Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Farealmer 06-19-05, 09:28 PM	Hi all you house ruling folks Farealmer here. In my games i have a 7th stat that seems to solve many problems. It is Supernatural(SNL) and it represents a beings supernatural power. This replaces charisma for monster/class supernatural and spell-like abilities, sorcerer bonus spells and all classes spell DC's. The logic is simple why should a mundane stat that represents mundane characteristics represent how supernaturally powerful a creature is. I understand that out of a 6 stat game it is the most logical. As it is necessary for creatures to have and makes more sense than wisdom. But with SNL you can give powerful creature powerful abilities without worring about how the stat influences their behavior. Now most of you may have noticed that the stat gives sorcerers a spellcasting advantage as both DC's and bonus spells are powered by this ability. That is intentional, as sorcerers are natural spellcasters. To make an analogy would would be a better swimmer, a professonal swimmer(wizard) or a merfolk(sorcerer). The real choice is obvious, the merfolk would. And so a natural spellcaster should be better than a learned one. When the SNL stat is reduced to 0 the creatures supernatural abilites, spell-like abilites, and spells don't work. Golems and other constructs, elementals, outsiders, and undead are also immobilized while their SNL is 0. A creature with - for SNL has no capacity to learn or use supernatural abilities.
Jaerom Darkwind 06-19-05, 09:57 PM	What does Charisma do, then?
Farealmer 06-19-05, 10:22 PM	Everything else listed under charisma. CHARISMA (CHA) Charisma measures a character’s force of personality, persuasiveness, personal magnetism, ability to lead, and physical attractiveness. This ability represents actual strength of personality, not merely how one is perceived by others in a social setting. Every creature has a Charisma score. You apply your character’s Charisma modifier to: • Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Gather Information, Handle Animal, Intimidate, and Perform. These are the skills that have Charisma as their key ability. • Checks that represent attempts to influence others. Bards get bonus spells based on their Charisma scores. However use magic device is covered under SNL.
Kintara 06-19-05, 11:22 PM	I like Charisma as it is. Why would a "mundane" stat affect magic? Why would a "mundane" creature be able to harness it at all? Magic should feel like a living thing, in my opinion, and as a living thing, I see no reason why it wouldn't be swayed by "force of personality." Charisma doesn't determine how supernatural you are (though I find the concept interesting), but it affects spellcasting in its own way, as Intelligence does in its own way. The reason it's the key ability for Sorcerers and creatures with spell-like abilities is that as creatures in some sense magical themselves, they are able to persuade it on its terms. It's not that they're more magical if they have a higher Charisma, it's that they have a better relationship with the force of magic. To put it another way Wizards trick magic, and Sorcerers woo it.
Shaken, not Stunned 06-19-05, 11:37 PM	That's sig worthy **** right there.
Steely Glint 06-19-05, 11:48 PM	I also like Charisma as it is, but partly because I consider there to be a nice symmetry between the physical and mental stats. Adding a seventh stat ruins what I believe is an elegant way to describe a creature's attributes. Con and Wis represent how hardy your body and mind are. They determine how hard it is for the outside world to affect you. Dex and Int represent the quickness of your body and mind. They determine how deftly you can control yourself physically or mentally. Str and Cha represent how powerful your body and mind are. They determine the extent to which you may impose your will on the outside world. I can understand why wizards use Int as their prime spellcasting stat, because the power of their spells is derived from how finely they are able to craft their incantations. The better tuned the equation is, the more powerful the spell. Wis as a spellcasting stat... meh. Also, this further weakens what is already the most oft-chosen dump stat.
Farealmer 06-20-05, 12:32 AM	If you like it that way thats O.K. but it is unfair to many creatures and characters that are forced to use a stat, that like all mental stats is always reigned in. Plus why should a creature who is charismatic have enhanced supernatural power. Like undead, most undead abilites are based on CHA. That is stupid pure and simple. The stat is what will give powerful constructs and undead a much needed boost in power without going crazy on HD. Especially because their is little reason why a creature brought back to life would have lots of CHA, but it would have lots of SNL running through it. Kintara magic is a force, in FR it might be a living thing, but in default D&D it acts like a force so i treat it like a force. Steely Glint i am after balance and seperating mind from supernatural is a important leap. Especially considering the types of creatures that have weak minds but lots of supernatural power. After all you see many of these types in popular culture. Misfits(low CHA) with huge power(SNL) but low physical tolerance(HD). The new stat solves it all, and who cares about CHA it is based on specific things and in those areas it does it's job. No need to give it more power than it should have. 6 may be a nice round number but in my experience trying to make everything round makes a square sooner or later.
Kintara 06-20-05, 12:48 AM	Kintara magic is a force, in FR it might be a living thing, but in default D&D it acts like a force so i treat it like a force.Well, my point is that Charisma is evidence that it isn't simply some energy force. Default D&D doesn't explicitly state what magic is or isn't, just how it works. And Charisma affects magic, therefore it must respond to force of personality. I prefer to think of it as living because of that. Besides, I find the idea of "dead magic" rather depressing. It's just another physical mechanism like gravity or the weak nuclear force. Heck, quantum mechanics posits that even these forces respond to human perception. I just think that if magic is just like coal or some other form of energy used to fuel some sort of variant technology, then magic has lost its...magic. Perhaps the trouble is in the associations you have with Charisma. I personally find Charisma an extremely flexible ability in how it can manifest in play. Charisma is how much who you are can affect others, simply by being who you are. I can't think of an ability more appropriate to be tied with magic. Edit: Besides, Tenzhi is right. And I don't think Charisma needs to influence a creature's behavior that much, anyway. It's not as though a particular personality trait is necessarily tied with Charisma. It can just as easily be terrifying as charming. Its presence can put you ill at ease, or lull you into a sense of security. It just means that the creature has the power to affect you, which it probably does anyway.
Tenzhi 06-20-05, 12:59 AM	The logic is simple why should a mundane stat that represents mundane characteristics represent how supernaturally powerful a creature is. Because it works for Intelligence and Wisdom, so why not Charisma too? But with SNL you can give powerful creature powerful abilities without worring about how the stat influences their behavior. Anything that exudes power is likely to exert some influence over those around it in one way or another. Likewise, those that lack power will be overshone by those that have it. Charisma.
Farealmer 06-20-05, 01:17 AM	Well, my point is that Charisma is evidence that it isn't simply some energy force. Default D&D doesn't explicitly state what magic is or isn't, just how it works. And Charisma affects magic, therefore it must respond to force of personality. I prefer to think of it as living because of that. Yes it does because like i said in my first post out of all the 6 scores CHA is the best one OUT OF THE 6. It doesn't make it the best one period especially considering how it's applied. Besides, I find the idea of "dead magic" rather depressing. It's just another physical mechanism like gravity or the weak nuclear force. Heck, quantum mechanics posits that even these forces respond to human perception. I just think that if magic is just like coal or some other form of energy used to fuel some sort of variant technology, then magic has lost its...magic. Thats an opinion i see no proof that CHA is better than SNL for supernatural attacks. I have given evidence of the weak links and how SNL eliminates them. All i see is that you like living magic. Magic ACTS like a FORCE, not a life form. Magic is magic because it takes the laws of physics beats it to a pulp, takes it's money, kills it's family(science), and looks cool and mysterious doing it. You want to treat it different fine but don't take the fact that WoTC didn't want to break the 6 stat system D&D was based on as an reason that SNL isn't necessary for a more balanced and fluid system. I see you argue about STR isn't the right stat for intimidate and that CHA is. Same thing here with SNL and magic, tradiationally super powers(magic or otherwise) aren't tied to CHA.
Farealmer 06-20-05, 01:32 AM	Perhaps the trouble is in the associations you have with Charisma. I personally find Charisma an extremely flexible ability in how it can manifest in play. Charisma is how much who you are can affect others, simply by being who you are. I can't think of an ability more appropriate to be tied with magic. For a 6 stat system with nothing representing an independent force. You seem to have a mage game view that mortal minds should be able to shape the universe. That cuts it on the outer planes but D&D is more than that and magic isn't bound to them. Because it works for Intelligence and Wisdom, so why not Charisma too? Because these are unnecessary and unfair to creatures with bad mental scores(constructs). Why is a magical construct supernaturally weak when a nonmagical human is supernaturally strong based on mental stats? Anything that exudes power is likely to exert some influence over those around it in one way or another. Likewise, those that lack power will be overshone by those that have it. Charisma. But many fictional people who are shy or uncharismatic have had god-like power. I'am i suppose to assume they should have 20+ HD despite the fact they were physically weak because otherwise their power couldn't work by D20 rules. D20 is about flexablilty and adding one more stat to represent power(which has never needed to show ties to the 6 stats) is a good idea.
