We're playing right now and a situation has come about with which we are unsure about the outcome. The villain has cast cause fear on one party member and before their turn another party member casts murderous command on him in the hopes it counter effects the fear. The GM ruled that the fear overrides the command which was fair play. We are just curious whether this correct for future reference.
Thanks.
Well, if the fear effect applied frightened, fleeing /is/ to the best of the charecter's ability.
Mudrurous command does not neves status conditions, and so long as he is still frightened, he acts as such.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.
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.
I'd have the controllers make opposed Charisma checks and he would either panic or attack nearest ally depending on the winner. However, round 2 murderous command would be over, and the fear would be the only remaining effect.
This is of course, assuming he failed his will save on both spells.
We're playing right now and a situation has come about with which we are unsure about the outcome. The villain has cast cause fear on one party member and before their turn another party member casts murderous command on him in the hopes it counter effects the fear. The GM ruled that the fear overrides the command which was fair play. We are just curious whether this correct for future reference.
Thanks.
First, as Rumpin stated the controllers must make opposed checks. Second, you do realize that Murderous Command causes the target to attack his or her allies right? So if the party member doesn't flee he starts attacking the rest of the party. How is that helping?
Murderous command makes the target attack "to the best of its ability". It does not negate any conditions on the target, including panicked. If the target is panicked, it is not able to attack.
Murderous command makes the target attack "to the best of its ability". It does not negate any conditions on the target, including panicked. If the target is panicked, it is not able to attack.
The only reason it can't attack is because of a competing mental effect. One is telling him to flee the other is telling him to attack. Opposed checks would be required.
Thanks everyone. Glad we basically got it right.
The target isn't Panicked from Cause Fear, he is Frightened. The Frightened condition says "A frightened creature flees from the source of its fear as best it can." Murderous Command says "You give the target a mental urge to kill its nearest ally, which it obeys to the best of its ability."
The two orders are contradictory - flee as best as you can, but attack to the best of your ability. Thus, an opposed Cha check is in order. However, even if the Murderous Command caster won the opposed Cha check, the character would still have the Frightened condition and take a -2 to his attack roll.
But as OldSkoolRPG pointed out, Murderous Command can only make him attack an ally. Is that what he was attempting to do? I suppose it's possible that having him attack an ally would be preferable to having him run away... but it probably is not what he was trying to do.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If he truly had the Panicked condition, such as from the Fear spell, he would be unable to attack and the Murderous Command would do nothing (since even to the best of his ability he is unable to attack.) But with the Frightened condition, he is still able to attack (albeit at a -2) and so Murderous Command has a shot at working.
Murderous command makes the target attack "to the best of its ability". It does not negate any conditions on the target, including panicked. If the target is panicked, it is not able to attack.The only reason it can't attack is because of a competing mental effect. One is telling him to flee the other is telling him to attack. Opposed checks would be required.
Would you do the same for a confused person? That's another mental effect that applies a condition. What about a held person?
I tend to think the quoted section about opposed checks is really about overlapping dominate effects. When there are status effects and commands, I'd apply status effects and see how the commands can be followed within the context of those effects.
On RumpinRufus's points about frightened vs panicked, if I can't choose to attack rather than flee because I'm frightened, I don't think Murderous Command should be able to do that, either.
Sorry, thought it mentioned fear, not cause fear. Same argument, though. A frightened creature cannot attack unless cornered, even if compelled to do so. It's no different than if the first spell was, say, sleep--the condition renders the command impossible.
If the initial effect was dominate person or some other spell in which the caster exercises ongoing control, then murderous command would trigger an opposed Charisma check. But cause fear does not exercise mental control--it just makes the target frightened. The target isn't ordered to be frightened--it's just frightened.
I think the mental control effects speaks to enchantment (compulsion) spells which force an action change. As Rufus stated, frightened isn't forcing you to do something, you are choosing to do it because you are scared. Murderous command does force you to do something, and thus if there was another spell forcing an action, there would be a Cha check. However, since there is not, the frightened character can't attack, and the murderous command effectively has no effect.
Berinor, it's all in the Condition descriptions.
Confused: "A confused creature is mentally befuddled and cannot act normally."
Even to the best of his ability, the confused creature cannot attack (unless he rolls 1-25.)
Paralyzed: "A paralyzed character is frozen in place and unable to move or act."
Even to the best of his ability, the paralyzed creature cannot attack.
Panicked: "A panicked creature must drop anything it holds and flee at top speed from the source of its fear, as well as any other dangers it encounters, along a random path. It can't take any other actions."
Even to the best of his ability, the panicked creature cannot attack.
Frightened: "A frightened creature flees from the source of its fear as best it can. If unable to flee, it may fight."
If he is unable to flee (in this case, if the Murderous Command caster won the opposed Cha check) then he is still allowed to attack.
I still find that use of murderous command humorous.
BBEG: "Flee in terror from my awesome awesomeness!"
Player 2: "No attack me instead!"
BBEG: "Oh on second thought do what he said!"
I would agree with Berinor. I don't consider this situation to be a case of being under the control of multiple creatures as, to me, that implies active control with orders being given. So in this case I think you just evaluate the two effects and see how it works out. Murderous Command gives the character an urge to attack an ally which I would equate to a players usual desire to attack an enemy. Since any attacking is secondary to fleeing when frightened I think the character would continue to flee.
I would agree with Berinor. I don't consider this situation to be a case of being under the control of multiple creatures as, to me, that implies active control with orders being given. So in this case I think you just evaluate the two effects and see how it works out. Murderous Command gives the character an urge to attack an ally which I would equate to a players usual desire to attack an enemy. Since any attacking is secondary to fleeing when frightened I think the character would continue to flee.
I disagree, I think the urge to flee would be competing with the urge to attack an ally. I think any two conflicting mental effects should be handled with an opposed Charisma check. But I think reasonable people can see it the other way. So it would be ultimately up to how an individual GM rules it at his or her table.