someonenoone111's page

Thanks for the quick responses, and the quote, and the example. #1 it is. :)

What happens?
1. Your standard action for this round and next round are consumed.
2. Your standard action for this round and movement action for next round are consumed.
3. Your next round is untouched, meaning there is no reason not to move before casting a 1 round cast time spell.
4. You can't. You treat it as a full-round casting time spell that finishes at the start of your next round.

When you advance your character, you're supposed to do it in this order:

Character Advancement wrote:

First, select your new class level. You must be able to qualify for this level before any of the following adjustments are made. Second, apply any ability score increases due to gaining a level. Third, integrate all of the level's class abilities and then roll for additional hit points. Finally, add new skills and feats.

You get your class benefits first, including the new spells from being a wizard. You get feats last. So, RAW are very clear that the answer to your question is yes.

Character Advancement

Thank you very much for the quote.

It says intelligence modifier instead of intelligence modifier without magic effects. So does that mean if I take the feat while wearing a headband of intellect +6, I get to master more spells?

So lets say I reached level 9 as a wizard. You get 2 new level 5 spells and a feat. If I choose to get spell mastery, can I select the 2 spells I just learned?

Alright, so general consensus here is "no, the called creature is not protected".

Ok, that's in my favor :)

This came up during my attempt to use mind-affecting spells on creatures called by planar binding.

If they are protected, then there's nothing I can do to make them susceptible to mind affecting spells.

If they are not, then i can use them as a reliable supply of dominate-able creatures.

Here's how I see it playing out...

(Wizard casts planar binding)
Wizard: "I call a Shadow Demon to the magic circle."
(shadow demon fails his will save, gets dimensional anchor cast upon him, and fails his charisma check to escape the trap)
Wizard: "Ha! I have you now foul beast! Do what I say for the next 24 hours and then I'll release you."
Shadow Demon: "Your petty cage does not frighted me. I do what I please, and when I am free you will pay for inconveniencing me like this."
Wizard: "We'll see about that." (casts charm monster, shadow demon fails will save)
Shadow Demon: "You know, you're actually a pretty cool guy, whatcha up to?"
Wizard: "Oh, you know, just murdering orcs. Nothing special. Hey, do you want to come with? You could totally possess these orcs while we kill them. It would be hilarious!"
Shadow Demon: "Sure thing man, but I usually charge a fee for helping mortals out like this."
Wizard: "Aw, com'on. Do it for me, your pal. It'll be fun, you'll see."
Shadow Demon: "OK, what the heck. I'll do it. And afterwards, we can have a BBQ at my plane."
Wizard: "Whatever you say, pal." (winks at the rest of the party)

Orc murdering ensues. The shadow demon fears and hurls rocks like a champ. Then some pesky spell caster ruins the day with dispel magic.

Shadow Demon: "What did you do to me? You will pay for this you puny elf!" (casts shadow evocation: fireball...ouch)
Wizard: (casts charm monster, shadow demon fails save)
Shadow Demon: "Please forgive my outburst. I'm just a bit homesick. Lets finish up moping up these orcs and then we can do the BBQ."
Wizard: "Well, we're pretty much done anyway. I deem your service fulfilled." (planar binding is now complete and whisks the delightful shadow demon back to his charming home in the Abyss)

exactly :)

@Bob Bob Bob
I think I finally understand where our disagreement is.

First off, I'm saying planar bound creatures will work for you for free in rare circumstances, like if a demon is destroying a kingdom, a planetar is sure to help you for free because they're good, and they love fighting fiends.

So then I say, with charm monster, I make it so that the target outsider views slave labor as a very reasonable deal for him, therefore is a reasonable contract.

Now, you're saying slave labor is unreasonable regardless of the individual, and I'm using charm monster to force him to accept the unreasonable deal.

Well, I guess you can rule either way, but since every creature's definition of "reasonable contract" is different, and I'm sure a very best friend would help you for free, but you're saying even to a best friend slave labor is unreasonable and I'm using charm to force him instead of persuading or scamming him into believing that slave labor is reasonable, so I guess this is where we agree to disagree.

Or, did I misunderstand your argument again?

A charmed character is entitled to an opposed Charisma check against his master in order to resist instructions or commands that would make him do something he wouldn't normally do even for a close friend. If he succeeds, he decides not to go along with that order but remains charmed.

The quote from the pfsrd explicitly states the spell can make you do something that he/she would never do even for a close friend.

You still haven't reconciled that with "An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders" and agreeing to be enslaved or "Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to" preventing them from agreeing to be enslaved for no pay. That part's from Planar Binding, nothing in Charm can override it.

So no, still not resolved.

I keep repeating the "slave contract" wouldn't be called a slave contract, or be that extreme. It'd be like "be my bodyguard" contract, which is not harmful at all.

It interests me that you did not provide your ruling on the discounted outsider. Guy charges 1000gp, you charm him and he gives you a discount to 750gp, and after serving you for a while, he gets hit by a dispel magic. Can he outright murder you for charming him into a discount, or does the planar binding spell prevent that? This is this thread's topic question.

