The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 344
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    hamishspence's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    I think you're overstating charm person a touch. It doesn't change your mind or your very essence. It makes you marginally more amiable to the person who cast it. Heck, while it does make it a bit easier to talk you into something you're not that opposed to anyway, it has 0 chance of someone talking you into something you absolutely would not do. Heck, if you hate someone such that they'd have disadvantage in talking you viewing anything they say in a favorable light, charm person would only get you back to an even chance.
    Going back to

    "what is the proper way for the law to treat the use or attempted use of charm magic"?

    And

    "what is the normal reaction, in-universe, to a use or attempt"?

    I think treating it as murder/rape or attempted murder/rape is a bit much.

    I can't see it being treated that way in an average D&D setting.

    It would be treated fairly seriously though - just not that seriously.


    And IMO, the average judge will not hand down the same sentence as they will for attempted murder.
    Last edited by hamishspence; 2019-05-05 at 04:19 PM.
    Marut-2 Avatar by Serpentine
    New Marut Avatar by Linkele

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigreid View Post
    I think you're overstating charm person a touch. It doesn't change your mind or your very essence.
    Yes, it most certainly does.

    It makes you marginally more amiable to the person who cast it.
    No, it makes you think the person who cast it on you is a friendly acquaintance. That can be a much bigger effect than making you marginally more amiable to them.

    And regardless of the size of the effect, it is still changing your mind and the very essence of who you are. Someone you didn't like, or didn't know, is now your friendly acquaintance.

    Heck, while it does make it a bit easier to talk you into something you're not that opposed to anyway, it has 0 chance of someone talking you into something you absolutely would not do.
    While I agree that many people treat the Charm Person spell as if it is more powerful than it is, if that were true, there would be no need for the spell. If I absolutely would not do something for a stranger but would for a friendly acquaintance, and you are a stranger that casts the spell on me so that I will do it for you, then I've done something that I absolutely would not do. And it can stop a creature from attacking you.

    Heck, if you hate someone such that they'd have disadvantage in talking you viewing anything they say in a favorable light, charm person would only get you back to an even chance.
    How so? I don't hate my friendly acquaintances, so any disadvantage imposed by that would be forgotten.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Somewhere
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    In the D&D novel Spellfire, the CG Elminster suggests that wizards in general frown on those who charm often or for frivolous reasons. But the spell itself is not portrayed as intrinsically evil.
    I wouldn't put much weight on anything Elminster says or thinks.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    hamishspence's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by JackPhoenix View Post
    I wouldn't put much weight on anything Elminster says or thinks.
    It came up when his CN ally brought up the possibility of the spellfire wielder being too powerful to be allowed to roam free - and maybe needing to be destroyed:


    "Ye, I, and all gathered here now, are dangerous. Should we then be destroyed out of hand because of what we might do? Nay! It is the right and the doom of all creatures who walk Faerûn to do as they will; it is why we of the art frown so at those who charm often, or in frivolous cause.”

    “Not even the gods took unto themselves the power to control ye or me so tightly that we cannot walk or speak or breathe save at another's bidding! It is their will that we may be free to do as we may. Slay a foe, sure, or defend thyself against a raider - but to strike down one who may some day menace thee? That is as monstrous as the act of the usurper who slays all babies in a land, for fear of a rightful heir someday rising against him!"
    Last edited by hamishspence; 2019-05-05 at 04:51 PM.
    Marut-2 Avatar by Serpentine
    New Marut Avatar by Linkele

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    FaerieGodfather's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Cheyenne WY
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Contrast View Post
    If I used Charm Person to get a bouncer to let me into a club without paying the entry fee I do not think it would be reasonable for them to drop the rest of their life and come after me with the intent of inflicting as much harm on me as possible. The reaction is disproportionate to the injury.
    That's the problem. You're only viewing the injury in terms of what the caster violated the victim's mind to accomplish.

    The injury is violating the victim's mind in the first place.
    "Love is at the heart of everything: all learning, all relationships. Love, or the lack of it." - Fred Rogers

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Aug 2016

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by jh12 View Post
    The spells are entirely different mechanically. With a Charm spell you invade my mind and affect my being. With an Enhance Ability (Charisma) you are affecting your own self.
    And mechanically the impacts of both spells are 'you have advantage on charisma checks'. They're still 'drugging' you into liking them - they're just using pheromones rather than slipping something into your drink.

    Quote Originally Posted by jh12 View Post
    How so? I don't hate my friendly acquaintances, so any disadvantage imposed by that would be forgotten.
    An acquaintance who you still remember has in the past used mind altering magic on you. Disadvantage plus advantage cancels out to a regular check.

    Quote Originally Posted by FaerieGodfather View Post
    That's the problem. You're only viewing the injury in terms of what the caster violated the victim's mind to accomplish.

    The injury is violating the victim's mind in the first place.
    If someone shoots me in the leg as part of a bank robbery in which they murdered several people they have committed a number of horrible crimes and I will likely be very angry at them. Would I quit my job, become a bounty hunter and start going to night school to learn the law so I can catch them, prosecute them and then try and become a prison guard so I can make their life hell in prison? Probably not. I'd probably just give my evidence to the police and then get on with my life. This isn't saying the person didn't do a bad thing, it's just that I have other stuff going on in my life which is more important to me than that.

    Again I'm not arguing people wouldn't be angry - I'm just saying the statement that anyone who has Charm Person cast on them will make it their personal mission to hunt the caster down and murder them regardless of what the Charm was used for seems like an overly extreme position to take. People have jobs and families and a million other responsibilities which would be more important to them than personally hunting down and murdering the guy who conned them out of 10 gold.
    Last edited by Contrast; 2019-05-05 at 06:29 PM.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by FaerieGodfather View Post
    That's the problem. You're only viewing the injury in terms of what the caster violated the victim's mind to accomplish.

    The injury is violating the victim's mind in the first place.
    This.

    Same way that drugging someone's glass while they weren't looking is violating, even if you don't do anytjhing else to them.


    OP, if you want an impression of how in-universe such spells are handled, the Waterdeep's Legal Code has several mentions of the punishments a waiting those who mess with people's mind. They're pretty heavy.


    Also, on a different subject, I don't think doing something like Harry Potter and the Natural 20 would work for 5e

    HPatN20 is built on the absurdity of 3.5 munchkinry and rule-lawyering. 5e is SPECIFICALLY built on the assumption that the DM's call trumps anything the book says, and that DM should rule reasonably (which depends on what their table wants/like).

    So either you'd be reducing 5e to "3.X once more", which 5e is not and it'd be nice to not see this misconception be spread, or you're losing the HPstN20 humor that isn't from the "fish out of water" elements of the usual crossover jokes based on referre cing the different works' events.
    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2019-05-05 at 06:36 PM.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    FaerieGodfather's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Cheyenne WY
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by FaerieGodfather View Post
    That's the problem. You're only viewing the injury in terms of what the caster violated the victim's mind to accomplish.

    The injury is violating the victim's mind in the first place.
    Quote Originally Posted by Contrast View Post
    Again I'm not arguing people wouldn't be angry - I'm just saying the statement that anyone who has Charm Person cast on them will make it their personal mission to hunt the caster down and murder them regardless of what the Charm was used for seems like an overly extreme position to take. People have jobs and families and a million other responsibilities which would be more important to them than personally hunting down and murdering the guy who conned them out of 10 gold.
    Quote Originally Posted by FaerieGodfather View Post
    That's the problem. You're only viewing the injury in terms of what the caster violated the victim's mind to accomplish.

    The injury is violating the victim's mind in the first place.
    You're right, people have priorities. Sometimes, testifying in court against the caster is all the justice they can afford. Sometimes, other priorities have to take moral precedence.

    So I will amend my statement to say that the appropriate response to being charmed is to cause as much harm upon your attacker as you feel you can practically afford.

    But that's the only moral limitation I will accept. There is no revenge for this grievance that I would call disproportionate.
    "Love is at the heart of everything: all learning, all relationships. Love, or the lack of it." - Fred Rogers

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by FaerieGodfather View Post
    That's the problem. You're only viewing the injury in terms of what the caster violated the victim's mind to accomplish.

    The injury is violating the victim's mind in the first place.
    But it is significantly different than a dominate effect, or even a mind-affecting drug.

    It's an hour-long effect that doesn't remove your ability to reason. It makes you friendly towards the person, but only a pretty superficial level. You see a stranger, they greet you, and though you're initially wary somehow the person just seems incredibly nice. You chat for a bit, and then they go on their way and its only an hour later that your realize that they enchanted you. Once again, though, it isn't like they made you do anything, or could have made you do anything, really.

