or Intelligence?

[@PhyreI3ird]

I've been running for half a year but I'm still such a noob (and thankfully my players are too) so I haven't had to deal with too many charisma checks. I didn't realize it until now, but part of the reason I've been avoiding more social-skill demanding/utilizing elements in adventures is actually because of how social checks are described and employed by most of the gms I've played with. (Thinking back I did have one gm who seemed to use your method, but it was so subtle I never picked up on it) This more thought-out "Steps" approach just makes so much more sense and makes it much much more approachable from the GM side of things to add social dynamics to the game. This is genuinely inspiring me, thanks dude!!

[@markfarmer7534]

I also toyed with an idea of when you enter a social encounter, you actually start another kind of combat where the opponents HP now becomes their ego. If you have a whole squad of people roll up into a master swordsmith's shop and convince the sword maker that his swords are not of the quality he once thought, you may be able to, as a group, bully him into giving you a discount. Unless his ego is huge. Dealing large amounts of emotional damage is difficult.

[@paavohirn3728]

Agreed! I especially like how you describe the effects of failed charisma checks as temporary drawbacks that make sense. I do try to find something special happening when a player rolls 1 or 20 but it's unlikely to make a rift in reality by accomplishing something ridiculous. But it is a fantasy world so maybe the queens guard hints at a way forward for the characters. Maybe their next contact in the chain up to the queen. Or in the direction of a person who actually makes decisions in court.

[@johngleeman8347]

I fall into the "likes playing charismatic characters but has a heck of a time roleplaying someone like that" category.

[@commandercaptain4664]

It depends on your familiarity with your character and the world. For now, stick with narration until you start recognizing aspects that you can easily get involved, and ask your DM for anything specific in an adventure that would allow you to speak up more.

[@johngleeman8347]

@@commandercaptain4664 Thanks for the advice.

[@Elmithian]

I have been playing charismatic LE character for the past 2.5 years and I am pretty sure it has helped me become more... not charismatic mainly but more... adaptive I would say the word is? Good at getting to a reasonable and logical point in why and how I am doing something. Since that character's main skill is bluff I do have become a bit too good at that though. Most of the other players know that my character is good on his word but know my character is _really_ good at obfuscating the entire truth... which has forced me to go a step beyond that to throw a veil over their eyes, which has worked quite well so far (no, not in the boring "I will betray you in the end" kind of stuff, but in the self interest and own goals kind of way)

[@kurga9790]

Always great advice, thank you professor. As you mentioned some players are not very conformtable with roleplay or can't always come up with smart ideas, that's why I find charisma and intelligence useful.

[@flexiblenerd]

Summary: nat 20 =/= I WIN EVERYTHING.

[@Wolfphototech]

*WarHammer Fantasy Role-Play really does have a beautiful variety of Modules that are amazingly well thought out .*

[@aaronc4899]

Irony check: Charisma is the least important characteristic in D&D, but it is the MOST important characteristic in Real Life.

[@Lowraith]

5E Bard enters the chat Warlock enters the chat Sorcerer enters the chat Paladin enters the chat Social Rogue enters the chat CRPGs enter the chat... Least important... Not in 5E. It's a toss-up between Str and Con.

[@1ULTRAKNIGHT]

@@Lowraith Easily STR then, since so many spell and items do it better. Con is useful for HP, is a strong Save, and aids spellcaster concentration. All classes need con.

[@ianbraun271]

Actually, I find Intelligence is the least important statistically. Only influences Wizards and Investigation. And the only marginally useful knowledge skills.

[@Lowraith]

@@ianbraun271 Arcana checks? Religion checks? Nature checks? Investigation checks? Document forgery checks? Merchant appraisal checks? Int is kind of a big deal, and not just for Wizards. (Full disclosure: I also play a lot of Wizards...)

[@TheCoolerDrilis]

Yeah, in 5e, I honestly have to say Intelligence is probably the least important. It was the primary Ability of _one_ Class before Artificer came along, and even with Artificer, it's still the least-used primary Ability. Very few situations call for Intelligence Saving Throws. Aside from Intelligence-based Skills, the only uses that other Classes had for it were if your Subclass used it. At least in older editions, it gave you bonus languages and skill points. Like, really, there's so much you could do for Intelligence so it's not the dump stat for every Class that isn't Wizard or Artificer. Bonus Skill Proficiencies based on modifier if positive Bonus Tool Proficiencies based on modifier if positive Bonus languages based on modifier if positive A combination of bonus Skill Proficiencies, Tool Proficiencies, and languages based on modifier if positive if allowing all of the above is too much Add your modifier to checks using tools I'm sure there are other things you could do with it to make it actually useful.

