What is charisma?

meagloth

In light of the recent "let's talk about" thread, and the upcoming(I hope) "let's talk about charisma" thread, I thought it would be nice to see what people thought about where charisma came from. I am speaking of the physical appearance/personality debate; which is more important for charisma?

Edit: If you haven't thought about it much, or you're thinking that the "other" button is looking pretty nice, here are some interesting resources related to the topic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM4Xe6Dlp0Y

http://freakonomics.com/2014/01/30/reasons-to-not-be-ugly-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/

Less related, but someone brought it up:
http://freakonomics.com/2014/03/20/women-are-not-men-a-freakonomics-radio-rebroadcast/

elminster

I really just wanted to see the results. So that is why I voted the way I did.

BGLover

I really just wanted Elminster's choice to top the polls. So that is why I voted the way I did.

meagloth

*sigh* @Elminister‌ @BGLover‌, people like you are the reason don't usually put those options there

jacobtan

@meagloth‌

You know, I suspect that in RL, it is possible for a person to have two charisma scores at extreme ends... 3 and 18 :P

Twani

I think many of us in life have known people we'd follow through hell who aren't anything more then average looking, if that. Likewise, there are many people who are beautiful and attractive, but lack and pull or charm who would make you want to believe their words or join their cause.

BGLover

Come on meagloth, a lil anarchy is always a good thing

BelgarathMTH

My take on Charisma is that it's about personal magnetism and leadership ability, sometimes referred to as "people skills", but high physical attractiveness gives you a bonus to those skills, while being physically plain, fat, unhealthy, or having asymmetric facial or body features ("ugly" would be the unkind word) gives you a penalty to those skills.

Let's say someone has base charisma skill of 15, but is very plain-looking. Minus 1. Maybe they have a mole on their face. Another minus 1. Maybe they're fat and out of shape. Another minus 1. Net charisma score: 12. You'll probably have a bad first impression, but as soon as you get to know them and hear them speak, their people skill, sense of humor, and charming personality will win you over.

Suppose that same person has a face like Helen of Troy or Adonis. Plus 1. They have a supermodel's or a star athlete's body. Plus 1. They have sparkling clear skin without a spot or a blemish anywhere, beautiful striking eyes, and shining luxurious hair. Another plus 1. Net charisma score: 18.

But now suppose that beautiful person is spoiled, vain, entitled, stuck up, and lacking in empathy or even basic people skills. Those qualities would go to their base score. Let's say that a person like this has a base charisma of 5-8. The beautiful one would get a partial pass with an adjusted score of 8-11. The "ugly" one would be in big trouble socially with an adjusted score of 2-5.

So, bottom line, personality, which is really both a talent and a learnable skill, gives you a base charisma score. Comeliness then gives bonuses or penalties to that base score, which governs how other people react to your presence, your actions, and your words. So, I voted for 80% personality, and 20% physical attractiveness for the final charisma score.

jackjack

One thing I've learned in my line of work:
You can't discount looks, but neither can you count on them.

O_Bruce

It depends. From my lectures about autopresentation I can recall that there is a big difference at how men and women are seen, since the society have different standards for men and women.

So I guess, when talking about men, charisma would be 80% personality and reliability and 20% appearance.
With women, I would guess 60% appearance, 40% personality. That's because women are expected to be looking good, and often they social skills and personality comes before their reliability (I mean, personality is subjectively considered more important than competences, but it's not like they doesn't matter)

meagloth

@ZelgadisGW‌ yes.

http://freakonomics.com/2014/03/20/women-are-not-men-a-freakonomics-radio-rebroadcast/

http://freakonomics.com/2014/01/30/reasons-to-not-be-ugly-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/

These have some(especially the latter) charisma relevance.

CrevsDaak

In my case, it's 100% personalty (both me to others and otherwise), I'm not ugly nor pretty, and I will react accordingly to other person's atitude, always (which means that I don't judge anyone for their appareance), I don't know if it happena the sams for all the people, but taking in account how I look and how I reply, I think the swcond influences more :P

ZaknafeinBaenre

As a member of the beautiful people club, I have to say it is completely looks. lol, j/k

HerrderGezeiten

I wished most People would use Mostly personality (~80%).

But there are so much people how hate Spiders and Snakes -> is it there personality? I don`t think so,..

Dungeonnoob

Charisma makes me think about Barak Obama,strong voice and keeps he's head up high.

Archaos

Charisma is mostly personality. Not only.

Body language, confidence, leading qualities, force of personality, looks and conviction are parts of it.

I could make a Half-Orc with 18 Charisma and a female elf with 3 Charisma.
Nevermind that beauty is in the eye of the beholder (no, not that kind of Beholder).

For example, Dorn has 16 Charisma I think and Viconia has 14 Charisma.
An evil half-orc is not prettier than a female exotic dark elf.

