Hating the Spell: Charm Person

[Matt2VK]

I seriously have a strong hatred of the 1st level spell: Charm Person.

This hatred mostly comes from the number of different versions of how this spell works (in combat) from different GMs and then there's the players trying to use it like it was another version of Dominate Spell.

I suppose my biggest problem with the spell is when it's used in combat. when used in combat I know you get a big bonus on your saving throw, it's what happens after the failed save I hate. If the saving throw fails your treated as a trusted friend and ally, you are NOT a automaton and have free will. Its the free will part which most people seem to ignore.

Then there's the opposed CHA check. What commands trigger this check and what happens if it fails?
Does the spell break and end?
What actions/commands trigger the opposed CHA check?

The FAQ on this doesn't really answer any of these questions. The one e/ample it gives is of a charmed orc convinced to attack some skeletons.
What a both that orc charmed while his fellow was busy attacking your party?
What happens then?

[Alzrius]

Not to mention the old question of "after it wears off, do they realize they were charmed?"

[Adamantine Dragon]

There are other threads on this subject.

I rule that if you charm someone you have as much influence over them as you would if you were a trusted friend. That means a lot, but it doesn't mean you will do anything they ask. I apply the "would I do that if my best friend asked?" test to the request and if the answer is "no" I don't even do a saving throw. I just tell the player "he says 'no.' "

[Lamontius]

Well but I think the real question that hasn't ever been covered in a six-thousand page thread is if using charm person makes you an evil person

[Adamantine Dragon]

Lamontius wrote:

Well but I think the real question that hasn't ever been covered in a six-thousand page thread is if using charm person makes you an evil person

I'd say it depends on what you do and why you do it, but certain things would definitely tip the "evil" scales for me.

[Jiggy]

Lamontius wrote:

Well but I think the real question that hasn't ever been covered in a six-thousand page thread is if using charm person makes you an evil person

Only if the target is helpless, or if you're a paladin. If you're a monk or rogue, you can auto-activate wands of charm person because you suck anyway and you need the extra friends.

Did I miss anything?

[Matt2VK]

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

There are other threads on this subject.

I know there are other threads on this topic...and I still hate this spell because it's played in so many different ways. It's so bad that I if I'm setting down with someone new with this spell on their list I'll ask them how they play it.

[Lamontius]

*waves his hand once*

You don't need to know how I play it, because you like me so much.

[Adamantine Dragon]

Lamontius wrote:

*waves his hand once*

You don't need to know how I play it, because you like me so much.

*eyes glaze over*

It sounds so reasonable when you say it.

[Kimera757]

Even 4e messed this up (they have an Instant Friends ability that's Charm Person under another name), but the Call of Friendship ability basically outlines exactly what it should do.

"The target acts as a friend for (duration), assisting you as they can, but take no actions that put them at risk or that requires an expense of more than (varies by skill check, presumably by level in Pathfinder)."

Because the victim won't do anything that puts them at risk, it makes it clear that it's not a combat spell. It's a "I need a person with local knowledge spell" kind of spell.

[Matt2VK]

Lamontius wrote:

*waves his hand once*

You don't need to know how I play it, because you like me so much.

I do like that mustache you have there :-)

[EWHM]

Charm person is one of the most GM and settiing dependent spells out there. Only illusions and divinations are moreso.

For instance, when I'm running things, and you use charm person, and make monster B your buddy, and you're in conflict with monster A through G, what happens?

In my case it depends an awful lot on who the monsters are, how much they like each other, and how good their discipline is.

If they're orcs with a typical level of Mordor-friendliness, the guy who you just charmed might spontaneously decide that you...the mighty wizard..etc, are here to establish a new orc order...well, over this camp/tribe/etc...and eagerly join on your side, hoping of course to be on the winning side and hence rewarded afterwards. He probably doesn't have any friends among A through G, and he MIGHT even, if he has someone he dislikes a particularly small amount, call out to them...Hey F, what's say we sign up with the Wizard!

On the other hand if you bust into a barracks with a more 'band of brothers' feel, your charm is more likely to get the one charmed to try to stop the fight/negotiate/or the like. Hey guys, lay off the wizard and his buddies, I'm sure our orders don't cover THIS.

