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.
Charm Person/Monster does nothing other than set the creature to friendly. Being friendly does not help bypass the process of Planar Binding.
Gauss wrote: 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.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
You are not asking him to slaughter a village. You are asking him to fail the Planar Binding charisma check (surrender to the Binding spell). That is, at the very least, contrary to what any creature summoned by Planar Binding would do.
So lets see what you have done:
Cast Planar Binding.
Cast Charm Monster.
Told it to kill things (Charm Monster)
Watch it become uncontrolled as the Charm Monster fails because you never rolled that opposed Charisma Check for Planar Binding.
Lets see what you would have done otherwise:
Cast Planar Binding.
Made an opposed Charisma Check to get it to do what you wanted with a bonus based on the nature of the service and the reward.
Looks like you have actually made your check HARDER by using Charm Monster and never bound it properly. Of course, the GM could ad hoc a bonus to the Planar Binding check based on the Charm Monster but I fail to see how it would be much more than asking it to do what it wants to do anyhow.
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.
someonenoone111 wrote: You can make a charmed creature kill his own mother if you wanted to. Actually how far you can push charm person compared to dominate person which could make you kill your own mother is up to the GM. There use to be a lot of debates about where the power of charm person ended before that.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
hogarth wrote:
The charm answer didn't really clear things up for me; the example of tilling a field is still within the vague range of something a friend might do for you. How about ordering a man to murder his wife and children?
Well, the point here is that it is really up to the GM to decide what is inside and outside a creature's general willingness. Tilling a field might really depend on the creature (I dont think Orcs care much for farming), but killing loved ones is probably always going to require a check, and might not even work (the creature might take its own life instead, its not your puppet after all).
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Gauss wrote: 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.
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.
Gauss wrote: 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.
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. :(
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.
Gauss wrote: 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 ^^.
@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.
Diego Rossi wrote: @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.
Planar Binding is Duration: Instantaneous.
When it agrees to the service, there is no effect in the rules that says what happens if it violates the terms of your deal, or prevents it doing so... Something in the nature of outsiders presumably keeps them from violating the Planar Binding agreement - under normal circumstances.
Now, basically no GM would make every summoned demon just up and turn on you. In fact, it seems highly implied that outsiders have to keep their end of a bargain that they promise to uphold (at least, the letter of the bargain. Also, be sure to get them to promise it aloud or in writing or something. I assume knowing Planar Binding means your character knows how this sort of thing works.). At least, when one party is a mortal. Demons betray each other all the time, I assume.
BUT, a bargain made under the effects of a Charm spell? I would say, it's not enforceable in court; you never had a valid contract. I think most any GM would rule that it goes uncontrolled when Charm ends if you "forced" it to agree to the binding with an opposed Charisma check via Charm.
All that being said, even if it did work, such creatures would certainly seek revenge after completing their service. Technically the spell doesn't say that you can't kill the creature before it's service is up... But I assume that would also violate the terms of the contract.
Basically, assume that magically compelling the outsider to accept the contract voids said contract. Assume, for the sake of argument, that all planar binding bargains and similar magical contracts have this sort of thing "built in."
Finally, an on-topic answer :D
One vote for option b.
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.
Gauss wrote: 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.
The answer is very simple, if you charm a monster but never make a deal with it through planar binding (the charisma check with the bonus/penalty) it's not beholden to you at all and can leave whenever it wants/attack you. Presumably the charm prevents that. Charm should probably give you a bonus on the planar binding check but that's all it would do. And that's assuming the creature doesn't have spellcraft and asks what kind of friend casts charm spells on it. Friendly doesn't bypass the need for the charisma check or diplomacy would also automatically succeed (and I have yet to hear anyone argue that).
You seem to have a very restrictive definition of "hostile". If I woke up in handcuffs with a hood on, I would assume the people who had me were "hostile" until proven otherwise. If a demon finds itself dragged to the Material Plane and stuffed into a circle it can't leave, that probably counts as hostile. Lawful creatures might be more amenable to that kind of treatment but I'm pretty sure locking up chaotic creatures violates their basic nature. This is why I suggest that Good casters binding Good creatures spend their first action breaking the circle as a gesture of goodwill. Turns it into something more like planar ally but Good enslaving things is... well, not Good.
Assuming chaotic evil creatures will keep their word is... well, close to the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Definitely worse than assuming lawful evil creatures won't find a loophole in the language and betray you when it's most opportune. I'm pretty sure backstabbing is every devil's hobby.
So I guess short answer is Planar Binding->Charm Monster would let you make the Charisma check with a bonus on the check or if you chose not to make the check and instead just relied on the charm then the monster would be the same as any other roaming monster you happened to charm (except it could teleport back to where it came from any time it wanted).