Our disagreement stems from what is a "harmful order". Slave contract is a harmful order, but how about a free or discounted bodyguard contract? Because there's not much difference between an outsider giving a 25% discount to his friend and a 100% discount to his friend (theory-wise, monetary-wise there is a huge difference XD).

Even if a creature is in complete agreement and loves your idea the charisma check is still required. Charm person which also might make them agree is not really going to improve on that.

Yeah, you're right, but that was never my intention. Dodging the charisma check was not the intention. Dodging the price and alignment stuff was the intention (CE helping a NG).

But if magic circle against evil protects the trapped creature, then there is no way anything related to charm, suggestion, or dominate will work, at least in pathfinder, in which case this whole thread is moot.

Magic circle against evil can be used 2 ways
1. An AoE protection from evil
2. A trap to hold an outsider called by planar binding.

When you use the 2nd way, does the trapped outsider get the protection from evil benefits?

You could say these are two ways to use the spell, so the two are mutually exclusive. The confusion is here because of this: when used as a trap, it specifically states that a creature too large for the circle is not trapped, and the spell becomes a protection from evil just for the trapped creature.

so the possibilities are:
1. The protection only happens only when the creature is too large

or

2. The trapped creature is both trapped and protected, but because the trap failed, only the protection remains.

or

3. Something else I didn't see or think of yet.

Does Magic Circle against (Alignment) give protection from (Alignment)? Because I think yes. So... That might protect against Charm Monster, but it might not, the language is odd. In 3.5, it definitely would work, but in Pathfinder, it might be Alignment dependent.

Protection from Evil wrote:

Second, the subject immediately receives another saving throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment [compulsion] effects, such as charm person, command, and dominate person. This saving throw is made with a +2 morale bonus, using the same DC as the original effect. If successful, such effects are suppressed for the duration of this spell. The effects resume when the duration of this spell expires. While under the effects of this spell, the target is immune to any new attempts to possess or exercise mental control over the target. This spell does not expel a controlling life force (such as a ghost or spellcaster using magic jar), but it does prevent them from controlling the target. This second effect only functions against spells and effects created by evil creatures or objects, subject to GM discretion.

Bold mine, etc.

The argument is that if you focus the magic circle inward, no one gets the protection benefits unless the trapped creature is too large for the circle. Some people say magic circle either gives protection or becomes a trap, never both, and other people says those who are trapped get the protection effects. This may warrant a new rules question thread, but I'm gonna go search for errata first before posting a new one.

In 3.5 it didn't really matter because protection only suppresses, so you can charm the guy and then remove the circle, but in pathfinder, the protected guy gets immunities so it may pose a problem if the trapped creature gets protected.

I said i was going to abandon this thread, but I came across some new evidence in the PATHFINDER srd.

Charming another creature gives the charming character the ability to befriend and suggest courses of action to his minion, but the servitude is not absolute or mindless. Charms of this type include the various charm spells and some monster abilities. Essentially, a charmed character retains free will but makes choices according to a skewed view of the world.

A charmed creature doesn't gain any magical ability to understand his new friend's language.
A charmed character retains his original alignment and allegiances, generally with the exception that he now regards the charming creature as a dear friend and will give great weight to his suggestions and directions.
A charmed character fights his former allies only if they threaten his new friend, and even then he uses the least lethal means at his disposal as long as these tactics show any possibility of success (just as he would in a fight with an actual friend).
A charmed character is entitled to an opposed Charisma check against his master in order to resist instructions or commands that would make him do something he wouldn't normally do even for a close friend. If he succeeds, he decides not to go along with that order but remains charmed.
A charmed character never obeys a command that is obviously suicidal or grievously harmful to him.
If the charming creature commands his minion to do something that the influenced character would be violently opposed to, the subject may attempt a new saving throw to break free of the influence altogether.
A charmed character who is openly attacked by the creature who charmed him or by that creature's apparent allies is automatically freed of the spell or effect.

so right there, it says, officially,

1. You have to openly attack the creature to break the charm. Keeping it held in a cage/trap does not end the charm
2. You can make it do anything it wouldn't do even for a close friend, so... it's almost as strong as dominate monster.

There ya have it to those who keep saying charm monster is limited to what only the guy would do for a friend. Official rulings that specifically say you're wrong. :)

My best friend can absolutely lie to me (it's the basis of all pranks) and under no circumstances would I ever, say, give her power of attorney. No matter the argument. And so if at any point you're making an outsider your slave you're offering them something worth it. Because I've already shown that Charm doesn't allow that (harmful order) and Planar Binding doesn't allow it (unreasonable command). If you really think friends often agree to be enslaved, by all means, try it out in real life. You may find yourself with less friends though.

That's YOUR best friend. This guy views you in the most favorable way. And you're not enslaving the guy, you're tricking him into enslavement, kind of like how a scammer would scam you out of your money through legal stuff, and you think he's a nice guy until the scam hits you.

Thanks for your answer on c. I know you disagree whether charming a guy into signing a contract is possible or not, but thanks for saying "if it does happen, then this is what will happen."

If you charm a guy in combat, some guy you were threatening before, and then after the charming you don't threaten him, charm doesn't break. So I will agree that casting charm monster on a planar bound creature may invokes a +5 to their saving throw, but saying it immediately breaks will make me say nonsense.