Kintara 06-20-05, 01:49 AM	Well, I don't know if I'd consider your points as proof any more than what I said was proof. I was simply describing how I think it can make sense the way it is. Of course it's an opinion. I don't see any problem with Charisma affecting undead abilities. It doesn't sound incongruous to me, at all. I don't see how Charisma creates problems with behavior of creatures. But since you didn't find my opinion persuasive, there really isn't much to say on this. Let's move on to the mechanics of your idea. Do you mind that Charisma might suffer a bit from its loss of association with magic? Think about Charisma as it stands now. It doesn't have a figured characteristic that it adds to all, or almost all, characters, besides skills. It doesn't get a save like Dex, Con and Wis. It doesn't add to basic Defense like Dex or Con. It doesn't add to basic skill ability like Int. It's closest to Strength in the sense of it's general utility, but even Strength has its almost universal uses. The "value" of the stat is important to the discussion because stats in D&D are valued equally. A point of ability is supposed to be equal with another point, if not individually, at least in general. Other systems apply different point values to the different ability scores to allow for abilities to balance well against other abilities. Charisma already makes me uneasy mechanically because I'm unsure if it has enough oomph. Social skills are powerful, or can be, but the mechanics surrounding those skills don't exentuate the power of Charisma overly much. Intelligence can, arguably, have more of an effect, if you would lack the skill points to spend on the skills. Does everyone have a SNL stat, or just creatures with appropriate abilities? What if they later gain the ability? I'll just assume that everyone has it. Doesn't that make it a perfect dump stat for someone like a Fighter, even moreso than Charisma as it is now? A low Charisma always has some sort of effect on a character, even if the character can avoid the worst of it, most of the time. But a fighter could leave SNL at 3, and be no worse for the wear. It's not exactly a deal-breaker, but doesn't have a precedent. What I like about it is that it gives a relative power boost to Sorcerers. Wizards are now dependant on two abilities, kind of like the Favored Soul. Is minimum spell level determined by SNL or the original key ability score? How did you handle existing ability drain and damage abilities? Did you add SNL draining attacks to monsters?
Farealmer 06-20-05, 02:24 AM	Do you mind that Charisma might suffer a bit from it's loss of association with magic? Think about Charisma as it stands now. It doesn't have a figured characteristic that it adds to all, or almost all, characters, besides skills. It doesn't get a save like Dex, Con and Wis. It doesn't add to basic Defense like Dex or Con. It doesn't add to basic skill ability like Int. It's closest to Strength in the sense of it's general utility, but even Strength has its almost universal uses. The "value" of the stat is important to the discussion because stats in D&D are valued equally. A point of ability is supposed to be equal with another point, if not individually, at least in general. Other systems apply different point values to the different ability scores to allow for abilities to balance well against other abilities. CHA is a role-play ability not a roll-play ability if you balance them, CHA will be used by your party without any other motivation. Besides out of all abilties based skills CHA based ons give your the most. Diplomacy can give you freinds in high places. perform can bring in money intimidate and gather information can get you info Bluff and Disguise can get you into places Handle Animal can get you both money and allies Most role-playing is based around these unless you run hack and slash games CHA pays for it'self. Does everyone have a SNL stat, or just creatures with appropriate abilities? What if they later gain the ability? Mundane people such as commoners don't but if they take into adept or a PC class they gain it. Doesn't that make it a perfect dump stat for someone like a Fighter, even moreso than Charisma as it is now? A low Charisma always has some sort of effect on a character, even if the character can avoid the worst of it, most of the time. But a fighter could leave SNL at 3, and be no worse for the wear. It's not exactly a deal-breaker, but doesn't have a precedent. Well if the fighter ever multi-classes into a supernatural power using class or prestige class then low SNL will hurt. But really melee users suffer enough in D&D. So there is no need to penalize them for this. What I like about it is that it gives a relative power boost to Sorcerers. One of the bonuses of it. Wizards are now dependant on two abilities, kind of like the Favored Soul. No worries there, wizards get enough benifits that this isn't going to trip them up. Is minimum spell level determined by SNL or the original key ability score? SNL, i use the original thing for bonus spells only, that way they can choose more powerful magic or more magic and better skills. How did you handle existing ability drain and damage abilities? What do you mean by this? Did you add SNL draining attacks to monsters? Yes, especially to creatures that drain magic items. For example that spider with the disjunction bite that did damage to magic creatures now does SNL drain instead.
Kintara 06-20-05, 02:45 AM	What do you mean by this?I was asking if you took some monsters with, say, Charisma drain, and moved it to SNL drain, for instance. It sounds like you might've. If not, it might be a good idea. Anyway, as for Charisma's "roleplaying" power, eh. For one thing, the effect of Charisma is hardly the only factor. Skill ranks (and, therefore Intelligence), synergies, and other effects have a rather large effect on those skills already, as do certain class abilities. Charisma may have some nice skills, but it's not, by any means, the only factor by which those skills are determined. Also, the social skills don't have a particularly robust system behind them, which makes them rather bland to use. Combat and magic are where D&D shines, so most games will gravitate to situations where they become useful. The system matters, and it affects how people approach the game, even when "roleplaying." There are other roleplaying systems that have more dynamic and robust social mechanics, and those systems tend to bring those options more into the forefront. But, anyway, this is getting slightly off topic. Perhaps you should add more negative effects to certain creatures when they reach SNL 0. I think it would make sense if incorproreal undead or dragons would suffer a great deal if they lost all their supernaturalness. It might even be the equivalent of being reduced to 0 Con for certain creatures. Edit: I suppose immobilization works. I like the idea of some creatures dying from it, though.
Farealmer 06-20-05, 03:25 AM	It might even be the equivalent of being reduced to 0 Con for certain creatures. Edit: I suppose immobilization works. I like the idea of some creatures dying from it, though. A good idea for (magical)constructs and undead. As they are powered by magic. For undead with the unholy toughness ability that gives them bonus hit points i use SNL for it instead of CHA. It should be noted that creatures immune to ability drain/damage aren't immediately immune to SNL drain/damage. Also this really helps for epic play as it gives epic creatures powerful abilites without boosting other stats they wouldn't have high marks on otherwise. I know statting gods is unpopular but this also helps with that. As i can go crazy on this stat with impunity.
Dragonsblood 06-20-05, 05:27 AM	I have an easier solution for you. Rename charisma to SNL and keep it functioning exactly the way charisma does. It seems like every reasoning you have revolves around the fact that "charisma controlling magic makes no sense" just because it's called "charisma." Now most of you may have noticed that the stat gives sorcerers a spellcasting advantage as both DC's and bonus spells are powered by this ability. That is intentional, as sorcerers are natural spellcasters. Actually you're weakening spell casters and unbalancing the game. Casters already use a single stat for spell DCs and bonus spells without your new stat. Charisma based skills (IE bluff for a sorcerer, or deplomacy for a cleric) would not be as high because points would be focused away from charisma. To make an analogy would would be a better swimmer, a professonal swimmer(wizard) or a merfolk(sorcerer). The real choice is obvious, the merfolk would. And so a natural spellcaster should be better than a learned one. Which begs the questions: Then why be a wizard? How does this balance the game?
