PDA

View Full Version : Dominated.



Duskwither
2007-03-04, 06:18 PM
In a game I play with some friends, I have a Wizard10, Loremaster3, Archmage3. We recently ran into a Drow Priestess, and due to some blundering saves on her part, she fell victim to my Dominate Person. And considering how powerful she was, I've decided that I want to keep her around (despite the fact that the LG Favored Soul was once a slave to Drow, and this particular drow was of the very same house she was a slave to:smalleek: ).

Now, we've convinced the Favored Soul that we could redeem her via Helm of Opposite Alignment (which we've currently joined the crew of a ship to find), but my character's main motivation (he's NE) is that she's incredibly useful. She's a Cleric 13, Hierophant 2 (House-ruled to allow increases of casting levels). My Dominate lasts for a good seventeen days, and considering I can force her to fail her saves, I could keep her as my little thrall forever. Now, this seriously strengthens the party. Another healer/facemelter/smashy character.

I'm... Kinda curious... Do people do this often? Keep a character permenantly dominated? And do DM's often let that go? Or do they get vengeful? Also, would putting a LG Drow into the world be as bad as Drizz't?

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-04, 06:29 PM
Problem: she's a drow cleric. That means she's getting spells from Lolth.
Now, if she becomes LG--or just starts doing good type stuff with your party because of the Dominate--do you really think Lolth will keep on granting her spells?

You could make a case for "she doesn't track what all of her clerics do", I suppose, but it's bound to come up eventually.

Duskwither
2007-03-04, 06:33 PM
Ah, I should've mentioned that. Her house is gone. It had lost favor with Lolth, so, technically she'd been devoting herself to ideals as of late for her spells.

Douglas
2007-03-04, 06:36 PM
Personally, I'd classify this under "Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out" unless you can convince her that the spell she's failing a save against is inarguably beneficial - which might be difficult given that she can probably make the spellcraft roll to identify it from the components automatically. Every time you renew the domination, she gets a new save.

Even if your DM doesn't agree with that, "Subjects resist this control, and any subject forced to take actions against its nature receives a new saving throw with a +2 bonus." Intentionally failing a save against a Dominate spell would most definitely be against her nature, so all you've managed to do is make her have to succeed on two saves rather than one to resist redomination. Plus, I'm sure any number of the things you'll want her to do for you will be against her nature, triggering a new save without a second one to fall back on.

Basically, to keep her dominated for an extended period of time will require many overlapping castings of Dominate Person to have any reliability and will still not be guaranteed.

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-04, 06:36 PM
Per RAW you can order her to fail her saves against your dominate person so you can keep her dominated forever.

EDIT: An order to not resist a spell is not obviously self destructive. And tell her to go to sleep first so she can't make the spell craft check to identify the spell as dominate person.

You just have to word stuff right. You don't say "go swim in the lava" you say "That lava is just an illusion and there is an artifact that will allow you to take revenge on those who reduced your house to rubble underneath that illusion so why don't you go and retrieve it?"

Since I use the Spell Compendium and play wizards most of the time I tend to go Dominate followed by Programmed Amnesia to completely rebuild their mind so that they are my servant forever and can't even contemplate freedom.

My DM's are fine with it (the challenges just get harder to compensate) or they kill off the thrall if it gets to be an issue.

No it isn't as bad as Drizz't. In fact using the Helm Of Opposite Alignment to do stuff liek that is great fun. You should Subdue a Balor one time and keep putting the Helm on its head until it rolls a natural 1 and fails its save.

Bears With Lasers
2007-03-04, 06:38 PM
In that case, depending on what her ideals are, the alignment switch may still make her lose them (but maybe regain them as she switches to new, LG ideals).

A very strong case can be made that you can't force her to fail her saves ("self-destructive"). She'll also get a chance to break free whenever you get her to do something against her nature (the Helm would help alleviate this).