Anyways, I'm gonna abandon this thread now. It is unanimous (including my DM's opinion) that in the original post, option a. is utterly impossible, so i got my answer.

@Diego Rossi
I apologize if I offended you. I do not intentionally insult anyone unless insulted first, but I do have a hard time hiding my distaste towards people who I believe is the type of person who only play the standard style and prevent creative ways to play the game by any means necessary, such as intentional house rules or fudging with a word in the RAW in a very weird way. (I've encountered more people than I like that does this.)

This is not even a RAW debate. The standard usage of planar binding is calling a creature, negotiate terms, and then he either goes home or serves you, absolutely no "threatening" at all. So if you still insist that talking to the outsider with the magic circle in place is "hostile" then there is nothing else for us to discuss. By RAW, you NEED the magic circle in place to even cast planar binding, so even if you call an outsider you've befriended in the past, he will be held in the circle, always, until you destroy it, so yes, you will hold a friend in a "trap", always.

@Bob Bob Bob
I'm not disagreeing with you. In the context you said, yes, you're absolutely right. But what if the binder said: "Let's go kill some fools. I know a good place, but I gotta make sure you listen to me otherwise you'll cause trouble for me." and he wins the charisma roll? Technically the outsider is now his slave if he agrees, but it's very plausible that he'd agree because his bestest friend would never trick him right? He'll probably share the loot right? Depends on the DM and the outsider, but it is possible that a dumb outsider might get fooled by these sweet words right? And your character has higher charisma than you, so he/she would word it even better than you right? That's why it's a dice roll right?

But enough of these extreme cases. Lets look at an intermediate case.
You planar bind an outsider, he demands 1000gp per hit die for the service. You charm him, and now since you're his bestest friend, he gives you the fabulous friendship discount (as Gauss suggested), and now asks 750gp per hit die for the service. After a few days, the outsider gets hit by a dispel magic. What happens?

a. My DM says, planar binding does absolutely nothing to enforce the deal, so the outraged outsider will kill you outright.

or

b. Planar binding does enforce the deal so the outsider is forced to finish the service at the discounted price, and later plots revenge.

someonenoone111 wrote:

If you can make an orc kill stuff and till fields for free, then you can make a demon kill stuff and till fields for free, or an angel, or a devil, or any creature who is susceptible to mind-affecting spells, including the tarrasque.

Tarrasque Stat Block wrote:

...Immune ability damage, acid, bleed, disease, energy drain, fire, mind-affecting effects, paralysis, permanent wounds, petrification, poison, polymorph...

Emphasis Mine

Just sayin'.

Yeah, I'm thinking of 3.5 again. Tarrasque in 3.5 is not immune to mind-affecting spells.

There is a difference between using charm monster to make it fight for you and forcing it to fail a check for planar binding. Planar binding can make it do more than just fight so to me those are two different premises.

Some people say a lot of things you want to do aren't "reasonable", such as getting them to work for you for free, unless your current task is strongly aligned with their views. I agree with this. The charisma check in planar binding is just the negotiation process simplified into a dice roll. If you beat it, then you persuaded the guy, but the DM can determine what's unreasonable and what's not.

I think everyone's talking past each other at this point. The problem is that the options in the original post are both about how planar binding works, but that's not what you're talking about in later posts. Your opening post is just dumb, because "Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to." I don't care if you're my friend, I'm not going to be your slave. You can't force it with a Charisma check, they just refuse.

The options are: charm allows you to skip the Charisma check on planar binding, charm gives you a bonus on the charisma check for planar binding, or charm doesn't interact with planar binding at all. I personally believe the middle one.

What you discuss on later posts is using planar binding to summon them, charm them, then set them free without making a deal with planar binding. Therefore no actual planar binding was done, just a summoning and a charm. And without a planar binding then yes, I don't think you can trust the word of a chaotic evil demon. Planar binding presumably forces them to keep to their deal but you can't force them to accept the deal without the planar binding mechanics (opposed charisma check).

My later posts describe what I am currently doing, it's different than what I was asking which is why I kept saying it's off-topic, and a lot of people insisted you can't charm outsiders you summoned with planar binding, which is just ridiculous.

If you planar bind and charm a creature, you could say because the outsider really likes you it decides to help you out and work for you for free, so it purposefully loses its charisma check in planar binding, and you got yourself a "slave" (you wouldn't ever use that word during the conversation).

If I make an analogy, a guy won't sign this contract, but I charm him, and then he suddenly really likes me and signs the contract. Now when the charm ends, is he forced to complete the contract?

My DM is arguing planar binding in absolutely no way enforces the contract. The only thing stopping the outsider from betraying you is the promise of your reward, to protect its reputation, because the creature is lawful, etc.

Some of you suggest planar binding does in fact magically enforce the contract, but only if the contract is legit, as in you didn't dominate the guy into signing the contract.

My question was, if you mind-control a guy into signing the contract, and if planar binding magically enforces the contract, would the guy be stuck into completing the contract?