    Personally, I'd view it as less intrusive than using disguise person to impersonate an acquaintance of theirs.

    There has to be some amount of moderation here. Clearly you might refuse to work with the guy if he ever comes around again. You might even tell everyone you know to avoid him. But in a setting where magic users are real, powerful, and generally respected, it isn't going to be a small thing to get a powerful wizard convicted of something, especially if they're out of town within a day.

    Quote Originally Posted by unoriginal
    Also, on a different subject, I don't think doing something like Harry Potter and the Natural 20 would work for 5e

    HPatN20 is built on the absurdity of 3.5 munchkinry and rule-lawyering. 5e is SPECIFICALLY built on the assumption that the DM's call trumps anything the book says, and that DM should rule reasonably (which depends on what their table wants/like).

    So either you'd be reducing 5e to "3.X once more", which 5e is not and it'd be nice to not see this misconception be spread, or you're losing the HPstN20 humor that isn't from the "fish out of water" elements of the usual crossover jokes based on referre cing the different works' events.
    Oh I am well aware. The premise is somewhat different. Two are inserted, a munchkin warlock and a more holistic, role-play focused fighter. The Munchkin forgets basic things like food, ticks off every third person they meet, and fosters an adversarial relationship with the GM. (in this case appearing as a glowing blob of light.) the more holistic player is able to get the GM to work with him to do unconventional things, and does a much better job attending to the world around him and how things change throughout the course of the story.

    So I'd view it as a continuation to HPN20's skewering of 3.5e rules-lawyering.
    Last edited by strangebloke; 2019-05-05 at 09:28 PM.
    I'm a tad rude. It's a tendency of mine that I'm trying to get better about. Call me out on it if you see it.
    Sacrifice your Humanity for POWER (homebrew effort)

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    But it is significantly different than a dominate effect, or even a mind-affecting drug.
    No it isn't. It's a mind-altering spell.

    It's an hour-long effect that doesn't remove your ability to reason. It makes you friendly towards the person, but only a pretty superficial level. You see a stranger, they greet you, and though you're initially wary somehow the person just seems incredibly nice. You chat for a bit, and then they go on their way and its only an hour later that your realize that they enchanted you. Once again, though, it isn't like they made you do anything, or could have made you do anything, really.
    They did make you do something. They made you think they were a friendly acquaintance. And if they weren't trying to get you to do something else you wouldn't do otherwise, why cast the spell?

    Personally, I'd view it as less intrusive than using disguise person to impersonate an acquaintance of theirs.
    I would disagree because Disguise Person doesn't invade their minds and alter their personalities. But using Disguise Person to trick someone in normal (non-combat related) circumstances is also wrong, so that doesn't get you very far.

    There has to be some amount of moderation here.
    There is, but it's on the magic user's side. Don't cast spells on unwilling people outside of combat-type situations. Help the people put down the bad magic users, the ones who do cast spell on unwilling people outside of combat, and the people won't have to go full Uthgardt in self defense.

    Clearly you might refuse to work with the guy if he ever comes around again. You might even tell everyone you know to avoid him. But in a setting where magic users are real, powerful, and generally respected, it isn't going to be a small thing to get a powerful wizard convicted of something, especially if they're out of town within a day.
    Why would magic users be generally respected in a setting where they went around assaulting people on a regular basis? Feared? Hated? Sure. But respected? Plus, Charm Person is a first level spell, so it's not like the wizard has to be all that powerful to abuse it.

    And if most of them don't, then the few that do look even worse in comparison.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    It's like realizing you've been drugged to do something that was against your will. You may not realize that magic was involved, though to most denizens of a fantasy world, magic explains everything, but you know the person who charmed you did something that subverted your will. In medieval Europe it would be easy enough to someone get burned at the stake for that.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    EvilClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Somewhere
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    In Eberron, using mind affecting magic is considered a form of fraud. Another form of fraud is "Counterfeint of identity with criminal intent", which covers Disguise Self and shapeshifting, but the wording suggest that unless you cause problems, you can shift into whatever you want. Cases of fraud require court resolution, and usual punishments are fines, exile (may not be relevant outside Sharn) and branding.

    In Waterdeep, impersonating a Lord or noble is serious crime, punishable by death in the first case, but there doesn't seem to be any penalty for impersonating commoners. Magically influencing someone without their permission is punishable by fine up to 1000 gp or imprisonment, with harder punishments when higher-ranking victim is involved

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Oct 2018

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    So I have a query to add to this debate then, given it's harry potter related. I'm not huge fan, nor do I want to bother googling BUT -
    In book 4 or so, doesn't Ron get charmed with a love spell meant for harry? I don't remember how long he suffers from it, but I don't remember people saying that girl should be kicked out of Hogwarts and put in prison for the rest of her life - which is the general tone of this thread's majority.

    So are we assuming, if charm for an hour = rape, minimum, that the girl from harry potter should have been kicked out school, possibly barred from magic altogether?

    And apart from that, serious question this time, what do y'all think about the Friends cantrip? That gives ADV on CHA checks to a person, and they know they were charmed after. Is that just as bad? And what if you fail? If I roll a 5 & 7, I will still fail, so can they still really tell I charmed them?

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    San Antonio TX
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    To the OP,

    Charm is not what civilized people do to each other. How the victim responds depends on whether they have access to some form of retributive justice.

    Then there's the question of whether they would even report it.

    Charm Person and Friends are akin to a humiliating assault by a bully who used their greater (magical) strength to knock over and pin another on the floor. How would you (the NPC) feel once they let you get up off the floor? What would you do?

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karnitis View Post
    So I have a query to add to this debate then, given it's harry potter related. I'm not huge fan, nor do I want to bother googling BUT -
    In book 4 or so, doesn't Ron get charmed with a love spell meant for harry? I don't remember how long he suffers from it, but I don't remember people saying that girl should be kicked out of Hogwarts and put in prison for the rest of her life - which is the general tone of this thread's majority.
    Harry Potter has a HUGE problem with the fact that how horrific love potions are is barely addressed.

    Voldemort's mother literally raped his father after making him drink love potion, but we're told we should be sorry for her because she had an abusive family.

    Fred and George regularly sells potion that force people to consent to sex and pretty much everything else. To teenagers. And that's exactly what that girl tried to do to Harry, except Ron ate the drugged chocolate by accident. Yet it's treated like harmlessly embarrassing.

    It's one of the many reasons why the HP setting is more horrific than Rowling intended.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karnitis View Post
    So are we assuming, if charm for an hour = rape, minimum, that the girl from harry potter should have been kicked out school, possibly barred from magic altogether?
    Yes, absolutely.

    Note that using the Imperius curse, which is mind-control, on anyone in HP is punishable with immediate prison sentence.

    For some reasons love potions don't get treated that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karnitis View Post
    And apart from that, serious question this time, what do y'all think about the Friends cantrip? That gives ADV on CHA checks to a person, and they know they were charmed after. Is that just as bad?
    Friends literally has the person you cast it on turn hostile once the effect ends and they realize what happened. So I guess you have your answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karnitis View Post
    I will still fail, so can they still really tell I charmed them?
    Luckily, no. They can tell you tried to cast a spell, though, given you noticeable waved your hands and said the spell's verbal components.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    hamishspence's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post

    Note that using the Imperius curse, which is mind-control, on anyone in HP is punishable with immediate prison sentence.
    Imperius is the equivalent of the Dominate line, not Charm. And the top end of it at that (Moody specifically states that you can make someone commit suicide with Imperius).

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Harry Potter has a HUGE problem with the fact that how horrific love potions are is barely addressed.

    Voldemort's mother literally raped his father after making him drink love potion, but we're told we should be sorry for her because she had an abusive family.

    Fred and George regularly sells potion that force people to consent to sex and pretty much everything else. To teenagers. And that's exactly what that girl tried to do to Harry, except Ron ate the drugged chocolate by accident. Yet it's treated like harmlessly embarrassing.

    It's one of the many reasons why the HP setting is more horrific than Rowling intended.
    The issue is brought up here:

    https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.p...alfBloodPrince

    With possible solutions being "the legal stuff is vastly weaker than the illegal stuff".
    Last edited by hamishspence; 2019-05-06 at 10:57 AM.
    Marut-2 Avatar by Serpentine
    New Marut Avatar by Linkele

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    Imperius is the equivalent of the Dominate line, not Charm. And the top end of it at that (Moody specifically states that you can make someone commit suicide with Imperius).
    Right. I think that's the thing here.

    It doesn't make the person see you as a close friend, just as a 'friendly acquaintance.'

