So I'm sure there's an answer to this, I'm just not able to find it.
Q: How do you handle contradictory compulsion effects on a single target?
For instance, say a creature is affected by both confusion and song of discord, each of which requires a roll to randomly determine the target's actions. Or, say a creature is affected by two suggestion spells, one telling him to walk 1 mile North, the other telling him to walk 1 mile South.
Thanks!
Some quotes ...
Multiple Mental Control Effects
Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as spells that remove the subject's ability to act. Mental controls that don't remove the recipient's ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.
Same Effect with Differing Results
The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.
So, the answer seems to be, in general, that the most recently produced effect takes precedence.
Thanks! I was searching for "compulsion" rather than "mental control", so no wonder I didn't find it.
Suggestion is pretty clear then.
What's trickier is when a creature is under the effect of both confusion and song of discord (originating from the same caster). It's not exactly mental control in that you're not commanding the target. Even if it was, I doubt you could make an opposed Charisma check with yourself. They're different effects, so I'm not sure that second rule would apply. Though maybe that's the best way to handle it: Roll each in the order they've affected the target, the last roll to result in something other than "target acts normally" then takes effect. Does that sound in accordance with the rules?
I would just simply go with 'most recently spell cast takes priority', myself.
Zhayne wrote: I would just simply go with 'most recently spell cast takes priority', myself. Yeah, that was the idea, it just assumes that the "act normally" result isn't itself mental control. Even when the most recent spell takes priority, they're still both active. So say confusion tells the target to babble incoherently, and then song of discord (the more recent spell) then tells them to act normally. Song of discord is essentially not taking effect, so they babble incoherently. If Song of discord instead told them to attack the nearest creature, they'd attack the nearest creature instead. Though I can see where rolling only the more recent of two spells is simpler.
Rhatahema wrote: Zhayne wrote: I would just simply go with 'most recently spell cast takes priority', myself. Yeah, that was the idea, it just assumes that the "act normally" result isn't itself mental control. Even when the most recent spell takes priority, they're still both active. So say confusion tells the target to babble incoherently, and then song of discord (the more recent spell) then tells them to act normally. Song of discord is essentially not taking effect, so they babble incoherently. If Song of discord instead told them to attack the nearest creature, they'd attack the nearest creature instead. Though I can see where rolling only the more recent of two spells is simpler. Attack the nearest creature while babbling incoherently? I meant that to be a joke, but thinking about it, it seems reasonable. Why not have both apply if they don't conflict with each other?
daimaru wrote: Attack the nearest creature while babbling incoherently? I meant that to be a joke, but thinking about it, it seems reasonable. Why not have both apply if they don't conflict with each other? Well, the full text is "Do nothing but babble incoherently". So it's the compulsion to do nothing verses to compulsion to do something (attack the nearest creature).
Rhatahema wrote: daimaru wrote: Attack the nearest creature while babbling incoherently? I meant that to be a joke, but thinking about it, it seems reasonable. Why not have both apply if they don't conflict with each other? Well, the full text is "Do nothing but babble incoherently". So it's the compulsion to do nothing verses to compulsion to do something (attack the nearest creature). OK, that makes sense. Still, since in this particular case the most recent spell is "attack the nearest creature", I'd favor the DM adding "while babbling incoherently" just because it's cool and funny and doesn't change the effect.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
