So, I looked over the threads about Compulsion spells but was unsuccessful in finding the answer to the following: To what extent is the victim of a Compulsion spell, specifically the Dominate types, capable of intricate tasks such as crafting items mundane or even magical?
We have a player in the group who seems to think that they could use such a person to get cheap or free items via this method. We've suggested adding the experience cost from 3.5 back in, but this doesn't seem like it would solve the issue.
Duration 1 day/level
Saving Throw Will negates; Spell Resistance yes
DESCRIPTION
You can control the actions of any humanoid creature through a telepathic link that you establish with the subject's mind.
If you and the subject have a common language, you can generally force the subject to perform as you desire, within the limits of its abilities.
Once you have given a dominated creature a command, it continues to attempt to carry out that command to the exclusion of all other activities except those necessary for day-to-day survival (such as sleeping, eating, and so forth).
Subjects resist this control, and any subject forced to take actions against its nature receives a new saving throw with a +2 bonus.
With this in mind, I think it would depend on the dominated character's personality, would they make magic items for people for free? Is this against their nature?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is what Ultimate Intrigue has to say about dominate effects; perhaps it will provide some insight:
[the GM]
With this in mind, I think it would depend on the dominated character's personality, would they make magic items for people for free? Is this against their nature?
I agree with this. It's not obviously self-destructive but it certainly would be against the nature of most people to work for free.
Now, if you're a bit creative - "Make a keen longsword +2 than you can then sell to me" is something that most people with the feat would be willing to do so no save. Then, give them a series of reasonable orders that result in the sword being easy to steal. Or maybe have them "loan" you the money at exorbitant interest until "later".
This is what Ultimate Intrigue has to say about dominate effects; perhaps it will provide some insight:
[the GM]
This clarification alone was worth the cost of the PDF. It's nice to have some official clarity that "Obviously selfdestructive" means more than "don't commit suicide".
Sooo... are you or any player in your group evil?
Mind control is not any better than slavery, and forcing someone to create something for you for free is basically stealing.
To answer your first question, I believe the victim is capable of all its usual actions (using its own skill bonus and feats).
If you and the subject have a common language, you can generally force the subject to perform as you desire, within the limits of its abilities.
While it is more or less obvious that the victim is under the effect of Dominate Person (DC 15 Sense Motive), it's not like they lose their sense of self.
Has there been a redo of the Blood and Magic 9th level spell Thrall (or something like that?0
Sooo... are you or any player in your group evil?
Mind control is not any better than slavery, and forcing someone to create something for you for free is basically stealing.To answer your first question, I believe the victim is capable of all its usual actions (using its own skill bonus and feats).
If you and the subject have a common language, you can generally force the subject to perform as you desire, within the limits of its abilities.While it is more or less obvious that the victim is under the effect of Dominate Person (DC 15 Sense Motive), it's not like they lose their sense of self.
Oh yes! Very evil!
If you take the "against their nature" line too far, it's not really DOMINATING them in any way. It's just suggesting things they might do anyway. For example:
Would you normally get up and walk across a room to open a door for someone who is standing right in front of the door? If not, it's "against your nature", and if the person dominating you tells you to get up and open the door for him, you get a new save.
That line of thinking pretty much kills the usefulness of the spell. I think you need to view it as "if they would do this under ANY circumstance, it's not against their nature". Such as "Would a person make a magic item for free FOR HIS 1st level NEPHEW to go adventuring with?" If the answer is still no, new save. But if the person could conceivably do the action in the best circumstance possible, no, no new save.
So far, everything I've read from you guys reinforces what the other player has stated. It sounds completely possible, per RAW, that they could have a personal item maker under their control.
Would there be a degree of evil, however, between a spell that makes a person friendly to you or one that crushes the will of the person?
If you take the "against their nature" line too far, it's not really DOMINATING them in any way. It's just suggesting things they might do anyway. For example:
Would you normally get up and walk across a room to open a door for someone who is standing right in front of the door? If not, it's "against your nature", and if the person dominating you tells you to get up and open the door for him, you get a new save.
That line of thinking pretty much kills the usefulness of the spell. I think you need to view it as "if they would do this under ANY circumstance, it's not against their nature". Such as "Would a person make a magic item for free FOR HIS 1st level NEPHEW to go adventuring with?" If the answer is still no, new save. But if the person could conceivably do the action in the best circumstance possible, no, no new save.