In some cases a charm is going to be actually even better than a dominate, because they retain some initiative. In others its not going to be all that useful at all.

[ciretose]

This thread will lead to a calm discussion that will resolve all of the disagreements of the various parties.

Said no one, ever.

[Adamantine Dragon]

ciretose wrote:

This thread will lead to a calm discussion that will resolve all of the disagreements of the various parties.

Said no one, ever.

Huh. I'm pretty sure someone did.

Hey, YOU did. Right there! Don't you see it?

[sciencerob]

ciretose wrote:

This thread will lead to a calm discussion that will resolve all of the disagreements of the various parties.

Said no one, ever.

The more comments I see on these message boards the more I am convinced that most tabletop gamers do not know how to have a calm discussion in which their opinion differs from another persons.

[tonyz]

I recommend my advice on charming.

[Grey Lensman]

I have played characters that use Charm Person, and for any long term control, Charm Person is only the first step. It makes the rest easier, but not automatic.

[Adam Ormond]

In my opinion, the biggest problem with this spell is its level. A first level spell should not grant "best friend" status for any duration, let alone hours. If the target fails their save, it almost always results in them being removed from combat (worst) or switching sides (best). Not even Color Spray is that good. And Charm Person has great uses outside of combat, too, while Color Spray does not.

[Atarlost]

sciencerob wrote:

ciretose wrote:

This thread will lead to a calm discussion that will resolve all of the disagreements of the various parties.

Said no one, ever.

The more comments I see on these message boards the more I am convinced that most tabletop gamers do not know how to have a calm discussion in which their opinion differs from another persons.

No, that would be people on the Internet.

[shallowsoul]

What's the difference, game terms, in dominating someone or smooth talking them to the point that they would do something crazy for you?

[StabbittyDoom]

shallowsoul wrote:

What's the difference, game terms, in dominating someone or smooth talking them to the point that they would do something crazy for you?

SR and a saving throw?

Actually, assuming you really mean Dominate and not Charm, there's a big difference. The former only allows a small number of commands and requires only a DC15 sense motive check for others to notice something is up. In the latter case, you can get them to do virtually anything... that they would do for a friend, and assuming you can communicate to them that desire. It's also a DC25 sense motive check to realize something is off.

In the long run, Charm Person will have a drastically different effect depending on the target's general outlook on life. The naive, helpful type will do almost anything and just assume that a friend can't be steering them wrong, while the bitter hateful type will just say "no" because they resent the fact that they even feel you are a friend and wish to break off the emotional contact so they can retreat back into their shell. Both of these are excessively unlikely, of course.

Charm Person should come with guidance similar to the above paragraph if you really want to make it clear and less GM dependent, but that would be a lot of work.

[Matt2VK]

My belief is that Charm Person should just make that person your best friend. You the charmer have no control over the charmed and the GM can run him as he thinks it should be run.

You can try and convince the charmed to do something, bringing in the opposed CHA check but doing so takes longer then full round action. (Isn't a full round action 6 seconds? You're trying to convince someone to do something and need to give them reasons why. This usually takes longer then 6seconds.)

This still gives the spell some use in combat but not "I must follow orders" I see most tables use.

[BillyGoat]

Matt2VK wrote:

My belief is that Charm Person should just make that person your best friend. You the charmer have no control over the charmed and the GM can run him as he thinks it should be run.

You can try and convince the charmed to do something, bringing in the opposed CHA check but doing so takes longer then full round action. (Isn't a full round action 6 seconds? You're trying to convince someone to do something and need to give them reasons why. This usually takes longer then 6seconds.)

This still gives the spell some use in combat but not "I must follow orders" I see most tables use.

Reading the spell description, I think that is what Charm Person does.

Charm Person:

This charm makes a humanoid creature regard you as its trusted friend and ally (treat the target's attitude as friendly).
...
This spell does not enable you to control the charmed person ... but perceives your awords and actions in the most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't normally do. (Retries are not allowed.)

Italics are mine, and basically say it works as you think it does. Even the charisma checks only apply to orders that aren't "obviously harmful". The order "defend me against your fellow tribesmen" is generally in the category of "obviously harmful". They out-number you. His turning against them will result in his loss of honor/home/family/rights/life, even if you're victorious. As a GM, that tells me that the average orc will automatically refuse any order that obviously (to him) gets him in significant trouble with his own people.

Different GM, different take on the "obvious harm" clause. But, the easiest way to read it is

My Take on Charm Person wrote:

Automatically succeed at the Diplomacy checks to move the target from his current attitude to friendly. Additionally, you may attempt to use an opposed Charisma check to entice him to go beyond the help he'd lend a friend, provided such help does not place him at risk of obvious harm (physical, emotional, spiritual, or societal). The affected character reverts to his original relationship at the end of this spell's duration".

I think that's really just a clearer re-wording of the original text. The original text doesn't limit "harm" to physical harm, and that's the big catch that GM's should keep in mind that limits the spell's effectiveness.

[Waterhammer]

BillyGoat wrote:

Italics are mine, and basically say it works as you think it does. Even the charisma checks only apply to orders that aren't "obviously harmful". The order "defend me against your fellow tribesmen" is generally in the category of "obviously harmful". They out-number you. His turning against them will result in his loss of honor/home/family/rights/life, even if you're victorious. As a GM, that tells me that the average orc will automatically refuse any order that obviously (to him) gets him in significant trouble with his own people.

Different GM, different take on the "obvious harm" clause. But, the easiest way to read it is
My Take on Charm Person wrote:

Automatically succeed at the Diplomacy checks to move the target from his current attitude to friendly. Additionally, you may attempt to use an opposed Charisma check to entice him to go beyond the help he'd lend a friend, provided such help does not place him at risk of obvious harm (physical, emotional, spiritual, or societal). The affected character reverts to his original relationship at the end of this spell's duration".

I think that's really just a clearer re-wording of the original text. The original text doesn't limit "harm" to physical harm, and that's the big catch that GM's should keep in mind that limits the spell's effectiveness.

This was actually helpful to me Thanks.

Means that if the subject is ordered to attack a friend, (a fellow party member for example) the spell will break, because attacking a friend is an obviously harmful act. You are breaking a valuable relationship. So, obviously harmful.

It is of special interest to me because, in a game I'm playing, right here on the boards, the DM used the spell on our group. Had one of the fighter types attack my Bard. We had some discussion and ended up retconing the whole thing. The other player actually ended up leaving the game anyway, so it shows how bad that spell can be if mishandled.

[Shadowdweller]

Those confused might try reading the passage in the core book about charm effects on page 561. It is more powerful than you seem to be to weasel the spell into.

1) A number of monster types have historically used charm effects in combat. It has NEVER required any sort of extended action to make requests of a charmee.

2) The description of charm effects specifically addresses the case of a charmee being asked to attack his or her companions. It does NOT cause the charm effect to break.

Referring back to the OP:

Matt2VK wrote:

Then there's the opposed CHA check. What commands trigger this check and what happens if it fails?

The commands that will trigger an opposed CHA check are dependent upon the command and the nature of the charmee. The best way to adjudicate this is to try to imagine what sort of requests the charmed creature would readily agree to if asked by a good friend, what sort would require some convincing, and what sort are completely against the charmee's view of the world (i.e new save).

Orcs, for example, are typically violent, militaristic, creatures who, being chaotic evil, tend not to have significant feelings of loyalty. Being asked to fight other orcs (even of their own warband) should not generally require a CHA check unless they have some strong personal connection to those others.

A simple cobbler without fighting experience, on the other hand, might take up arms for a friend or loved one but is not likely to do so unless they could be convinced said friend or loved one was in extreme danger. Or possibly for some sort of life-changing reward.

An Azata, supernatural manifestation of good, would probably fundamentally rebel at the prospect of murdering an innocent puppy. Or contrarily if a demon, supernatural manifestation of evil, was asked to babysit and change the diapers of some puling orphans without any other justification.

Matt2VK wrote:

Does the spell break and end?

If the request is exceptionally contary to their nature (e.g. azata being asked to kill a puppy) the target gets a new save. Otherwise - the friend is unconvinced and merely refuses.

Matt2VK wrote:

What a both that orc charmed while his fellow was busy attacking your party?

What happens then?

What would YOU do if two of your...useful minions... suddenly started violently attacking each other?

[Shadowdweller]

Alzrius wrote:

Not to mention the old question of "after it wears off, do they realize they were charmed?"

The spell makes no mention of causing targets to forget...the description of charm effects makes no mention of causing memory loss, the description of enchantment effects makes no mention or causing targets to forget...

...so our default assumption must be....?

[IejirIsk]

Had this discussion with a friend earlier... Charm is an incombat diplomacy, or diplomacy for wizards... In combat diplomacy takes alot of penalties to use on an enemy... starting with a dc25 hostile iirc... it doesn't dominate, but may cause an enemy to bash his old 'friends' or show you where the master keeps his bubbly, or treasure, or what traps lie ahead. Probably wont let you send the lackey after the traps without a cha check, at least.

[Snorter]

I think the people trying to get maximum use out of this spell tend to forget;

Friends still disagree about things,
Friends still refuse to do things (often with colourful objections),
Friends still fight.

If you saw a friend about to do something you thought was idiotic, dangerous, evil, wrong, illegal, or that would get you, them, or another one of your friends into trouble, wouldn't you try to stop them?

Especially if your 'new best friend' is someone you've only met five minutes ago, and the people he's attempting to harm are your family/friends/workmates you've known for years?

It doesn't require the caster making a direct order to the charmed person, to perform an act that would harm them personally, to make them act against the caster.
They still have free will, and can object to things they see you doing, to other people.

"Stand in the corner, and don't move (while we stab your family in the head.)" is not a valid use of charm person.

Nor is "Stand there, while we rob your employer, putting you out of a job, possibly in jail for being an accessory, put your wife and kids into poverty, sent to the work house, or to be pimped out on the streets."

The caster can't defend his actions, by protesting "What's wrong? I never ordered him to actually take part!".

[TheSideKick]

remember that when a player combines bluff, diplomacy, and charm person they can make that person believe just about anything. and they have set dcs, for what you're trying to accomplish.

charm person is very, very powerful when used by a player that knows what they are doing. cast spell before combat, then roll bluff to get that badguy to think all of your party members are good friends and allies of the target, then cast hold person after he "relaxes and allows you to cast a spell on them" taking the save away from the npc... then the fighter coup de graces the target.

cast charm person, then diplomacy to get them to helpful, then roll bluff to get them to believe just about anything you want them to (within reason of course), tell them not to resist while you cast a spell that will make them stronger, cast hold person/sleep/insert spells here, coup de grace end of adventure.

[IejirIsk]

interesting use... not thought of that... assuming person doesnt recognize the spell.. and definitely would call that an evil act.. but well played, sir.

[Sitri]

I have already failed my Con check to see this topic reach denouement, but I also failed my Wis check to not post in this one. This is the only bit I plan to add.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2oupu?FAQ-answers-to-previous-locked-threads#2

[Alzrius]

Shadowdweller wrote:

Alzrius wrote:

Not to mention the old question of "after it wears off, do they realize they were charmed?"

The spell makes no mention of causing targets to forget...the description of charm effects makes no mention of causing memory loss, the description of enchantment effects makes no mention or causing targets to forget...

...so our default assumption must be....?

...that the question isn't if they *remember* that they were charmed, but if they realize it at all when the spell wears off?

[IejirIsk]

Quote:

Many abilities and spells can cloud the minds of characters and monsters, leaving them unable to tell friend from foe—or worse yet, deceiving them into thinking that their former friends are now their worst enemies. Two general types of enchantments affect characters and creatures: charms and compulsions.

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.

Compulsion is a different matter altogether. A compulsion overrides the subject's free will in some way or simply changes the way the subject's mind works. A charm makes the subject a friend of the caster; a compulsion makes the subject obey the caster.

Regardless of whether a character is charmed or compelled, he does not volunteer information or tactics that his master doesn't ask for.

Hmm... coulda swear was something in there... modify memory... that would make them forget... seems dm call? unless spell says otherwise, seems like a definite maybe