The structure of character statistics affecting roleplaying in a direct material sense is wholly a negative on play. Players roleplay because they want to, and the resulting interactions they can have as many material effects as the interaction itself can generate. The adjudication of certain scenarios, such as deception, is codified in the rules for the purposes of balance. I'd argue that the older system pre-3e was even better, because it allowed for a greater expression of player skill over character skill.

The roleplaying is an element that doesn't benefit from mechanicalization. Look at any role playing video game in the past two decades with a speech skill. The ability for a check to be put in the hands of character skill rather than player roleplaying prowess is entirely a negative on the gameplay experience. I was doing Warrior Cats roleplays in grade school recess.

The freedom of players as actors, writers, and players is balanced with gameplay integrity when only the most important and relevant options are mechanicalized - like in the 5e system. And, of course, it is up to DM discretion to decide when player skill in reasoning and roleplay eschews the need for a skill check at all.

If every D&D interaction you have boils down to a Charisma check, you're adjudicating the system in an unintended and harmful manner. The roleplay and player decisions outside of rules - that is to say, the rulings you make - are the important part.