Greetings amazing community members I am running way of the wicked and one of my players is an arcanist who is making liberal use of the Charm person spell with a dc of 17 thanks to a few things so I just wanted to double check all of the limitations of the spell since he uses it a lot!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That spell is a whole can of worms, doubly so in an evil campaign.
I find the best way to adjudicate it is as follows.
Take the spell out of the equation. This person is your best friend. There, now if you ask your best friend to murder an innocent young girl, would he do it? No? Then he won't do it while charmed.
On the other hand, you as the GM could say that a guard would let his best friend take a tour of the castle. Hence, charm allows you to get past the guards.
What it boils down to IMO, and what I think a lot of players misunderstand, is that Charm Person is not Dominate Person. But too many players want to see it as such. Think of it as a shortcut to friendship with the person.
He actually hasn't used it for that purpose it's more of a give me all your stuff kind of use
yea and if he wouldnt theirs still an opposed cha check to get him to do it
It's an instant Friendly result on the Diplomacy chart.
It pretty much says so in the spell description.
(treat the target's attitude as friendly)
It doesn't even bring him up to Helpful.
He likes you. That's it. The DC for using Diplomacy on him is now 10+ his Cha Modifier and you can try and give him an Order to do something he won't normally do with an oppossed charisma test, as long as it's nor suicidal or harmful (DM definition of harmful need not be limited to physical harm and can include things like "Will get me Fired/Beaten/Whipped/Arrested")
Nothing about the spell says he forgets doing things for you, and he will remember that he opinion of you changed suddenly (pretty much at the time you waved your hands around and spoke funny words). If he has even a rank or two of Knowledge Arcana or Spellcraft he likely will figure out what happened to him once the spell wears off.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh ffs we just had this conversation in the rape thread. Twice.
The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if it were an automaton, but it perceives your words and actions in the most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do. (Retries are not allowed.) An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing. Any act by you or your apparent allies that threatens the charmed person breaks the spell. You must speak the person's language to communicate your commands, or else be good at pantomiming.
...
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.
...
This spell can make someone knock their allies unconscious...unless that isn't likely to work, and then the spell can make allies kill each other. It is very clear that the spell lets you go well beyond the "friendly" attitude's limits.
On top of this, look at printed creatures and how they use the spell. Dryads routinely enslave humanoids with their Charm SLA and keep them around as guardians. A type of Qlippoth charms people into coming along with it to it's hell dimension. The Naga with a Charm Person gaze attack turn humanoids into fervent cultists. Seriously. Here, have a quote from the naga's stat block.
...
To aid them, spirit nagas often use their enchanting gaze, changing victims into fawning fanatics and would-be sacrifices.
...
Oh, and for all of these things to work, the term "obviously harmful" has to be interpreted very narrowly. Otherwise a whole bunch of creatures break. So it's clear that the RAI is for the "obviously harmful" term to mean things like jumping on a sword, not something like handing over your stuff or coming with the tentacle monster to another plane.
Is the Charm person spell too powerful as written...probably, yes. But presumably the developers want to have this really powerful low level effect for narrative purposes, and since it is available to the PCs they get to enjoy it's absurd power too. If you want to nerf the spell, you need to change the behavior or stats of a range of creatures that routinely use Charm effects.
would adding a hit dice cap to the spell break it and make it useless?
in the same it does with sleep?
but then if a character has a good diplomacy and uses charm person as long as the person fails the save he can make them do almost anything!
it just seems a little ridiculous
it also gets to me because if the person failed the save you can jsut cast it again they arnt imune to it for a time
ok i just worry about having a character go to the guards after they have left and them getting mad at me
diplomacy checks doesn't work on pc, they will on a regular npc though. So that limits charmed person even more when a pc tries to use it on another pc.
All they have to do is pick relatively low level victims with lower charisma. If they are higher level or have a comparable charisma, they SHULD be breaking free often, I see no reason why this necessitates a narrow reading of harm in any way.