Option a. was: Yes, the guy is stuck
Option b. was: No, and gives my DM's reasoning.

I should've put a third option.

Option c: No, for other reasons.

But since I can't edit my 1st post, i was combining option c. into option b., since it's close enough.

The off-topic posts were caused by people who kept saying "You can't charm outsiders you planar bind", so I was defending my position. Look at reply #1

Charm Person/Monster does nothing other than set the creature to friendly. Being friendly does not help bypass the process of Planar Binding.

And the whole thing went off-topic because this guy didn't read the charm monster erratas, or the charm monster spell description, and said it only set NPC attitude to friendly.

Some people are arguing you can't charm a guy into signing a contract, which I find absurd because you can make them kill their wife or son (or commit suicide), but their reasoning is very similar to my DM's reasoning, which is option b, so I've been just letting it go.

Anyways, I got my answer. Thanks everyone, or, most of everyone.

You can charm outsiders and make them fight for you, if you win the check. Unless your GM thinks it's extremely outside of the outsider's basic nature.

The two spells don't really interact at all, other than as a method for getting outsiders to your location.

Yes, thank you. That is option b., which means making it agree to the "deal" does absolutely nothing so it's pointless to do so and I should just continue with what I was doing.

I agree that using charm monster to force it to accept the deal either doesn't work or is pointless. I asked the question just to be sure.

What I don't agree is that people saying I can't charm outsiders and make it fight for me. Read the goddamn charm monster examples paizo gives in erratas and you'll see you can make them do almost anything. If you can make an orc kill stuff and till fields for free, then you can make a demon kill stuff and till fields for free, or an angel, or a devil, or any creature who is susceptible to mind-affecting spells, including the tarrasque.

If you say charm monster just makes you friendly and does absolutely nothing, you are houseruling and is a very closeminded person who shunts other people's creativity and force people to play the standard way. Perhaps you had a bad experience with someone abusing diplomacy? My goodness, so many people think charming a monster into fighting for you is broken as f**k.

@Bob Bob Bob
Yeah, that's the debate with charm monster v.s. dominate monster. Right now, the way I view it is, those two spells are almost identical. The differences are:
1. When ordered to do something against its nature, charm monster requires a charisma check, where as dominate monster requires an additional saving throw. So for high charisma characters, charm monster is better where as for low charisma characters, dominate is better.

2. Charm has some limits, dominate doesn't. Charmed monsters don't do anything suicidal, and may commit suicide instead of killing his wife and child, but anything not that extreme, charm monster can accomplish. Despite this though, charm monster is VERY powerful, and all the official examples show that you can make a monster go fight stuff for you for free. So a charmed demon would fight for you for free, but you will need to make a lot of charisma checks to stop it from slaughtering innocent people. People seem to get caught up on the "friendly" attitude, but you gotta remember that charm monster can magically compel you to do stuff you'd never do. They are your puppets, just that you gotta have a silver tongue too, not just powerful magic, which is why wizards will always go dominate over charm.

@subway rat
Another vote for option b. :)
There are a lot of safeguards I can use, like boosting my caster level and grabbing rings that boost my dispel check. Ring of counterspells with greater dispel magic stored is my favorite.

They have all been on-topic. If you bring a faulty premise into the rules forum and then ask people to determine which result is legal it is completely on-topic for them to tear apart the premise.

I really appreciate the effort you've put into this thread. I'll put you down for another option b. vote. It seems the answer is pretty obvious now.

Finally, an on-topic answer :D
One vote for option b.

@someonenoone111

All charm spell have this limitation:

PRD wrote:

Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell.

Planar binding is an hostile act.

So the creature first get a +5 to the save, then if hit fail it, the charm is immediately broke an you are undergoing an hostile action against it.

You don't held a friend in a trap.

That's now how it works. You shoot a guy in the face with an arrow, and then try to charm him, he has a +5 to the save but if you succeed that's the end of it. By your logic because he has a giant arrow stuck in his head the charm breaks immediately. We were enemies before, but now we're friends, so as long as I don't attack him after the charm, the charm won't break. So likewise, if you planar bind an outsider, you can argue he gets a +5 to his save v.s. charm monster, but after succeeding it's the end of it.

It seems people have some misunderstanding on what I'm doing. This is the normal way
1. Find a monster
2. Teleport to it
3. Charm it

But what I'm doing is
1. Find a monster
2. Teleport it to me (planar binding)
3. Charm it

After we become friends, I let him out of the cage and we have a merry time.

The rules question I posted is simply: if I make magically compel it to accept my "deal" and he gets his charm dispelled, what happens? Arguably the text in planar binding is just a method to do negotiations with dice roll, so in my original post the answer is option b., but I just wanted to be sure.

By your logic charm monster should break itself since charm monster is a hostile act, so no one can be charmed because the act of charming alone is hostile, and he is charmed.

And planar binding by itself is not a hostile act. The way I am using is arguably hostile, but what about Mercanes? I planar bind Mercanes all the time to trade magical goods.

Dumping physical stats will hurt you in wild shape. Perhaps you are thinking of 3.5 where wild shape replaced your physical stats. Pathfinder just boosts them.

