Dominate Person


Rules Questions


What happens when two people have cast dominate person on the same target?

My guess is that they would have to make caster checks to take control of the subject as the spell doesn't say anything otherwise.

Does this then mean that you could cast dominate person on yourself as a sort of safeguard against anyone else casting dominate person on you?


I would go with the CL check, yeah, though I might only require it if orders outright conflict.

I would not allow dominating oneself to block other dominates. You control yourself. Someone else controls you. There's no conflict there—they tell you what to tell yourself to do.

Silver Crusade Contributor

Instead of caster level checks, I would use Charisma checks (similar to charm person, except made against the other caster, whenever orders conflict).

That's just a houserule, though. Beyond that, there don't appear to be any rules. So... ask your GM. ^_^


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ahh....

Magic rules: Stacking Effects wrote:

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.

Are we done here?

Silver Crusade Contributor

Hmm. Apparently it wasn't a houserule.

Yay for accidentally being right. ^_^


Oh, neat.


I know right.

Reading obscure parts of the rules is helpful.

As for the dominate self sillyness, I would personally probably just veto that from a sanity standpoint, but as for running it by RAW if you gave yourself a command using dominate you would be forced to obey that command and effectively lose control of yourself while obeying your own orders(yes, it's wierd). If someone else gave you an order using dominate that conflicted with outstanding orders you would be entitled to a Cha check to continue obeying your own pre-given orders.

Of course, if you give yourself an order consisting of "Act as you would normally unless you are dominated by another creature and in that case stand there and wait unless obeying a command by *insert party members here*, and while dominated by another creature obey all of *insert party members here* orders without question", then any orders I can think of come into conflict with the above order and would warrant a Cha check. It would be a good way of buying a couple of rounds in which you can essentially act normally so long as there is an ally around to tell you to keep fighting (and you could probably tweak the command so that even that is not necessary).


What if the dominator commands you to voluntarily fail that Cha check? Could that work? ;P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
What if the dominator commands you to voluntarily fail that Cha check? Could that work? ;P

I believe that this would qualify as doing something other than waiting around and obeying allies, so it would require a Cha check before you can be made to fail your Cha checks(can you even willingly fail ability checks anyway?).

Once again, veto because sanity, not RAW.

EDIT: You probably shouldn't even be aware as a character that a Cha check is being made. The alternative is that you have to do random Cha checks out of nowhere because someone you charmed a week ago got charmed a second time and your orders and their orders conflict (the charmed creature failed it's own Cha check on both). It's probably better to just consider it a property of spells and characters can't control the check at all.

Silver Crusade Contributor

Snowblind wrote:

Ahh....

Magic rules: Stacking Effects wrote:

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.

Are we done here?

Good catch, by the way. ^_^

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Dominate Person All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions