Charm person question


Rules Questions


Sorry if this has been answered before I'm sure it has, but I didn't see it answered in the threads I went through.

Say a Lamia charms a PC who fails her save. Maybe orders the PC "I'm so thirsty. Could you go get me water from the fountain?" to take the PC out of the battle for the moment. Something a friend might do. The PC fails the opposed charisma check. Another PC grabs the charmed PC and requests "don't do that we need you here". Would there be another opposed charisma check-maybe against the DC set by the Lamia's roll or would the PC make best efforts to fulfill the Lamia's request?


Really shouldnt be any opposed checks for that, unless the character has a traumatic experience as a waitress or something


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I get what the OP is trying to ask --- I think.

The Lamia used a round to attempt to take a PC out of combat and it was diced and the PC failed. Should the Lamia's efforts then be thwarted by a swift or immediate action by an allied PC without ANY check? as an auto-success?

If so, then the Lamia (in this example) has lost a round completely, and there was no "real" penalty for the failed check.

Somebody, somewhere has to pay a penalty for the failed check.

As the DM, I'd say yes, the other PC must spend their round shaking the PC, lightly slapping them on the face, etc. in hopes of making them snap out of it to earn a renewed check.

There is a lot left unsaid about Charm, so its left up to the DM in many cases, that would be my judgment, YMMV.


Here's the thing, though. The PC trying to get her water: does he know there's a battle going on?

If the charm effect happened out of battle, as did the request, it entirely makes sense that the charmed one would go get water. After all: why not?

If the charm effect happened in-battle, the charmed one is more likely that the friend can help snap him out of it. Not out of the charm, obviously, but out of leaving.

Charm clearly makes you friendly. It doesn't make you stupid or unaware of the current situation.

That said, the exactly nature of what it can accomplish is left in the hands of a GM.

Also, here's a potential scenario:

- Lamia: uses action to take a fighter out for multiple rounds (getting water)
- PC: uses a round as an opposed check

This partially takes out two PCs for one turn, or takes out one PC for multiple turns.

(That said, the one request seems like a better suggestion.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Good point about the timing. If the "lead" action in the surprise round was the charm, I'd still rule it as it stands.
Yes, Charm does not make a slave, it is NOT suggestion or dominate, but it does "gloss over" the individual affected, temporarily rearranges their priorities so long as the rearrangement is reasonable.

If this was in the middle of combat... asking to get her a drink would not be a rational request, more like a non-sequitur... Maybe telling them weapons hurt, and slapping is better (lol)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
mardaddy wrote:


If this was in the middle of combat... asking to get her a drink would not be a rational request, more like a non-sequitur... Maybe telling them weapons hurt, and slapping is better (lol)

If you're already in the fight "hey, stop your friend from attacking me, tackle him or something" is a pretty reasonable request to an adventurer.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The charmed target is obliged to act as if the charmer were their friend. What would the victim have done if, say, the victim saw an illusion fall away from the lamia, revealing the PC's long-lost best friend? And the PC's party (including said PC) was just attacking her! How terrible! But the rest of the party doesn't seem to realize what's happened....

That's the charmed person's perspective, on average. Unless the lamia orders the target to do something that the target wouldn't do for a trusted friend or ally, no opposed check ensues--only hijinks.


The water request is weird; so I'd say that you can't just make them get water. I know if I just climbed a giant temple and met a friend and they ask me to do work for them, I'd tell them to screw off probably.

But blahpers seems right IMO, and BigNorseWolf said a similar thing.

_______
I think Charm person is definitely best used out of battle; and is of limited use in battle outside of the things mentioned above. I am open to persuasion though

Scarab Sages

Beat wrote:

Sorry if this has been answered before I'm sure it has, but I didn't see it answered in the threads I went through.

Say a Lamia charms a PC who fails her save. Maybe orders the PC "I'm so thirsty. Could you go get me water from the fountain?" to take the PC out of the battle for the moment. Something a friend might do. The PC fails the opposed charisma check. Another PC grabs the charmed PC and requests "don't do that we need you here". Would there be another opposed charisma check-maybe against the DC set by the Lamia's roll or would the PC make best efforts to fulfill the Lamia's request?

You mean diplomacy? Diplomacy doesn't use opposed rolls. The DC is fixed based on their CHA mod + their current attitude to the PC. This DC is also modified by the request.

And, technically, Diplomacy checks can't be used on players (a poorly designed mechanic, I think, but it prevents players from being forced to role play friendly behaviour towards a-hole PCs). A PC, in theory, is using role playing to substitute for this lack of diplomacy check.

The charm spell adjusts their attitude to friendly. The base DC for diplomacy of a friendly target is DC 10 + their CHA mod. Checks are only needed if the request would go against the nature of the NPC or puts them in danger. So you could certainly request they leave the room, provided it's safe to do so.

Additionally, the Charm Spell only adjusts the target's attitude towards the caster, not the party of the caster. So while the caster becomes a friend, their party may still present as enemies or otherwise untrustworthy, depending on their actions. The spell also doesn't affect their attitude towards their own allies, which means that even if you become their friend, they still may choose to ally with their other friends...

So charm won't control the PC, and even a reasonable request may be reconsidered if the PC's friends are in trouble. That said, if the PC isn't on friendly terms with their party, then Charm can be very effective for NPCs during combat.

Getting back to your question, Yes, the Lamia could attempt to get you to leave combat, but that would depend on the PC's personality. If a friend asked you to leave a combat between people that were all your friends, would you leave because your friend asked? The subject of Charm honestly believes that the caster is their friend in the true sense of the word. They treat them as they would any other friend, including how they respond to requests from their friends.

If your friends are fighting and one asks you to leave the the room, how would your PC handle it? A PC that loves combat, probably won't leave. A PC that would be inclined to get their friends to work it out, non-violently, would make efforts to make that happen. And so on an so forth.

The caster of Charm as zero control over their target, but that lack of control can make the spell very powerful. All it does is make them regard you as a friend, and that friendship can be very potent.

Scarab Sages

Cattleman wrote:
I think Charm person is definitely best used out of battle; and is of limited use in battle outside of the things mentioned above. I am open to persuasion though

Well, you are correct, using it in battle is often a bad plan. The spell itself specifies that the target gains a +5 to their will save if used while they are currently threatened or being attacked by you or your allies. So it's tough to use in combat, just for that, and additionally tough because it doesn't grant a predictible response from the target. Other people often treat their friends very differently than you'd treat your friends and most adventurers are emotional wrecks anyway...(Adventuring is very traumatizing to begin with, and most adventurers usually have sad stories on why they are adventuring in the first place).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If a friend asked me to go get water while other friends were trying to kill them, I'd say no and try to stop my friends from killing each other. It's not a reasonable request, even from my best friend. After all, I'm aware my other friends are currently to try to murder them.

if used during battle, I'd definitely require the opposed charisma check to force it, even without the PC assist because of this.

Charm person doesn't make me a moron, after all. Why would I go get water while my friends are murdering each other?


That raises an interesting question. Does Charm Person affect morons more than smart people?

Scarab Sages

Weables wrote:

if used during battle, I'd definitely require the opposed charisma check to force it, even without the PC assist because of this.

Charm person doesn't make me a moron, after all. Why would I go get water while my friends are murdering each other?

Where are you getting the idea that there is an opposed CHA check? There isn't one. You'd still be in full control of your actions while subject to charm. The difference is purely in that you now regard the caster as a friend.

That said, perhaps you're the apathetic type that would perfer to let your friends sort it out on their own...If I was running a true neutral character, I would certainly give serious thought to leaving the room while my friends did their thing.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Weables wrote:
Why would I go get water while my friends are murdering each other?

In an adventuring party what are the odds of at least one of your party members routinely setting someone or something on fire?

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Weables wrote:
Why would I go get water while my friends are murdering each other?
In an adventuring party what are the odds of at least one of your party members routinely setting someone or something on fire?

I was just talking to a player about this sort of encounter. His Rogue went ahead to firebomb some trolls, and then party shows up in their wagon with casks of oil...some oil contacts a flaming troll and you know the rest...lol


Murdock Mudeater wrote:
Weables wrote:

if used during battle, I'd definitely require the opposed charisma check to force it, even without the PC assist because of this.

Charm person doesn't make me a moron, after all. Why would I go get water while my friends are murdering each other?

Where are you getting the idea that there is an opposed CHA check? There isn't one. You'd still be in full control of your actions while subject to charm. The difference is purely in that you now regard the caster as a friend.

That said, perhaps you're the apathetic type that would perfer to let your friends sort it out on their own...If I was running a true neutral character, I would certainly give serious thought to leaving the room while my friends did their thing.

whoops, confused it with dominate for a second with the opposed cha check. my bad on that part

Edit: even if you're the true neutral type, if your character has an int of a lightbulb, usually they're smart enough to realize that in most cases, you need these people to keep you alive. that's how my groups tend to play anyways, to give motivation for evil PCs to work with good ones, etc. You're deep in a dungeon together, barely surviving challenges that tax the 4-6 of you to your limit, would you really let all your friends slaughter each other, no matter your alignment? no matter what, your dead friends mean whatever your goals are, that you presumably believe in because you're there, are going to fail because now half of you are dead.

maybe its the pragmatist in me, but i think anyone who adventures professionally, or is thrust into the role wants as many friends alive as possible. my characters wouldn't be above doing worse to the party than leaving and getting water, they'd be in there using non-lethal damage and debilitating spells to make sure my friends don't kill each other if necessary, so we can beat whatever 'BBEG' needs beating.

which you know, may be even better for the Lamia. But they still wouldn't go get water.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Charm Person wrote:
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.


Beat wrote:

Sorry if this has been answered before I'm sure it has, but I didn't see it answered in the threads I went through.

