Is Mass Charm Balanced?

[wyrdone]

I just hit level 17 before our last session and my wizard found the spell "Mass Charm" and took it.

We played on Sunday last week and had 2 encounters where I used Mass Charm in each.

My DM was skeptical that the power is correct as written. The fact that it has no Will attack seems odd. All I have to do is tell the DM that these 2 or 3 monsters slide over there and attack their friends and they just do it, no questions asked. Can that be right?

Another player pointed out that if the DM used this on us we'd be toast. Not that our barbarian's will defense is that high, but if there was a roll we'd at least have a chance that the DM couldn't simply slide our barbarian around the board and attack whichever one of us he wanted to.

So was there an errata that didn't make it into the character builder yet, or is this really how Mass Charm works? And if so, what's stopping DMs all over from using it to make the PCs fight among themselves?

 

[SFurtwangler]

AFAIK there is no errata.

Also, nothing really stops your DM from using it, except that monsters generally don't use PC powers (or have class levels) in 4E. He could certainly make up a monster with a mass charm like power - but he could also just make a volcano erupt at your feet and kill you all, if that was what he wanted to do.

In my experience, powers that don't target a defense, offer a save, or otherwise make the target feel like they were not helpless are fine against disposable monsters, but if used against PCs will have them calling shenanigans.

 

[wyrdone]

It just reminds me of 3.5 and weapon sundering. We started using it against the monsters and then the DM started using it against us. In the end we called a cease-fire saying if you don't sunder us we won't sunder you.

I can imagine the same might happen here as I control the DM's monsters for him one round every encounter he may decide that looks like fun and have a mind flayer or something do the same to us. And yeah, he could just have a volcano wipe us out, but Mass Charm is actually in the rule book.

Just seems odd that there is no Will attack on this spell. I have a few other similar spells and they all require a Will hit before I can start making the target do something against their wishes.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I just hit level 17 before our last session and my wizard found the spell "Mass Charm" and took it.
...
My DM was skeptical that the power is correct as written. The fact that it has no Will attack seems odd. All I have to do is tell the DM that these 2 or 3 monsters slide over there and attack their friends and they just do it, no questions asked. Can that be right?

Yes. It effectively gives three basic attacks worth of power. Effective - but not even that powerful (it does little in solo fights for instance).

Another player pointed out that if the DM used this on us we'd be toast.

Off three basic attacks from three different people? What are your barbarian's statics? Because I make it something like d12 (weapon) +6 (stat) + 4 (weapon) + 2 (focus) + 4 (item) + 8 (fudge for other bonusses) = 30 on average.

By comparison average damage from an ordinary level monster should be 17+8 = 25. From an average brute or artillery it's this * 1.25 = 33. Or more than your barbarian does on a basic attack. (Yes, they do more on encounter powers or even at wills - but this is just a basic). So the barbarian would only do the damage of a brute or artillery. (And the to hit will be similar - which is why for balance against monsters you don't need the extra roll).

And if so, what's stopping DMs all over from using it to make the PCs fight among themselves?

Absolutely nothing - and nothing's preventing them crashing a meteorite into the gameworld to wipe out the PCs either. It's just not fun for the players and the DM has his own toys. The DM has the responsibility to play much fairer than the players do.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

it´s not that ottos irresistible dance or confusion allowed saves in older editions...

and such a spell would not be appropriate for a standard monster, but for solo, as a standard action, it would be perfect...
and it´s not that all people in your group are strikers...

 

[pauljathome]

I just hit level 17 before our last session and my wizard found the spell "Mass Charm" and took it.

Its definitely very powerful and I certainly wouldn't want to see it used against us. But there are LOTS of PC powers that would be too deadly in the hands of monsters so I'm not sure that is a fair metric.

There are limitations to it. We are currently fighting lots of undead and it is of only marginal use under these circumstances (they all have resist necrotic and are incoporeal and their at wills deal necrotic damage so they do nearly 0 damage to each other). The movement can also be very powerful but at least they get a saving throw and by L17 there are LOTS of forced movement abilities anyway.

And its only a non enlargeable burst 1. Which tends to mean (in my experience, anyway) that it rarely hits more than 2 targets.

Don't get me wrong. Its definitely very powerful and I'm not planning on retraining it anytime soon. But I'm not sure that its too powerful. If it required an attack vs will I'd definitely consider other alternative spells (at least partly because I already have a couple of good charm/forced movement options)

 

[the Jester]

Yeah, keep in mind that if you have to roll to hit with this, you are in double jeopardy: You can miss, or your charmed guys' attacks can miss.

Pc powers that force attacks are, at least lately, of the model that there shouldn't be double jeopardy.

 

[SFurtwangler]

We had the same kind of cease fire with our DM in 3.X with Disjunction. The problem there was, if he used it on our high level characters, we were f-ed, but if we used it on our enemies, it just cost us a lot of loot that we might otherwise get when we won. Either way, the players lost.

The DM agreed to the ceasefire both to maintain game balance (we weren't strong enough to continue after we got hit with it the first time) and because ti took so long for everyone to recalculate a no-item version of their character.

Anyway, I agree with some of the previous posters. NPCs/Monsters work differently than PCs. Granting your striker a basic attack is generally better and will do more damage than granting some random monster a basic attack, so having the DM mind-control your striker will be a lot worse than you mind-controlling some random orc.

The DM may certainly pull out mind-flayers or some other mind-control creature, but he will find that most official monster powers that take over player actions need to hit their will defenses. This is because monsters and PCs play by different rules, and it isn't fun for players to get automatically hit and lose control of their character (even briefly). He wont find, for example, a monster with "mass charm" as a power. He would either be making one up, or putting you guys up against a NPC who is built like a PC (which he can certainly do, but it isn't how most NPCs are statted out in 4E, so its a bit hand-wavey).

 

[webrunner]

Yeah, keep in mind that if you have to roll to hit with this, you are in double jeopardy: You can miss, or your charmed guys' attacks can miss.

Pc powers that force attacks are, at least lately, of the model that there shouldn't be double jeopardy.

Yeah, generally these kind of attacks are either:

Effect: The target MBA's

or

Hit: The target MBA's with a +4 power bonus

 

[ThirdWizard]

Yeah, keep in mind that if you have to roll to hit with this, you are in double jeopardy: You can miss, or your charmed guys' attacks can miss.

This.

If you had to roll an attack vs. Will, the power would be next to worthless.