I'd vote for option B.
The planar binding spell traps the outsider on your plane, but not much else. The spell states that you can keep them in the trap as long as you like, and try to persuade them to perform acts of service for you. This is done by making the opposed charisma check. But even then, they won't do something "unreasonable".
On the other hand, charm monster will make them friendly, and if you make the charisma check you can get them to do something unreasonable. If they are charmed and hit by dispel magic, I imagine that creature would still be under obligation to perform the task to be sent home by the spell, but otherwise could act as if he broke out of the circle.
Maybe you could have him wear a magic item that absorbs spells or automatically counters dispel magic. I'm sure there are other safeguards you could put in place. Maybe you could buy a cold iron morning star, break off the head, shrink it, slather it in sovereign glue, and shove it up his nose. Fail safe.
@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.
someonenoone111 wrote: @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.
How far that goes is up to the GM. For most evil monsters such as outsiders they would even kill friends trying to keep them prisoner, and if they have knowledge arcana and/or spellcraft they may recognize the spell.
The charisma check for planar binding is to get the monster to actually agree. That is different from forcing it to cooperate. The fact that someone might kill themselves instead of completing a task due to charm person/monster is showing they are not in agreement with it. That is why charm monster won't work to bypass the charisma check for planar binding.
someonenoone111, I did not state I voted "b" or any of your options. Your premise is still flawed.
Bob Bob Bob wrote:
Assuming chaotic evil creatures will keep their word is... well, close to the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Definitely worse than assuming lawful evil creatures won't find a loophole in the language and betray you when it's most opportune. I'm pretty sure backstabbing is every devil's hobby.
Well, nothing in the spell compels them to actually do as they promise... So either Planar Binding a Demon and getting it to serve you by sacrificing virgins or whatever (something very in-genre) is just pointless (and there's lots of suggested gifts for demons to give bonuses on the charisma check) or there's something about Planar Binding and similar magical contracts that means an outsider simply cannot break the contract under normal circumstances.
Edit: Yes, of course a Devil would try to find a way around a badly written contract, if it were to said Devil's advantage. And I imagine that a Demon would try to find a way to anull it (jumping in front of a spell you cast at a foe, so that you technically dealt the Demon damage might just void your contract...). That or the Demon would simply complete the service, then kill you - planar binding does nothing to prevent that.
Gauss, premise? The premise that you can cast charm monster on a monster that you have summoned with planar binding?
What you can get it to agree to with charm monster is a GM's decision, but saying "if you charm it, and you get it to work for you for free..." is not a faulty premise. It's a hypothetical situation.
Avoron, that is the equivalent of bringing in a bunch of house rules into the rules forum and then asking people what the rule is for something based on that. It does not belong in the rules forum because it is not based in the rules.
By presenting, in a rules forum, a hypothetical situation that is against the rules as the premise is faulty.
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 g!~!#$n 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.
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.
Avoron wrote: 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.
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'.
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.
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).
Cyrus Lanthier wrote: 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.
wraithstrike wrote: 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.
Bob Bob Bob wrote: 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
Gauss wrote: 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.
someonenoone111 wrote: a lot of people insisted you can't charm outsiders you summoned with planar binding, which is just ridiculous. People (I at least) say that you can't charm someone that you are keeping into a cage and the trap that planar binding create is exactly a cage.
So if you try to charm a creature that is confined by the trap created by planar binding it get a +5 bonus to its charm against the spell as you have harmed before casting the spell (he is bound into a trap) and if the charm succeed the spell is broken immediately as you are harming it (you are keeping it into a cage).
Charm line of spells wrote: If the creature is currently being threatened or attacked by you or your allies, however, it receives a +5 bonus on its saving throw.
...
Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell.
And try to moderate your language. Insulting people isn't a good idea.
Again, Planar Binding wrote: Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to. Period. Not "if they're your friend they'll agree", not "you can magically compel them in some way", never agreed to. Now for charm. Charm Person wrote: An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders "Please agree to whatever I want through a planar binding" is an obviously harmful order (especially if it's magically enforced), much like please automatically fail a save against a not harmless spell. It could be something that's not actually harmful but letting someone do something to you sight unseen or agreeing to a contract without knowing what the contract is are both pretty clearly harmful. Again, never obeys. You can't force it with a Charisma check, if it's obviously harmful or suicidal they just refuse.
So no, you can't use Charm Monster to force them to fail the Charisma check for Planar Binding. Because putting your signature on a contract that isn't written yet is clearly a harmful order.
I was using oversimplified language and my statement still applied in that Charm Person/Monster does not help bypass the process of Planar Binding. You were unclear as to how you were using it (you were using significant simplification yourself). Had you been clearer to begin with the oversimplification could have been avoided.
