Just an average roleplay question.


Advice


I'm building an Enchantment focused Wizard and I just realised what exactly that means and how my companions could view this. They could come to loathe me due to me bending people's wills to my own. Any suggestions on how to spin/present this in a way that may not bring negative context upon my character?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Dominate your companions it's the only way to be sure.

But seriously, it really depends on the make up of your group in terms of classes and alignments. So long as you're using your abilities to benefit the party and you don't have anyone that's whole deal is freeing people from bondage (like a cleric of desna for example) then you should be good to go.

For RP purposes, maybe your character uses their abilities to rehabilitate / lobotomize evil creatures. With the goal of making them productive members of society. The fact that said creatures carry out your perfectly reasonable requests is just a sign that it's working.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Basic Being A Good Guy
Don't use charm person as a date-rape drug even if you get the perfect opportunity. Heros don't take hostages, let alone kill them. That sort of thing.

Basic Social Engineering
Yes, there are a lot of good 3rd level spells but your first one will be heroism. Don't save it for yourself either. A wizard with buffs for the party is more popular than a selfish one.

Deflections
Seize the moral high ground on something else - maybe you try to avoid unnecessary killing, or else maybe there's one enemy you want to redeem, or some other such goal - and stick to it. Note the others moral failings for when comparisons are necessary.

Of course it depends on how other players see the world. In one online discussion I was told that intimidate was the best and easiest way to interact with all NPCs - it's clear that there are major differences of opinion about what's acceptable out there. Know your friends.


Magic is not the only way of bending people to your will. If other members of your party are using those make sure to call it out. So when the barbarian uses intimidate to get his way call him out. When the rogue uses bluff t to trick someone in to doing what he wants call him out. Don’t be an ass about it, but bring up the fact that they are doing the same thing you are except you use magic.

There are also a lot of enchantment spells that are beneficial to the target. Heroism for example is an enchantment spell. While the mind control spells are the ones most people think of when you mention enchantment they are not the only thing the school does. By taking other enchantment spells you not only avoid some of the negative perceptions of the school, you also broaden your abilities. These type of spells also allow you to use your required enchantment spells when facing something immune to mind affecting spells.


I have a PFS character who is a sorcerer with the serpentine bloodline, so his bloodline arcana and bonus spells mostly involve mind-affecting enchantments. He uses them with great care, however, because 1. as a noble, he's very conscious of his reputation, 2. some of his Pathfinder allies do find "loss of consent" magic distasteful, 3. he's gotten scary good at Diplomacy, which is often more effective, and 4. charms and hypnotism are largely useless once a fight has started. He does, however, make frequent use of spells like hideous laughter and hold person to neutralize threats in combat, which most of his fellow PCs *do* appreciate.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fighter: "hey, I don't like how you used magic to force that guy to act against his best interests."

Wizard: "...you split that other guy's face in half with your axe."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Are you looking to be an evil enchanter but convince others that you aren't, or are you looking to only use enchantment in the most ethical way possible?

The two are very different.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The character I've built, for roleplay aspects, is a 16 year old prodigy. Shes a giant book nerd, reading not only for fun but also for information. She's also quite adept at forgeries. I had planned on her being a little selfish, but at the same time she would be using the mind affecting magic mostly for self defense or to diffuse conflicts quicker. I dont plan on being like, oh well theres a person blocking my way better charm them. I was just curious as to what arguments people had for justifying the use of mind affecting enchantments to say a Lawful good paladin.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

A chaotic good character would probably have more of an issue with mind effecting magic than a lawful good one would.

I don't know that there is any need to justify using a spell because of a tag it has (except perhaps 'evil'.) Do you feel you have to justify using your fire spells? While I wouldn't enjoy being mind controlled, I wouldn't enjoy being set on fire either.

Why do you think these spells need some sort of special justification? If you give some sore of argument on why you think they are uniquely bad we could perhaps counter it.

(obviously they could be used for evil, but you can also fireball an orphanage)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, you might ...

... wait, this is a paladin thread now? *jumps out the window*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darc1396 wrote:
I'm building an Enchantment focused Wizard and I just realised what exactly that means and how my companions could view this. They could come to loathe me due to me bending people's wills to my own. Any suggestions on how to spin/present this in a way that may not bring negative context upon my character?

Don't spin it. Own it.

They don't like what you do? Too bad. They fear you? Good. If they ask you to stop making the innkeeper dance like a chicken, fine, for party solidarity and all, but never apologize. You are who you are.


What would Obi-wan do?

Seriously, when done carefully, a little enchantment makes one of the most beloved characters. Make sure they see that in the character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

On the one hand, Obi-Wan Kenobi.

On the other hand, Imperio!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
blahpers wrote:

On the one hand, Obi-Wan Kenobi.

On the other hand, Imperio!

...on the other other hand, Harry himself used the Imperius curse, when it was the only evident path between them and the good they were trying to do. There's a lot of grey area when it comes to enchantment, but like others have pointed out, the same could be said of fire. A lot of that grey area is ash, though. :P


Idealistic Denizen of Ivory Towers.
Obviously such naysayers are being superstitious. Magic may be a more expedient way to manipulate people, but in many ways it's less damaging to the target. A simple dispel magic could reverse spells used to deceive whereas a person deceived through mundane means would have no such recourse. Magical fear wears off in a matter of seconds, mundane fear can scar you for life. If anything, enchantment spells are the safest ways to experience emotions.

The Determinist:
You may have nudged them to one behavior or belief over another, but in the end, there could be no other result than the one that occurred. The spell you cast on them is only one of many outside influences on that persons decision making, and it's unfair to the whole of existence to say that your one spell held it back. For all you know, that person's own influence is what necessitated your casting the spell in the first place, after all, you aren't impervious to outside influences either.

The Liar:
"That's not the spell I cast! I didn't charm them with magic, I enhanced their wisdom enough that they came around to my way of thinking."

Dark Archive

Darc1396 wrote:
The character I've built, for roleplay aspects, is a 16 year old prodigy. Shes a giant book nerd, reading not only for fun but also for information. She's also quite adept at forgeries. I had planned on her being a little selfish, but at the same time she would be using the mind affecting magic mostly for self defense or to diffuse conflicts quicker. I dont plan on being like, oh well theres a person blocking my way better charm them. I was just curious as to what arguments people had for justifying the use of mind affecting enchantments to say a Lawful good paladin.

Magic that doesn't draw its power from inherently evil source is all about how you use it as tool and what for. If you use it to get free service in shops, then you are using it for criminal/evil purposes, if you are using it in combat and not being overly cruel about it, then how is it any different from burning people to death with fireballs?

Another thing to note is that if characters feel squemish about dominating an enemy to fight their friends, you could just order them to non lethally knock out their friends and then order them to tie up themselves. Heck, enchantment magic let's you do stuff like just telling crook to turn themselves in to the city guard :p

(and yeah, chaotic characters might have more strong opinion about free will related questions than lawful ones would)


avr wrote:

Well, you might ...

... wait, this is a paladin thread now? *jumps out the window*

I see what you did there, my paladin friend.


I appreciate the input here guys, I think I will use it for self defense, and if anyone questions me it is a hell of a lot safer and more humane than tossing a fireball.


Screw the mind control, Enchantment is full of awesome ways to improve the party and cripple the enemy! Mind control just seems like a hassle.


Darc1396 wrote:
I appreciate the input here guys, I think I will use it for self defense, and if anyone questions me it is a hell of a lot safer and more humane than tossing a fireball.

It's always about proportional response.

It's very easy for people to see that dropping a fireball because the bartender won't give you a free drink is abusing magic.

It's not easy for people to see proportionality for enchantments. And if you're using 3rd level enchantment spells to get free drinks at the bar, it's going to be just as distasteful. But if you're using your spells appropriately, nobody should really question you except out of curiosity.

Silver Crusade

blahpers wrote:
Darc1396 wrote:
I'm building an Enchantment focused Wizard and I just realised what exactly that means and how my companions could view this. They could come to loathe me due to me bending people's wills to my own. Any suggestions on how to spin/present this in a way that may not bring negative context upon my character?

Don't spin it. Own it.

They don't like what you do? Too bad. They fear you? Good. If they ask you to stop making the innkeeper dance like a chicken, fine, for party solidarity and all, but never apologize. You are who you are.

see, I kinda disagree with this, this is how to you create needless party conflict. If that is already Okayed from the go, then fine. But down right ignore party member complaints does not a cohesive group make. Even if it IS all in character and everyone OOC is fine with it.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Just an average roleplay question. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.