Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Thank_Dog Aug 30, 2014 21:45:57	Is it just me or is there a glut of Charisma-based classes? I was just thinking that I really wished that the Warlock was Intelligence based because it didn't make sense to me that Charisma was their primary stat and then it occurred to me that the Sorcerer, Warlock, Paladin & Bard are all Charisma-primary classes. And even the Rogue is a class that heavily benefits from Charisma due to so many skills relying on it. Yet there is only one Intelligence-based class. Seems whack to me. Anyone else wish that the Warlock was Intelligence instead of Charisma or that there is too much focus on Charisma in this edition?
#2 Marandahir Aug 30, 2014 22:19:52	We've got 3 casters who are Int-based, and 4 casters who are Cha-based.  Incidentally, we have 4 casters who are Wis-based.  Int might be slightly losing out, but I really don't see it as lopsided.  Charisma makes a lot of sense for Warlocks.  There have been threads about this in the past though.  The general consensus was this: Warlocks may want a good Intelligence for studying up, learning arcane rituals, and the like, but ultimately, they're breaking the rules.  They're not the studious students.  They're the ones that find the shortcuts, the ones that charm the teacher into fudging their test scores, or distract them long enough to steal a look at the answers.  Warlocks are very much Cha-casters.  Rogues are actually more turned towards Intelligence than Charisma; some Thieves might want Charisma for their cons, but a good number of Assassins, Thieves, and most importantly, Arcane Tricksters, want heavy investment in Intelligence.  Similarly, Eldritch Knights want heavy investment in Intelligence for their spells.  I don't think it's a problem.
#3 Shiroiken Aug 30, 2014 23:25:48	Depends on how you define "casters." Two of the three "casters" mentioned are actually sub-classes. A better method might be considering the level of caster.   Int: 1 2/3 (1 Full Caster + 2 Third Casters) Wis: 2 1/2 (2 Full Caster + 1 Half Caster) Cha: 3 1/6 (2 Full Caster +1 Half Caster + Warlock [2/3 Caster]) OR 3 if you consider Warlock only a Half Caster   Looks pretty lopsided to me.
#4 pukunui Aug 30, 2014 23:38:34	4e was pretty skewed towards Charisma too, if I recall correctly. (I may have once made a disparaging remark about 4e being too much of a high school popularity contest for my liking.)   Intelligence still has its uses: languages, Investigation, knowledge skills, etc.
#5 Thank_Dog Aug 30, 2014 23:44:44	pukunui wrote:
#6 The_White_Sorcerer Aug 30, 2014 23:53:29	3.5 also had a huge amount of Cha casters vs. Int casters, because Cha was the go to stat for spontaneous casters.
#7 masterfat78 Aug 31, 2014 0:07:16	I actually felt that the lore college bards should have used int instead of cha.
#8 pukunui Aug 31, 2014 0:16:08	Thank_Dog wrote:
(Reply to #3) Ashrym	Shiroiken wrote:
#10 seti Aug 31, 2014 1:59:50	There aren't any CON-based classes. But everyone needs CON for HP's and for saves, so...I gues that's ok...   A sorcerer could be CON based instead of CHA based pretty easily though; just rationalize it as they must have great fortitude to not explode or pass out when channeling so much raw arcane energies.   I think clerics should be CHA-based too. A cleric shouldn't be better (on average) at perception than rogues, rangers, fighters, etc. Rangers should be WIS based IMO. Rangers could even use WIS for ranged attacks instead of DEX.   Also, wizards being the 'only INT based caster is slightly misleading. They do have 8 subclasses, after all. Much more than anyone else. If and when psionic classes come out, at least one should be INT based, the classic Psion.
#11 ChristopherGroves Aug 31, 2014 4:11:24	I would have liked to see more INT-based stuff on assassin - abilities and the like.   Same w/ historically-expertise-related items on the Battlemaster.
#12 Marandahir Aug 31, 2014 5:16:07	Yeah, in terms of Archetypes, we have many Int-based ones: Diviners/Astrologists/Mediums, Enchanters/Telepaths, Illusionists, Necromancers, Alchemists, Conjurors/Teleporters, Barrier-Mages/Exorcists, and Spellslingers/Boomstick-shooters.  Also, about Clerics and Wisdom – they need empathy and insight and perception to form their link with their deities – to understand their deities' wills, and to actualise it in the world.  This is why Wisdom is so important.  Also, while Charisma may be important for some preacher-types, understanding the needs of the flock is arguably more important (and plays into the healer/supporter archetype that the Cleric naturally is inclined towards).  Charisma would be a good, flavourful ability to have high for many Clerics though, just as Intelligence is (for scholars-of-the-Book types) and Strength and Constitution are as well (for warrior-types). Finally, if we're counting classes by subclass, then Monk should be counted thrice since all Monks need high Wisdom for their ki abilities (it's directly tied to the DC the targets have to meet to avoid/mitigate the effects).  So in terms of subclasses in the PHB, casters are like this: 10 INT (8 Wizard, 1 Fighter, 1 Rogue) 14 WIS (7 Cleric, 2 Druid, 3 Monk, 2 Ranger) 10 CHA (2 Bard, 3 Paladin, 2 Sorcerer, 3 Warlock) It looks relatively even.  However, as you can see even here, the "balance" problem is NOT with Charisma, but rather with WISDOM!  To further emphasise this point, let's look at all classes and their favoured abilities.  We want to do it by sub-subclass chassises, (where Druid Circle of the Lands origins count equally, and each combination of Warlock pact boon and patron counts, as do the three Hunter sets x 2 for different multiattack options), and favoured combat stats as well as action stats; thus, we get something like this:   18 STR (4 Barbarian, 1 Bard, 2 Cleric, 3 Fighter, 3 Paladin, 2 Ranger, 3 Warlock) 21 DEX (1 Bard, 3 Cleric, 3 Fighter, 3 Monk, 3 Paladin, 2 Ranger, 3 Rogue, 3 Warlock) 11 INT (1 Cleric, 1 Fighter, 1 Rogue, 8 Wizard) 26 WIS (7 Cleric, 9 Druid, 3 Monk, 7 Ranger) 17 CHA (2 Bard, 3 Paladin, 2 Sorcerer, 9 Warlock) WOW.  the INT question is definitely valid in this case, as it falls behind all the other stats.  But WIS is by far the leader, and CHA is the second smallest!  DEX is also a bit high!
