Skip to content

A Possibility for Improving CHA

MilesBeyondMilesBeyond Member Posts: 324
So we all know that CHA tends to be a bit of a "dump stat." There's also been a few threads around wondering at the possibility of expanding the party size.

I propose we kill two birds with one stone.

Here's the deal. For every 2 points of CHA above 14 that CHARNAME has, one extra NPC can be added to the party. So the party can consist of 7 at 16 CHA and 8 at 18 CHA. Now there's some temptation to put more points into CHA, so you can have a bigger party (since it really didn't do all that much before), and a larger party is something that those who don't want can easily avoid entirely (unless you play as a Paladin, I suppose...)

Have it only check base CHA, and that will prevent people from creating low CHA characters and then cheesing things like Friends, Ring of Human Influence, etc to get 8 party members.

Thoughts on this?

Comments

  • LRECLREC Member Posts: 68
    Seems like you would have to increase monsters and their damage to offset having 2 more party members.
  • AliteriAliteri Member Posts: 308
    If I remember well, Arcanum did something like this. But I suppose that you'd sacrifice some combat power in order to boost charisma so things balanced out (not that combat is Arcanum's forte).
  • WinterstormWinterstorm Member Posts: 19
    I like the concept quite a bit. And like @Aliteri stated, the sacrifices you make to your own combat abilities is made up by the 2 extra party members. Monster damage wouldnt need to be balanced too much to compensate for the shift. Would make me max out my Charisma in every BG roll :p.
  • Jean_LucJean_Luc Member Posts: 228
    Don't see how "sacrificing" a few attribute points to CHA in exchange for a whole new party member makes for a (relatively) balanced game. The addition of a new party member can only be counterbalanced by the removal of another member, 2 CHA points doesn't even come close to being worth that much. Tbh I don't see how cha could be made more useful without some 3ed-ization of BG and I doubt people would like that.
  • WinterstormWinterstorm Member Posts: 19
    Jean_Luc said:

    Don't see how "sacrificing" a few attribute points to CHA in exchange for a whole new party member makes for a (relatively) balanced game. The addition of a new party member can only be counterbalanced by the removal of another member, 2 CHA points doesn't even come close to being worth that much. Tbh I don't see how cha could be made more useful without some 3ed-ization of BG and I doubt people would like that.

    I do see you point there actually.

    I still like the concept of 2 extra (optional) party members, despite the balancing issues.
  • AnduineAnduine Member Posts: 416

    So we all know that CHA tends to be a bit of a "dump stat." There's also been a few threads around wondering at the possibility of expanding the party size.

    I propose we kill two birds with one stone.

    Here's the deal. For every 2 points of CHA above 14 that CHARNAME has, one extra NPC can be added to the party. So the party can consist of 7 at 16 CHA and 8 at 18 CHA. Now there's some temptation to put more points into CHA, so you can have a bigger party (since it really didn't do all that much before), and a larger party is something that those who don't want can easily avoid entirely (unless you play as a Paladin, I suppose...)

    Have it only check base CHA, and that will prevent people from creating low CHA characters and then cheesing things like Friends, Ring of Human Influence, etc to get 8 party members.

    Thoughts on this?


    The concept is interesting, and in a way, it makes sense. Having such a high base charisma would likely provide some kind of charm/leadership benefits. However, as has already been said, being able to permanently add 1-2 characters to your party is just too powerful a benefit from an ability score.

    Yes, you'd need more XP to level up, but your increased damage/durability would easily offset and overwhelm that drawback. Ultimately, charisma should not be able to add a benefit like this, even if it's an appealing one.

  • SabotinSabotin Member Posts: 38
    Maybe a bonus on certain saving throws (fear/dominate?) or a reduction in romance timers? Maybe allowing more mistakes in conversations. It feels like it should have something to do with conversations rather than mechanics.
  • MilesBeyondMilesBeyond Member Posts: 324
    edited August 2012
    To all those who consider it too powerful a benefit:

    I disagree entirely. Don't forget that with extra party members, XP is being distributed even more thinly.

    I've found that you'll always have an easier time with a party of 4 than with a party of 6. Less people = faster experience gains, and especially with spellcasters, this translates into massive power gains in a shorter amount of time.

    Think about it. You've got a party of 8. Let's say that at least 3 of them are MC. That level up sound is going to be rare and hard-earned. You're going to have more people, at the price of them all being weaker.

    I might actually go so far as to suggest that 8 might even be more difficult than 6, especially in the beginning where you'd be fighting Tazok with most of your characters hovering around lvl 2. Like I said, 6 is generally more difficult than 4, so wouldn't that translate? You'd probably have to grind pretty heavily to get them to even approach the level that a party of 6 would be at by the end of the game, and you'd have to spend half the game grinding if you ever wanted to max out.

    Seriously, try it out. Create a PC who can cast some divine magic (I'd say preferably a F/C or F3->C), and then grab Imoen, Minsc and Dynaheir. It might be more difficult at first, but once things get rolling you'll be on easy street. Especially if you decide to replace Immy with Coran when you get to Chapter 4.
  • reedmilfamreedmilfam Member Posts: 2,808
    And the party size is hard coded, so it's not do-able. As for 'sacrificing CHA', that really doesn't apply to any system pre-buy in points (3rd ed). You would just keep rolling...

    Bigger parties are limited XP wise; the only reason I'd want more members is that there are so many NPCs to choose! If I had 8, I'd want 9. If 9... You get my drift.
  • CheesebellyCheesebelly Member Posts: 1,727
    Problem as I see it is that you would be able to exploit this very easily. How? Well, make a paladin... or elven ranger. Their stat rolls are insane. Like, every roll will be superior to 80. Getting a 95 isn't that hard this way (meaning you could have 18/##, 18, 18, 10, 13, 18 with a paladin, or 18/##, 19, 17, 9, 14, 18 with Elven ranger). Now let's pick some easy areas to get XP - Shoal the nereid can be archered to death on level one with extreme ease. You hit level 3. Get to save Melicamp, talk to Marl, buy book for Firebead Elvenhair and kill 4 spiders in Beregost. You hit level 4! NOW, go and gather around your party... 8 members all on level 3-5. If two level 4 members are enough to hit Bandit camp with ease... 8 are enough to own everything till late Baldur's Gate (final chapter), which by then they'll all be level 6-8 anyway!
  • Humanoid_TaifunHumanoid_Taifun Member Posts: 1,063
    I don't think that XP are going to be the biggest problem for a large party. After all, you still get at least 75% as much XP with 8 members as you would with 6, which doesn't mean much in BG1.
    But you can't control this many characters as once with full efficiency.
  • jhart1018jhart1018 Member Posts: 909
    It'd be nice if CHA played into shopkeeper interactions, and yes, conversation/romance options could be shortened/improved. For sorcerers and bards, doesn't higher CHA = more spells? Never understood why paladins need high CHA, but I've only played a paladin once; they're badass but not my favorite.
  • FrozenDervishFrozenDervish Member Posts: 295
    Paladins have high CHA due to what they represent.

    I could see this working without the need for 8 characters could be 8 or less CHA could be 1 party member, 10 being 2, 12 being 3, and 14 on up the full 6 so having a decent CHA would be essential, but not needing rdiculous amounts of it.
  • Humanoid_TaifunHumanoid_Taifun Member Posts: 1,063
    @jhart1018 No, charisma is only as important to bards and sorcerers as it is to anybody else.
  • FrozenDervishFrozenDervish Member Posts: 295
    @Humanoid_Taifun only in BG as bard uses charisma while sorc is a 3rd ed. class.
  • Humanoid_TaifunHumanoid_Taifun Member Posts: 1,063
    @FrozenDervish That is the point of the thread, yes, the effect of charisma in Baldur's Gate.
  • FrozenDervishFrozenDervish Member Posts: 295
    @Humanoid_Taifun Sorry thought you were saying it in 2nd ed. terms.
  • AliteriAliteri Member Posts: 308

    I like the concept quite a bit. And like @Aliteri stated, the sacrifices you make to your own combat abilities is made up by the 2 extra party members. Monster damage wouldnt need to be balanced too much to compensate for the shift. Would make me max out my Charisma in every BG roll :p.

    Actually, I forgot to say exactly what Jean Luc did. In Arcanum you're sacrificing your combat ability for those Charisma boosts, in BG you really don't.
  • jhart1018jhart1018 Member Posts: 909
    Right, but in BG2, a higher charisma should mean bonus spells for a sorcerer. It should mean more spells for a bard in BG1 as well. I honestly forget if that made the transition from pnp to crpg.
  • PaheejPaheej Member Posts: 126
    Although the Charisma affecting party size is a good idea (like other posters mentioned in Arcanum and I believe Fallout 2), the only way it seems you could implement it would be to reduce the original 6 party memembers to 4,3, or even 2.