If there is obvious harm, they don't have to do it, full stop. No charisma check or anything, they just don't. There are rules that explain some of the things that are allowed by Charms and printed examples of monsters using their Charm SLAs/Su abilities in various ways. It's fair to say that the RAI is that these abilities should function the way the stat-block says they function, and that the rules saying what charm effects can do aren't basically useless. Going by this guiding principle, any interpretation of "obvious harm" that forbids the printed uses of Charm effects or renders parts of the Charms and Compulsions glossary section useless are not following RAI. The printed uses of Charm effects and the glossary section mention extreme behavior that puts charmed creatures in severe immediate danger and will probably cause extreme long term distress (like killing your friends to defend the charmer, which is explicitly allowed if a non-lethal option isn't viable). As such, "obviously harmful" really can't be read as much other than "self destructive". Unless you can think of an example that allows pretty much every printed example of charms getting used while not being extremely narrow in it's definition of "obviously harmful".
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So your preference is for the reading that makes charm patently ridiculous?
My preference is to acknowledge that the evidence I have listed above points overwhelmingly towards the "patently ridiculous" interpretation being the intended interpretation. I don't know how else I can put it. I can point to all these cases of Charms being used in an absurdly powerful way in printed Paizo products, and I can point to actual rules text in the CRB that specifically permit Charms being used in an absurdly powerful way. You can point to...Charm Person being really powerful for a 1st level spell. Yes, it's really powerful for a 1st level spell. Just like Sacred Geometry and Dazing Spell and half a dozen other things are absurdly powerful. That doesn't give anyone permission to display willful ignorance when trying to figure out the intended power of the spell. Don't like how the spell works? Houserule it, ban it or tolerate it's brokenness as written and intended. Just like you would with Sacred Geometry, Dazing Spell, Master Summoners and whatever else.
The reason I am being so blunt about this is that willful ignorance is what causes these problems in the first place. When you refuse to acknowledge that a problem exists, that problem shall continue to exist and fester. It's much better to make an honest assessment of what the rules are supposed to mean without letting your sense of balance interfere with reading what the actual rules and printed examples of the spell in play say, and then tell the OP "Yes, with mildly clever use Charm person can easily make best friends murder each other because it is stupidly powerful as written. No, you shouldn't run it that way, but that's what the rules say and that's how creatures in the bestiary use it". Then everyone is on the same page. We don't need to have arguments about "patently ridiculous" interpretations vs interpretations that violate the rules text, and GMs can decide for themselves whether or not they want to houserule the spell and deal with some monster behaviors being no longer viable, letting the spell be used as written, or altering the spell for PCs only and possibly having troubles later on when the PCs complain that the GM is being inconsistent with their rulings when it suits them. But they actually know what decisions they need to make and can assess which ones fit their game best, instead of you making it for them because you have decided that Charm Person should work the way you want it to, rules be damned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry, I'm on my phone, but you'll find this helpful, an actual system for adjudicating what can and can' the asked for.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?172910-Articles-Previously-Ap pearing-on-GiantITP-com
and Snowblind, I'm not sure the spell is the problem. I think it' is the vagueness of the skill system used to influence people.
I find it frustrating that combat gets many chapters devoted to it, while social encounters get as many paragraphs. No wonder it's difficult to adjudicate 'friendly', it's SO much less well defined than 'entangled', for example.
Keep in mind that Charm spells are Emotion affecting, while Compulsions are thought affecting.
So with Charm Person you need to keep in mind the person's actual personality as well.
For Example
The Joker is now your very best friend thanks to magic.
He still has his original personality and behaves the way he normally would
he just really likes you
is that a good thing?
here is as thread I started to hopefully get a FAQ about what can charm person actually do. Because as it is now, Yes, I feel it is the strongest spell out there. Stronger by far than dominate person.
Best thing to do would be to talk to your player and set your games rules for charm person, what it can and can't do. And offer your player a rebuild if he doesn't like the way it'll work.
here is as thread I started to hopefully get a FAQ about what can charm person actually do. Because as it is now, Yes, I feel it is the strongest spell out there. Stronger by far than dominate person.
Best thing to do would be to talk to your player and set your games rules for charm person, what it can and can't do. And offer your player a rebuild if he doesn't like the way it'll work.
Charm spells actually give you a save for things you would be "violently opposed to", so it isn't quite as powerful. It also doesn't have that telepathic link thing going on. Still, it certainly isn't 4 spell levels lower than dominate person.