Farealmer 06-20-05, 08:59 PM	I have an easier solution for you. Rename charisma to SNL and keep it functioning exactly the way charisma does. It seems like every reasoning you have revolves around the fact that "charisma controlling magic makes no sense" just because it's called "charisma." Um i don't get this, i use CHA for the stuff i presented above, you know things that a mundane ability score that reflects personal magnitism and social graces would control. Really too many of you see it as a MISC stat, to put everything that has no home of it's own. Traditionally CHA has represented very specific things. Actually you're weakening spell casters and unbalancing the game. Casters already use a single stat for spell DCs and bonus spells without your new stat. Charisma based skills (IE bluff for a sorcerer, or deplomacy for a cleric) would not be as high because points would be focused away from charisma. Yes i am weakening spellcasters, but really, look at the rest of the boards, that isn't a bad thing. I tend to see most CHA based skills more a bards thing than a sorcerers. Which begs the questions: Then why be a wizard? How does this balance the game? well splat book wise clerics, druids and other divine spellcasters are getting too powerful, this solves that. As for wizards they have always had just a bit more of an advantage than sorcerers, this balances that out. You play wizards if. 1. You want to get higher spells earlier. 2. You want your spell selection limited only by your time and money. 3. You want multiple organizations and/or guilds for your trade(after all since wizards learn magic by study thier will always be more places for wizards). 4. You want bonus feats for metamagic and/or item creation(golems are a nice idea). And lets face it thier are many things out there that although both wizards and sorcerers can learn/be they make sense only for wizards. Such as spell focus and the archmage to name two. Really after looking at that list i want to be a wizard, they're good enough lets give a little back to the sorcerer.
Owatkiam 06-20-05, 10:36 PM	Far, Somethings don't make realistic sense to balance the game. plain and simple. For 25 year they tried to figure out how to make Charisma seem like it wasn't a useless stat, now in 3.x we have Charisma as a viable skill. Maybe you are thinking about this backwards... your charisma doesn't affect your supernatural abilty, but the other way around... the more innate supernatural ability you have, the more charismatic you are! This makes some sense in a system where some skilled performers are able to use their performance to magically influence others (bards... in case you didn't already figure that out).
Farealmer 06-21-05, 12:05 AM	Somethings don't make realistic sense to balance the game. plain and simple. For 25 year they tried to figure out how to make Charisma seem like it wasn't a useless stat, now in 3.x we have Charisma as a viable skill. Forcing balance on a system rarely works. Not all ability scores are created equal and acting like they are is a mistake. If people think their characters should have high CHA they will take it. Forcing it causes more problems than it solves. Maybe you are thinking about this backwards... your charisma doesn't affect your supernatural abilty, but the other way around... the more innate supernatural ability you have, the more charismatic you are! You mean that in EVERY SINGLE thing the D20 system covers supernatural power must be tied to CHA. Thats alot of things from D20 future to D20 anime, and you say all creatures from all of them, that have powerful abilities will gain high CHA from it????? That isn't right and putting it all on CHA just to make it important isn't the answer. Example: X-men mutant abilites would give them less CHA because of social stigmata. People shun them, they gain low self-esteem, and they lose social graces. This is especially bad for morlocks, and yet by this system any abilites that rely on CHA will be weak. This makes some sense in a system where some skilled performers are able to use their performance to magically influence others (bards... in case you didn't already figure that out). And giving them a bonus to influence those that hear their preformances(and like it) is the answer. But not every one cares about or likes music especially monsters. To beholders it probably is no better than screeching. The magic is what universally matters, not the music it comes in on.
GreyLord 06-21-05, 12:27 AM	I like the idea, and it makes more sense to me actually. Not that I'll houserule it into our games, but neat idea.
James Wildspell 06-21-05, 01:10 AM	Add a 7th stat to an existing game that is based upon 6 of them? Might I suggest that you volunteer to work on the 4.0 version of the game. Given a couple of thousand hours of work, you might integrate such a concept into the core materials. Then you can start on the splat books. And when we are all 10 years older we may all do it that way. Or not.
Gilean 06-21-05, 01:46 AM	Con and Wis represent how hardy your body and mind are. They determine how hard it is for the outside world to affect you. Dex and Int represent the quickness of your body and mind. They determine how deftly you can control yourself physically or mentally. Str and Cha represent how powerful your body and mind are. They determine the extent to which you may impose your will on the outside world. Str is the force of influence character can use in physical world Con is the resistance character has against physical world Dex is the finesse and smoothness of manipulating the physical world, including the position of one's own body Perception is what determines the flow of information between the character and the world Cha is what determines the force of influence character has on surrounding auras. The aura of charater with high charisma is like a beacon, shining and altering everything around it. Willpower (yup, no wisdom to be found) is what determines the strength of character's aura against influence. The aura of character with high will seems like a hard shell. Int of character determines the smoothness and finesse of aura alterations character can do. This includes both other creatures and the character. Mana determines the actual strength of character's aura. It caps all aura influence character can use, sense or resist, but is not very useful in and of itself. Wis as a spellcasting stat... meh.The ability to channel force of much greater magnitude than you could create yourself without going BOOM. It can be explained.Steely Glint i am after balance and seperating mind from supernatural is a important leap.I fail to miss the point of separating supernatural from mental in setting where they can just as well be considered identical.Magic is magic because it takes the laws of physics beats it to a pulp, takes it's money, kills it's family(science), and looks cool and mysterious doing it. You want to treat it different fine but don't take the fact that WoTC didn't want to break the 6 stat system D&D was based on as an reason that SNL isn't necessary for a more balanced and fluid system. Magic looks cool and mysterious as long as you make it so. D&D doesn't. Many things nonmagical ignore science. Case is a point, a high-level barbarian with power attack and a wooden club can smash walls of stone, given time. With IUS, it can be done without weapons. So there.You seem to have a mage game view that mortal minds should be able to shape the universe. That cuts it on the outer planes but D&D is more than that and magic isn't bound to them.My theory of auras works fine. Mortal mind alters surroundings, if it is strong enough (eg. has strong enough an aura). Most don't. Similarly, surrounding affect mortal minds if their aura is strong enough compared to the mortal. Example is the inherent corruption that happens in fiendish planes.But many fictional people who are shy or uncharismatic have had god-like power. I'am i suppose to assume they should have 20+ HD despite the fact they were physically weak because otherwise their power couldn't work by D20 rules. D20 is about flexablilty and adding one more stat to represent power(which has never needed to show ties to the 6 stats) is a good idea.Examples of fictional people in fantasy- or mythological sources, if I may ask. And the physical weakness is a function of strength and con, not HD. HD represents overall might.CHA is a role-play ability not a roll-play ability if you balance them, CHA will be used by your party without any other motivation. Besides out of all abilties based skills CHA based ons give your the most. :banghead: Wait, I'll repeat that :banghead: Now. Abilities should be of roughly equal importance. Tell me examples of those heroes who stammered, blushed when anyone looked at them, etc. Heroic characters have high charisma for a reason. In my homebrew, that is the influence factor, which includes luck. In your games, I assume, all characters are socially inept as WotC makes them. (Check the sample NPCs. Most have low charisma.) You attempt, simultaneously, argue that balance is unimportant and use balance as an argument to further your cause. Double standards much?Example: X-men mutant abilites would give them less CHA because of social stigmata. People shun them, they gain low self-esteem, and they lose social graces. This is especially bad for morlocks, and yet by this system any abilites that rely on CHA will be weak. Not necessarily. Social stigmata doesn't directly influence charisma. Note the force of personality in the description. For example, Raistlin (in Dragonlance). He defines social stigmatization, but definately has a high charisma (in the books, that is). People shiver for being near him. He is scary. Charisma is not how you are viewed by society, it is the actual force of personality you have.
Steely Glint 06-21-05, 02:24 AM	Str is the force of influence character can use in physical world Con is the resistance character has against physical world Dex is the finesse and smoothness of manipulating the physical world, including the position of one's own body Perception is what determines the flow of information between the character and the world Cha is what determines the force of influence character has on surrounding auras. The aura of charater with high charisma is like a beacon, shining and altering everything around it. Willpower (yup, no wisdom to be found) is what determines the strength of character's aura against influence. The aura of character with high will seems like a hard shell. Int of character determines the smoothness and finesse of aura alterations character can do. This includes both other creatures and the character. Mana determines the actual strength of character's aura. It caps all aura influence character can use, sense or resist, but is not very useful in and of itself.I have no idea what point you're trying to make with this list, nor what system it comes from. My list was describing how I find the symmetry between the physical and mental stats in the standard dnd rules inherently pleasing. The ability to channel force of much greater magnitude than you could create yourself without going BOOM. It can be explained.I know it can be explained, and I use Wis as a casting stat in some of my campaigns (not the current one, as no gods answer the prayers of mortals to grant them spells). I just don't like the flavor of Wis based casting. I've considered making save DCs always based on Cha, but that seems a little excessive. That said, I agree with most of your post (not sure what the aura stuff is though). I had written up a response to Farealmer a few minutes ago, but it was lost when my browser crashed during a routine word find... and I'm too lazy to write it again seeing as you cover some of the same points.
Farealmer 06-21-05, 02:37 AM	I fail to miss the point of separating supernatural from mental in setting where they can just as well be considered identical. Except D&D is a part of D20 which is many worlds, can you speak for them all? Magic looks cool and mysterious as long as you make it so. D&D doesn't. Many things nonmagical ignore science. Case is a point, a high-level barbarian with power attack and a wooden club can smash walls of stone, given time. With IUS, it can be done without weapons. I was using magic in general, besides that little thing you got there is taking a point out of the meaning. Which was to respond to what kintara said. So there. This alone should make me disregard your post. And call you a trolling kid, but the beat goes on. My theory of auras works fine. Mortal mind alters surroundings, if it is strong enough (eg. has strong enough an aura). Most don't. Similarly, surrounding affect mortal minds if their aura is strong enough compared to the mortal. Example is the inherent corruption that happens in fiendish planes. Unfortunalty not all D20 applications assume human minds are the all powerful force of the universe. Many are built on a universe where humans are insignificate, supernatural power or no. And corruption happens in the fiend planes because they are the destination of all evil thoughts, deeds, and souls. Examples of fictional people in fantasy- or mythological sources, if I may ask. And the physical weakness is a function of strength and con, not HD. HD represents overall might. Fantasy, i don't read much myth. HD is also connected to hp and many of these people cannot take damage. Now. Abilities should be of roughly equal importance. Thats flawed logic, ability importance should be based on what you are about. Tell me examples of those heroes who stammered, blushed when anyone looked at them, etc. Heroic characters have high charisma for a reason. There's your reason to take it, but putting supernatural power on it to gain importance isn't the answer. In your games, I assume, all characters are socially inept as WotC makes them. (Check the sample NPCs. Most have low charisma.) Now your judging my games, i have known you for 10 minutes and i already don't like you. You attempt, simultaneously, argue that balance is unimportant and use balance as an argument to further your cause. Double standards much? I argue supernatural power balance, not ability score equality. Not necessarily. Social stigmata doesn't directly influence charisma. Note the force of personality in the description. For example, Raistlin (in Dragonlance). He defines social stigmatization, but definately has a high charisma (in the books, that is). People shiver for being near him. He is scary. Yes and morlocks live underground because they are hated on the surface, many of them dislike themselves, you saying thats high CHA.
Lord Gwydion 06-21-05, 02:56 AM	I'm going to have to chime in on the "This is unnecessary" camp. Hopefully you'll take this as constructive criticism and rational responses as to why I don't feel this is necessary, rather than an attack on your idea. First of all, the game already takes the "Charisma powering supernatural abilities" into acount with monster stats. Look over some of the more powerful undead/outsiders/aberrations. A lot of them have above average Cha. This is because they have both lots of supernatural power, AND because they're supposed to be really scary. I understand your reasons for wanting to divorce the personality from the occult power of the creature, but unless you change around lots of stats on monsters for no other reason than to arbitrarily change them ("With SNL, I can give dragons a high score there, and we can have some that are not scary or threatening at all, but still have the magic power to crush you with a thought!" :uh-huh: ) there will still be powerful supernatural creatures with strong personalities/presence. Second, how would this ability be determined for player characters? Would you include it in stat rolling/point-buy? If so, as others have mentioned, it would throw things farther out of whack by requiring all spellcasters but one to double up on their pump stat, while giving an extra dump stat to the non-casters. While Sorcerers may need a slight boost, throwing every other class out of whack to do so seems like the wrong way to go. Like trying to cut off parts of the other three table legs to even out a table with one short leg, rather than propping up the short leg. If it works, it will be more pleasant overall, but the chances of ending up with all of the legs at different lengths is pretty high. Also, you mentioned that creatures without supernatural abilities could have a -- score in SNL. What if, at level 10, a Fighter with -- in SNL wanted to multiclass into Cleric. Would he gain an SNL score at random? Or would the character be forever banned from spellcasting multiclasses for having a low score there? Should players be punished for deciding to change the character's career/course halfway through their adventuring life because they didn't think ahead at character creation? Alternately, if they gain an SNL score when they multiclass, should they be rewarded (assuming point-buy for SNL)? Third is the argument that Constructs and other creatures made of or powered by magic might have low Charisma scores. Well, yeah, that's a possibility. But there's no rule saying that every monster's supernatural or magical abilities must be based on Charisma that I know of (if I've overlooked it, someone please remind me where to look). Just as Undead now switch their Constitution functions to Charisma, low Charisma but highly supernatural creatures could use Intelligence (if arcane) or Wisdom (if divine) instead. The existing rules for spellcasters would imply this to be so. Want a weak-willed, suck-up demon who has magic dripping out of his fingertips? Either give him levels in a spellcasting class that doesn't rely on Charisma, or switch his demonic power save DCs from Cha dependency to Wis dependency. Fourth, and related to the last point, is that spell-like and supernatural ability save DCs are modified by Charisma, but the real bang for the DC buck comes from the creature's level or hit dice. Charisma is just icing on the cake, or a slight fly in the ointment (if low). A Racial Bonus to the save DCs is also appropriate. Fifthly, what about Monks, Rogues, or other classes that have supernatural class abilities, but are not spellcasters? Do Monks suddenly have to worry about one more ability score now? They're already the most multi-stat dependant class in the game (with Paladins probably second). If they have to spend points in SNL just to use Diamond Body or Quivering Palm, there will probably be a lot fewer Monks. Is that worth it just to give a boost to the sorcerer and allow for monsters with low Charisma and hit dice but high save DCs? Okay, that's a lot to think about, and a lot to address. Don't feel obliged to answer each of these points in detail if you feel you've already addressed them before in this thread. I just wanted to get all my reservations about implementing something like this down in one post. Hopefully you have considered many of these points/potential problems, though, or will consider them now as you implement this new stat in your games. Oh, and on one more point, you may want to change the acronym. SNL makes me think of "Live, from New York...It's Saturday Night!!!"
Farealmer 06-21-05, 03:54 AM	First of all, the game already takes the "Charisma powering supernatural abilities" into acount with monster stats. Look over some of the more powerful undead/outsiders/aberrations. A lot of them have above average Cha. This is because they have both lots of supernatural power, AND because they're supposed to be really scary. I understand your reasons for wanting to divorce the personality from the occult power of the creature, but unless you change around lots of stats on monsters for no other reason than to arbitrarily change them ("With SNL, I can give dragons a high score there, and we can have some that are not scary or threatening at all, but still have the magic power to crush you with a thought!" ) there will still be powerful supernatural creatures with strong personalities/presence. Really scary? by your reasoning a iron colossus should be more charismatic that a normal human. After all if most people saw a iron colossus hold a semi truck over it's head. Then fold it like an accordian, they would be intimidated. However look at the CHA score. "Scary" is a bad way to judge CHA. Second, how would this ability be determined for player characters? Would you include it in stat rolling/point-buy? If so, as others have mentioned, it would throw things farther out of whack by requiring all spellcasters but one to double up on their pump stat, while giving an extra dump stat to the non-casters. While Sorcerers may need a slight boost, throwing every other class out of whack to do so seems like the wrong way to go. However you deciede stats. And as said before spellcasters are powerful enough. And so what if they have a dump stat, not everyone has to be well rounded to be a good character. And it isn't just about sorcerers, that was an afterthought. Also, you mentioned that creatures without supernatural abilities could have a -- score in SNL. What if, at level 10, a Fighter with -- in SNL wanted to multiclass into Cleric. Would he gain an SNL score at random? Or would the character be forever banned from spellcasting multiclasses for having a low score there? Should players be punished for deciding to change the character's career/course halfway through their adventuring life because they didn't think ahead at character creation? Alternately, if they gain an SNL score when they multiclass, should they be rewarded (assuming point-buy for SNL)? Awaken spell, same thing here, you roll a SNL score to show you have gained supernatural power. And the same thing happens now to fighters that put it all into physical stats and not mental ones then multi-class later. Third is the argument that Constructs and other creatures made of or powered by magic might have low Charisma scores. Well, yeah, that's a possibility. But there's no rule saying that every monster's supernatural or magical abilities must be based on Charisma that I know of (if I've overlooked it, someone please remind me where to look). Just as Undead now switch their Constitution functions to Charisma, low Charisma but highly supernatural creatures could use Intelligence (if arcane) or Wisdom (if divine) instead. The existing rules for spellcasters would imply this to be so. Want a weak-willed, suck-up demon who has magic dripping out of his fingertips? Either give him levels in a spellcasting class that doesn't rely on Charisma, or switch his demonic power save DCs from Cha dependency to Wis dependency There is no rule saying it's not possible but no mental score is good for supernatural power, so shuffling magical power from one score to the next is not the answer. Fourth, and related to the last point, is that spell-like and supernatural ability save DCs are modified by Charisma, but the real bang for the DC buck comes from the creature's level or hit dice. Charisma is just icing on the cake, or a slight fly in the ointment (if low). A Racial Bonus to the save DCs is also appropriate. Putting HD up the wall to give them higher DC's isn't a way to go, HD controls WAY more than just that. Racial bonus, hell why not just make all DC's based on "racial bonus" and just make up what happens when they get new powers? If they have to spend points in SNL just to use Diamond Body or Quivering Palm, there will probably be a lot fewer Monks. Is that worth it just to give a boost to the sorcerer and allow for monsters with low Charisma and hit dice but high save DCs? I doubt people will give monks up just for that. Plus monks are the kind of classes that can go in many directions maybe the "nonmagical" monk is prefered by some people. But i see no reason for high INT, DEX, CON, or CHA for a monk they could put it into SNL. Oh, and on one more point, you may want to change the acronym. SNL makes me think of "Live, from New York...It's Saturday Night!!!" You don't sound like you care anyway, so why does what it remind you of matter. Use SPL until you can find a funny thing that means too.
Farealmer 06-21-05, 04:39 AM	What this mainly does is give a supernatural "strength" score. In all of D20 the highest average stat is STR. Because what you see is what you get. You can lay it on a creature to boost combat effectiveness and not worry about having to think how it alters their behavior. That what SNL does, gives a magical "muscle" stat that needs no second thought when you jump it up. Because it gives exactly what it shows supernatural power, no more, no less. I don't understand why thats hard to accept. I guess when you play a system for so long change is not an option.
Steely Glint 06-21-05, 04:44 AM	Really scary? by your reasoning a iron colossus should be more charismatic that a normal human. After all if most people saw a iron colossus hold a semi truck over it's head. Then fold it like an accordian, they would be intimidated. However look at the CHA score. "Scary" is a bad way to judge CHA.An iron colossus is an automoton. All it does is follow orders. It could be used by its master to give himself a bonus to his intimidate checks, but it will actually be intimidating anyone itself. Considering the flavor text, I'm surprised they have as much Int and Cha as they do (at least in my 3.0 copy of the ELH). The scariness Lord Gwydion was referring to comes from the amount of presence the creature has. Creatures with this kind of eerie charisma are often described as having piercing (or otherwise scary) eyes. You can tell by the way a charismatic dragon, ogre mage, rakshasa, or vampire carries itself that it is powerful and knows it. Personally I think it's good that supernaturally powerful creatures tend to look and act badass in addition to actually being badass. What this mainly does is give a supernatural "strength" score. In all of D20 the highest average stat is STR. Because what you see is what you get. You can lay it on a creature to boost combat effectiveness and not worry about having to think how it alters their behavior. That what SNL does, gives a magical "muscle" stat that needs no second thought when you jump it up. Because it gives exactly what it shows supernatural power, no more, no less. I don't understand why thats hard to accept. I guess when you play a system for so long change is not an option.I totally understand what it does, I just think that Cha does that perfectly well already. Creatures with high Charisma don't ever have to use it socially, in fact I don't think you'd ever see most high-Cha monsters using Diplomacy. I do think they should be intimidating though. Charisma can be used exactly the way you want to use SNL; the reason I don't accept the idea is that I don't think such a drastic change is worth the trouble it will cause. In fact, I'm not sure there's actually a problem that will be solved by the addition of SNL. Oh, and on one more point, you may want to change the acronym. SNL makes me think of "Live, from New York...It's Saturday Night!!!" You don't sound like you care anyway, so why does what it remind you of matter. Use SPL until you can find a funny thing that means too.When I saw "SNL," Saturday Night Live was the first thing I thought of too. :P
IceFractal 06-21-05, 05:45 AM	In D&D, because of the way things work, all stats should really be of equal value. In the Hero system, on the other hand, Dexterity is about 3 times as useful as Strength ... and it costs three times as much. In D&D they cost the same amount - therefore they should be the same amount as useful. Not that complex a concept. CHA is a role-play ability not a roll-play ability if you balance them And you almost lost my respect totally with this remark. This is a variation of the Stupidest Argument Ever (TM). Basically, someone makes a house-rule based on their perception of something. Then someone points out an imbalance, and the response is "just roleplay, don't rollplay" ... well then, you roleplay it! if "rollplaying" is so unimportant, then why does it matter what the stats are at all? Just roleplay that your Sorcerer has a Supernatural stat instead of a Charisma stat. Seriously - solve roleplaying problems through roleplaying and solve mechnical problems mechanically. Don't try to balance one with the other. I'm sorry if that came out too vitriolic. I've just seen that fallacy so many times that I'm getting really, really sick of it.
Gilean 06-21-05, 05:56 AM	I have no idea what point you're trying to make with this list, nor what system it comes from. My list was describing how I find the symmetry between the physical and mental stats in the standard dnd rules inherently pleasing.The system is homebrew. I mainly printed it as a curiosity, to note the similarities.That said, I agree with most of your post (not sure what the aura stuff is though). I had written up a response to Farealmer a few minutes ago, but it was lost when my browser crashed during a routine word find... and I'm too lazy to write it again seeing as you cover some of the same points.You are welcome.Except D&D is a part of D20 which is many worlds, can you speak for them all?Flawed logic. If I say that birds have feathers to keep them warm, you respond by saying: birds are animals, can you say this about all animals?. D&D has a very specific niche. The niche is wargaming in high-fantasy, high-magic setting. This is what D&D is made for. What it is best at. You have said nothing about specific settings, so I assume standard D&D niche. Why would you be using D&D, if some other game was better, anyway.This alone should make me disregard your post. And call you a trolling kid, but the beat goes on.The intention wasn't hostile, believe me. I was critisizing your suggestion, as I see it partially unnecessary and partially badly implemented, causing imbalance around the system. One could as well make a homebrew game.Unfortunalty not all D20 applications assume human minds are the all powerful force of the universe. Many are built on a universe where humans are insignificate, supernatural power or no. And corruption happens in the fiend planes because they are the destination of all evil thoughts, deeds, and souls.All poweful? Hardly. As said, I was assuming D&D setting, and these are D&D boards, so I do find it logical assumption to make.Fantasy, i don't read much myth. HD is also connected to hp and many of these people cannot take damage.The examples? Could you provide some? Fantasy is fine.Thats flawed logic, ability importance should be based on what you are about.Of course. That still doesn't mean that every other ability should be totally irrelevant (as charisma currently tends to be). Surely, for a fighter, charisma should mean something. Agains, there is a reason most heroes do have some charisma.There's your reason to take it, but putting supernatural power on it to gain importance isn't the answer.Well, it fits. Don't change things if they don't need changing.Now your judging my games, i have known you for 10 minutes and i already don't like you.I apologize. My comment was uncalled for and rude.I argue supernatural power balance, not ability score equality.If you are into balance, apply it everywhere equally.Yes and morlocks live underground because they are hated on the surface, many of them dislike themselves, you saying thats high CHA.No. I said that perceptions of society correlate very poorly to actual charisma score. Of course one with low charisma is more likely to be shunned, but being shunned doesn't imply low charisma. Morlocks, I may have once, several years ago, read a story with them. Though I'm really not certain. The comment was general in nature.There is no rule saying it's not possible but no mental score is good for supernatural power, so shuffling magical power from one score to the next is not the answer.Well, except for charisma, of course.Putting HD up the wall to give them higher DC's isn't a way to go, HD controls WAY more than just that. Racial bonus, hell why not just make all DC's based on "racial bonus" and just make up what happens when they get new powers?HD symbolises personal power. It is quite often used for determining DCs, at least indirectly. Racial bonus is reserved for things with truly effective abilities. For example, the aura of whatever archons have.I doubt people will give monks up just for that. Plus monks are the kind of classes that can go in many directions maybe the "nonmagical" monk is prefered by some people. But i see no reason for high INT, DEX, CON, or CHA for a monk they could put it into SNL.To balance or not to balance...
