How do you accurately portray a high CHA score?

Confident, outgoing personality, with a commanding presence that can easily get the attention of a crowd if he tries. Capable of speaking loudly and clearly. Attractiveness optional but doesn't hurt.

File: uwotmellon.jpg (23KB, 255x298px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 255x298px

>not just abusing game mechanics to turn a high charisma score into pseudo-mind control

>>53709720
>reading rpg reviews on suptg while bored
>every social system writer complains about it being just mind control
>one RPG says that people are unlikely to be persuaded from stuff they already want to do/don't want to do
>complains that social stuff is worthless

>>53709514
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EFe9Vpd3ps

>>53709752

i saw that the latest exalted edition has a mechanical statting to "various kinds of shit you care about" that, when brought up, grants your social attacker a bonus to changing how you feel (but only how you feel, not what you do with that feeling)

which was directly inspired by how 2nd edition exalted's social combat was referred to as shitty mind control, and made to avoid that.

and it's fun because it turns discovery of an NPC or PC target into a more conversational experience; you can say "fuck it i roll to figure this guy out" and instead of saying "okay he's pliant to you" your result is "you realize he's only putting up with you on the hope that you can make his situation better for his family." to which you as the player can be like "okay cool i'll totally insist i know where he's coming from about family being important so i can use that intimacy against him, then"

which, surprise, isn't questioned or considered "mind-control" because everyone sees the clear connection to the manipulation and change of tone.

>>53709514
There are many ways
A fast talking plucky salesman who would gladly sell you his own mother without a warranty, only for her arm to fall off three minutes later can have high Cha due to his ability to run circles around people in conversation and convince them of things using questionable logic while not giving them time to think things over. Eg, Cut Me Own Throat Dibbler from diskworld.
A cute girl who puts people at ease with her bubbly and outgoing personality, maybe she's a bit of a clutz. She's got cha because she makes people want to keep her safe/happy by being or acting cute, and also causing them to underestimate her.
An ugly politician who can capture an audience with his voice and sway the masses to his point of view with eloquent points that strike home to the "Everyday man" also has high charisma by being able to speak well, and exude an air of camaraderie or "being on the side" of the common man against some other, perceived or real, issue.
High charisma can be modeled in many ways, some which factor in physical appearance, others which don't. Much like the only way to model intelligence isn't an autistic wizard librarian.

File: janet guzman.jpg (273KB, 1362x2048px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 1362x2048px

>>53709514
Bursting with primary and secondary sexual traits that the players would find attractive.

>>53709752
Burning Wheel has a good compromise: yes, you can convince people to do what you want or to see things your way, but you won't truly change their mind about anything. They'll go along with your plans, but grudgingly so.

>>53709819
That does sound fun. To bad most people that play table-top games are literally too socially and/or intellectually inept for this to actually work as intended. And no, that's isn't a gross generalization.

Then again, I doubt many of that ilk would even be playing Exalted in the first place.

>>53710952
That sounds awful. Why would anyone use this system?

>>53709819
It's better than that, you need those intimacies to actually get anyone to do anything. It neatly solves the issue of 'I have social stats through the roof, I walk up to this random citizen and tell him to go murder his family and he does it'

>>53717338
Is it not better than either relying purely on roleplay and having no system for it at all, or rolling diplomacy once and completely changing their minds? You're not supposed to change a person's mind instantly and easily, but you should also have a system for this because it's an integral part of the game.

>>53717919
It should probably be possible to change a person's mind, though, just generally not easily and not with one roll or in a short time.

File: bikini armor.jpg (181KB, 1080x596px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1080x596px

>>53709514
With appropriate armor.

>>53718068
You actually CAN change someone's mind in Burning Wheel.

You can, as in any system, do it via roleplay.
You prove yourself to the NPC or have a real solid argument on your side that the GM can just "Say Yes" to it and have them change their mind.

You also can have someone changing their mind via the mechanics, it just has to be a valid intent. The "Argument, not mind Control" section is,
A) a bit of an appeasement to people who just hate social mechanics at all because "wah mind control"
B) Basically a roundabout way of saying that intent and task still apply. In order for you to do anything in Burning Wheel, you need to have a goal, and a means of achieving it that is actually feasible. In GENERAL, in a debate, argument or negotiation, the losing side doesn't come out with a complete 180 point of view. So in GENERAL, the DoW is not the Appropriate mechanic to leverage for it.
This sometimes DOES happen, and the rules acknowledge is can happen "While [changing someone's mind] is possible, it is not the goal." The goal is "Which party gets what they want, and how much do they have to concede to do it".

You can run a DoW with the stakes being emotional changes, but, it has to be a valid task for that intent, and since either party can say "I don't like those stakes", you can't force a DoW on anyone, and thus can not FORCE someone to change their mind (I'm sure you've had experience in real life where you are trying to convince someone of something and they just refuse to listen)

>>53709514

Speak in such a way as to convince everyone you sell an idea to that it was their idea to begin with.

File: diplomacy.png (227KB, 918x680px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 918x680px

>>53709514
Play a game like Diplomacy, where you have to convince people to make alliances with you in order to win. It only really works if you're playing with at least a few novice players, otherwise everyone will already know the best moves and it'll purely be a game of strategy. But if you don't really know what you're doing, people will form alliances based on who sounds the most convincing.

This is exactly the sort of thing that charisma is meant to represent. When you get to the end, think back to how the winner acted throughout the game. Based on the one and only game I've played, he won't be the most aggressive, the most flamboyant or even the most trustworthy. He'll be the guy who'' talk to everyone, and after the conversations where players discuss their strategies, everyone else will end up with plans that make them think they're using him. Either as a buffer, an ally, or just someone who they can rely on to stay out of their way while they attack the weaker target. And at first, they won't even notice that "their" plans seem to work out awfully well for him too.

Until it's too late.

And yes, I did win that game.


The point being that real charisma, of the type applied in games, usually isn't about hyper-confident personalities performing what's almost a sort of hypnotism. It's about being able to show the player's target the logical chain of reasoning that makes it clear that what the player wants really what they wanted to do all along, and being able to act in a way that will lull them away from questioning it too closely.

The way you apply this is games is by forcing your player to make an actual argument, and never letting them do it if they don't have at least some leverage.

>>53718598
Good answer

>Only pretty people are charismatic
Haven't seen one of these in a while.