A search turned up many dominate person questions and answers, but none to my particular query.
My players were escorting a dignitary through a king's treasury, and while there, the dignitary stole some money from the treasury. THey tried to question the dignitary about it, but when that failed, one of the pc's cast dominate person and made the dignitary empty his pockets, then they proceeded to have a little fun by making the dignitary slap himself.
When they returned from the treasury, the only order given the dignitary was to go to his room and stay there, at which point they left his presence.
On his walk back to his room, I had the dignitary tell passing guards and servants that he was being mind controlled and he needed help, which eventually led to the spell being removed and the pc's getting in trouble.
My question is, how specific do you have to be when instructing someone who is dominated? If you tell them to speak to no one, can they write people messages? It seems like there'd be a tedious default list someone casting the spell would need to rattle off after each casting to make sure they didn't get caught during the spell's duration.
It doesn't seem like there's any rules for pre-empting someone who has been dominated so the caster can stop them from doing something to tip off they aren't under their own control.
|
Also this paragraph in the spell description kind of indicates it would go to its room only, nothing else:
Once you have given a dominated creature a command, it continues to attempt to carry out that command to the exclusion of all other activities except those necessary for day-to-day survival (such as sleeping, eating, and so forth). Because of this limited range of activity, a Sense Motive check against DC 15 (rather than DC 25) can determine that the subject's behavior is being influenced by an enchantment effect (see the Sense Motive skill description).
okay, we, took that last part to mean that the dominated person would do whatever possible to carry out the instructions, but that they could do other things as long as they no way impeded carrying out the instructions.
And all the other posts I could find on the topic seemed to imply the dominated target is fully aware they aren't in control of their actions.
As long as he was in his room he's fulfilling his command. I see no reason why he couldn't talk or yell. He couldn't leave. If he was outside and going to the room I could see the exclusion of other activities including talking. But, he's there. He's doing what he's supposed to. The PCs didn't tell him to keep quiet.
Now, since dominate makes a telepathic link to the target and you don't need to see the target to control it after it's been dominated, you could easily check up on him and issue new commands.
Quinley Basdel
As long as he was in his room he's fulfilling his command. I see no reason why he couldn't talk or yell
Those would be other activities that are explicitly excluded.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The way I read Dominate Person and run it IMC can be summarized thusly:
"You do as you are told, and you don't do as you are not told."
Glassy-eyed automiton, unless told NOT to be a glassy-eyed automiton.
And anyone passing by gets a DC 15 Sense Motive check to notice the glassy-eyed automaton going "Yeth, mather, yeth, mather" all down the hall. I don't have any problem with this being noticed and the PCs consequently getting in trouble.
Now a suggestion spell, that would be less obtrusive.
Remember, the defining character of the enchanter is subtlety.
That's counter to the ability though. If you were a perfectly glassy-eyed automaton you would essentially be a statue but the spell lets you can do other, normal tasks essential for survival such as eating and sleeping.
The command given was "go to your room." As long as he's in his room he can walk around, mess with his stuff, have a seat and order a meal (requires talking), etc. He just can't leave the room.
Thing is if it came down to starve or stay in your room then the spell would let him leave to go get food. The spell isn't a "stay in this box and let yourself die" enabler. It's all up to how the GM wanted it to play out, really.
Yes, I run it that they do just stand there, until told not to just stand there. If not commanded, the subject will stand still until they are about to collapse from exhaustion, at which time they would lie down in that very spot and sleep. Same goes for food and water, once on the verge of dehydration, they will move to the nearest source of known safe liquid and drink, then for starvation move to the nearest known source of food and eat.
It is an extremely powerful spell, but it's only 5th level. It has to have some drawbacks, espeically since "kill yourself" only nets you a new save. And it lasts for DAYS.
|
|
It is an extremely powerful spell, but it's only 5th level. It has to have some drawbacks, espeically since "kill yourself" only nets you a new save. And it lasts for DAYS.
The way I read it, "kill yourself" is completely ignored and "kill your friends" would net you a new save (with a bonus, in fact).
There is no "kill yourself" application of the spell.
"Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out."
Even kill your friends is gray. If your friends are similarly powerful characters it could easily be seen as obviously self-destructive as you'll likely be killed.
|
Thing is if it came down to starve or stay in your room then the spell would let him leave to go get food. The spell isn't a "stay in this box and let yourself die" enabler. It's all up to how the GM wanted it to play out, really.
The spell allows the target to fill basic survival needs like food, water, sleep, and shelter, so the spell would indeed allow him to get food. It doesn't allow and specifically excludes other activities not essential to physical survival, like telling someone he's under a spell.
Odds are decent though that in a crowded castle someone would have made the Sense Motive check to notice that the dignitary was acting odd - the GM probably should have made a few rolls for this.
As I said, it's really up to how the GM wanted to play it out. Even if he wasn't shouting "hey I'm charmed" it'd be fairly obvious. Any person with a sense motive of +5 could tell with take 10.
There is no "kill yourself" application of the spell.
"Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out."
Even kill your friends is gray. If your friends are similarly powerful characters it could easily be seen as obviously self-destructive as you'll likely be killed.
You are correct, my mistake. There isn't a "kill yourself" option. But "kill your wife/children/mother/dog" only grants a new save at +2.
And the spell does specifically state that the subject performs the task given to the exclusion of all others, which to me definately rules out shouting "Hey look at me, I'm being Dominated!!"
What's the straw-man here?
As I said, anyone with a +5 sense motive would know.