Right, it was 3.5. Our group is relatively new to pathfinder ^^.

Sorry for the double posting, but I forgot to talk about the planar ally v.s. planar binding Gauss mentioned.

That case is just simply another arcane v.s. divine case. Divine is weaker but easier, arcane is harder but stronger.

Miracle is free, and henceforth spammable. Wish however, costs a lot of money but in exchange, can do much more powerful things than miracle.

Planar Ally:
1. You can't choose the type of creature. DM chooses. You can suggest but ultimately it's the deity who chooses. That means after casting greater planar ally, you might receive a 1hd outsider to help you.
2. You are restricted on the creature that can be sent over. Good deities won't send fiends even if you want one.
3. You can't weasel out of the cost.
4. Very safe. 0% chance of it backfiring.
5. Quick. Just 1 round to cast, and 1 round to negotiate. Can be used mid-battle.

Planar Binding:
1. Any creature you want, DM has no control.
2. You can weasel out of the cost, but the bound creature is almost never friendly, and you need to take measures to counter that.
3. Dangerous. 5% chance every day it can escape you during the deal and outright splatter you.
4. Vengeance. A planar bound creature who you weaseled out of the cost will dedicate it's life to killing you.
5. More spells required. You need dimensional anchor and magic circle.
6. Slow. Creating the special diagram takes time, so using it mid-battle is out of the question, especially because an untrapped planar bound creature can just go home immediately. Also many people seem to forget that planar binding has a will save, so binding a strong outsider requires many castings.

Higher risk should end in higher rewards. Planar ally is 0 risk, planar binding is potential death, so why should those two be equal?

I understand your concerns Gauss, but some people play more high powered games than others. In some of the games dumping physical stats and staying in wild shape all the time as a druid is considered too optimized for some tables, while in others unless you choose your spell load out perfectly with the best spells, you will be useless, like memorizing fireballs or summon monster instead of evard's black tentacles or solid fog.

But just because something is a bit more optimized than what you're used to is no excuse to say "that's too powerful, you can't and shouldn't do it, and the rules should be changed so you can't do it." because in my table, I am actually the 2nd weakest character in the party. Basically I'm just a souped up fighter who uses a buffed up demon instead of his own sword arm. The casters in the group treat me like I don't exist because my contributions to the fight, even with a buffed up glabrezu or marilith, is marginal. They're the ones dividing up the battlefield and debuffing the enemy until they can barely crawl, I just finish the job, and can be replaced by a mercenary or one planar ally/binding they cast during down-time.

edit: Bleh, this thread went off-topic. :(

someonenoone111, ultimately, the problem is that you are trying to bypass the normal cost of planar binding in order to get a free semi-permanent servant. At the very least this is a game balance issue.

Compare it to Planar Ally. Planar Ally is clearly friendly. Heck, it is a representative sent by your deity. But, it has a cost attached.

Why should you be able to bypass the equivalent spell's (Planar Binding) cost just because you make it friendly? You shouldn't.

Any GM should toss this out as an attempt to abuse the system even if you may be technically within the rules. (Note: I do not believe you are within the rules on this, I am just stating that if this is technically in the rules it should still be tossed.) Ultimately, you are in a huge grey area as to whether this combination could even work and if it does work whether it works the way you think it does.

I think it could give you a bonus to accept reduced price terms. I do not think it should give you carte blanche to get an unlimited supply of free outsiders.

The character I'm rolling is a charmer, but if the DM only throws trash mobs and the occasional strong creature who is immune to mind-affecting spells, I gotta get some other way of getting strong monsters to charm.

It also depends on the level of optimization in your game. My current DM absolutely loves to throw dispel magic around like it's some sort of joke so charming more than 1 outsider is a serious risk because if 2 or more are dispelled, while I try to recharm 1, the other one can significantly hurt the party, not to mention if I roll low on initiative, both can cause significant harm before I regain control. If I bind like 3 or 4, it's going to be a total party kill because of 1 dispel magic.

It seems though in your games, dispel magic is completely ignored, which is why you think what I'm doing will lead to an army of outsiders, but after playing around with this character for a while in multiple games (same DM), my experience is charming more than 1 creature at a time is a significant risk that's not worth taking, so in that sense it's balanced.

The topic question of this thread is just a "good to know" thing for me. My DM is ruling option b. in my original post, and I don't mind because I like managing 1 minion, not 10 or 100, why I don't use animate dead, but I just wanted to know for sure.

d&d is the only game that allows me to pit evil v.s. evil (demons v.s. whatever I'm fighting), so I'm not going to change what I like because it's not standard play or potentially game breaking, because I trust myself not to break the game. Roleplay wise, there is absolutely no way my PC would even consider binding more than 1 outsider because if it got away then he'll spend the rest of his life trying to kill my PC.

edit: Oh right, I forgot to mention that I'm only binding demons and devils, no angels or the like because of role-playing reasons. I like the idea of 1 mistake = death or almost death, and no mistake = significant power (not really though, as building a build around binding demons/devils is very suboptimal compared to the other BFC things spellcasters can do). So you see, this character satisfies a lot of things I like to do :). But again, this question is a purely "good to know" thing because regardless of the answer, I'm not going to bind more than 1 demon at a time, and my DM will probably house rule his way if the official answer is something else. Not that I mind.