I think conviction is the best way to describe Charisma in another word.
When you try to persuade someone, you must be convinced and believe in it.
Paladins have conviction about their faith, they're not just knowledgeable about it and are natural leaders. (17 cha minimum)

That's why Sorcerers need Charisma for their casting in 3.5E.
They are not researching formulas and theories to cast their spells. (Intelligence)
They are not using their strong faith to their gods to cast either. (Wisdom)
They are using pure conviction. They are confident, they feel absolutely that they can force magic from the Weave and into the world but cannot explain it. They just know it deeply inside like a sixth sense. (Charisma)

CrevsDaak

Archaos said:

Body language, confidence, leading qualities, force of personality, looks and conviction are parts of it.

Those are mostly psychological (all of them except 'looks' are).

meagloth

Archaos said:

Body language, confidence, leading qualities, force of personality, looks and conviction are parts of it.

Those are mostly psychological (all of them except 'looks' are).

That's what I mean when I say personality.

CrevsDaak

meagloth said:

CrevsDaak said:

Archaos said:

Body language, confidence, leading qualities, force of personality, looks and conviction are parts of it.

Those are mostly psychological (all of them except 'looks' are).

That's what I mean when I say personality.

Because personalties are not a part of human psychology now, right? :P

mumumomo

Mostly personnality IMO.
But you cannot discard the looks.
Even if, like crevsdaak, you try to judge people based on their attitude, i am also 100% sure that everyone gets influenced (without knowing) by the looks. Because, looks have a major influence on the first impression.

Vakarian

While personality and attractiveness are usually bundled together in the charisma stat, I had a DM once who had us roll a separate "comeliness" sub-stat to account for how attractive a character was, leaving charisma to represent only the force of the character's personality. Most charisma-based checks still only used the charisma score, but particular social interactions (depending on the personality of the particular NPC, if there was some flirting going on, etc.) were also modified by comeliness.

Aristillius

Defiantely personality. Imagine the most beautiful man/woman in the world - this person could still have a 1 in charisma, being totally without personality and branlessly following other people.
In my understanding of personality, appearance can *help* - if only that when you attempt to make use of your will, people might easier notice and follow you, making it easier to develop your charisma further. But it is far from a neccessity. Imagine a horrible scarred person, this person could still make people follow him/her, due to personality, vocabulary, the force of his/her cause and so on.

FinaLfront

I really think the stat "Charisma" should be split into 2 separate stats like Intelligence and Wisdom. Much like how I believe Intelligence works to Wisdom, being that Intelligence is the NOW attribute, and Wisdom being the slower, more pondering attribute, Charisma IMO has pretty much the same setup. The NOW stat (physical attractiveness), and the slower personality stat, which can't be assessed at a glance. Further more, I think the other stats should add, or take away from your total charisma.

So it would break down like this

MIND:
Intelligence
Wisdom

BODY:
Strength
Constitution
Dexterity

CHARISMA:
Allure (Physical Attractiveness) would with bribes, asking for more money, quest rewards, getting laid
Disposition (Personality) would help with leadership, morale, maintaining relationships

For example, let's say that for every 5 points spent past 10 Strength and/or Dexterity, add 1 free point in Allure. Every 5 points spent past 10 Intelligence and/or Wisdom, add 1 free point to Disposition. This works the other way too. Every 5 points below 10 str/dex/wis/int takes away 1 point from the respective attributes. This would simulate the appeal of a fit body (str) skilled dancing (dex) sharp wit (int) philosopher (wis).

I see a lot of people saying how much more important personality is. It's true that personality is important, but there is no denying the huge advantage attractiveness has with everyday life. It's really not fair to compare appearance and personality anyways since they both offer completely different advantages. 50/50 for me

element

I don't think its one thing or the other and I don't think it should be thought of that way

I think high charisma can be achieved through a number of social tools one doesn't beat another, but u don't need both to make it to the top

meagloth

Ah, I just thought of another related resource:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM4Xe6Dlp0Y
Skip to 6:30 for the especially charisma-related bit.

Zyzzogeton

STR DEX split works because of Fighters and Thieves
Which of course causes CON to splinter off on its own

INT WIS split works because of Mages and Clerics

CHA doesn't need to be split because no class only uses the "looks" part it. Very few situations will use "looks" without "presence" becoming relevant. While all classes (Paladins, Bards) that use CHA still need the "presence" aspect, and work mostly off it anyway. Very little game mechanics revolve around only physical beauty.

And unlike CON which, while having no real class attached to it still has the all important HP stat to keep it relevant as well as Fort Saves in 3E, what exactly will physical beauty do? D&D isn't a life simulator it's a system to determine how stuff works out for a group of adventurers doing stuff.

Ultimately splitting CHA is more of a house rule matter than something to be included in the core rules.