Say a Lamia charms a PC who fails her save. Maybe orders the PC "I'm so thirsty. Could you go get me water from the fountain?" to take the PC out of the battle for the moment. Something a friend might do. The PC fails the opposed charisma check. Another PC grabs the charmed PC and requests "don't do that we need you here". Would there be another opposed charisma check-maybe against the DC set by the Lamia's roll or would the PC make best efforts to fulfill the Lamia's request?

I'd say the PC directly ignores that command

First, charm does not grant direct control, merely changes the target's attitude towards the caster to "friendly". That does not even mean you will stop attacking the caster, but you may think twice because "my friend could've be controlled or something because he's acting weird. Let's go nonlethal so we can deal with his condition later"

Second, the charmed creature does not lose awareness. If you're in combat with your friends in peril, you'll not abandon combat risking defeat or even deaths to just fetch some water

Scarab Sages

Weables wrote:

Edit: even if you're the true neutral type, if your character has an int of a lightbulb, usually they're smart enough to realize that in most cases, you need these people to keep you alive. that's how my groups tend to play anyways, to give motivation for evil PCs to work with good ones, etc. You're deep in a dungeon together, barely surviving challenges that tax the 4-6 of you to your limit, would you really let all your friends slaughter each other, no matter your alignment? no matter what, your dead friends mean whatever your goals are, that you presumably believe in because you're there, are going to fail because now half of you are dead.

maybe its the pragmatist in me, but i think anyone who adventures professionally, or is thrust into the role wants as many friends alive as possible. my characters wouldn't be above doing worse to the party than leaving and getting water, they'd be in there using non-lethal damage and debilitating spells to make sure my friends don't kill each other if necessary, so we can beat whatever 'BBEG' needs beating.

which you know, may be even better for the Lamia. But they still wouldn't go get...

Lots of ways to role play true neutral. Apathy is one way. And my qualifier was that I would "give serious thought" not that I would automatically abandon my allies.

But regarding the ideal of keeping your friends alive, that is not a True Neutral outlook. True Neutral is selfish. You care about yourself more than others and you might not care much about yourself either. A true neutral character may still care about others for the purposes of what others do for them. Mutual survival is definitely a compelling arguement for a true neutral character, but it isn't enough for a definite response.

Additionally, the class of the true neutral character may have a large impact on their descision. A druid may consider their friends attempting to return to the earth, rather than regarding killing eachother as a bad thing. A Necromancer may not even see the difference between living party members and undead party members. And clerics of certain deities are rather accepting of death (and many encourage it).

Scarab Sages

Yorien wrote:


I'd say the PC directly ignores that command

First, charm does not grant direct control, merely changes the target's attitude towards the caster to "friendly". That does not even mean you will stop attacking the caster, but you may think twice because "my friend could've be controlled or something because he's acting weird. Let's go nonlethal so we can deal with his condition later"

Second, the charmed creature does not lose awareness. If you're in combat with your friends in peril, you'll not abandon combat risking defeat or even deaths to just fetch some water

You would really beat your friend unconscious and risk their death, if you thought they were "acting weird"?

People can die from non-lethal damage, don't forget that. But sure, if that's how you'd react to one of the PCs "acting wierd" then I see no issue responding like this to NPCs that also do that.

Though I don't know why you could conclude that the caster is one acting wierd, rather than your party acting weird (perhaps the party is acting wierd, and it's up to you and your lamia buddy to render them unconscious).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
You would really beat your friend unconscious and risk their death, if you thought they were "acting weird"?

On the advice of my attorney, I decline to answer that question.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:

You would really beat your friend unconscious and risk their death, if you thought they were "acting weird"?

People can die from non-lethal damage, don't forget that. But sure, if that's how you'd react to one of the PCs "acting wierd" then I see no issue responding like this to NPCs that also do that.

Though I don't know why you could conclude that the caster is one acting wierd, rather than your party acting weird (perhaps the party is acting wierd, and it's up to you and your lamia buddy to render them unconscious).

The actions a charmed creature may take would depend on the exact scenario, the charmed creature's class, her alignment, and previous caster's actions. Charm person just makes the caster your "friend", doesn't make the charmed creature stupid or amnesic. Also, she may be your "friend", but so may be the rest of the party. Finally, take into account the OP essentially pointed that the group is already in combat, probably against her.

A couple scenarios with some possible outcomes.

Scenario 1:

Combat Round #4 in the middle of some random ruins: Lamia already attacked several times, another party member is downed, two orcs are attacking your mage and suddenly she asks you to fetch some water while she's holding your party's rogue under her paws. There's no need to roll CHA here, there's clearly something wrong with her and/or your party. No chance you'll leave battle to fetch water; stop everyone before more damage is done but try not to kill anyone except those orcs.

Scenario 2:

Combat round #4 near a city: Orcs are attacking your party but she's been acting passively (although why the hell she's not helping your group?). She suddenly asks you make a run to the city and call for reinforcements while the rest of the group keeps the orcs busy because your barbarian is the fastest runner. Hey that idea is actually not half-bad - specially if you think the party will manage against "only those orcs" - and she may perfectly get that CHA roll.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Charm person question All Messageboards

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