edit2: I also forgot to mention my DM carries around a large number of dispel magics in encounters to make use of the counterspelling stuff, another severely underused feature, but if I bring an army of charmed demons, then instead of counterspelling he'll be dispelling, just like how he dispels gishes who buff themselves to high-heck before a fight. In my experience, because of the proximity of the demons to our casters at the start of a fight, binding 2 = death of most of our spellcasters, including myself, and binding 3 = death of entire party upon a successful dispel. Of course, in the original post, if option a. is how it's ruled, then I understand the potential for abuse.

edit3: I just wanted to add what I'm doing is absolutely nothing compared to the real standard usage of planar binding, which is spamming enervation, bestow curse, lesser geas, etc. At least my way requires an entire character built around the thing, which is why my DM doesn't mind.

Summary:

The problem here is that your premise is faulty in what you think you are asking it to do with Charm Monster.
You are not asking it to 'slaughter a village'. You are asking it to surrender to the Planar Binding. THEN you are asking it to 'slaughter a village' as part of the Planar Binding spell.

So to answer your original question, you violated the Planar Binding spell when you used Charm Monster and failed to get it to agree as per Planar Binding. The moment Charm Monster fails you are in a battle with an uncontrolled creature.

The character I'm rolling revolves around charm monster, so I got her charisma check sky-high, so winning charm monster charisma checks aren't a problem. And a failure does not mean a hostile creature. They just won't do what you want, and you either got to live with that or cast a 2nd charm monster, risking an attack if they make their save.

I have been ignoring the deal part of the planar binding as it was confusing. This is what I was doing
1. Planar Bind
2. Charm Monster.
3. If successful in making it adventure with me, otherwise repeat 2.
4. Destroy the magic circle (no deal made)

so essentially planar binding is a reliable way to get strong creatures to charm. But the question has been bothering me which is why I posed the question. It is possible for planar bound creatures to serve you for free if what you're doing is strongly aligned with their views so...

1. Planar Bind
2. Charm Monster
3. Convince it adventuring with me is reward enough with a successful charm check. I am his bestest friend and he wants to spend time with me.
4. He agrees via planar binding to serve me for free for 1day/caster level

About charm v.s. dominate, I agree that the orc may kill himself instead of killing his wife and child, but it has to be one or the other. The orc won't say "nah, i'm not gonna do that", he either has to commit suicide, perform the deed, or somethign similar.

Charm Person/Monster does nothing other than set the creature to friendly. Being friendly does not help bypass the process of Planar Binding.

As per Pathfinder errata

"Charm person makes a humanoid "friendly" to you, as per the rules found in the Diplomacy skill, but it also allows you to issue orders to the target, making an opposed Charisma check to convince the target to do something that it would not normally do. How does that work?

The charm person spell (and charm monster by extension) makes the target your friend. It will treat you kindly (although maybe not your allies) and will generally help you as long as your interests align. This is mostly in the purview of the GM. If you ask the creature to do something that it would not normally do (in relation to your friendship), that is when the opposed Charisma check comes into play. For example, if you use charm person to befriend an orc, the orc might share his grog with you and talk with you about the upcoming raid on a nearby settlement. If you asked him to help you fight some skeletons, he might very well lend a hand. If you asked him to help you till a field, however, you might need to make that check to convince him to do it."

So if I bind a demon and charm him, if I want it to slaughter a village, no charisma check, but if I want it to NOT slaughter a village, I need to make that charisma check. Likewise, an outsider won't work for you for free, but by winning the charisma check, you can make it work for you for free. You can make a charmed creature kill his own mother if you wanted to. You can't with diplomacy, but you can with charm spells. After the charm wears off though, he'll dedicate his life to killing you.

You planar bind an outsider. You then charm it. Then you make it agree to work for you for free.

During combat, enemy dispels the charm monster. What happens?

a. Planar binding somehow forces all creatures to uphold their deal, magically compelled or not.
b. Nothing is forcing the creature to do anything. He could lie during planar binding and kill you the moment the trap is removed. The only thing stopping him from slaughtering you outright is the promise of the reward. As such, the outsider in question tries to kill you and finds its own way home.

Shrew to manticore is 1week, manticore to shrew is permanent, though dispellable.

The lava thing is just an example. I could just as well turn the ground the enemy is standing on into acid, a hole that's 1500cft deep, etc. In 3.5 PaO's strongest abuse was a "just die, no save" spell, so i was wondering if such use is possible in pathfinder, and whether or not a gentleman's agreement is required.

So you're saying by RAW, PaOing corpse is legal? :)
Lore wise, undead are just corpses connected to the negative energy plane. No spirit needed, just a connection, which animate dead establishes.

I actually do have one more question.

4) Can you polymorph stuff into named creatures?
a. A general is about to invade a country. Can you PaO a rock into that general, who now has 10/10/10/5/5/5 stats, and use charm person to extract information out of him?
b. You have a fanatic follower and a suicide mission. Best solution would be to PaO a rock into that fanatic follower and have it go on the suicide mission, sparing your fanatic follower.