Blackraven

I agree with most here that charisma is comprised of both physical and non-physical traits, but couldn't it be possible that the proportion between the two depends on the individual and the environment in which they function?
It's difficult to quantify charisma, but let's assumefor argument's sake that Nelson Mandela and 1980s/90sAxl Rose both had 18 charisma. Mandela's charisma could have consisted for 30% in his looks: he was tall, pleasant to look at, had a disarming smile and aged gracefully. The rest, 70%, might well have been non-physical charisma: his humbleness, his intelligence, his achievements (against all odds), his kindness, his peacefulness, and his forgiving nature enabled him to unite a very polarized people.
1980s/90s Axl Rose was a good singer (unique voice), an attractive man, and a very compelling stage personality thanks to clothing style, stage moves, body language. These are all physical characteristics (although many physical traits do reflect one's personality imo, but that's another matter). He was also a creative lyricist and musician and quite intelligent, which are nice non-physical characteristics. Apart from that the general public (I'm sure that insiders will have a different view) has seen him behave as an *sshole most of the time, not showing up at concerts, insulting people, being arrogant, picking fights etc. Without wanting to bash GnR, I think they've made amazing music, Axl Rose's charisma might have consisted for 50% in his physical charisma (image) and 50% in non-physical charisma (his rebellious personality and creative talent).

These people and their numbers are just examples, and I don't claim the percentages to be true. What I'm trying to say is that different people can be equally charismatic but on different grounds. I also think that a politician's charisma might be measured differently than an artist's charisma.

lanlyn

My vote was not influenced or biased in the least....

FinaLfront

Zyzzogeton said:

Very few situations will use "looks" without "presence" becoming relevant.

Not true.

Zyzzogeton said:

Very little game mechanics revolve around only physical beauty.

That's because it's based on a single Charisma stat system. The game could have easily incorporated checks for beauty and personality. Granted, a single Charisma stat system does simplify things. I'm just pointing out that it's not a very accurate portrayal of Charisma as a whole.

Looks would have far more impact on your dealings with people that you are only briefly acquainted with. Bribing the random guard, talking to people at a tavern. Asking random people on the streets for information. Returning to random guy and asking for a better quest reward. These things wont be necessarily easy for a Paladin with strong leadership skills if he's face looks like it got beaten in with an ugly stick, everyday people won't quickly open up to him.

Personality has far more effect on people that are around you all the time. That's really just going to be your group. This is where the game would make it's morale checks, and the ugly Paladin would instill courage, keep fights from breaking out within the group, have different banters, better romance options, as if he had a Charisma score of 18.

The way Charisma works in D&D just assumes that your Paladin with 18 Charisma is also the most gorgeous person ever. Yeah, that's pretty convenient, but anyone that's wants to role play a more realistic approach and takes a Charisma hit to simulate some ugliness, is also going to take a hit on other aspects of Charisma that wouldn't have anything to do with looks. That's really what I'm trying to say here.

I dunno, am I making sense? Sometimes I feel that I have a hard time getting my thoughts across.

@Blackraven Your post has me thinking about what effect fame and especially money would have on Charisma

Zyzzogeton

How many D&D campaigns actually care that much about how gorgeous the PCs look?

Looks are mostly wasted stat because it rarely ever comes up on its own in a campaign. As for disfigurement, the DM is more than free to place penalties on CHA related rolls if the NPC actually cares about looks.

No class uses Looks, all the other stats except CON serve as primary stats for the core classes. Practically only the Presence part of CHA matters to Paladins and Bards, and Sorcs are all about presence. CON lends to HP which justifies it given how gigantic portions of the source material is related to combat.

Looks can be roleplayed, checks can be adjusted.

And D&D isn't about creating an accurate system, it's an approximation. If it was accurate, the section on how XP is divided would take entire chapters. Every encounter would have a ridiculous amount of calculations to determine how much XP a PC actually got. But D&D just divides the XP equally. That's not accurate at all, but it is an approximation that in the long run all the PC's contributions will level out. So the same goes for Charisma, it's an approximation. Looks may matter in some cases, but not enough to warrant anything more than modifiers to CHA rolls if the DM bothers with it, so it just gets absorbed into Charisma.

FinaLfront

@Zyzzogeton You are doing a pretty good job of explaining how D&D works with a single Charisma score. Your argument boils down to the simplicity that single stat Charisma provides, and justifies it with "Looks rarely exist in the game" which, is the case because there is no outlet for such rolls to be made. In other words, they would exist if the system was in place for it.

Yes, in D&D you can have any sort of house rules in place. That's not the point. Incorporating "Looks" into the game wouldn't be this vast, unimaginable undertaking, far too complex to implement in a video game. It wouldn't be any harder than incorporating diplomacy and bluff checks as 3E did.

Your point about accuracy is moot. No one is asking for a "realistic" xp distribution system. Who cares about that? On that note, just because certain aspects of anything are inaccurate, that other things related couldn't be improved upon? My post wasn't asking for every aspect of the game to mimic real life as much as possible. It's just a way to more clearly define Charisma.

Look I get it, you really like the system that's in place, and that's fine. Not trying to sound rude or anything, but I don't think we should bother arguing about this any further. We obviously aren't going to change each others opinion. I see, acknowledge, and understand your stance. Let's move along now.