I wouldn't hold out on getting an FAQ. Seriously, the question of the limits of Charm Person has been around as long as 3.0 IIRC. I doubt it is getting answered now. Especially since the question has come up several times before on the Paizo forums. It's still worth FAQing (which I did the first time round on that thread), but there isn't a good chance of getting an answer.
|
|
The difference between charm person and dominate is that dominate allows you to directly control the person, charm means the person will take your suggestions into account and value your opinions. The real constraints should be seen as the alignment of the character. So evil people think you are chill, but if they were fighting your party I would definitely say that the evil character thinks you specifically are okay and continue attacking the rest of your party. For lawful creatures, they are supposed to follow the rules so a charisma check every time they would break any rule they would normally follow is in order(including not giving all of their stuff to their friend as they believe in working for money or etc.). Chaotic people would actually be equally hard to convince if they follow paizo's idea of what chaotic is as they would be very unlikely to take direction from another person. Good would be the easiest to convince to do nice things for you, but would require a charisma check to attack anyone who they normally wouldn't. In reference to the uses of the ability by creatures and etc:
Dryads enslaving people to hang out with them and stop people from attacking them is not out of character for most people, but if someone was on a quest it would definitely allow a new save to not hang around as that is out of character. The Qlippoth is just chilling with it's friend in the hell dimension, but I am 100% sure that if the character actually knew what was going on (IE knowledge(plans) would get a new save to hang out with a qlippoth, and then another to go through to the hell dimension. The spirit Naga should have diplomacy maxed as then it could easily turn someone into a fanatic for sacrifice or what have you after charming someone, but currently I am pretty sure that would only work on a character that had low to no knowledge of religion and/or cared about self-preservation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ LazarX: Do you have an answer to the claims being made in this thread regarding the uses monsters put charm to, RE:Driads and such?
If you need a justification, say that involves long term charm and personality modification. There's a difference between what you'll do for they guy you just met that charmed you, and the beautiful creature that's been manipulating you for months and years, using spells, persuasion, and seduction to mold you into a highly motivated guard willing to risk his life.
NOte that the part about the purview of the GM cames into account only to determine then your interest align with the interests of the charmed person. The part about the charisma check is unrestricted in the rules and in the FAQ.
This is your interpretation.
It is wrong.
It goes not only against what the spell itself says, but also specific clarification from multiple staff and official FAQs.
Doing something else more sensible is not home brew, house rule, cheating, or other passive aggressive insinuations that a person disagreeing with you isn't following the rules.
Thanks everyone for the debate so I'm going to put forth a specific situation that may happen in the future we have a party of 4lvl vilians in the way of the wicked they are bartering with a lvl 5 dwarf fighter who is for the most part specialized in crafting wepons and armor and is probably the most stubborn dwarf you've ever met. since its a dwarf let's say 8cha the arcanist of the group has a 16 cha and can make the dc of charm person 18 10(base)+5 stat+1 spell focus +2 potent magic exploit
He charms the dwarf and is successful he then asks the dwarf for 1 specific item for free the dwarfs pride and joy the best blade he ever crafted (a magic weapon ofcourse) now is this a straight cha check? Or more? Since its something he wouldn't give away for free to anyman no matter how close they are.
Except if they fall their charisma check as the spell states.
No PC or NPC will give up everything due to charm person.
No need for a charisma check. It's a clear and obvious harm. It's an autofail.
It is not passively aggressively, I'm direct about it. It is not in the text of the spell or the FAQ.
Yes. It is.
This charm makes a humanoid creature regard you as its trusted friend and ally (treat the target's attitude as friendly).
Friendly isn't a random word choice, it specifically refers to the attitude tracker in diplomacy. That states...
Once a creature's attitude has shifted to helpful, the creature gives in to most requests without a check, unless the request is against its nature or puts it in serious peril. Some requests automatically fail if the request goes against the creature's values or its nature, subject to GM discretion.
The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if it were an automaton<----- which is exactly what you're trying to do, unless you think this sentence somehow relates to sticking a wind up key in their back and turning it.
but it perceives your words and actions in the most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do. (Retries are not allowed.) An affected creature never obeys suicidal or obviously harmful orders, but it might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing.<------ right there blows the "it does anything with a charisma check" idea out of the water. It NEVER obeys suicidal orders, not evern with a charisma check.
In what part f the FAQ states taht the DM can say no to the charisma check?.
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.
There is nothing there that says you can tell the orc to kill its mother with an opposed charisma check. Everything has tossed this into the dms call. When something specifically says "this is the dms call" the dm making a call isn't remotely house rule