nope, its just one of those whacky AD&D role play type thingies, like how a Paladin is supposed to have at least 17 charisma but in actual game, it doesn't do anything to enhance their class abilities
Yea. They think you'll be starving with a dump stat charisma if you were a bard. Check your local wanna-bes for a point.
See, normally I'd totally agree with you, but D&D went and slapped objective good/evil labels on things. It's pretty clear, mechanically-speaking, that the game believes in objective good and evil AND that a paladin must uphold objective good. Which is... really weird, honestly. But it's what the rules say. What you're describing would fall much more accurately under lawful neutral than lawful good, according to the game's moral claims.
I remember a quite extensive debate on that somewhere on these forums a year or two back. Essentially, the problem is that in a world where actual deities exist it's very hard to find out where "good" and "evil" actually come from, without making them arbitrarily defined meta characteristics of the game and not worrying too much about them.
Also, for the "don't lie" thing, any paladin who tells a murderer where to find the prospective victim is a terrible paladin. First, because paladins aren't allowed to compromise some of their principles (protect the innocent) for the sake of others (don't lie), and second, because not being allowed to lie doesn't mean you have to answer the question.
It was just an example for the principal nature of rigidly following a code, not an actual case. I chose that dilemma because it's a well-known example from philosophy (Kant) that illustrates the problem of a categorical imperative, and also from religion (doctrine of mental reservation). So don't get too hung up on the actual example because it's about the underlying principles. And of course you're correct in that most (if not all) paladins also have overriding tenets that make this particular case more clear-cut - but that may not be the case for every moral/ethical dilemma they face. In fact it's even likely, given the long history of problematic moral choices both IRL and within D&D.
Think of the old "don't lie" dilemma; a paladin whose tenets of faith were "don't you ever lie!" would most definitely answer truthfully if a murderer asked him where that escaping victim was hiding (assuming here of course no other tenet that overrides).
Not really a great example. A paladin asked by a murderer where the victim was hiding would kill the Murderer. For Great Justice. :P
Historically Druids were the law in ancient Celtic society. They'd act as judges so I can see where the high CHA requirement comes from.
In D&D I think the stat requirement of the classes has more to do with enforcing rarity then anything else. When we played we rolled 4d6 and took the highest 3 dies for each stat, and were then able to switch two stats (pretty sure this was a house rule). Then we were also allowed to increase one stat by 1 if we reduced another stat by 2. The DM would watch us make our rolls too, so there was no cheating.
We never did have a paladin in one of our groups, the stat requirements were too high, and I think this is intended. There should be 20 fighters for every paladin out there. When I was a kid I remember going to D&D camp (this was early 80s), all we did was roll 4d6 for each stat and the DM came around and told us what class we were going to be. We also rolled d100 and if we got 15 or under we could be something other then human.
I agree with @BelgarathMTH 's explanation fully, bards are the charming people with pretty faces and lustrous hair and perfect teeth. They also have a way to influence and inspire people so they have stage presence as well. A homely person without min 15 cha just can not become a bard in AD&D, no one will like them enough and want to listen to their songs and stories.
Now if only we can explain why druids require as high CHA as well, they are the nature worshipping kinda-hippies living in forests and surrounded by wild life and animals. They are not the benevolent guiding ceremonial religious leaders as far as I can tell. They don't cherish as much human interaction as well, they don't actually preach their beliefs as much as other religion clerics do. Their number one priority is keeping the balance, not converting people to their religion. Actually I assume many would prefer the presence of wild life to those of people. And, living in the forest too long, I am sure they will all look like bestial with long and unkempt dirty hair/beard, finger nails, and teeth etc. I would assume being a druid would put a limit to max cha rather than requiring a minimum.
Do you really want an ugly person dancing naked in the moonlight?
Seriously though, the high charisma score for bards is what let's them inspire courage with their songs and stories and use other class abilities, it just isn't specified as a casual relationship.
Druids need the high charisma as it requires a forceful personality to interact with animals. You can tell the low charisma dog owner, he's the one that can never let their dog off the lead and has to resort to physical control constantly.
I strongly agree with the idea of charisma as "presence" and not only appearance or charm. A sorcerer may be quiet and shy, but because of his high charisma people will realise that he is more "special" than common folk.
Comments
And of course you're correct in that most (if not all) paladins also have overriding tenets that make this particular case more clear-cut - but that may not be the case for every moral/ethical dilemma they face. In fact it's even likely, given the long history of problematic moral choices both IRL and within D&D.
Historically Druids were the law in ancient Celtic society. They'd act as judges so I can see where the high CHA requirement comes from.
In D&D I think the stat requirement of the classes has more to do with enforcing rarity then anything else. When we played we rolled 4d6 and took the highest 3 dies for each stat, and were then able to switch two stats (pretty sure this was a house rule). Then we were also allowed to increase one stat by 1 if we reduced another stat by 2. The DM would watch us make our rolls too, so there was no cheating.
We never did have a paladin in one of our groups, the stat requirements were too high, and I think this is intended. There should be 20 fighters for every paladin out there. When I was a kid I remember going to D&D camp (this was early 80s), all we did was roll 4d6 for each stat and the DM came around and told us what class we were going to be. We also rolled d100 and if we got 15 or under we could be something other then human.
Seriously though, the high charisma score for bards is what let's them inspire courage with their songs and stories and use other class abilities, it just isn't specified as a casual relationship.
Druids need the high charisma as it requires a forceful personality to interact with animals. You can tell the low charisma dog owner, he's the one that can never let their dog off the lead and has to resort to physical control constantly.