[@amoctheflock1364]

Thank you. I been having problem with Charisma and this video will go a long way helpings me DM.

[@davemunger8803]

I can't be the only one who doesn't see a dice check/role playing a charisma interaction as a strict dichotomy of "A" or "B", the way this guy lays it out, can I? I also think it's very narrow, even just inaccurate, to think of charisma in interactions as 100% about word choice and nothing else. Real life charisma doesn't work that way most of the time (consider that, in person, most of the message is in non-verbals, for one thing). The way I do it, everybody has to give me the gist of what they're going to say. Then it's my job as GM to say how that plays out on the dice roll. Off the top of my head, one example is, the player hems and haws a bit, but then makes the roll. Fine, then one way I can handle it is to say, "The duke is charmed by your humility and affable shyness in his presence. He tells you that he admires how genuine you are." This doesn't seem that hard to me, tbqh.

[@jonpaul6948]

Stopped reading at "most of the message is in non-verbals". Lol, right.

[@davemunger8803]

@@jonpaul6948 That's what tons and years of research into communication shows, but I guess your "lol" is an airtight, fact-based counterargument.

[@jonpaul6948]

@@davemunger8803 Ok let's flex our respective intellects then since you wanna be the smart guy. You in all likelihood are referencing Mehrabian's studies in the 60's, which resulted him coming up with the 7-38-55 rule (verbal, tone of voice, and body language respectively). The problem with that is Mehrabian himself said his study was only in relation to feelings and attitudes (like/dislike), and thus had no bearing on anything outside that specific subset of communication. So now that we have established my basis for saying so, LOL.

[@davemunger8803]

@@jonpaul6948 Thanks for actually engaging in a discussion. So, you don’t think persuasion has anything to do with dealing in feelings and attitudes? I’d go so far as to say that’s a bit ironic, considering how the goal of your own communication seems to be to make others feel small first and foremost, as well as to demonstrate an inflexibility on your part. I had to actually suggest you give more to your communication than that.

[@jonpaul6948]

@@davemunger8803 This is the internet, not a classroom. I don't comment on youtube to type paragraphs, and I usually don't bother replying back when challenged unless it's clear the person is operating under the misconception that they are the most intelligent person in the thread. Even then it's only to watch them shift the goalposts (like you've done here) for a chuckle. I didn't say persuasion has nothing to do with feelings and attitudes, I stated that according to the SOURCE for the study behind this silly idea his research only applies when you are trying to communicate your feelings and attitudes ABOUT a topic. Whether you like something, or dislike it. That's it. Nice attempt at putting words in my mouth so you can then try and turn the tables using my own stance against me, but it works better if the person actually said what you claim in the first place. Reading comprehension is just as important as verbal communication it seems!

[@DammitVictor-8H]

Lot of stuff to think about here. Designing my own (mostly) skill-less retroclone and I'm trying to really focus on social interaction stuff since it's a key feature of the playstyle I'm aiming for. One thing I think you skirt around the edges of is how much it depends on scenario and encounter design. There's very little guidance for setting up NPCs, either monsters or named NPCs, with workable "this is what this DC gets you" and "this is how much one roll gets you" and "this is as far as this NPC goes".

[@nonya9120]

Geezer here.... About 30 years back we tossed the "mental stats" for home brew... Int.... That's your characters smarts. Memory, awareness, agility of mind and figuring things out. Wisdom became Will Power.... Your characters mule headedness. Strength of will. Great for cultists and such. Good for resisting illusions... But no indication of smarts or help with most skills the kids use it for these days. Charisma was always the kicker. We ended up with social skills always being a skill check. And as you pointed out, the guards job is not letting people in. Best have a dang good story and maybe you cause a distraction was the way it went at our tables. Not only should there be a range of reaction but that nat 20 will only get your character so far was our method. Game On.

[@scottschreck88]

Solid advice from the Professor! I learned this one the hard way. Now I ask the players to give me the gist of what they want to accomplish then have them roll. If they want to roll play it, great. But I do not base the DC on their role play (unless its great, then I might lower the DC). This way, it's always working based on the CHARACTERS abilities, not the players.

[@rynowatcher]

I still like charisma to modify a reaction roll, personally, but you do you.

[@raymondlugo9960]

"Do you"

[@rynowatcher]

@@raymondlugo9960 I do.

[@timpyke4511]

Voodoo

[@raymondlugo9960]

@@timpyke4511 oh, man...and that was a group effort...

[@josephsage3524]

According to this IDIOTS logic making this video....all ability scores should be done away with.

[@ronwisegamgee]

Good advice. This is very much in the spirit of games like Apocalypse World, where specific narrative events trigger game mechanics. In the case of Charisma, the common misconception seems to be, "Charisma is rolled to get someone to do something I want," without acknowledging the prerequisite conditions needed to be eligible to roll at all. This is where disposition comes in, as the more favorable the disposition, the more relaxed the prerequisite conditions become (as well as the target number for said tests). Even then, the highest disposition available via Charisma checks is "Helpful," not "Fanatical" as in the Deities & Demigods source book for D&D 3e.

[@dminard1]

Charisma is the social intelligence of the character. If someone has a CHA of 18 and sucks at roleplaying they still get reactions as though they are charming. That's why the attribute scores are there. The social skills of the player mean literally zero.

[@dmdc5719]

Great vid, really good points. I like to; I guess you could say, use both A and B in a way. When my players say something that is meant to persuade an NPC one way or another I take what they say and then secretly apply a bonus or penalty depending on the situation. I also set a secret DC just based on who the recipiant of their attempt is and what is going on around the situation. I do the same thing with intimidate checks meant to demoralize opponents in combat. I always just try to factor in what the circumstances are during any given check.

[@thaerosulderian3244]

The flip side of Charisma is when you have a very Charismatic player that chooses to dump their Charisma stat, but still uses their social gifts to dictate the game. They may waltz through social encounters without you (or the GM) for a roll and win NPC graces because outside the game - well, they’re Charismatic and that’s what happens. And check your bias at the door you’ve probably let this happen without even noticing it because, again, that’s what real Charisma is. It’s an exceptionally difficult stat to simulate because of how much influence it can have on the people playing the game. The fact that it is most often a stat with the least general benefit to the mechanics of the simulation make it exploitable.

[@inappropriateperson6947]

To add to that one... Is when you have a odd player that falsely believes that they are very charismatic in real life but is not bright enough to realize that they are not. AKA dunning-kruger effect. So they dump their Charisma stat "hoping" their social gifts will dictate the game. What do ya do? Go easy on them & use dice I hope.

[@thiagom8478]

Fair points. My impression is that a lot depends on context. Specifically, what is the main focus of your story. It often is combat, and if that is the case simplify the representation of social interactions is advisable. If the essential ingredient is social interaction, then the combat may ask for some simplification. Prioritize everything is usually a bad strategy, but only take one thing in consideration and ignore all the rest does not seem to work well either; something in between has more chance to be fun for everybody.

[@spacemancoco]

I believe it's "Cody" at Taking20, not "Cory", but I'm sure Cory is nice too.

[@ostrowulf]

Convenient timing for this video. My buddy is making a set of rules, and is trying to find a way to make social interactions and persuasion better, so at the brainstorm with me point. Currently my mind is toward using things I learned in a work place mediation course to make a system.

[@hermitda2640]

Anyone seeing the Queen Mother is going to be difficult seeing as she passed away in 2002! That's going to need some powerful magic 🤣

[@ruBenes94]

As my first adventure, I ran Mines of Phandelver with some of my, also first time, players and one was a bard. Some of the things you named here are mistakes I wont do again :) Thanks for the video!