#13 Thank_Dog Aug 31, 2014 5:22:49	Add in skills.
#14 Zardnaar Aug 31, 2014 5:31:25	The_White_Sorcerer wrote:
#15 masterfat78 Aug 31, 2014 6:04:42	Id really like to see more reason for taking stats that are not prime class stats. Yeh Yeh I know skills but youll see a ton of either really stupid or really borish fghters again this edition.
#16 Zardnaar Aug 31, 2014 6:29:06	masterfat78 wrote:
#17 Einlanzer Aug 31, 2014 8:16:27	To me it's more an issue of the stats just not being particularly well balanced. They never really have been, and other than Con they don't do enough that's independent of class needs. I've often tried to come up with interesting mechanics, like a tactical bonus based on your Int score than can be applied to a reaction once per day, or wisdom replacing your passive perception rather than only modifying it, etc.
#18 Brock_Landers Aug 31, 2014 8:57:09	Warlock as Con-based is very early 4th Ed, and the Sorcerer is easily a good argument for a Con-based caster.
(Reply to #9) Shiroiken	Ashrym wrote:
#20 ankiyavon Aug 31, 2014 9:35:03	seti wrote:
#21 souldoubt Aug 31, 2014 10:08:34	Intelligence is one of the weaker scores and could use some boosting for non-Int-based classes.   But if they made the warlock Int-based, I'd probably have to make a pact with some dark entity to grant me the power to hunt down and kill those responsible for turning the warlock into an alternate-flavor wizard.
#22 Captain_Kobold Aug 31, 2014 10:42:42	Maybe you need confidence and force of personality to break the normal rules of the world, and doing it by rote and formulae is actually unusual.
#23 Brock_Landers Aug 31, 2014 10:51:05	This: ability score dependance; what should the P rely on?
(Reply to #15) Ashrym	masterfat78 wrote:
(Reply to #19) Ashrym	Shiroiken wrote:
#26 Thank_Dog Aug 31, 2014 14:53:50	souldoubt wrote:
#27 Zardnaar Aug 31, 2014 15:16:10	The Eldritch Knight might use intelligence, odds are it will not be a high score though as you do not really have that many spells to use so it is better to take spells like magic missile, true strike and shield as opposed to offensive magic.    Intelligence was a bit of a dump stat in AD&D but at least in 2nd ed you could get maybe get bonus NWP or even WP as optional rules and languages as well.
#28 souldoubt Aug 31, 2014 19:32:22	Thank_Dog wrote:
#29 Zardnaar Aug 31, 2014 19:35:00	If you are sick of things like dump stats, roll the dice for PC abilities. if you do not you only have yourself to blame so it is pick your poison I suppose if you do not like rolled stats.
#30 viper5 Aug 31, 2014 19:45:13	Thank_Dog wrote:
#31 Zardnaar Aug 31, 2014 19:53:29	viper5 wrote:
(Reply to #29) seti	Zardnaar wrote:
(Reply to #10) ManoVega	seti wrote:
#34 Zardnaar Aug 31, 2014 22:27:15	seti wrote:
#35 dmgorgon Aug 31, 2014 23:35:15	Zardnaar wrote:
#36 Zardnaar Sep 01, 2014 0:35:29	dmgorgon wrote:
#37 OrionStyles Sep 01, 2014 11:49:20	Alot of concepts are not very consistent.   eg: Warlock excerpt "And sometimes, while poring over tomes of forbidden lore, a brilliant but crazed student's mind is opened to realities beyond the material world and to the alien beings that dwell in the outer void."   Because that's how an extraverted, people person that is craving power spends his or her time. *eyeroll*   I have a deep loathing of the whole "The Little Engine That Could" mentality being strictly tied to effective charisma casting for some classes.   Now don't get me wrong, in some places tying spell casting to a single attribute makes sense (you're a magic academic). However, for some others, the game would be better if there were multiple attributes to chose from to tie your casting to, and different trade offs for doing so.
(Reply to #37) seti	OrionStyles wrote:
#39 Polaris Sep 01, 2014 12:10:27	OrionStyles wrote:
#40 ankiyavon Sep 01, 2014 12:13:12	OrionStyles wrote:
#41 Hebitsuikaza Sep 01, 2014 13:13:21	seti wrote: