On 06Apr2022 0720, kaladorn at gmail.com (via tml list) wrote:
> In the D&D case, once they started making CHA a key stat for Bards &
> Sorcerers and tied their powers and spells to strength of personality, the
> stat had a real meaning. Cha also always drove encounter reactions and once
> skills became a big thing (3E+), Cha mattered for a lot of interaction
> skills so it WAS worth having. Most classes had some sort of dump stat
> (least used) but at least it wasn't just CHA for every one but Paladins
> (AD&D made Paladins need a 17 CHA so they had to sink in one of their best
> rolls, likely the best, into a stat that didn't do very much overall).
>
> Even once most of us age and look to story and characterization more than
> simple dice rolls, Soc still isn't a good proxy for CHA as it seemed mostly
> treated as social level for shopping. CHA (or my preference, Presence)
> would relate to communication, presentation, how to read subtle cues from
> the other side, etc. and would be useful in play.
Funnily enough, in the very old D&D editions, CHA was a pretty important
stat because it determined how many people you could hire to go into
dungeons with you and how good their morale was. As the game was hells
lethal, having a bunch of followers to round out the party and make it
large enough to actually fight in proper formations was pretty important.

It was when players started seeing the game as being about small groups
of heroes and lost interest in treating low-level dungeon runs as
basically a skirmish wargame that CHA took a dive in utility, though it
did modify encounter reaction rolls in some editions, so having someone
with decent CHA to be the 'face' meant you had more encounters where you
could talk, or at least decide if you wanted to start the mayhem or just
walk away (rather than the other side just attacking you). Unfortunately
that basically meant someone had to take one for the team (unless they
wanted to play a Paladin) and dump a good stat onto CHA.

--
Rupert Boleyn <xxxxxx@gmail.com>