Hmn... I can see this getting out of hand real quick.

Personally I would say no, because part of the undead condition in my opinion comes from what a corpse of a creature used to be: A living creature that dies and takes on a semblance of death afterward.

Well, if you can give life to a rock by PaOing it into a living creature, i don't see why you can't turn a rock into a corpse with semblance of death. For a more clear example, if you have before you a body of a dead giant, why can't you turn other stuff into that same dead giant? Of course, since this is all magical, 1 successful dispel magic will utterly annihilate everything about it.

Also, you can PaO stuff into undead zombies so...

But your logic would definately say no to #2. For #2, I was wondering with PaO if I can turn stone to flesh into something more powerful. So instead of just inert mass of flesh, I was wondering with PaO I can add bones and such.

I don't think this would get out of hand because a 20hd skeletal dragon is hardly a threat, especially in a CR15 setting. It's more of a fluff thing for me than anything. 130hp with 12 AC is just a wall if anything, and its attack is +17 and +12, not to mention they cost 500gp to raise one and a dispel magic would end them right then and there. It's just an alternative to using create undead spells, which are corpse-type independent.

For the 1500cft of lava, PaO can affect 100cft/level, and since I'll be level 15 when i get that spell, I just chose 1500cft as a reasonable amount, if anyone is wondering where I got that number.

In 3.5 I used to artificially make my own corpses for animate dead.

PaO doesn't just change the appearance, it changes the object into a different object, so you can PaO a piece of wood into stone and it wouldn't be just a disguise.

Since corpses are objects, you could turn a corpse of a goblin (or just a pebble, corpse is just to increase the PaO duration) into a corpse of a 20hd dragon and animate it via animate dead. This is RAW legal in 3.5 and I was wondering if I could use the same trick in pathfinder. Unlike a real corpse though, the animated skeleton is dispellable so it is inferior than the real thing, but on the other hand you don't need to go corpse hunting.

Pathfinder polymorph is weird, it juts changes attributes and adds some small gimmicks, nothing more. But PaO's ability to change objects into other objects seem unchanged so i'm posting this just to be sure I'm right about that. I hate hunting for good corpses for animate dead, especially since the raised skeletons don't last very long.

About the lava thing, molten rock is an object, so is ice. By your logic you can't PaO a piece of wood into a block of ice, so I think you're mistaken about the temperature thing.

1. Can you use this spell to turn a corpse into another corpse for animate dead? (corpses are objects, so no HD limit)

2. Can you use this spell to turn a statue into a legit corpse by modifying the "replicate stone to flesh spell" thing?

3. Can you turn a grain of sand into 1,500cft of lava for 20 minutes and wall yourself in for 20minutes while everyone in the dungeon either drowns or burns to death from the lava?

My current character relies heavily on charm monster. As a sorcerer with various stat boosting items, she generally has a 80-95% chance of succeeding the charisma check to make the monster do what she wants. However, upon a failure I need to be able to retry, as I am traveling with a small band of charmed creatures I keep renewing charm monster on. I'd also like to add I've been using diplomacy after they're charmed to get them to helpful attitude so they would take risks for me.

So lets say I have a charmed monster, and I failed the charisma check. Can I cast a 2nd charm monster, breaking the charm since it's a hostile action, and do another charisma check?

It'd be similar to a charmed guy getting hit by a dispel magic. He would then try to kill me but if I charm him again I need to succeed on the charisma check a 2nd time to make him resume his old order.

*charm monster*
"Would you help me carry this?"
"Sure"
*hit by dispel*
"I'M GONNA KILL YOU!"
*charm monster*
"Would you help me carry this?"
"Sure"

so the one without dispel magic would be
"Would you kill this guy for me?"
*fail roll*
"No, that's my brother."
*cast 2nd charm monster*
"What the- what was I doing again? Oh I remember y-"
*charm monster finished casting*
"I like you1"
*diplomacy*
"I really, really like you!"
"Would you kill this guy for me?"
*success*
"Sure, because I love you more than my brother."

Alright thanks.
I still think such an unrestricted shades is nothing compared to miracle, the spell that lets you duplicate every spell of 7th or lower without a 20% chance of failure and no material cost, but alright. Thanks. The thread is still flagged as an faq so I'll still keep this page bookmarked but yeah, I guess I'll stick with gate for now. Nice quote shroudb, and a quote from the Lead Designer too.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with my tone, it was unintentional. This is not the first Shades argument I had. At the end of every single Shades argument I had people say "You're right. By RAW you can cast every single conjuration spell 8th or lower but because it's too powerful I'm house ruling in the conjuration(summoning) and conjuration(creation) restrictions or at least the sorcerer/wizard spell list restriction." and I didn't want to have another argument on this forum, where I did in fact find 3 other threads asking the same thing with all 3 threads not coming to a consensus.

Even if you disagree whether Shades can or cannot cast planar binding, please for this topic say you agree and share your opinion, after all, the question on the title of this thread requires that.

The shadow conjuration guide I found online believes shades planar binding is just a normal planar binding and Abraham Spalding seems to agree with this interpretation.