    You could do something like 18+ CHA = 6 party size, 16 CHA =5, 14 CHA = 4, 12 CHA = 3, 10 CHA = 2, <10 = solo baby!

    However this a great restriction for party banter/NPC dialogue which is one of BG's main strengths. I'd prefer to simply go with more dialogue options and quest solutions.

    I'd also love it if your INT < 7 severly changes all dialogue options and an INT of 3 would mean that the only dialogue option for your character in any interaction would be "Barbarbarbar . . . BAR!" (which is the origin of the word Barbarian, as the Greeks thought foreigners sounded like they were saying "barbarbarbarbar").
  • MilesBeyondMilesBeyond Member Posts: 324
    Hahaha the low INT interactions were easily among the best parts of Fallout 1-2 and Arcanum. I can't for the life of me figure out why they scrapped that for Fallout 3...

    I especially liked Arcanum's low INT journal. Could you imagine that in Baldur's Gate? Chapter 2: "Man smell bad. Ask kill demons. They in mine. Me go now."

    Having CHA should have a broader impact on your dialogue choices.

    It does to an extent - I recently made a character with kinda crappy CHA and I couldn't get a few NPCs to join me (Kivan, for example). But more of a change might be nice.
  • LRECLREC Member Posts: 68
    Thought about it a little more, and having extra party members would require a SLIGHT increase in monster damage. That's because your party members would be leveling up more slowly. However, 8 party members over 6 is a HUGE difference (i.e. an extra cleric and mage would be overkill), so you would have to make adjustments to monster damage.
    Hahaha they did that for Neverwinter Nights, where if your INT was below a certain number (9 I think), you had the funniest dialogue options. Absolutely loved it, it was unfortunate I always made sure I had a relatively good INT score.
  • ddubiousddubious Member Posts: 29
    You could do something without more party members.

    What about keeping your followers happy, so they don't fight or leave? Your charisma score could affect the reputation value, up or down, that followers leave at, and whether npc conflict occurred between party members?




    18 charisma - Ignore reputation for the purpose of characters leaving. Characters with even direct enmity toward each other will not fight. (Rare exceptions, like Ajantis. The paladin code is pretty strict.)

    17 charisma - Ignore reputation for the purpose of characters leaving. Characters with general enmity toward each other will not fight (Yeslick and Kagain, Khalid / Jaheria and Zhar / Montaron, etc.)

    16 charisma - Ignore reputation (unless 0 or 20, e.g., 1 to 19) for the purpose of characters leaving. Characters with general enmity toward each other will not fight (Yeslick and Kagain, Khalid / Jaheria and Zhar / Montaron, etc.)

    15 charisma - Ignore reputation (3 to 17) for the purposes of characters leaving.




    Its a little extreme at the higher end, but I keep remembering that 18 charisma is supposed to be the best (demi-)humanity has to offer as a leader. It would make the ring of leadership and influence actually mean something.
  • MilesBeyondMilesBeyond Member Posts: 324
    That's interesting, that's very interesting. I like that. Maybe spice it up a bit, as far as BG1 is concerned, by allowing PCs with 18+ CHA to split up pairs (e.g. kick out one of either Montaron and Xzar, Khalid and Jaheira, Minsc and Dynaheir, or Eldoth and Skie without the other leaving)
  • PaheejPaheej Member Posts: 126
    @MilesBeyond and @ddubious
    Gentlemen, excellent ideas. Those ideas coupled with a new dialogue options and a few extra quest solutions sound most reasonable.
  • BjjorickBjjorick Member Posts: 1,208
    Aliteri said:

    If I remember well, Arcanum did something like this. But I suppose that you'd sacrifice some combat power in order to boost charisma so things balanced out (not that combat is Arcanum's forte).

    fallout 1 and/or 2 did this as well
  • MokonaMokona Member Posts: 89
    edited August 2012
    If you hit 20 CHA you sparkle like a twilight vampire.
  • Humanoid_TaifunHumanoid_Taifun Member Posts: 1,063
    Sparkling should be an HLA available to everybody with an appropiate charisma score.
Sign In or Register to comment.