Owatkiam 06-21-05, 09:31 AM	Forcing balance on a system rarely works. It may not, but this isn't "Forcing" balance, this is rebalancing something that was tremendously out of whack since the old brown books. EVERYONE I've talked to in person that's been playing since at least 2E thinks that putting importance on Charisma is good...even if it occasionally feels artificial. Not all ability scores are created equal and acting like they are is a mistake. If people think their characters should have high CHA they will take it. Forcing it causes more problems than it solves. That sentiment is precisely why for the last 25 or so yrs I've been GMing, I've had to deal with questions like "If I make my charisma 3, can I have a 20 str?" If they aren't equal, then I hope you aren't allowing players to re-arrange rolls or do a points buy. This perception fuels munchkinism. You mean that in EVERY SINGLE thing the D20 system covers supernatural power must be tied to CHA. Thats alot of things from D20 future to D20 anime, and you say all creatures from all of them, that have powerful abilities will gain high CHA from it????? That isn't right and putting it all on CHA just to make it important isn't the answer. Geez, relax dude. Its starting to look like you are taking the "I wasn't throwing this out for discussion, but to tell you how wonderful my idea was" stance. If that's the case, I'd say that you should probably not reply to this post anymore, because you're just wasting a lot of your time. All I was trying to say was rather than trying to fit the game rules to your concept, fit your concept to the game rules. Its called "Suspending disbelief", and we have to do it on a somewhat regular basis...not all the time, but there are times when its just not worth all the follow on effects to try to change something. In the day of a gazillion rule supplements, the closer a change is to the core mechanics, the more its going to upset many other things. If you are actually open to ideas, then consider instead of going to 7 stats, then go to 12 stats as was done in the original 1E UA...i.e. split each of the existing stats up with Cha being split into "SNL" and "Influence" . Going to 7 stats is going to cause a lot of subtle issues and will mean, at the least, you have to constantly tinker with CR and EL. MANY feats will be thrown off kilter, you'll need to address what to do with the ability score increase every 4 levels (should it be more often then?), a broad number of prestige classes will be afftected.... 12 stats will keep the math easier if nothing else.
Fuzzy_Logic 06-21-05, 09:39 AM	Farealmer- wqhile there's nothign wrong, in principle, conceptually, with having an SNL stat, there are several problems here. first of all, your statement that mundane stats shouldn't influence magic is completely and utterly false. they don't NEEd to- you could invent a universe in which they don't. but there's no reason they shouldn't. regardless, charisma isn't exactly a mundane stat. one definiton of charisma is a divine blessing or power, i believe, or something like that. charisma isn't just being good at social niceties. charisma is raw aura of power. there ar epeople with it in real life- people who make heads turn when they walk intoa room, and not because of their looks. people who can glance at quickly and rivet your attention, who can begin a speech and have the room go silent instantly, people who are regarded by everyone with a sort of awe. how could that kind of power NOT be related to magic in a fantasy world? now, using charisma for spellcasting doesn't mean that magic is "alive" in the sense that it has thoughts and feelings. remeber that riveitng gaze our high-charisma lad had? charisma is the ability to stare down the universe. the monster manual says that creatures with no charisma can't tell the difference between themselves and othernthings- charisma isa the differention which says to the world itself, "look at me, i'm special!" charisma represents force of will, a concept commonly used in fnatasy. now, you say that charisma is a rstat used only for roleplaying that doesn't need a mehcanical advantage. but, if the ncmapaign is a powergaming hack-n-slash, the stat now does nothing. mroe importantly, most games feature some roleplay and some comabt elemetns. while I try not to dump charisma, i'm unlikely to put a 14 or higher in a stat which doesn't help me in combat at all, since most D&D games feature a lot fo combat. the brilliant thing about charisma-based magic is that PCs can afford a high charisma without gimping thier characters. as for your monsters, there are LOTs of ways to fix mosnters so that they work as you want them to. you coud use SNL dfor them, liek taint from Rokugan. you could use wisdom. you could assign DCs totally at random, but i don't see the eneed to mess up the functioning of PC classes. but what's so bad about high-charisma monsters? they don't need to use diplomacy or the like if you don't want them to. and Charisma is DEFININTELY the stat fr intidmidate. sure, strength should nbe (and is) related. how? well, at leas tin my campaign, you can't intimidate someone unless you have some way of harming them, physicall, politically, or whatever. (or you use Bluff to CONVINCE them that you could hurt them) therefore, strength helps, but a 10 strength, 20 dex renowned elven duelist should be nearly as scary. the key point of intimidate is that you're MAKING people be afraid deliberately to manipulate them. people cna fear you wihtout your using intimidate. if a giant iron golem smashes your hous,e of course you'll be a fraid, and of course you run for your life. but you're not ebign manipulated, you're just being smart. intimidate is the art of inspiring unreasonable fear and/or using someone's fear to get them to do what you want, something a 5 charisma golem doesn't do well at. simply being strong enough to bash someone's brains out doesn't make a good intimidate. there ar epeople who aren't scary at all, even when they really could make trouble for you.
Farealmer 06-22-05, 01:48 AM	So many of you posted that i am only going to post to the important points. Some of you seem to think to system is new for me i have used it for 9 years in one form or another. When I saw "SNL," Saturday Night Live was the first thing I thought of too. This is the end of my debating with you. And you almost lost my respect totally with this remark. And you lost all my interest. Flawed logic. If I say that birds have feathers to keep them warm, you respond by saying: birds are animals, can you say this about all animals?. D&D has a very specific niche. The niche is wargaming in high-fantasy, high-magic setting. This is what D&D is made for. What it is best at. Not flawed, D20 is a system that represents more than just D&D, to put it all on just D&D is flawed logic however. If you are into balance, apply it everywhere equally. Impossible, the best we can hope for is to smooth wrinkles. The examples? Could you provide some? Lets look at pokemon shall we, they are not exceptional in any area, however they have powerful abilities. You seem to only think D&D, i use creatures from everywhere. And the 6 stats given doesn't make sense for all supernatural power. I gave D&D examples before. To balance or not to balance... This is where we part ways. All I was trying to say was rather than trying to fit the game rules to your concept, fit your concept to the game rules. I tried that, unfortunaly i have creatures in my game with the CHA of a lobotimized deaf-mute, the WIS of a gnat, the INT of a goblin, the CON of an aids sufferer, the DEX of a violet fungus, the STR of a common human child, and the HD of a dog. But is able to flatten a trailer park with a motion. By your reasoning not only should that creature not have power but should be worthless. first of all, your statement that mundane stats shouldn't influence magic is completely and utterly false. they don't NEEd to- you could invent a universe in which they don't. but there's no reason they shouldn't. When i create worlds i start from the point of veiw of this universe and go from there. And CHA doesn't make humans magical, so why should in a world that has/gains magic it mean anything? how could that kind of power NOT be related to magic in a fantasy world? Easy, make SNL the brilliant thing about charisma-based magic is that PCs can afford a high charisma without gimping thier characters. Unfortunatly having high CHA has more ingame effects than that. And none of these should be tied with supernatural power. Lets go golems, you know creatures so magical they nearly leak it. force of personality- How is not having "presense" making a golem less magical. persuasiveness- Most golems have no reasoning skill, does that mean their magical power should be useless. personal magnetism-Not unless they are made of magnets. ability to lead-None there, so should they be supernaturally inert. physical attractiveness-Yuck as for your monsters, there are LOTs of ways to fix mosnters so that they work as you want them to. you coud use SNL dfor them, liek taint from Rokugan. you could use wisdom. you could assign DCs totally at random, but i don't see the eneed to mess up the functioning of PC classes. None of them work, tried them all already. And PC classes work fine with this.