As for Diego Rossi's post, you have to replace "mimic any sorcerer or wizard conjuration (summoning) or conjuration (creation) spell of 3rd level or lower." with "mimics conjuration spells of 8th level or lower." The result is quite powerful as Shades would allow a wizard to cast true resurrection but that's how it works in RAW, which is why as I mentioned all of my DMs restrict shades with house rules (One of my past DMs even house ruled material components in saying ignoring material components via Shades is broken). But please note that Shades has an 20% chance of failure compared to the real spell, and is of higher level too, which is why I think it all balances out, after all, level 9 spells are supposed to be crazy powerful. The pathfinder version of gate is arguably very, very powerful as you can abuse enervation to beat the charisma checks of 40hd outsiders without the 1000xp cost. An 80% real teleport just means it has an 80% chance of success. If you roll a 17 or higher the shades teleport fails.

Blahpers suggested that the created outsider has free will, which is sort of the thing I'd like cleared up.

For those who agree that shades can cast planar binding it seems their opinions boil down to these three:
1. It's just a normal planar binding with additional saves
2. You create a quasi-real clone which acts like your simulacrum because you made it, it's technically an illusion, and you control all of your own illusions, like simulacrum.
3. You create a quasi-real clone but you need to bargain with it because it thinks it's not an illusion or something.

Things would have been a LOT clearer if shadow conjuration specifically stated mimicked summon spells create shadow creatures, but it doesn't. Instead it just says the spell creates quasi-real creatures, and it mimics conjuration(summoning) and conjuration(creation) spells of 3rd level or lower, leaving the possibility of a quasi-real creature formed via a conjuration(calling) spell very possible.

Right now I have to argue with every new DM I meet to see where he stands on the shades matter before I decide whether my sorcerer should get it or not, so a clear "official" answer would be really nice. Role-play wise I enjoy creating monsters like golems or shadow creatures rather than force outsiders to do my bidding, so quasi-real 18hd outsiders support is not "power gaming" but if shades is a normal planar binding then I'll just grab gate and bind 40hd monsters and be a power gamer :P

I can't edit my 1st post to make the note sound less rude >.<
Once again I apologize. I get that a lot. People say my emails with questions sound very rude.

Argument for creating quasi-real outsiders:
Summon Spells bring a REAL creature into the fight. Shadow conjuration however, instead of bringing in a real creature, it CREATES a shadow creature. By this logic, instead of bringing in a REAL creature, planar binding should CREATE a shadow creature too.

"You use material from the Plane of Shadow to shape quasi-real illusions of one or more creatures"

No reason why you can't shape quasi-real illusions of 18HD outsiders especially since summon monster VIII includes elementals with 21HD or more. Role-play wise, you could say summon monster spells target specific types of creatures, and shadow conjuration merely makes copies of those creatures with shadow materials instead of actually bringing them in. In other words, the real creatures are just blueprints the shadow conjuration spell uses to create the shadow creatures. So with planar binding, shades could also just use the targeted outsider as a blueprint and create a shadow creature based on it instead of bringing the real outsider into a trap.

The resulting shadow creature is either under your control because you made it out of shadow materials and is basically an illusion and you have absolute control over all of your illusions, or summon monster spells have a built in obedience thing while planar binding does not, so the copied creature is independent and acts like the real thing, but that would require the creature to have its own will, and be able to disbelieve its own body, etc. It is my understanding that shadow creatures from shadow conjuration are mindless silent thralls created and controlled by you so shadow creatures created via planar binding are no different, after all, it's the same copy from blueprint principle except that planar binding can choose a lot more blueprints than summon monster spells.

No where does it say that you are limited to summoning spells to shape quasi-real creatures.

Arguments for bringing in a real outsider:
1. Planar binding is a CALLING subtype, not a SUMMON. So in this case shades would first roll to see if it can beat the target's spell resistance, then the outsider would roll to see if it disbelieves the illusion, then the outsider would roll for the planar binding's will save, and finally, if the outsider successfully disbelieved but still failed its will save, a final roll will occur for the 80% success chance.

Shades, unlike shadow conjuration, is able to use conjuration(teleport) spells, so no reason why it can't teleport an outsider in like planar binding, but then again summon monster also teleports creatures in and shades creates copies instead of teleporting.

So which is it? When shades mimics Planar Binding, does it bring in a real outsider or create a quasi-real one?

note: Please don't say shades cannot cast planar binding, you are wrong. The rules clearly state that Shades is like shadow conjuration except that it mimics conjuration spells of 8th level or lower. Conjuration spells, not conjuration(summon) spells or sorcerer/wizard conjuration spells. It's not lazy writing, conjuration spells encompass all spells in the conjuration school. It is powerful as a level 9 spell should be, and Paizo did not alter the rules, unlike shapechange and gate, so it is intentional, unless the development team specifically says so. I usually get gate on my sorcerer, but in exchange for 2HD of controllable monsters, Shades provides a lot more flexibility which is why I'm asking. Gate is superior than shades in this sense because it can bring in up to 20HD monsters, and they don't require will checks for reduced damage and hp so such a usage of shades is not "broken" or "OP"