However, as mentioned in a reply before, using guile and deceit, it's entirely possible to manipulate a person's view of a situation so that it no longer appears as against their nature. Any evil enchanter worth his weight had a maxed bluff.
So, I looked over the threads about Compulsion spells but was unsuccessful in finding the answer to the following: To what extent is the victim of a Compulsion spell, specifically the Dominate types, capable of intricate tasks such as crafting items mundane or even magical?
We have a player in the group who seems to think that they could use such a person to get cheap or free items via this method. We've suggested adding the experience cost from 3.5 back in, but this doesn't seem like it would solve the issue.
At the least, if your player insist upon this make them take as long as possible crafting. Since its an NPC you get to decide what level and what mechanics the NPC has. Don't give it any that reduce crafting time.
Once you see that an individual can only produce 1000gp worth progress per day things start to cost too much (in actual game time) to make this plan particularly worthwhile. 1 month later sure he has 30,000 gp worth of goods. But he could have made much more than that adventuring (probably).
Also combine it with a time limits that mean he can't just sit around and wait for crafting to happen.
Make threats ever present and bad things always just around the corner. If bad things are always on the horizon the party will want to stay on the move and the player wont really see much benefit as the game continues.
Lastly, it would definitely be against most peoples nature to give away items for free to a stranger. Or someone you barely know.
If he tries to get them for free I would say the person gets another save with a bonus. At best, the player might get a 10% discount without giving the dominated person a save.
However, as mentioned in a reply before, using guile and deceit, it's entirely possible to manipulate a person's view of a situation so that it no longer appears as against their nature. Any evil enchanter worth his weight had a maxed bluff.
Perhaps, but it shouldn't be necessary often, because you've gone to the effort of magically controlling someone with a mid-level spell. If you could just convince the person to do something anyway, why even bother dominating them and then having to make a skill check as well? Leave the spell off your list and use your skills.
So, I looked over the threads about Compulsion spells but was unsuccessful in finding the answer to the following: To what extent is the victim of a Compulsion spell, specifically the Dominate types, capable of intricate tasks such as crafting items mundane or even magical?
We have a player in the group who seems to think that they could use such a person to get cheap or free items via this method. We've suggested adding the experience cost from 3.5 back in, but this doesn't seem like it would solve the issue.
At the least, if your player insist upon this make them take as long as possible crafting. Since its an NPC you get to decide what level and what mechanics the NPC has. Don't give it any that reduce crafting time.
Once you see that an individual can only produce 1000gp worth progress per day things start to cost too much (in actual game time) to make this plan particularly worthwhile. 1 month later sure he has 30,000 gp worth of goods. But he could have made much more than that adventuring (probably).
Also combine it with a time limits that mean he can't just sit around and wait for crafting to happen.
Make threats ever present and bad things always just around the corner. If bad things are always on the horizon the party will want to stay on the move and the player wont really see much benefit as the game continues.
Lastly, it would definitely be against most peoples nature to give away items for free to a stranger. Or someone you barely know.
If he tries to get them for free I would say the person gets another save with a bonus. At best, the player might get a 10% discount without giving the dominated person a save.
I should say, I'm not the DM. Just a concerned, fellow player.
It would seem that you could just lie or manipulate them into creating the item. Tell them you'll give them x percentage now and the rest once it's completed, then go back on your word (bluff) once the items done.
More than this, I was wondering if there was some kind of official clarification/errata that I could point to to deter that sort of abuse. It's just a lot of power and leway given to only a 5th level spell.
However, as mentioned in a reply before, using guile and deceit, it's entirely possible to manipulate a person's view of a situation so that it no longer appears as against their nature. Any evil enchanter worth his weight had a maxed bluff.Perhaps, but it shouldn't be necessary often, because you've gone to the effort of magically controlling someone with a mid-level spell. If you could just convince the person to do something anyway, why even bother dominating them and then having to make a skill check as well? Leave the spell off your list and use your skills.
Because it clears up a lot of the work,"Get in the wagon, keep your head down and don't make noise."
"Okay."
There would be lot more to capturing an unwilling target who is acting of their own accord.
With this in mind, I think it would depend on the dominated character's personality, would they make magic items for people for free? Is this against their nature?I agree with this. It's not obviously self-destructive but it certainly would be against the nature of most people to work for free.
Now, if you're a bit creative - "Make a keen longsword +2 than you can then sell to me" is something that most people with the feat would be willing to do so no save. Then, give them a series of reasonable orders that result in the sword being easy to steal. Or maybe have them "loan" you the money at exorbitant interest until "later".
Using the idea that "making something for someone for free is against their nature" as a reason to allow the bonus saving throws seems to me to greatly weaken Dominate Person as a spell since one could easily expand that to "well, I wouldn't do that for the caster while under the influence of Dominate Person" and now every single command gets the bonus save.
I think @rando1000 has a valid concern here. I think it more reasonable to adjudicate based on the question "would this be against the target's character under the most optimum circumstances for the demand". Yes this tilt's the playing field back in favor of the caster but that's rather the point. Why would I bother to cast a spell that is fairly easy to spot for those who interact with the target, has limited if long-term duration, and which already has a provision for those bonus saves when the bar is so low for obtaining those saves?
If the entire war of wills comes down to "I'm going to do what you said but by god I'm going to make you pay through the nose to get it done by dragging my feet and interpreting your demands in the absolute worst possible way" then frankly I don't want to bother with that spell.
I really like this!
The other thing to keep in mind is that most people capable of making powerful magic items really have good Will saves. It might be worthwhile expending some effort trying to find a low-Wis guy with the Master Craftsman feat.
I think there's room for play in "against his nature" -- getting the Divine Light Magesmith Of Kitten-Loving to make a +4 unholy vicious felinebane weapon is likely to backfire real fast, but someone who's reasonably proud of his skill could be challenged to excel himself, someone whose enemy pool overlaps with yours could be convinced to help you kill his enemies, someone who likes mayhem could be convinced you were going to serve his goals, etc., etc. Or you could promise to pay them when they're done, and then stiff them with a fake check (or kill them before they realize the deception and/or break free of the spell.)
Enchanters generally need to be subtle and work at guiding their victims down plausible paths that don't trigger Will saves, and I don't think dominate person is an exception to that. There's less chance of a backfire if you reinforce your dominate or suggestion with deception, bluff, trickery, and plausible semi-cooperation efforts.
Does the rest of the group know what this player is planning? What are their thoughts on it?
Does the rest of the group know what this player is planning? What are their thoughts on it?
We're all evil, greedy bastards, so needless to say we are all on board. Like I mentioned, it just seems like an abuse of a poorly written spell.
Using the idea that "making something for someone for free is against their nature" as a reason to allow the bonus saving throws seems to me to greatly weaken Dominate Person as a spell since one could easily expand that to "well, I wouldn't do that for the caster while under the influence of Dominate Person" and now every single command gets the bonus save.
Arguing that you can't rule "A" because someone else might rule "B" at a later date isn't a very convincing argument to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For this to be against someone's nature, they'd have to be pretty greedy on a Scrooge-like level, making a point of not doing anything for free.
The catch to this approach is that you still need to supply materials and the crafter is still making checks. Anything difficult will have a failure chance- since the PC doesn't know the spellcraft modifier, there's no easy take-ten option. In addition, it's more or less kidnapping since anybody who meets the person is likely to notice the unusual behavior. For comparable effort, the crafter could be locked up in a cellar and only fed when they make progress.
Does the rest of the group know what this player is planning? What are their thoughts on it?We're all evil, greedy bastards, so needless to say we are all on board. Like I mentioned, it just seems like an abuse of a poorly written spell.
Well, that's how most evil campaigns are. You realize that the only thing stopping you is your sympathy. And then you powerspike out of the stratosphere.
I mean, you could just abduct people to your Santa's Sweatshop and get them addicted to drugs. Then they'll willingly make the items for you in exchange for their fix. And not only do you not have to rely on that they'll fail every will save for as many days as you need them to craft, you will also corrupt them and ruin their lives for long after you are finished with them.
Bonus points if you make the crafters mix drugs in their families' food, and then sell them into slavery or prostitution.
Arguing that you can't rule "A" because someone else might rule "B" at a later date isn't a very convincing argument to me.
Eh, I'm not a logician. Just my .02.
Why just not take the leadership feat?
|
Remember, the reason for the DC 15 sense motive is that the person who is dominated will single-mindedly attempt to accomplish the task given to them. That leaves zero room for hemming and hawing, slowing down the work or even attempting to free themselves. They only want to accomplish their given task.