Overall, though--well, it's like having a fifth party member. Less XP and gold for everyone (unless you don't spend any gold on her), more people in the party.

Amiria
2007-03-04, 06:40 PM
Yeah, once she gets lafwul good because of the helm, Lolth won't grant her spells anymore. She'll have to convert to the faith of an appropriate deity to cast spells again. This may take some time and probably a quest.

martyboy74
2007-03-04, 06:41 PM
Actually, just ask the DM to let her join the party (after the helm), and just have you control her. No big difference, except one extra spell slot per a while.

Mewtarthio
2007-03-04, 06:49 PM
"Hello, Dispel Magic, my good friend. Ah, look, you've brought your buddy Break Enchantment out to play! Oh, is that the "undo harmful effects" clause of Wish and Miracle in the distance? Joy! Now all we need is Disjunction and our party will be complete! Let's all go say 'hi' to that inexplicably LG drow over there!"

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-04, 06:53 PM
Dominate is easily broken, Programmed Amnesia on the other hand requires a wish or Miracle (even disjunction won't fix it)

NullAshton
2007-03-04, 07:02 PM
How about have a big long quest after the helmet to get a new deity/ideal to get spells from, eventually ending in the cleric becoming an effective cohort of you, two levels lower?

Mewtarthio
2007-03-04, 07:04 PM
Dominate is easily broken, Programmed Amnesia on the other hand requires a wish or Miracle (even disjunction won't fix it)

What's Programmed Amnesia from? Isn't it the same level as Wish and Miracle?

Anyway, I was responding to the idea of perpetual domination in general. So long as you're not such a high level that you have access to more permanent mind-altering effects, the only thing that you can rely on to keep your thrall from turning on you at the first dispel is Stockholm Syndrome (even the Helm of Opposite Alignment won't work, as I imagine an LG drow would be pretty ticked at being controlled by an NE wizard).

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-04, 07:28 PM
Originally a Psionic power the Spell Compendium made it a 9th level spell.

Yep. There are great plot hooks involved in having thralls (its why many DMs are ok with them)

Variable Arcana
2007-03-04, 07:51 PM
Per RAW you can order her to fail her saves against your dominate person so you can keep her dominated forever.
How do you get that??

RAW:Subjects resist this control, and any subject forced to take actions against its nature receives a new saving throw with a +2 bonus. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/dominatePerson.htm)

I suppose if your DM is willing to rule that it's in the nature of this particular CE Drow priestesses to deliberately enslave herself to a member of an inferior races, then it's possible she wouldn't get a save at +2 every time you tried to re-enslave her... On the other hand, you really wouldn't need the spell at all, then.

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-04, 08:14 PM
*sigh* You don't say "Fail your next save against Dominate XXX" you say "I'm going to cast Super Awesome Magic Booster on you but it requires you to be asleep and if you resist the magic it will fail to work."

Now the bluff check which you can make every time with Glibness and you can keep her perpetually dominated.

It's very much in a drows nature to try to become as powerful as possible.

TheOOB
2007-03-04, 08:16 PM
You don't even need to lie, just tell them to go to sleep (something that is well within the nature of any creature), and cast it on them then, they won't know they had a spell cast on them, and even if they did it wouldn't matter.

Renegade Paladin
2007-03-04, 08:16 PM
Eventually she'll stop believing you, bluff or not. And sleeping is well outside the nature of elves.

TheOOB
2007-03-04, 08:18 PM
Okay, tell them to trance. It's more out of their nature to not sleep when they get tired though.

Tor the Fallen
2007-03-04, 08:56 PM
Do drow sleep?

Renegade Paladin
2007-03-04, 09:06 PM
No, they don't.

Aximili
2007-03-04, 09:12 PM
You should Subdue a Balor one time and keep putting the Helm on its head until it rolls a natural 1 and fails its save.
Wouldn't that require one helm per try?

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-04, 09:17 PM
No. Read the description.

Aximili
2007-03-04, 09:35 PM
Holy *#$&@!! I could swear it was a one time thing!

Isn't that way too much for 4000GP?

Mewtarthio
2007-03-04, 11:18 PM
Best of all, even though the Balor will always register as Evil due to the subtype, you can still tell when you succeed by using Detect Magic to determin when the Helm loses its charge.

Duskwither
2007-03-05, 12:14 PM
Whoa, leave the intarwebz alone for a day and they run amok!

I think the Stockholm Syndrome one made me laugh the most. I would find such a situation to be hilariously awesome for Roleplay, considering the Favored Soul's past affiliation with her and everything. Although, I sincerely doubt my DM would go for such a thing. I don't think he's big into infatuation/romance stuff.

The Balor situation has come up quite a bit actually, and it's something we'd all love to do to one. If merely for the fun of it. Also a LG Balor fighting alongside Solars gives me a fuzzy feeling inside.

Now, I realize how easily dispelled/broken etc... Dominate is, and my DM is the type to make his wizards cast spontaneously because he forgot to check their prepared spells, making the situation rather hazardous, but at this point, considering her ECL is higher then mine, I might be willing to take that chance.

Now, one of the tricks is preventing the CG rogue-type from stealing the Helm from us and using it on my Imp familiar...

Oh, considering this is a cursed item... If we went to a large enough city, couldn't we find someone who was at least selling one?

Clementx
2007-03-05, 12:32 PM
*sigh* You don't say "Fail your next save against Dominate XXX" you say "I'm going to cast Super Awesome Magic Booster on you but it requires you to be asleep and if you resist the magic it will fail to work."

Sleeping creatures are considered willing targets, but that does not mean they automatically give up saving throws. You can Teleport your enemy after you knock her out, but if you try to use any spell that allows saves, she can resist. Ordering her to be a willing target and to not take her save against harmless spells is fine because that only allows you to cast beneficial spells. Ordering her to fail a save against a non-harmless spell is against the nature of every creature, so she gets a save at +2 against Dominate.

There is a reason that sleeping targets are talked about under Targets but not Saving Throws. Or do you think that "willing target" means that you automatically fail your save against Fireball when you are asleep? (Hint: The explicit answer to that question is spelled out in every FAQ- you get your save, albeit at a penalty).

Gorbash
2007-03-05, 03:28 PM
Where is the description for Helm of Opposite Aligment?

Thes Hunter
2007-03-05, 03:33 PM
You can force her to fail her saves?



Ummm? Really?


Because that seems to seriously ping on my Munchkin radar.

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-05, 04:06 PM
Sleeping creatures are considered willing targets, but that does not mean they automatically give up saving throws. You can Teleport your enemy after you knock her out, but if you try to use any spell that allows saves, she can resist. Ordering her to be a willing target and to not take her save against harmless spells is fine because that only allows you to cast beneficial spells. Ordering her to fail a save against a non-harmless spell is against the nature of every creature, so she gets a save at +2 against Dominate.

There is a reason that sleeping targets are talked about under Targets but not Saving Throws. Or do you think that "willing target" means that you automatically fail your save against Fireball when you are asleep? (Hint: The explicit answer to that question is spelled out in every FAQ- you get your save, albeit at a penalty).

No. You have her in trance so she can't make a spell craft check to identify the spell as dominate person (and thus harmful). She does not get to know what spell it is until after its cast on her and she identifies it with spellcraft. Since she willingly fails her next saving throw she is dominated.

Your a bard, you will make the bluff check for her to think it it is a harmless spell every time.


And per RAW a dominated creature doesn't know that they are dominated. They just do what you say and think that they are doing it because they want to, they don't realize that they are under a compulsion to do what you want.

Mewtarthio
2007-03-05, 04:40 PM
No. You have her in trance so she can't make a spell craft check to identify the spell as dominate person (and thus harmful). She does not get to know what spell it is until after its cast on her and she identifies it with spellcraft. Since she willingly fails her next saving throw she is dominated.

Your a bard, you will make the bluff check for her to think it it is a harmless spell every time.

I always believed that creatures know, at the very least, whether or not the incoming spell has the (harmless) descriptor in its Saving Throw line. Otherwise, you could instantly dominate anyone by Bluffing them into believing you're about to cast a Cure spell (Will save for half healing) or Owl's Wisdom (Will save negates) on them, and instead casting Dominate Person. Or worse, tell them you're casting Enlarge Person (Fort negates) and instead cast Finger of Death. You'd be able to instantly kill or control anyone you wished so long as you could convince them that you wanted to buff or heal them. Also, there's no way she's going to believe you short of an epic Bluff check (see below).

Note also that I don't believe Bluff should make the target believe every word you say. Otherwise, you could convince people of anything so long as it was a lie. Rather, I believe that a successful Bluff check only means that they don't detect any dishonesty from you. That's a crucial difference.


And per RAW a dominated creature doesn't know that they are dominated. They just do what you say and think that they are doing it because they want to, they don't realize that they are under a compulsion to do what you want.


Subjects resist this control, and any subject forced to take actions against its nature receives a new saving throw (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#savingThrows) with a +2 bonus. Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out.

They resist the control. Furthermore, people can detect domination with only a DC 15 Sense Motive check because they are so totally under your control. A creature who is Charmed still believes it is in control, but I see absolutely nothing to suggest that a Dominated creature believes it is killing its allies of its own volition and everything to suggest otherwise.

Aximili
2007-03-05, 05:51 PM
No. You have her in trance so she can't make a spell craft check to identify the spell as dominate person (and thus harmful). She does not get to know what spell it is until after its cast on her and she identifies it with spellcraft. Since she willingly fails her next saving throw she is dominated.

I believe the taget always knows if the spell is beneficial or not (why else would it have described in the "Saving throw" entry?). But I don't have anything to back it up.

What I really wanted to say is that sleeping people don't get to deliberately fail their saving throws agaisnt harmfull effects. After all, they are asleep. They can't conciously decide to not resist the spell.

Tor the Fallen
2007-03-05, 06:06 PM
Whed drow 'trance' is it identical to sleeping?

TheOOB
2007-03-05, 06:59 PM
Unconsious creatures are always considered willing targets for spells, so whether or not they would accept the spell is irrelevent.

Aximili
2007-03-05, 07:05 PM
Unconsious creatures are always considered willing targets for spells, so whether or not they would accept the spell is irrelevent.
Even if it's not harmless?

Rigeld2
2007-03-05, 07:10 PM
Unconscious (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#unconscious) creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#helpless) (such as one who is bound, cowering (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#cowering), grappling (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#grappling), paralyzed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#paralyzed), pinned (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#pinned), or stunned (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#stunned)) is not automatically willing.
Even if its not harmless.

Aximili
2007-03-05, 07:21 PM
So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are 100% certain to kill him as long as you have a save-or-die?

Tormsskull
2007-03-05, 07:27 PM
So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are 100% certain to kill him as long as you have a save-or-die?

Only until you apply the common sense filter that every DM should have before he buys a D&D book.

Jack_Simth
2007-03-05, 07:31 PM
A Willing Target and a creature that voluntarily gives up it's saving throw are different things (at least, potentially with the way the rules are written) - they are different sections.

Besides, if an unconscious target always automatically gives up a saving throw, why the saving throw entry on Nightmare?

Rigeld2
2007-03-05, 07:38 PM
So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are 100% certain to kill him as long as you have a save-or-die?
So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are pretty certain to kill him as long as you have a Scythe?
(Coup De Grace, automatically hits+crits, 8d4, average damage is 20 without any other mods, DC 30 fort save or die... )

The_Werebear
2007-03-05, 07:49 PM
So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are pretty certain to kill him as long as you have a Scythe?
(Coup De Grace, automatically hits+crits, 8d4, average damage is 20 without any other mods, DC 30 fort save or die... )

That's a coup de grace, and a different situation. IN this case, sleeping renders you helpless for the purpose of melee, hence the CDG.

Jack_Simth
2007-03-05, 07:49 PM
So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are pretty certain to kill him as long as you have a Scythe?
(Coup De Grace, automatically hits+crits, 8d4, average damage is 20 without any other mods, DC 30 fort save or die... )Thing is, if, for some bizzare reason, you say that sleeping/unconscious critters always choose to fail their saves, a dagger in the hands of a strength-1 Kobold Commoner-1 will quite handily kill a Fighter-20.

Draz74
2007-03-05, 07:50 PM
So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are pretty certain to kill him as long as you have a Scythe?
(Coup De Grace, automatically hits+crits, 8d4, average damage is 20 without any other mods, DC 30 fort save or die... )

"No matter how powerful he is" could easily include creatures that can easily survive 20 damage (or 100 damage!) and pass that Fort save most of the time. :smalltongue:

Mewtarthio
2007-03-05, 07:52 PM
"No matter how powerful he is" could easily include creatures that can easily survive 20 damage (or 100 damage!) and pass that Fort save most of the time. :smalltongue:

But if he forgoes his Fortitude saving throw...

TheOOB
2007-03-05, 07:55 PM
Ahh, but being willing has no effect of fort saves, you can't willingly turn of your immune system, but you can willingly not evade an affect(reflex) or allow something into your mind(will).

Draz74
2007-03-05, 07:56 PM
Right, but the point of that post was to imply, "Being able to kill someone in their sleep automatically because they can't make saves vs. Finger of Death isn't overpowered, because you can kill them automatically anyway due to the CDG rules."

I was merely pointing out that the save allowed vs. no save allowed issue is still relevant.

TheOOB
2007-03-05, 08:04 PM
I suppose it boils down to the DM. If the DM wants you to keep your thrall, then just have them automatically fail when they sleep, it's logical to think that someone who's mind is constantly assualted with that magic would be weakened by it.

If your DM want's your thrall to go away (or be a less permenate thing), they can allow them saves, even while sleeping, as logically a mind might gain resistance to control over time.

EDIT: Upon inspection, I think the "always" willing clause may not be applicable to saves but rather to "willing only" spells such as teleport.

Aximili
2007-03-05, 08:05 PM
A Willing Target and a creature that voluntarily gives up it's saving throw are different things (at least, potentially with the way the rules are written) - they are different sections.

Besides, if an unconscious target always automatically gives up a saving throw, why the saving throw entry on Nightmare?
Yes, this must be it.

So, if you catch a guy in his sleep, no matter how incredibly powerful he is, you are pretty certain to kill him as long as you have a Scythe?
(Coup De Grace, automatically hits+crits, 8d4, average damage is 20 without any other mods, DC 30 fort save or die... )
Sure, a fort DC 30 is very hard. But not at all impossible (and maybe even easy) for an incredibly powerful guy.:smallwink:

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-05, 08:07 PM
Nightmare is actually a stated exception the the standard rule (since it allows a save).

Geoff
2007-03-05, 08:10 PM
I'm... Kinda curious... Do people do this often? Keep a character permenantly dominated?IMX, most players have more self-respect than to try that. I mean, it's an heroic fantasy game, and you mostly want to keep the action focused on the players, constantly-present NPCs can detract from that in a variety of ways, thematic and mechanical.

But, it's the kind of thing evil types with access to Dominate would generally love to do, so it doesn't sound out of character if you're NE. Might not be that great an idea in the long run, as the Dominate may later be broken at an inconvenient time, unleashing a vengful NPC on you - but, RPing an evil character can mean making classic villain mistakes like that out cruelty or hubris.


And do DM's often let that go? Or do they get vengeful? DMs are an upredictable lot. Some may think "well, if you /can/ order someone to fail the will save and keep them dominated forever, and you /don't/ get will saves in your sleep, then it'd be foolish for the party's enemies not to at least try a plot to dominate them all in thier sleep..."


Also, would putting a LG Drow into the world be as bad as Drizz't?Good-aligned Drow are one of those "bold original breaking of a stereotype" tricks that have, themselves, become a hackneyed stereotype.

Aximili
2007-03-05, 08:10 PM
Ahh, but being willing has no effect of fort saves, you can't willingly turn of your immune system, but you can willingly not evade an affect(reflex) or allow something into your mind(will).
Actually, reflexes doesn't need to be about evading. In fact, it doesn't have to have anything to do with the character moving. After all, he can make Reflex Saves even while helpless.

But still, I know you can forgo any saving throw you so wish. I specifically recall an example in which a character willingly failed his fortitude save against licanthropy. (it was probably in the "Lichanthropy as a Disease" part)

Nightmare is actually a stated exception the the standard rule (since it allows a save).
If it were an exception to the rule, it probably would have said so in the description, instead of simply writting the exact same thing as in the other spells.

Mewtarthio
2007-03-05, 08:44 PM
Ahh, but being willing has no effect of fort saves, you can't willingly turn of your immune system, but you can willingly not evade an affect(reflex) or allow something into your mind(will).

Then why don't fighters get their Fort saves to resist Enlarge Person?

Clementx
2007-03-05, 08:44 PM
Even if its not harmless.

Nice SRD quote, except you didn't say that it was under Targets, and defines what a willing means when deciding if spells like Teleport can target. Now quote the second under Saving Throws and voluntarily giving them up. Nothing about being unconscious. I said all of this in my first post, but apparently no one read it.

martyboy74
2007-03-05, 08:57 PM
Actually, reflexes doesn't need to be about evading. In fact, it doesn't have to have anything to do with the character moving. After all, he can make Reflex Saves even while helpless.

But still, I know you can forgo any saving throw you so wish. I specifically recall an example in which a character willingly failed his fortitude save against licanthropy. (it was probably in the "Lichanthropy as a Disease" part)

Please tell me that that's typo, and you instead meant "lycanthropy". Lichanthropy....now that's scary.

Jack_Simth
2007-03-05, 09:10 PM
Ahh, but being willing has no effect of fort saves, you can't willingly turn of your immune system, but you can willingly not evade an affect(reflex) or allow something into your mind(will).
It's the exact same rules text for all three saving throws. They aren't differentiated in the relevant sections.

SpiderBrigade
2007-03-05, 09:11 PM
What would happen if a lycanthrope became a lich, anyway? The template says it wouldn't lose it's special qualities, but...what would it shift into? A lich wolf?

Mewtarthio
2007-03-05, 09:13 PM
What would happen if a lycanthrope became a lich, anyway? The template says it wouldn't lose it's special qualities, but...what would it shift into? A lich wolf?

A wolf with horrific, stretched-out skin, bones, and tiny points of red light instead of eyes.

Aximili
2007-03-05, 09:22 PM
Please tell me that that's typo, and you instead meant "lycanthropy". Lichanthropy....now that's scary.
:smallbiggrin: Oops...
Yes, yes. A typo (twice in a row).

What would happen if a lycanthrope became a lich, anyway? The template says it wouldn't lose it's special qualities, but...what would it shift into? A lich wolf?
I played a Solar/werewolf/vampirie once (ti was also a Half-dragon). But the question never came up cause I never got to change shape.
(do I need to say this adventure lasted only 1 day?)

Rigeld2
2007-03-05, 11:52 PM
Nice SRD quote, except you didn't say that it was under Targets, and defines what a willing means when deciding if spells like Teleport can target. Now quote the second under Saving Throws and voluntarily giving them up. Nothing about being unconscious. I said all of this in my first post, but apparently no one read it.
Wrong.


Target or Targets

Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.
If the target of a spell is yourself (the spell description has a line that reads Target: You), you do not receive a saving throw (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#savingThrows), and spell resistance (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#spellResistance) does not apply. The Saving Throw and Spell Resistance lines are omitted from such spells.
Some spells restrict you to willing targets only. Declaring yourself as a willing target is something that can be done at any time (even if youíre flat-footed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#flatFooted) or it isnít your turn). Unconscious (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#unconscious) creatures are automatically considered willing, but a character who is conscious but immobile or helpless (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#helpless) (such as one who is bound, cowering (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#cowering), grappling (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#grappling), paralyzed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#paralyzed), pinned (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#pinned), or stunned (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#stunned)) is not automatically willing.
Some spells allow you to redirect the effect to new targets or areas after you cast the spell. Redirecting a spell is a move action (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#moveActions) that does not provoke attacks of opportunity (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/attacksOfOpportunity.htm).
Theres the entire section. Show me where it limits what it applies to. Hint: It doesnt. Every spell with a Target or Targets line uses those rules.

Douglas
2007-03-06, 01:02 AM
That unconscious targets are considered willing is pretty solidly established. Now where does it say that "willing" status automatically implies voluntarily failing all saving throws instead of just being eligible for willing-only spells like Teleport?

Kantolin
2007-03-06, 01:13 AM
But, it's the kind of thing evil types with access to Dominate would generally love to do, so it doesn't sound out of character if you're NE.

Actually, I could utterly understand a group of people utilizing dominate as a creative form of 'jail'.

Heck, it could even be pseudo-willing. "Mr. Human, you have been charged with Grand Theft Carriage and Murder. Your sentence will be alleviated to something not death provided you volunteer to help us fight in the approaching army. To ensure that you will not escape, you will be placed under the spell domination."

or

"Mr. Halfling, you have been charged with a sizeable amount of theft and kidnapping. As your crimes were not fatal you will not be given the death penalty but rather X years in prison. If you like instead, you can be dominated and do Y instead"

Or even

"You're an evil man, Mr person-we-adventurers-just-captured, and we can't afford to carry you out of the dungeon, and odds are you're good at getting out of ropes. To ensure that we can get out without worrying about being backstabbed I'm going to dominate you until we get to town and can give you a trial."

Rigeld2
2007-03-06, 06:50 AM
That unconscious targets are considered willing is pretty solidly established. Now where does it say that "willing" status automatically implies voluntarily failing all saving throws instead of just being eligible for willing-only spells like Teleport?
yayIdidntunderstandthepreviousargumentsorry.

Talya
2007-03-06, 06:15 PM
No, they don't.

Despite what others have said, yes, some of them do. While Drow can take reverie, many do not, and in fact, have difficulty doing so. Elven reverie requires a certain self discipline and inner peace that many drow are unable to replicate. Also note that elves can sleep. Their reverie is a trained, learned behavior, and if they don't take it, they get tired like anyone else.

Now, that's Forgotten Realms novel material (Daughter of the Drow, War of the Spiderqueen, etc.), not sourcebook. But it's still pretty canonical.

Emperor Tippy
2007-03-06, 07:09 PM
Not really. Page 103 of the MM "These traits are in addition to the High Elf traits except where noted". Page 15 of the PB "Elves do not sleep, instead they trance.". Page 102 of the MM "-Immunity to sleep effects"


Drow don't sleep and its arguable if they even can per RAW. None of the FR novels are cannon or rules legal.

monotone
2007-03-06, 07:48 PM
Unconscious

Knocked out and helpless (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#helpless). Unconsciousness can result from having current hit points between -1 and -9, or from nonlethal damage (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm#nonlethalDamage) in excess of current hit points.



I'm not sure the SRD defines unconscious as sleeping.