I am quite aware of the Charm Monster erratas, and the spell description.
As for going off-topic, it was not off-topic. It was central to the whole topic. Whether or not your specific options were viable was dependent upon looking at how you got to that point.
@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.
So again, the jail thing depends on the outsider. "Outsider shows up, you negotiate a price, they go and do it" is Planar Ally. Planar Binding is "Outsider shows up locked in a cylindrical cage, you demand it does something for you, if it fails the charisma check it agrees" with a whole lot of extra caveats, including lots of ways it can fight back. For a chaotic creature, a creature of pure condensed freedom, locking it up is probably considered hostile. Lawful probably tolerates it as the cost of doing business.
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.
As for your situation, b. is the closest of the options you give. I much prefer c. Planar Binding forces the creature to finish the service but it's sullen, resentful, and constantly plotting how to screw you over until it finishes, then it plots revenge.
By the rules charm person does not bypass the spell. The spell has no provision for not allowing a charisma check for the bound monster. Would it be logical if the monster was dominated? Sure. However what makes sense and what the rules allow are two different things.
The rules state " You make a Charisma check opposed by the creature's Charisma check. The check is assigned a bonus of +0 to +6 based on the nature of the service and the reward.".
They do not state " You make a Charisma check opposed by the creature's Charisma check unless the creature agrees in which case no charisma check is needed. The check is assigned a bonus of +0 to +6 based on the nature of the service and the reward.
The best you can hope for by the rules is a modifier of +0. Seeing as how this is the rules section you are getting a rules based answer. If you want "how should this be played" answer then I advise you to go to general discussion or the advice section.
Bob Bob Bob wrote: 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.
I said i was going to abandon this thread, but I came across some new evidence in the PATHFINDER srd.
Quote:
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. :)
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.
Cyrus Lanthier wrote: 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.
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.
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.
Bob Bob Bob wrote: 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).
wraithstrike wrote: 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.
someonenoone111 wrote: @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.
Check your posts, you have been pretty offensive to people left and right.
And I feel fairly difficult to understand how you can say that keeping a friend in a cage isn't threatening him.
You can charm the creature after it has left the circle, to ensure better cooperation and more control (let's say to assure that your bound devil won't "accidentally" put you in the area effect of its Order wrath SLA or he wouldn't summon a bunch of unbound friends), but as long as it is in the circle it is under the effect of a threatening spell cast by you.
someonenoone111 wrote:
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.
And that is exactly the piece you are missing. Keeping someone in a cage until he agree to work for you is exactly threatening it.
"You will stay in this cage until you agree to make a deal with me."
How you can see that as not threatening?
someonenoone111 wrote: I said i was going to abandon this thread, but I came across some new evidence in the PATHFINDER srd.
Quote:
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...
You have been show several times the exact wording of the spell:
PRD wrote: Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell. That is from Charm Person, and Charm Monster say:
PRD wrote: This spell functions like charm person, except that the effect is not restricted by creature type or size. The part you cited (and please, if you want to cite something use the PRD) is from the glossary, the Charm and Compulsion section. It is a more general rule.
The spell has more specific and stringent limitations.
to mirror your words: "I do have a hard time hiding my distaste towards people that try to cheat selecting what piece of the rules they want to use and what they want to forget."
I answered your question. Bob Bob Bob wrote: As for your situation, b. is the closest of the options you give. I much prefer c. Planar Binding forces the creature to finish the service but it's sullen, resentful, and constantly plotting how to screw you over until it finishes, then it plots revenge. So it's forced to complete the discounted service by the magic of the spell, it just no longer does so willingly or with full cooperation.
Again, a "free" contract is a slave contract. "Follow me around and be my bodyguard for a year for no pay" is not the same as "can you take a little off the fee". Theory or monetary-wise. If my friend asks me to help them pack up to move I will do that for free (though I'll probably expect pizza/beer). If they ask me to do that, put it all in my car, drive across country, and unpack it all, they better be paying for gas, at a minimum. The difference between zero and any value that is not zero is huge for real world values.
Quote: 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.
someonenoone111 wrote: Quote: 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. And? Nothing in that quote changes the restrictions of Planar Binding: "Impossible demands or unreasonable commands are never agreed to". Period. There's no wiggle room, there's no exceptions. You can't force something explicitly forbidden by the spell.
And that's assuming the rules in the glossary for charm and compulsions override the rules in Charm Person (and by extension Charm Monster) "An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders". That's similar but not identical to what you quoted, meaning it might have a different meaning.
I've quoted these three times now. Until you address both of them (you've at least somewhat addressed the second one) then your plan for slave labor just doesn't work. And without a game definition of "unreasonable commands", "impossible demands", and "obviously harmful orders" it's always going to be GM discretion.
|