[@AndrewTheFrank]

It has been about a decade since I either played or DMd and I would have to say that I did it differently than how I was first introduced to the idea of role playing games. When I first learned I was at a card shop as a kid and the guy was probably using AD&D rules. He kind of just described a room and then let me ask questions and decide what to do. He never asked me questions so as to attempt to push me forward. As I proceeded more info came forth, new rooms and me asking more questions about maybe what my character maybe had or what things i could maybe do to deal with monsters that were in the next room. It actually took me back towards some RP I was doing as a kid. There was an older kid in the nieghborhood that did some RP with my siblings, which was kind of more like LARPing and so there was no dice but all about acting and actual social interaction and always pushing forward to ask the DM to flesh out more of the word as you pushed on its boundaries. Once I was in the later highschool and early college years it was now time for me to DM and i kind of defaulted to dice rolls and sometimes asking for descriptions and gists with my introverted friends. There was only one friend I didn't really dice roll much with social stuff and it was because he was an old school been playing since he was a child and knew the AD&D rules and 3e rules as well and he loved acting it all out. It was fun interacting with him, but when it came to everyone else it was fairly hard to engage them into the game or into anything beyond, "roll for that please." And everything kind of quickly became an either major failure or a major success. There was little concept of just a little adjustment in likability. It was very different from my childhood where most everything was handled without dice and was instead more about imagination. Don't know if I would be DMing again but this video really has me thinking of how to improve such sessions if they did every happen. Thanks.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Thanks for sharing, Andrew. The dice call. Time to pick them up again & return to the table in glory!

[@Dabeef64]

well said, professor! Now here are some ways I also handle the Charisma stat. Now I only use the 1st edition rules (modified) of D&D but anyhow: Magic, for the Illusionist class, I allow a negative to an NPC savings throw for particular spells. for clerics & Paladins etc. I will allow a bonus for s special boon if they entreat their god for a special favor, spell ect. But! R/P still counts: A cleric prays for some form of "miracle" I still expect them to R/P and if they do well instead of a +1 to their roll I might allow a +2 ( because of high Cha) or whatever. Fighters will get a bonus if they try to rally their troops in combat or are trying to recruit militia from several nearby villages ( the fighter would give 1 speech & then just roll for the rest of the villages to keep the game moving). Now for those that are a bit more introverted, I allow a bonus because they may seem mysterious ( vs just odd) so when they speak, it captures the attention of those around them. I find after a while those players who may be shy, kind of warm-up after a few sessions and either learn to r/p a lot more or even play up the "Mysterious stranger" routine . Finally charisma can be a lifesaver in my campaign. I have players run into monster sometimes, they have no business fighting. My ex wife who played fantastic druid, had to speak to an ancient blue dragon to llearn about part of a quest she was trying to complete. She had a decent Cha & gave it her best to R/P ( which she was good at but she never thought she was) and I had her make a roll . With her Cha bonus, she had such a good roll ( 18+ I think?) The dragon was "amused" and actually gave her more information than she was hoping to get. The dragon also reminded her & the rest of the group, he was no one to trifle with, giving a big toothy grin as electricy popped & crackled cross his several inch fangs.

[@indianajoe9029]

I like the default responses being prefigured before game.

[@eddarby469]

This was a very good discussion. I look forward to working this into my group.

[@johnharrison2086]

I agree that multiple checks are necessary to change someone's opinion of you or to make them more friendly towards you. I also agree that some things are impossible regardless of the roll I let players roleplay but the dice determine the result. Just like how I allow a puzzle to be solved by an Intelligence roll. I try not to treat mental stats differently to physical stats. You describe your actions and I determine if what you are trying to do requires a roll, automatically succeeds or automatically fails.

[@JonathanQiao]

I use charisma a lot in as creative ways as I can think of. When a new player joins my game I usually have them roll a charisma saving roll and if it is high then they get an impressive description for their first impression but if they roll low then they get an awkward description of their first impression. For example a high strength fighter rolls high: you step out in front of this adventuring group, the sweat gleams off your bulging biceps and the wind gracefully blows through your hair making you look an impressive sight to the new group of hardy adventurers before you OR a low roll: the wind blows your long flowing hair in your face making it hard to see and as you spit your own hair out of your mouth half blinded you trip over a branch - make a dexterity saving throw to see if you fall on your face in the mud. I use charisma for other situations like during combat or during an acrobatic feat and I sometimes have players asking me if what they did looked cool because they know they can roll for it and even something great like killing a monster can have a comical unusual result which is nice to change up the narrative of combat a little bit. It definitely does add flavour to the game and my players are familiar with social awkwardness so it gives them something extra to work with during roleplay. When players encounter NPCs I usually have an idea of what the NPCs motivations are so based on what the players say could result in an automatic pass or fail but in situations where it is not absolutely certain then I have them roll for it. My players know that if they roleplay well through a situation then dice rolls may not be needed or that they get advantage for their rolls but I do have situations where players are not really convincing but I let them roll and on a high roll I take what they told me and present their character saying it in a more persuasive way or describe the visual aspects that the charisma would affect the mannerisms. For some players this is useful because they might want to do something like this but are not sure how to present it so demonstrating it like this sometimes gets such a player more active in roleplay because it helps to separate the personality of the player from the personality of the character.

[@bigbroauctions]

Old man here- Back when I was playing 1e all the time, we adopted a supplementary rule of "Comeliness"- Actual physical beauty, which was played when we RPed. Comeliness was used in conjunction with Charisma, depending on the DM.

[@GlitchWitchNyx]

Great advice! Definitely pairs well with the video you mentioned.

[@merdaneth]

You can integrate both camps. What you do with combat rolls is to have the player declare how to go about it and then determine difficulty. The issue is, the with regards to combat rolls, most players choose the default option: 'I attack'. They do not target anything specifically and their goal is simply to inflict one regular blow. It is the role-playing equivalent of 'I talk'. You can do that with role-playing as well, if they talk you can have them roll and say 'it was a good conversation' or 'you didn't have a good conversation', depending on the pre-existing attitude (the social AC) of the one they talk to. But like with combat, they players often try to reach a certain goal. To do so, they maneuver, clear out minions first etc, before they (can) assault the Big Bad. You can do the same for social encounters, and their role-play determines how tactically they do so. If they immediately attack (socially speaking) without regards to terrain, minions etc and expect the Big Bad to fold after one blow (apparently hoping for a lucky crit), then that is viable, but very rare. But if they build up their social attack plan, then you could have them progress step by step towards their goal. You can have the players RP their social combat steps, or you can do it (for players less socially skilled) the same you would do for players who have difficulty describing their combat encounters.

[@MagnusBellatorr]

With Charisma, and any roll really, I like the method of the role deciding the luck of the outcome of the action. I dont know if I am wording that right but your examples are great ones and match what im talking about. Like I would allow players to ask to see the king with a role even though the answer is always 'no', the charisma roll affects how the guard takes it. A single success or failure might just lead to the guard ignoring them like they are trained to, but multiple failures could lead to them getting arrested while multiple successes would just have the guard break his stoic act to politely(while obviously sounding annoyed at the pestering) explain to them that they cant get in without a royal summons or something similar.

[@thesonofdormammu5475]

I switched the way my group does Charisma, Intelligence, and Wisdom check after watching that Taking20 video. Been playing since 1984, it took that long for us to figure out a better way.

[@styxdragoncharon4003]

The DMG in 3e did a good job of making rules for improving someone's trust or friendship... I followed that which is mostly what you described in your better scenario. Charisma is honestly my favorite skill to have as a player and the one I use most in my tests as a GM/DM. This is the first video I have watched of yours and thank you for making me think.

[@swaghauler8334]

I do pretty much the same thing but I added a FIRST IMPRESSIONS roll for NPCs. This sets the NPC's outlook towards the PCs as: 1) Very favorable. DC 3 2) Favorable. DC 5 3) Neutral/uncaring. DC 10 4) Unfavorable. DC 15 5) Hostile. DC 20 Outlook modifies the DC of any social interaction from those PCs. The DC for a typical CHA check is set at 10 (the standard for uncaring) and goes up or down based on the NPC's outlook towards the PC. A NATURAL roll of 20 means that the NPC's outlook improves one step for future interactions (as long as the check was a success) and a NATURAL roll of 1 makes the NPC's outlook WORSE after the CHA check. I also modify the check based on: = The level of trouble the NPC will face for doing it. = Bribes or rewards offered for the NPC's help. = How famous/infamous the NPCs are. = Any debts/favors the NPC owes.

[@branthebear]

Great video wishes I was in your RPG group. Man, that would be a hell of a game. Have a great one, sir, and will be watching more great vids of yours

[@GroundThing]

I like a sort of halfway stance between the roll first, vs RP first on social checks. Essentially give the gist of what you want and how you want to get it ("e.g. I'm going to try and flatter the noble by taking an interest in his hunting trophy on the wall, to try and get him a little more loose-lipped about the mysterious deaths in the nearby villages."). From there I might modify the DCs depending on how well it aligns with the character they're interacting with, like how willing they are to do what the player wants and how effective their method is at getting it, then they roll, and decide how they RP what they said they were going to do based on the result of the roll (for instance on a low roll, on the previous example they might RP it as accidentally doing a sort of oneupsmanship by mentioning a hunt they'd been on). Less for introversion, though it probably helps there, but I like it because it allows the dice not to be the sole arbiter, and analyzing the character to see what might motivate them will help nudge the result, but it allows the player to roleplay the result and not have the underwhelming aspect of making their best case or coming up with a clever bluff and then rolling low.

[@mijxero]

I love this video. That is such a great way of looking at it, my players always feel like a high roll = impossible things should happen.

[@AzraelThanatos]

One other thing is to try to get a general thing about what the players are wanting to say. Then go with the roll...going with role play as a way to grant advantage or other things to it as a bonus. I know few DM's or goups with the patience for things like someone actually going through a 10 minute speech for Inspiring Leader or any variant of it (My DM let me use a version using Wisdom rather than Charisma at one point, going with a medical glance over rather than a speech at one point for a character that was functioning as a doctor). Even more so if there's a deadline for ending the session because then it only annoys other players for minor benefits in comparison. But for getting an audience with royalty, there are ways to go about it with a series of checks that someone could puzzle out. A door guard probably has a messenger nearby they can call on and send to either request backup or to ask further directions on something...an unexpected visitor would be one of them, and there would be a check to convince him to start passing it up the chain...then you might get someone like a guard captain or a secretary for the court who might see them if they don't know them, which would go to an aide or a major domo who might either set up the meeting, pass it on, or deny them. It's not just one check, it would be several of them, and might tie into non-charisma based skill checks to figure out the more general plan rather than the specifics. The natural 20 might mean that the guard is friendlier and urges the messenger to hurry, that it's important rather than him heading off for it. It might also have him suggest things directly. The 20 there opens up potential and makes the encounters later on in the chain easier...and you could add other things to make it easier or harder. Perhaps that Paladin trying to gain an audience has the noble background...or the party might have a letter addressed to the King and were requested to directly hand it to him, potentially to wait for a reply to take back afterwards. In which case, it wouldn't be unreasonable for them to make the request. Of course, you might also have a higher level party making the request, and that natural 1 might do the exact same thing as a 20...just in different ways. The king and his court being terrified out of their wits by the group that could, probably, solo everyone in the castle and barely break a sweat, can mean the same as charming your way in for a friendly talk about something, just with various hazards or benefits with regard to where it goes. Also the party showing up to have an audience with a king they'd never met or who doesn't really like them is relatively common in fantasy as it is...such as the meeting with Theoden in Lord of the Rings or however many knights and the like seem to just waltz into King Arthur's court (Same in chunks of mythologies from all over).

[@csbonepatem]

The idea of default position is really great!

[@jh1859]

That vest of yours today looks kind of like in the +3 area.. Definitely dressed sharper than I did today. Cheers Prof! Excellent.

[@BigDaddy_2K]

I am actually running power behind the throne (wfrp 1st edition, hogshead republished version of the nineties) with my friends right now as part of our ongoing enemy within campaign. I love how much fellowship ( the warhammer version of charisma) is used. also I like how they actually use different stats to influence the checks. for example, some characters appreciate grace.. and therefor high dexterity characters get a bonus, where as the city's high wizard and deputy high wizard are more impressed by highly intelligent characters. I love charisma. I even take it for characters that should honestly be using it as a dumpstat. it's just way too much fun. in other games I play social interaction is very elaborate as well. Exalted 3rd edition for example. you use conversation and observation to find out and manipulate intimacies and (ab)use this knowledge to steer someone's opinion or their favor your way. it's a very intriguing way to handle stuff.

[@DUNGEONCRAFT1]

Always remember Petra Liebkosen is the key to that scenario. She can tie most of the ends. BTW: Liebkosen means “caress” in German.

[@BigDaddy_2K]

@@DUNGEONCRAFT1, I know but since we also played death on the reik my players started off completely ignoring the taxes and dead focused on that slimy toad Gotthart goebels (Wittgenstein). I'll let miss Hess point them in Petra's direction since our Elven spy did send a Pidgeon back to her base to get some contacts here.. Thusfar they have managed to gain the attention of the princess due to our dwarf cleric being of noble blood. But they have absolutely zero clues about what is actually going on.

[@bryanstephens4800]

With all checks, player innovation is rewarded in our group. The GM gives bonus for what we are doing. And, often, the roll is not needed for mundane things. Pathfinder has these steps. Ultimate Intrigue is a good read

[@taryntessrog7588]

I was just reading this OSR supplement called "On the Non-player Character" (by the guy who writes the Hack and Slash blog) that presents some pretty cool and easy to use rules for social actions. One of the features I liked is that the initial reaction roll also determines how long a random encounter NPC is willing to talk before the start to loose patience; and there are guidelines for NPC's souring turning hostile if the players try to keep talking to them when their patience is used up.

[@benvoliothefirst]

Can't remember if it has been in previous 5E campaigns, but in Icewind Dale: RotFM, they tell you whether NPCs are helpful, unhelpful, or neutral, and a successful charisma check would bump them up one category. 3 steps seems perfectly manageable to me with this system.

[@taryntessrog7588]

The original rules we even simpler. Roll 2d6 on the reaction table and adjust for charisma. The thing I liked about the supplement I mentioned above was that it game-afied the rest of the social encounter. That might not seem like a desirable thing, adding more rules to situations that can be role-played, but I think there is advantage to leaning on the dice in a sandbox game. My whims as a dungeon master might be less random, but also more capricious than the dice. I might be more inclined to let one player succeed in talking their way past a monster than another because I find that player more charming or less annoying. I might decide that trying to talk to a band of orcs should automatically result in a surprise attack from the orcs because the image in my head of that band tells me that that is obviously a stupid thing to do, even though I haven't described them well enough to the players for that to be obvious to them. If you always make a reaction roll with consistent modifiers, social interaction become more predictable in a fun way. The kind of predictable that lets players make smart, informed decisions. And then if you can drop the things they say during role-playing into certain buckets with simple rules, that can have the same affect. Like, if a player role-plays offering a monster food, treat it as them spending an action on one of the 3 turns that this NPC is willing to sit and chat by offering them food or drink, which on a 7+ on 2d6+charisma modifier will turn them from neutral to friendly or friendly to helpful. Then they might have better luck on the next turn when they ask the monster to lead them to a certain room. Reward the player for being a smart player instead of judging their success on how charming they are as real person.

[@dashlaru2]

This is some excellent insight! I can definitely use this, thanks Professor.

[@joelgonzaga3408]

A lot of good thoughts here on the information on the Charisma score.

[@davidrose7938]

For me a 20 is only an automatic success and a 1 is only an automatic failure as an attack roll. I recently read an article that discussed the stats and their intent at the beginning days of D&D. Regarding Charisma, it was described as strength of conviction. So, character with higher CHA is more likely to get what they want, or less likely to believe an illusion or be enchanted because of conviction for their wants, needs, and belief in how things should be. I have no idea where I found the article, but it helped me understand how CHA impacts the classes that use it (more in prior editions than 5e if you think about 3.5).

[@richmcgee434]

Heh, that outro is golden. I think I can safely say Seth's extremely generous to the NPCs in his videos - they get every penny he earns, even. :)

[@youvegotmailed]

they guys I play with are all ridiculously funny, so we usually go with what makes the most laughs lol

[@lythnookwemin]

I add the App(Appearance) Stat. Charisma is personality and the player can chose to use cha or app for certain skills, depending on how they wish to use the skill. They have to state how they are doing it and based off their role playing, I adjust the skill check. But I also use a characters con mod for AC. Dex is a reflex not how much damage you can take before fainting. But my players get to also chose if they wish to try a reflex or stand their ground. And yes I have everyone attach at once. Even though it's not this video, thanks again for that suggestion. It has made the game so much smoother.

[@lythnookwemin]

Personally if I removed a stat it would be Dexterity, Wisdom easily replaces it. After all wisdom is your instinct.

[@erispapps9929]

Good video, pretty much universally relevant to every D&D table or role playing game.

[@sketchingjohn1678]

I really liked this one. Gave me a lot to consider, especially rolling first or second.