Dominate Person -- Dividing Line Between Against One's Nature and Self-Destructive?

[Balkoth]

So Dominate Person is a spell that states:

"Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out."

Paizo clarified that this is not merely physical harm in their Intrigue section:

"First, the creature never takes obviously selfdestructive actions. The spell doesn’t mention whether this means only bodily harm, but there are many sorts of destruction beyond the physical. For instance, a command to make a king announce something that will obviously irreparably destroy his reputation and tear his kingdom apart likely counts."

So from this we can draw a few conclusions:

1, you can't dominate a person and tell them to kill themselves

2, you can't even do this "indirectly" by telling them to jump into lava or off a cliff or something

3, you can't tell them to go fight a Great Wyrm dragon (unless they're completely stupid (which is possible), part of an army, or actually strong enough to stand a chance)

4, you can't tell the King to announce he's giving up his throne to his vizier (or any other act that would destroy the King's reputation)

The question then becomes "Where is the dividing line between against one's nature vs self-destructive?" And the answer might be "It depends on the situation" -- after all, the vizier commanding the king to be his foot-rest in private is probably only against the King's nature but it wouldn't destroy the King's reputation like doing so in public would be.

Also, how does this apply to things, y'know, worse than death? Including eternal punishment in the afterlife?

[blahpers]

As a Rules Question™ . . . good luck. "Obviously" is an inherently subjective term, and Paizo folks have more or less refused to clarify this one, probably because it's one of those sliders they want to leave for the GM to tweak.

The best I can offer is a published example:

Serpent's Skull spoilers:

The captain of the ship you start on is dominated and ordered to steer into reef-studded waters that are known to be extremely dangerous. He does as he's told. I don't recall if he got a saving throw for that particular order, but he does finally throw off the spell just before the end of his, ah, voyage.

This predates Ultimate Intrigue, though, and that book makes its own rules that may or may not apply in non-intrigue games.

[Balkoth]

blahpers wrote:

This predates Ultimate Intrigue, though, and that book makes its own rules that may or may not apply in non-intrigue games.

Dangerous does seem to be different than effectively suicidal, FWIW.

And yeah, right now I'm mainly concerned with

A, controlling enemies (either the PCs controlling NPCs or vice versa)
B, intrigue/hidden information (info that people would rather die than tell, who would have their reputations ruined, etc)

[deuxhero]

Forcing someone to say something publicly is unlikely to work.

Quote:

Sense Enchantment: You can tell that someone’s behavior is being influenced by an enchantment effect even if that person isn’t aware of it. The usual DC is 25, but if the target is dominated (see dominate person), the DC is only 15 because of the limited range of the target’s activities.

Over one quarter of people will instantly tell the king is under some kind of spell.

[blahpers]

deuxhero wrote:

Forcing someone to say something publicly is unlikely to work.

Quote:

Sense Enchantment: You can tell that someone’s behavior is being influenced by an enchantment effect even if that person isn’t aware of it. The usual DC is 25, but if the target is dominated (see dominate person), the DC is only 15 because of the limited range of the target’s activities.

Over one quarter of people will instantly tell the king is under some kind of spell.

"Instantly" = "if they spend at least 1 minute specifically watching the victim for signs of enchantment-based influence". But your point has merit.

[Kayerloth]

blahpers wrote:

deuxhero wrote:

Forcing someone to say something publicly is unlikely to work.

Quote:

Sense Enchantment: You can tell that someone’s behavior is being influenced by an enchantment effect even if that person isn’t aware of it. The usual DC is 25, but if the target is dominated (see dominate person), the DC is only 15 because of the limited range of the target’s activities.

Over one quarter of people will instantly tell the king is under some kind of spell.

"Instantly" = "if they spend at least 1 minute specifically watching the victim for signs of enchantment-based influence". But your point has merit.

And, of course, proving it is also problematic as the other "75%" of his advisors and guards might, umm, not appreciate casting spells or otherwise doing stuff at HRH to prove the point etc.. Never mind "I AM STILL THE KING, SIR!" Those 25% only 'believe' the King is under some sort of influence (they do not know the success or failure of their results). It is risky though as pointed out as well as being a common theme/trope of fantasy literature.

It really goes right back to blahpers first post. The grey area is DM territory.

[deuxhero]

Keep in mind most games assume a world where magic is provable and exists. A king worth the attention of a 9th level wizard is certainly going to have some contingency for mind control. Even something as simple as "if I make unusual or very big proclamations that aren't overly time sensitive, call over a pair of casters and have them check for enchantment magic" is trivial to implement.

[blahpers]

deuxhero wrote:

Keep in mind most games assume a world where magic is provable and exists. A king worth the attention of a 9th level wizard is certainly going to have some contingency for mind control. Even something as simple as "if I make unusual or very big proclamations that aren't overly time sensitive, call over a pair of casters and have them check for enchantment magic" is trivial to implement.

You would think so, but various regicides in published Golarion lore indicate that it's pathetically easy to kill a monarch without leaving easily-found evidence unless said monarch is a powerful spellcaster in their own right. Ensorcellment isn't that far off from that. Sometimes what is possible via the rules, for whatever reason, isn't as accessible by NPCs for narrative reasons.

[deuxhero]

What regicides were those? Surely a couple of people capable of casting a cantrip on every class should be within reach of a kingdom.