Lord Gwydion 06-22-05, 02:20 AM	I tried that, unfortunaly i have creatures in my game with the CHA of a lobotimized deaf-mute, the WIS of a gnat, the INT of a goblin, the CON of an aids sufferer, the DEX of a violet fungus, the STR of a common human child, and the HD of a dog. But is able to flatten a trailer park with a motion. By your reasoning not only should that creature not have power but should be worthless. Which begs the question--what point would such a creature serve? Adventurer 1: "Hey, look, it's an autistic paraplegic kobold baby!" [maximized meteor swarm spews out of creature's left nostril] Adventurer 2: "Man, that's the second one of those buggers this week!" ________________________________________ ______________________ Okay, so your new stat would allow that sort of creature to exist. I just don't see the point of something like that, though. If it's got these amazing powers, it's going to obliterate low level characters unless one of them gets initiative, then it won't even be a contest. Against high level characters, it's not a contest at all, because they'll be expecting the bad-ass powers, but will have no challenge at all with the creature. What sort of CR would this thing have? 1/2 or 25 depending on if the party Rogue gets to sneak attack it or not before it drops the nuke on them. And if this totally weak and ineffective but utterly powerful creature is there merely to serve a story function, why not just stat out the autistic, paraplegic kobold baby as normal, then give it Meteor Swarm* as a spell-like ability X times per day? Why try and monkey with the entire stat system just to make a plot device? Anyway, I'm giving you one last chance to try to reply to my post with thoughtful rebuttals, rather than kneejerk reactions. While I am being harsh on this idea of yours (and using humor to show some of the weaknesses of the idea), I'm not doing it to try to play some immature game of "I'm smarter nya-nya-nya." I'm asking these tough questions to make you really think about the ramifications of implementing such a big change in the game mechanics. By your answers to my last post, it sounds like you don't really want to think about what might happen if you tried to implement SNL. You'd rather have us all praise your amazingly original and vitally necessary idea. If your reply to this is yet another variation of "Your criticism sucks, can't you see how brilliant this idea is? Give me positive feedback or else" then I'm outa here. So, just to be clear, I'll state my real question again, without the sarcasm: Would the implementation of a Supernatural stat only be a mechanical justification for a story device? And if so, how would weak, low hit die, low stat creatures with overpowering magical abilities related to a new stat be any different from low hit die, low stats creatures with overpowering magical abilities based on DM fiat rather than an ability score? *substitute your favorite high level spell, epic level ability, or something overpowering you make up here if you like
Kintara 06-22-05, 02:25 AM	Hmm, magic is, by definition, a force that responds to your command, is it not? Charisma is your effectiveness to command (i.e. "force of personality"). It doesn't measure how much magical juice you have, just your ability to command it effectively. Succinctly, that's one way to explain why it makes sense for Charisma to be able to govern magic. Now, your idea doesn't not make sense because Charisma can, and vice versa. I've played in other games where magical power is a different stat. But, you know, usually some part of the system calls upon one of the "mundane" stats to govern an aspect of it. A skill-based system will make spells intelligence-based, for instance, or the character will take fatigue damage to cast a spell, and Willpower affects the power of the spell. But for things like inherent abilities, they tend not tied precisely to one one ability at all. They tend to have set parameters which aren't tied to a specific magical stat. D&D is a little strange in that regard. The save DC for most monster abilities is tied to Con or Cha. It would probably make more sense for those abilities to simply be set to whatever level seemed appropriate, and have it improve (if it does improve) by HD and feats like Ability Focus. You know what's been bugging me, just a little, now that I think about it? SNL improves save DCs, right? I suppose this is something of a preference, but I think, were I to do this, I'd make SNL govern max spellcasting level and bonus spell slots, but not save DCs directly. Indirectly, they would by allowing for higher spell ability. Somehow, that just seems to fit better to me. I guess I like the idea of a stat that actually has a component that I can quantify in some way personally to govern something like improving the save DCs. One thing about SNL is that it's entirely abstract for someone in the real world. The other six abilities supposedly coincide with real world characteristics of people. I suppose that's why max spell level and bonus spells would make more sense, as those seem to be more abstract than save DCs are. Also, when I think of special talent, I think of someone having capabilities that I just don't have. Everyone who casts a spell with a save would have some sort of DC, but not everyone has access to X level spells, let alone bonus spells. Does any of that make sense?
Farealmer 06-22-05, 02:40 AM	Hmm, magic is, by definition, a force that responds to your command, is it not? Charisma is your effectiveness to command (i.e. "force of personality"). It doesn't measure how much magical juice you have, just your ability to command it effectively. Succinctly, that's one way to explain why it makes sense for Charisma to be able to govern magic. Spell magic perhaps but magic is more than just that. I also use SNL for all abilites that are supernatural. Such as a mutant abilities, transformations, power contests(think magic grapple), and psionics(which is different from magic). D&D is a little strange in that regard I like how save DC's are governed by stats and HD, just not the stats that govern supernatural power. I understand that for many of you it isn't worth the change, or you like having all stats equal in importance for everybody. But having SNL makes the system more fluid. In that i don't think disagreement can be had. The less dependent things are on eachother the more flexable the system. You know what's been bugging me, just a little, now that I think about it? SNL improves save DCs, right? I suppose this is something of a preference, but I think, were I to do this, I'd make SNL govern max spellcasting level and bonus spell slots, but not save DCs directly. Indirectly, they would by allowing for higher spell ability. Somehow, that just seems to fit better to me. I guess I like the idea of a stat that actually has a component that I can quantify in some way personally to govern something like improving the save DCs. One thing about SNL is that it's entirely abstract for someone in the real world. The other six abilities supposedly coincide with real world characteristics of people. I suppose that's why max spell level and bonus spells would make more sense, as those seem to be more abstract than save DCs are. Also, when I think of special talent, I think of someone having capabilities that I just don't have. Everyone who casts a spell with a save would have some sort of DC, but not everyone has access to X level spells, let alone bonus spells. Does any of that make sense? Yes it does :cool: :D :) ;)
Farealmer 06-22-05, 03:08 AM	Lord Gwydion i just noticed your post. First in my games my players rarly use characters classes, instead they use creatures that they A. Get from somewhere else B. Make up themselves So nonstandard is standard for me and weak creatures with powerful abilities happen often. Also "weak" enemies tend to be part of a group and serve a very specific role in that group. By your answers to my last post, it sounds like you don't really want to think about what might happen if you tried to implement SNL. See a previous post, it has been tried, tested and approved. You'd rather have us all praise your amazingly original and vitally necessary idea. No i mearly want to show that liberating spiritual power from other ability scores, makes the system more fluid. Give me positive feedback or else" then I'm outa here. Thats your choice, i force noone to read or respond to my posts. Would the implementation of a Supernatural stat only be a mechanical justification for a story device? No i have already explained the areas of improvement. Frankly i tire of giving examples so until i see a real reason to give more i won't. And if so, how would weak, low hit die, low stat creatures with overpowering magical abilities related to a new stat be any different from low hit die, low stats creatures with overpowering magical abilities based on DM fiat rather than an ability score? Because their are many creatures i have got from various sources to fight my PC's. To customize everything then just say they blow everything up because i say so despite them knowing where i got it from and knowing that's incorrect is easily solved by this. I guess i should've put this in playing with everything. Only GM's that have mixmatched can understand the trouble a system lacking a pure supernatural stat can cause.
Steely Glint 06-22-05, 03:47 AM	Unfortunatly having high CHA has more ingame effects than that. And none of these should be tied with supernatural power. Lets go golems, you know creatures so magical they nearly leak it. force of personality- How is not having "presense" making a golem less magical. persuasiveness- Most golems have no reasoning skill, does that mean their magical power should be useless. personal magnetism-Not unless they are made of magnets. ability to lead-None there, so should they be supernaturally inert.Yes, golems are quite magical. However, they are essentially just animated objects. They do not wield magic in the same way that a powerful being (high cha sorcerer, dragon, etc.) wields it; if they have any supernatural abilities they are like a wand being activated. Notice that their supernatural abilities are based off of Con anyway, of which they have none... all their power comes from their HD. Their strength lies in their immunity to magic and ability to smash stuff, not in their fine control of the arcane arts. And this is just the way I think it should be. An intelligent golem with a more forceful personality would have better control over its supernatural powers (if it actually had any based on Cha). A lack of reasoning skill does not make a golem's powers useless, it just means that it cannot wield them as well as someone who does possess said skills. Take two creatures, each with the same supernatural powers. One is intelligent/charismatic, the other is not. Should the second one be just as skilled at wielding its supernatural powers as the first one? I submit that it should not be. On a similar note, HD is supposed to be the most basic representation of creature's overall power. It is a good thing that a large fraction of a creatures magical potency is derived from HD, because it means that save DCs will scale with creature HD. Cha represents how effectively the creature is able to wield that power. I still haven't seen any example where SNL actually solves some problem; Cha seems fully up to the task. To repeat my core point: HD determines the powers available, Cha determines how effectively they are wielded. It sounds like you run a pretty off-the-wall campaign with pokemon and players playing strange creatures taken from all over the place. It's possible that in such a setting you may need a 7th stat to bring together creatures from completely different sources (and genres?). In a more straight-forward campaign setting, Cha is fully up to the task of handling supernatural powers, and a 7th stat is not needed. When I saw "SNL," Saturday Night Live was the first thing I thought of too. This is the end of my debating with you.I don't know why you're offended by that statement... I'm not attacking you or anything. SNL is simply an acronym I associate with the TV show.
Lord Gwydion 06-22-05, 04:03 AM	Lord Gwydion i just noticed your post. First in my games my players rarly use characters classes, instead they use creatures that they A. Get from somewhere else B. Make up themselves So nonstandard is standard for me and weak creatures with powerful abilities happen often. Also "weak" enemies tend to be part of a group and serve a very specific role in that group. _________ Because their are many creatures i have got from various sources to fight my PC's. To customize everything then just say they blow everything up because i say so despite them knowing where i got it from and knowing that's incorrect is easily solved by this. I guess i should've put this in playing with everything. Only GM's that have mixmatched can understand the trouble a system lacking a pure supernatural stat can cause. Well, first of all, thank you for posting in a more polite manner. I doubt you were intentionally trying to be rude before, but it sure read that way to me. Second, if this works for your group, which is very non-standard, then I'm happy for you. But for most groups, where the monstrous PC is the exception to the rule (if they exist at all), this system would cause lots of hassles IMO. I don't see adding a new stat to purely govern magic as an improvement. There are already three stats to govern various aspects of magic, which work fine for most people. And what you describe sounds so much like free-form gaming, that I wonder why you need to bother with game mechanics. If they are free to come up with their own races to play, why would they feel like they need to bind you as the DM to the rules of D&D (or the source the creature came from) when it comes to what monsters you use? Apparently they do have a problem with you doing that, so I guess this works as a "legitimate" way to use DM fiat in your group. If they ask how the autistic quadraplegic kobold baby death squad defeated them, you can point to the SNL score of 50 that you gave them and they'll accept it.
Farealmer 06-22-05, 04:25 AM	And what you describe sounds so much like free-form gaming, that I wonder why you need to bother with game mechanics I have rules-lawyer munchkin players, without mechanics they take advantage of my liberal gaming methods. And since i GM 90% epic, their are too many possible abuses/problems with unchecked mental stats. If they are free to come up with their own races to play, why would they feel like they need to bind you as the DM to the rules of D&D (or the source the creature came from) when it comes to what monsters you use? Otherwise i can go overkill without realizing it. When virtually nothing i find D20 stats for is off limits, things can get crazy fast. If they ask how the autistic quadraplegic kobold baby death squad defeated them, you can point to the SNL score of 50 that you gave them and they'll accept it. It's more complicated than that but basically yeah. The point is when the D20 "we can take anything and make it work" slogan is at work. I need a stat that i can easily pull powerful abilities from, especially when video games are concerned. Most RPG video games have a stat for supernatural power, this makes it so i don't have to bend backwards for ways to make abilities work in the system.
Gilean 06-22-05, 04:35 AM	Have you considered remodeling magic entirely? So that magic only needs one stat (your SNL, I'll call it mana as that's what I'm used to) but benefits from multiple? For example, mana determines the upper bound of casting or singular powers, int the amount of said powers, cha the effectiveness, will the capacity of using, or something like that. This works well in settings where magic is a natural phenomenon. What kind of feel are you reaching for?
Sinaz 06-22-05, 02:42 PM	It is Supernatural(SNL) and it represents a beings supernatural power... ...When the SNL stat is reduced to 0 the creatures supernatural abilites, spell-like abilites, and spells don't work. Golems and other constructs, elementals, outsiders, and undead are also immobilized while their SNL is 0. A creature with - for SNL has no capacity to learn or use supernatural abilities. A.) Don't abbreviate it SNL or else NBC may stop by and issue a cease and disist order. ;) 2.) I'm actually more interested in the +/- aspect of this stat and wondering if it would be easier to track Abilities and modifiers based on +/- from 0. 0 is base, and then every two below or above 0 for an ability score changes the related modifiers. Just a thought... neat.
GreyLord 06-22-05, 03:18 PM	I don't know why all of you are having such a cow over this idea. Personally I wouldn't use it...but I can see complete sense in why he would use it. For those who think it makes any sense at all that magic is in some way connected to Charisma... Well, I think his argument about a Golem makes complete sense...next time you want to go smooch with something, go smooch that clay ball over there...afterall, according to the stats it should either have a great deal of Intel, Wis, or Cha... I have no problem with the Supernatural ability and think that it could meld well with those who want to use it. For example, if you want to play an Xmen type of game...anyone who knows anything about Xmen will know that some of those guys have what would be no Charisma...but have mutant abilities that are rather good. Or, if you want to play A game where magic-users are scorned...how much sense would it make for a group of Sorcerers, or an organization, which has some of the greatest CHA in the entire world...to be the greatest group scorned.... Not much. Now personally, in the magic department I'll stick with D20 how it's written, but I can completely see the guy's point and don't have a problem with his thinking. Even though I'll continue using d20 rules...those of you that are arguing over this like it's out in left field...I really can't understand your point...and all you've really done is to make me wonder how logical you all are in your approach. Of course it is fantasy, and you could define magic off someone's physical strength for all we care (which in some instances might actually make more sense than basing it off CHA to me...but...in game rules that WOULD be unbalancing as opposed to this SNL ability as I understand how he's put it)... If you really have a problem with all this just remember, you play the game how you want...and remember that rule 0 can be called into effect if a DM desires and sees something differently than how you see it.
IceFractal 06-22-05, 04:55 PM	Psionic powers aren't always based off of Charisma. If you use the 3.0 psionics rules, they could be based off of any stat, depending on the power. I like the 3.5 rules better, but you could always use that concept. Mutant powers sound like they'd be based off of Con to me. They could also be based off other stats, not just Cha. And also - Charisma is only one factor determining the save DC of things. Another factor, for SLAs, is the HD of the creature. Also, the creature could simply have a bonus to the DC (Gnomes have one, so it's not unprecedented). The simplest solution - IMO - would simply be to take any creature that would have its powers based off of SNL and instead give it a racial bonus to the save DCs equal to what it would have gotten. And I submit that giving something an "arbitrary" +10 save DC bonus is no more hokey than giving something an "arbitrary" 50 SNL.
Gilean 06-23-05, 04:06 AM	Here are some thought on what you are doing and why it generally is a bad idea. (http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/magic/) Not that it applies to you, but anyway.
Sir Todd 06-23-05, 10:06 AM	Some observations: 1- This is wildly unpopular as written. I don't see anyone supporting the use of this house rule without changing it first. Most people seem to think it's broken. 2- The exsisting stats use the first three letters of their name as an abbreviation. Why not simply call it SUP to please everyone? Personally either abbreviation doesn't bother me. 3- The logic of applying real definitions to stats seems to have eluded WotC when it came to mental stats anyway. You seem to be trying to fix that in a very odd way. As most people say this seems unnessessary, but I do aplaud any effort to fix what is broken. 4- The variant stat systems all operate on a 6 stat foundation. Altering this number of stats makes things hard on people who like the popular alternate stat systems. 5- All you really leave CHA is a small group of skills... it would fix a lot if you simply removed CHA and divided those 6 (at last count) skills into INT and WIS. The empathy with others skills go to WIS, the rest to INT. 6- The reason Sorcerors have fewer bonus feats and slightly slower spell level increases than wizards is because WotC felt not having to spend time memorizing spells and not requiring a spellbook were advantageous enough to warrant some drawbacks to sorcerors. The best way to fix sorceror is to grant them more Skills in their primary stat. 7- This last point isn't so much an observation as a fix to your houserule: If you want casters to NEED two stats. Then make ALL DCs based on SUP (Supernatural). And make the number of bonus spells and level of highest spells based on INT for all arcane users (including sorcerors) and WIS for all divine casters. Incidentally this changes sorceror enough to effectively fix it against wizard. Both classes now need INT and SUP as primary scores.