    Ultimately, the power of that effect is contingent on how the person viewed you before you cast the spell. Cast it on an enemy? Hoo boy, yeah, that's really invading their mind. Cast it on a friend? Their behavior and personality wouldn't change at all. Cast it on a stranger? They notice that you made yourself seem very nice by some kind of magical means, but it isn't like you dramatically altered their personality.

    • So yeah, cast it on an enemy? That's a heck of an effect, nearly as strong as a mind-effecting drug. I can see them really really hating you after that and trying to get you killed. But they hated you before.
    • Cast it on a friend? Why did you do that? That was really pointless!
    • Cast it on a stranger? This is where I am not sure. Arguably, you could get the same effect with a plate of brownies, but obviously doing it with magic is more insidious. Even then, though, the extent to which you invaded their mind wasn't going to allow you to do anything truly awful to them. The kind of favors that a "friendly acquaintance" can reasonably expect are pretty limited.
    I'm a tad rude. It's a tendency of mine that I'm trying to get better about. Call me out on it if you see it.
    Sacrifice your Humanity for POWER (homebrew effort)

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    Imperius is the equivalent of the Dominate line, not Charm. And the top end of it at that (Moody specifically states that you can make someone commit suicide with Imperius).
    You can easily use a love potion to make someone ruin their lives in was that would easily make Suggestion or weaker charms fail. While they were under their respective love potions, Ron was willing to furiously beat up his best friend for merely suggesting he was joking when declaring his newfound "love", and Tom Riddle Sr. abandoned his family, his friends, his hometown, his fortune and the woman he loved or at least was engaged with, plus had sex with and obeyed a total stranger.


    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    With possible solutions being "the legal stuff is vastly weaker than the illegal stuff".
    Except for the fact that it's known waiting for a while can strengthen the potency to dangerous levels.

    If you sell someone a paintball gun who becomes a real gun if you don't use it for a couple of months, you're probably going to be charged with illegal weapon selling.
    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2019-05-06 at 11:08 AM.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    hamishspence's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    While they were under their respective love potions, Ron was willing to furiously beat up his best friend for merely suggesting he was joking when declaring his newfound "love", and Tom Riddle Sr. abandoned his family, his friends, his hometown, his fortune and the woman he loved or at least was engaged with, plus had sex with and obeyed
    See the aforementioned:


    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    possible solutions being "the legal stuff is vastly weaker than the illegal stuff".

    In Ron's case, Slughorn suggests that the reason the effects on Ron are so strong was that the chocolates in question had been kept for months.
    Last edited by hamishspence; 2019-05-06 at 11:07 AM.
    Marut-2 Avatar by Serpentine
    New Marut Avatar by Linkele

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    See the aforementioned:





    In Ron's case, Slughorn suggests that the reason the effects on Ron are so strong was that the chocolates in question had been kept for months.
    See my response above.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    hamishspence's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    It may be closer to the case of eating something that's way past its "Best Before Date" and getting food poisoning.
    Marut-2 Avatar by Serpentine
    New Marut Avatar by Linkele

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    GreenSorcererElf

    Join Date
    Dec 2018

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    Right. I think that's the thing here.

    It doesn't make the person see you as a close friend, just as a 'friendly acquaintance’.
    Not to be disrespectful, but it seems that you’ve made up your mind regardless of what other people are writing (and count me among those who consider Charm Person as a serious offence which would lead a rash and reckless person to form a posse to beat the hell out of a person who pulled it).

    Charm person is actively messing with someone’s mind. People generally take an extremely dim view of that.

    The fact that you can achieve a similar effect with different spells that don’t mess with someone’s mind is completely irrelevant. This is akin to saying that if a friend would probably lend me 40$, he would not have a problem with my picking his pocket and just taking 40$ out of his wallet. One way is asking for a favor. The second is a massive betrayal.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    • Cast it on a stranger? This is where I am not sure. Arguably, you could get the same effect with a plate of brownies, but obviously doing it with magic is more insidious. Even then, though, the extent to which you invaded their mind wasn't going to allow you to do anything truly awful to them. The kind of favors that a "friendly acquaintance" can reasonably expect are pretty limited.
    You already did something truly awful to them. You invaded their mind and subverted their will. It doesn't matter what you are trying to get them to do after that. It doesn't even matter if you were trying to get them to do something for their own good.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Let us consider friends. It gives you Advantage on Charisma-based checks against the target for 1 minute; after that, the target becomes Hostile to you because he realizes you messed with his head. Interestingly, this latter is framed as non-magical and given a fluff explanation, but (for example) would you really expect somebody to become hostile to you for doing this if, say, they asked you to demonstrate how it worked? Or other contrived circumstances where they'd be grateful by the time the minute was over (e.g. they're afflicted by a mental control effect and you use it to gain Advantage on an opposed roll with their controlling caster to try to counter the controller's orders)? The spell makes no provision for this, so either we're in "rulings, not rules" territory for the DM to decide if that bit doesn't apply, or it's actually part of the spell to sour attitudes towards you as a sort of rebound effect.

    Why do I bring up friends? Because it is an interesting contrast with charm person in that charm person contains no text dictating the attitude dropping to Hostile. Indeed, the spell specifies that the Charmed creature is Friendly to you, and that, when the spell ends, it knows it was Charmed by you. The latter suggests that it doesn't know (or doesn't care) that it's Charmed by you while under the effects of the spell. The former could be read in a twisty way to say that the Charmed effect ends with the spell's duration, but the Friendliness doesn't.

    Less cheesily, it doesn't specify that the creature ceases to regard you as a friendly acquaintance with the end of the spell. It also doesn't say the creature does make such cessation. Therefore, it is entirely up to the DM to determine where his attitude goes. I think this would depend a great deal on how you used or abused your "friend" while he was Charmed. If you just talked down that bandit from attacking you, and hired him to come with you as a bodyguard after negotiating and determining whether he'd mind or not, he may remain friendly. Yes, you Charmed him, but you also treated him well and are continuing to treat him well.

    It's also worth considering the usual skeevy example(s) that get brought up wrt Charm and the like. So let's examine our Cassanova Bard who uses charm person on the comely bar maid. It makes her regard him as a "friendly acquaintance." Unless she's the sort to be friends with benefits with friendly acquaintances, it's unlikely that his Charms are enough to get her out of her skirt and into his bed. He still has to seduce her. He just made it so that he was handsomer, more charming, and generally more pleasant to be around (and a little more persuasive) while engaging in seduction. A friendly acquaintance can absolutely say "no" to a sexual encounter, even with somebody knowing how to say all the right things (i.e. having Advantage on Charisma-based checks). Assuming the assignation takes no more than the hour duration, afterwards, she knows he used magic to Charm her, but she also doesn't really have a sudden realization that he's uglier, nastier, or less charming than he seemed. If she is the sort to have regrets - perhaps she was on the fence about chastity and now feels remorse - she might be angry at him for the same reason she'd be angry at him for seducing her even without magic, but with slightly more justification. But it can't make her do anything she wouldn't for a friendly acquaintance.

    Therefore, my conclusion is that the reaction to realizing they've been Charmed is based on how they view what happened while they were Charmed. Actual adjustments to attitude made with that Advantage and the starting point of "friendly acquaintance" probably stick, though might give a sour note to it for them to bring up if further conflicts develop. If, on the other hand, there are deeper reasons for dislike, those reasons reassert themselves and now you know your enemy/con man/rival just whammied you into liking him and doing things for him that you would never have done.

    Remember that while it is mind control, it isn't compulsion. It's a "like me" beam, not a "do anything for me" beam. The angry thug in the bar you Charm and then befriend may realize you Charmed him after the hour is up, but will he really care when you're not insulting him, you're not provoking him, and he's had an hour to cool off and get to know you and your pals?

    Believe me, I understand the real-world-thinking that this Enchanter just messed with my mind, of course I'm furious with him now that I know that! And if he took advantage of me in ways that put me out and leave me regretting the encounter, yes, I expect that I'd feel betrayed, angry, and violated. Just as if he'd walked up and mugged me after conning me into helping him get his (non-existent) little brother out of a pile of boxes pinning him down, or something.

    But do the heroes hold it against the beautiful nymph when her enchanting beauty makes it hard to say "no" to her? Sometimes, yes; sometimes, no. It depends a lot on the encounter and its outcomes. Just because it's harder to say "no" to her than to another woman doesn't mean you can't say "no." It's just less pleasant/more unpleasant to do so.

    The more deception and manipulation went into it, the more resentment it probably leaves behind. The more genuine effort to be a good friend, the more likely it's irksome but not going to ruin the newfound friendship.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    Jan 2018

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    [*]Cast it on a friend? Why did you do that? That was really pointless!
    There's an edge case where casting it on a friend makes a lot of sense. Let's say they're under some compulsion to attack you (confusion, crown of madness, whatever). Charm Person gives the target the Charmed condition which, on top of the advantage to social rolls, also says that the charmed creature can't attack the charmer. So, caster Charms his buddy, who is now unable to attack him, thus negating the spell or whatever that would have had the buddy otherwise trying to kill his friends. The Charm wears off in an hour, hopefully the other effect has as well, and the buddy is aware that you charmed him. "Hey, thanks," says the buddy. "That spell really saved our butts".

    Circumstantial, but it's not nothin'.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    Jan 2018

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    [*]Charm Person is blatantly used for theft. What is the reaction here? Would the resulting punishment be worse than for theft?
    Yes. ABSOLUTELY yes.

    In a world where magic is known and understood, you can assume the people writing the laws have at least a basic understanding of what a Charm spell can do. Laws are pretty harsh about what happens to traitors and secret-spillers. When the ruling class is interested in keeping secrets, the fact that someone with ill-intent can very easily make anyone on their payroll into a "trusted acquaintance" would be extremely threatening to them. Laws against that kind of manipulation would be accordingly harsh, and in many cases probably harsher than the crime committed under the Charm.

    As a corollary, I would see Guards in this setting getting increasingly annoyed with apprehended perps who claim that they were Charmed into doing their mis-deeds. "Honest, guv'nor. Oi NEVAH woulda' taken it, only me boss CHARMED me into takin' it. 'E MAGICKED me into doin' it, 'e did". How could they ever prove he was lying?

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    strangebloke's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by patchyman View Post
    Not to be disrespectful, but it seems that you’ve made up your mind regardless of what other people are writing (and count me among those who consider Charm Person as a serious offence which would lead a rash and reckless person to form a posse to beat the hell out of a person who pulled it).

    Charm person is actively messing with someone’s mind. People generally take an extremely dim view of that.

    The fact that you can achieve a similar effect with different spells that don’t mess with someone’s mind is completely irrelevant. This is akin to saying that if a friend would probably lend me 40$, he would not have a problem with my picking his pocket and just taking 40$ out of his wallet. One way is asking for a favor. The second is a massive betrayal.
    I've not made up my mind completely, although I do disagree with the complete lack of qualification here.

    Any enchantment effect, it seems, no matter the context, proof, or extent, appears to be worthy of execution by Mob Justice.

    That seems an extreme interpretation, the sort imposed by a controlling DM whose been scarred by murderhobo player tendencies in the past. The only way to uphold it is by appealing to certain historical examples of draconic legal systems, which weren't actually ubiquitous even in their own time. Sure some people got burned as witches. Other people got burned for making false accusations of witchcraft. These comparisons further ring hollow because they're coming from a setting (our world) where magic is supposed to come from demonic powers and where proof of magical interference was impossible.

    In a setting where magic is relatively common and often benign, "fear of magic" in general shouldn't be an issue.

    So then the question becomes, absent any completely irrational response, what would be the rational response to this?

    Now, it's possible that any mental interference at all would make a person incredibly angry. But I have a real tough time envisioning how a person might articulate such anger in some circumstances.

    "That wizard, he cast a spell on me!"
    "Oh no, were it a curse?"
    "Nay! It made me like him better! We talked pleasantly for half an hour!"

    The main actual usage of the spell, I find, is for stopping unnecessary violent conflict. Its for when the bartender freaks out and goes for his crossbow because he thinks you're with the cartel. In such a context, isn't a minor charm effect preferable to the alternative of getting beaten unconscious?

    So no, I haven't made up my mind, except that the response should vary depending on circumstance.
    Last edited by strangebloke; 2019-05-06 at 01:49 PM.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2019

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    It's also worth considering the usual skeevy example(s) that get brought up wrt Charm and the like. So let's examine our Cassanova Bard who uses charm person on the comely bar maid. It makes her regard him as a "friendly acquaintance." Unless she's the sort to be friends with benefits with friendly acquaintances, it's unlikely that his Charms are enough to get her out of her skirt and into his bed. He still has to seduce her.
    And what if she is? Does that make her any less worthy of protection?

    He just made it so that he was handsomer, more charming, and generally more pleasant to be around (and a little more persuasive) while engaging in seduction.
    No he didn't. The effect is all in her mind. He forced her to think that "he was handsomer, more charming, and generally more pleasant to be around (and a little more persuasive)" while he tries to rape her.

    A friendly acquaintance can absolutely say "no" to a sexual encounter, even with somebody knowing how to say all the right things (i.e. having Advantage on Charisma-based checks).
    And is more likely to do so when not under a spell, which is the reason for casting the spell in the first place. There's no point in casting the spell if you aren't trying to affect her mind. There's no point in casting the spell if you aren't trying to make her more likely to do what you want, and less likely to do what she wants.

    Assuming the assignation takes no more than the hour duration, afterwards, she knows he used magic to Charm her, but she also doesn't really have a sudden realization that he's uglier, nastier, or less charming than he seemed.
    Sure she does. Because he is "uglier, nastier, or less charming than he seemed." The spell made him seem better. It didn't actually make him better.

    If she is the sort to have regrets - perhaps she was on the fence about chastity and now feels remorse - she might be angry at him for the same reason she'd be angry at him for seducing her even without magic, but with slightly more justification. But it can't make her do anything she wouldn't for a friendly acquaintance.
    So what? He wasn't a friendly acquaintance. He used a spell to convince her that he was and to become more susceptible to his advances because he has so little regard for her value as a person that he doesn't care whether she actually wants to have sex with him. He's a rapist, plain and simple, just like anyone who uses a love potion or other magical enchantment. And she has more than enough right to be angry with him for raping her regardless of her feelings about chastity.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke
    In a setting where magic is relatively common and often benign, "fear of magic" in general shouldn't be an issue.
    That depends on how responsible the magic users are. If they run around casting Charmed Person on the "local miller" to "mess with him a bit," why wouldn't ordinary people fear and hate magic?

    The main actual usage of the spell, I find, is for stopping unnecessary violent conflict. Its for when the bartender freaks out and goes for his crossbow because he thinks you're with the cartel. In such a context, isn't a minor charm effect preferable to the alternative of getting beaten unconscious?
    That's the one acceptable use, as a substitute for violence.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    Now, it's possible that any mental interference at all would make a person incredibly angry. But I have a real tough time envisioning how a person might articulate such anger in some circumstances.

    "That wizard, he cast a spell on me!"
    "Oh no, were it a curse?"
    "Nay! It made me like him better! We talked pleasantly for half an hour!"
    To be fair, the way it more likely is expressed is, "He bewitched me! I wasn't in my right mind! He made evil things sound reasonable!" Without articulating that "hanging out with him" is an "evil thing" in this guys mind, now, because he's mad as heck about being Charmed.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    The main actual usage of the spell, I find, is for stopping unnecessary violent conflict. Its for when the bartender freaks out and goes for his crossbow because he thinks you're with the cartel. In such a context, isn't a minor charm effect preferable to the alternative of getting beaten unconscious?

    So no, I haven't made up my mind, except that the response should vary depending on circumstance.
    I agree. It's a common problem with magical "charm" effects, because our natural instinct is to view that as fundamentally different from a really charming guy who can talk his way out of any trouble persuading the barkeep to give him a chance. But then we tack these spells and effects onto "charmer" characters. And they actually act counter-productively, because they make people like you less, not more.

    So I think the appropriate way to handle it is simply to base it on how the Charmer treated the target. If they worked to expand on the "friendly acquaintanceship," then that should probably stick, assuming there's not underlying reason to have deeper feelings of resentment. (Charming the guy who's dedicated his life to killing you for what you did to his family won't stick, obviously.)

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    GreenSorcererElf

    Join Date
    Dec 2018

    Default Re: Proper Reaction to Charm Person.

    Quote Originally Posted by strangebloke View Post
    I've not made up my mind completely, although I do disagree with the complete lack of qualification here.

    Any enchantment effect, it seems, no matter the context, proof, or extent, appears to be worthy of execution by Mob Justice.

    That seems an extreme interpretation, the sort imposed by a controlling DM whose been scarred by murderhobo player tendencies in the past.
    You say you haven’t made up your mind, but I’ve counted about 5 different posters who have indicated that they would react fairly extremely and you have been rather dismissive, claiming that such a reaction is irrational or that this interpretation is that of “a controlling DM scarred by murderhobo player tendencies”.

    Why do you have so much difficulty understanding that the posters are expressing how they would feel if a complete stranger used magic to take advantage of them?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •