D&D 5E 5e completely nerfed charm - for YOU, anyway

[jgsugden]

The enchantment spells will always be more heavily influenced by DM interpretation than by text. Since the start of this thread we gained Charm Monster and other enchantment spells. I've played a lot of hours as an enchanter wizard and find the spells to be fine, and fun. Even with a mediocre charisma.

 

[Riley37]

one of those orange posts admonishes us all not to discuss moderation decisions in-thread, I'm gonna leave it at that.

Prudent. I suspect that *challenging* moderation decisions in-thread is the form of discussion most likely to provoke negative response, but discussions with a tone of respectful approval are probably safer in Meta than in-thread, lest misunderstandings or dog-pile ensue.

Charm person is for when you need to make the guards let you in, right now, and you'll clean up the mess later.

Yes. Friends does the same but on an even shorter scale, and without the option to overcast for multiple targets. Hm, in some situations, one might start with Friends, and if the target fails THAT save, then try again with Charm Person? Anyways, yeah, if walks to the prison cell, releases the prisoner, gives the prisoner arms and armor, waits while the prisoner dons armor, then casts a protective spell on the prisoner - all of those things are easier to do while not fighting guards. Fighting one's way out is easier than fighting in AND out.

 

[Caliburn101]

The explanation can be found in post #57. You can trace the history by looking for the orange text throughout the thread. Since one of those orange posts admonishes us all not to discuss moderation decisions in-thread, I'm gonna leave it at that.


Each spell level lets you target another creature, so if you cast it in a 4th-level slot, you can charm 4 people at once.

And it is, indeed, not suited for long-term interactions. That's what suggestion is for. Charm person is for when you need to make the guards let you in, right now, and you'll clean up the mess later.

Again: 1st-level spell.

Then intuitively, I'd say it's fine, but should be renamed Suggestion, and the current Suggestion renamed Charm.

That's similar to the way GURPS does it - suggestion being short term, and charm being longer term.

 

[Seramus]

IMO, that's a feature, not a bug. The Enchanter does eventually gain the ability to stealth charm people, but as a general rule I don't think charm should be the go-to move that a player pulls out anytime an NPC doesn't do what he or she desires. Charm spells shouldn't be an "I win" button that obviate social skills and the role playing of scenes.

Charm Person does not win anything. It prevents the target from attacking you and gives you advantage on social skill checks, the latter of which is the same as any teammate helping you. It has multiple points of failure, including a saving throw with conditions that can grant the target advantage on the save, V and S components that enemies can notice if they have Arcana, and immediately ends if you do anything harmful to the charmed target.

Many spells do constitute an "I Win" compared to skill checks, but Charm Person is absolutely not one of them.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Charm Person does not win anything. It prevents the target from attacking you and gives you advantage on social skill checks, the latter of which is the same as any teammate helping you. It has multiple points of failure, including a saving throw with conditions that can grant the target advantage on the save, V and S components that enemies can notice if they have Arcana, and immediately ends if you do anything harmful to the charmed target.

Many spells do constitute an "I Win" compared to skill checks, but Charm Person is absolutely not one of them.

You forgot the strongest part, which is that it causes the creature(s) to regard you as a friendly acquaintance. That, by itself, should allow you to automatically succeed in many situations.

 

[jgsugden]

There is a huge difference between charm and suggestion. Charm makes you a friend that is charmed while suggestion encourages a specific course of action. Your friends don't always do what you want. Many people would stab their friends in the back for profit. Other won't let friends do bad things. Others want to protect their friends from the very things their friends want.

Charming a loyal guard? "Look, you know I'd help you if I could, but my job is to keep everyone out. Even you. Turn back."

Charming a vile Blackguard right before she attacks you? "I don't relish going through you, but you stand between me and the Idol of Night. Nothing will stop me. You know I won't hurt you, but I will find a way around you."

Charming a sage to get information he hides from the world? "I ... can't tell you. If you knew, your life would be in as much jeopardy as mine. This is my secret to carry - alone."

 

[Fanaelialae]

There is a huge difference between charm and suggestion. Charm makes you a friend that is charmed while suggestion encourages a specific course of action. Your friends don't always do what you want. Many people would stab their friends in the back for profit. Other won't let friends do bad things. Others want to protect their friends from the very things their friends want.

Charming a loyal guard? "Look, you know I'd help you if I could, but my job is to keep everyone out. Even you. Turn back."

Charming a vile Blackguard right before she attacks you? "I don't relish going through you, but you stand between me and the Idol of Night. Nothing will stop me. You know I won't hurt you, but I will find a way around you."

Charming a sage to get information he hides from the world? "I ... can't tell you. If you knew, your life would be in as much jeopardy as mine. This is my secret to carry - alone."

Sure, they're different. Charm Person is a level 1 spell while Suggestion is level 2. Charm functions independently of language, while Suggestion does not.

"Hey, [charmed] guard, I've brought you a hot beverage [dosed with tranquilizers] to help pass your watch."
"Thanks friend!" Chug... Zzzzzz...

If you're planning to drug the guard anyway, worrying about him being mad about being charmed is probably the least of your worries.

D&D magic is all about using the right tool [spell] for the right job.

Another way to put it:

Fireball won't charm the guard into letting you pass.

Fireball won't open the porticullis to allow you passage.

Fireball won't allow you to read the information from the sage's mind.

There are, however, other spells that can do those things. That fireball cannot do those things isn't a limitation of fireball per se.

Dominate would work as a (heavy handed) solution to the scenarios you propose.

Lesser charms requires a bit more finesse.
You might try to convince the guard that you just saw a suspicious looking person in the passage they are guarding. While he's investigating, you sneak in.
You could tell the blackguard that the info he has on the Idol of Night was planted by his enemies and that it is in fact a cursed item intended to lay him low.
In the case of the sage, you may be able to coerce him into sharing the information because the world itself is at stake (or something along those lines).
The charm would aid in all of those scenarios, it just wouldn't be an auto-win. You'd still need to play the right angles.
If one of my coworkers (a friendly acquaintance) ran up to me and told me someone was trying to steal my car, I'd be far more inclined to believe them than some random stranger. Same idea. Work with what you've got, not with what you don't.

 

[jgsugden]

Sure, they're different. Charm Person is a level 1 spell while Suggestion is level 2. Charm functions independently of language, while Suggestion does not. ....
The charm would aid in all of those scenarios, it just wouldn't be an auto-win. You'd still need to play the right angles.
If one of my coworkers (a friendly acquaintance) ran up to me and told me someone was trying to steal my car, I'd be far more inclined to believe them than some random stranger. Same idea. Work with what you've got, not with what you don't.

To a extent you seem to be missing my point.

Charm person makes the target your friend, but what people are willing to do to their friends differs greatly.

Bob, upon hearing his car was being stolen from his friend, might ask his friend to try to get a good look at the thieves... because he can't leave his post.
Sam, upon the same situation, might run to look.
Tim might assume it is a prank and do an active insight check.
Hank might break down and cry, telling his good friend how this is the last straw. First his wife leaves him for an elf, then his mistress leaves him for an orc, now his car is stolen... Geesh!

Charm person has a non-specific impact and can create a lot more story opportunities. It should not have been labeled as something that negates challenges. It can negate them, but only if the DM sets that up.

 

[Fanaelialae]

To a extent you seem to be missing my point.

Charm person makes the target your friend, but what people are willing to do to their friends differs greatly.

Bob, upon hearing his car was being stolen from his friend, might ask his friend to try to get a good look at the thieves... because he can't leave his post.
Sam, upon the same situation, might run to look.
Tim might assume it is a prank and do an active insight check.
Hank might break down and cry, telling his good friend how this is the last straw. First his wife leaves him for an elf, then his mistress leaves him for an orc, now his car is stolen... Geesh!

Charm person has a non-specific impact and can create a lot more story opportunities. It should not have been labeled as something that negates challenges. It can negate them, but only if the DM sets that up.

A creature could be resistant, immune to, or even healed by fireballs.

That's why information gathering is valuable.

Sure charm is only an auto-win if the DM allows it to be, but that's much the same as saying if the DM doesn't actively road block it, which is true of literally everything in the game.

As the DM I believe that it's my job to be not only entertaining, but even more importantly fair and impartial. So if the PCs charm random no-name guard, I'm not going to suddenly invent a personality for him that is absurdly paranoid or something. I'm going to play him as a typical person. He will react as a typical person would. If his personality has more depth, then it will be pre-established and something the players can learn (and manipulate).

To put it a different way, in your earlier sage example, if the PCs decide to cast Dominate and force the sage to tell them the DM could at that point decide that the sage has Mind Blank always cast, and therefore it fails. But, to me, that is basically cheating. Now, if the DM had decided it beforehand it would be fine, but that's because the PCs could spy on the sage and see that he casts it once per day, or intuit the fact because their divinations fail. They could then arrange to show up on his doorstep a few minutes before he recasts it so that it expires during their conversation, or whatnot.

I do hear what you're saying, but in large part it's no different from the notion that the DM has the power to do whatever they desire. If the DM regularly abuses that power to road block (or railroad) players, they're going to have a problem on their hands. At the very least, the players are going to wonder who keeps hiring all of these eccentric guards!

 

[jgsugden]

...Sure charm is only an auto-win if the DM allows it to be, but that's much the same as saying if the DM doesn't actively road block it, which is true of literally everything in the game.

Now you're fully missing my point.

I do hear what you're saying, but in large part it's no different from the notion that the DM has the power to do whatever they desire. If the DM regularly abuses that power to road block (or railroad) players, they're going to have a problem on their hands. At the very least, the players are going to wonder who keeps hiring all of these eccentric guards!

Which is better: bland and repetitive or eccentric? I'll follow the lead of a good fiction and go 'eccentric' - or at least with a notable personality - every time.

There is a huge difference between randomly giving enemies defences to thwart PCs on the fly and establishing depth for the NPCs that the players are engaging.

Let's say that the PCs walk up to a guard at a city gate. Prior to that session I had not expected them to go to that city. I had not considered what the gate situation would be. However, their unexpected course of action is putting me into an improvisation mode. As they apprach the gate the sorcerer casts charm person on the guard... who I have only described as, "... a lone human guard in tattered armor sitting on a makeshift stool with a weathered crossbow on his lap." All I know about the town is that they're paranoid about recent werewolf attacks, really.

What is the correct answer as to how this situation should be resolved?

I say there is no one correct answer. Your answer seems to be saying there is unless the DM is effectively cheating, there should be a typical person personality template applied.

In my game, the second the PCs decide to interact with that guard I decide on a personality for him. I don't expect him to be a main character, so I treat him like a secondary character. In most movies, tv, or novels a secondary (or minor) character is given one or two significant personality traits to distinguish them. I can either just pick one or two at random from my brain (or randomly roll them up if I have a table - there are plenty of tables out there), or I can do what I actually do. I think of a minor character from some book, movie, or tv show that was in a similar position and let the guard emulate that character.

I might pick one of the vicious Gold Cloaks from a scene in the Game of Thrones tv show. I might pick a thug from some cop show. I might pick Ted Raimi's minor character from Army of Darkness ("You can count on my steel."). Instant personality. And that instant personality gives me something to play off of on a charm person, or other social interaction.

Gold Cloak: "Eh, now what have we here? Good to see you didn't get torn up out there. Dangerous out there tonight with the wolves so active. I've been told to keep the gates closed til morning. You can hang out here with me - I wouldn't mind the company."

Thug: "What the heck you doing out there, fool? You're going to get killed. It ain't safe with the recent attacks. I'm not supposed to be letting anyone in the city, but... if you have a few coins for me to bribe my boss if he catches us, I can get you in safe now. Interested?"

Ted: "Hail and well met! I'm glad to see fellow brave heroes ready to defend the town. You're here to join me on watch I take it? I don't need the backup, obviously, but if you're here anywa... WHAT WAS THAT... oh, you have a cat. I, uhhh ... it just caught me off guard."

I suggest giving the Critical Role podcast a listen for other examples of on the fly personality (although he also prepares a lot more detail than most DMs).

Pulling back to charm person: If you have one generic personality for minor characters, maybe it will be the 'auto-win' you fear. In my experience, that does not need to be true, nor does it result in complaints from players when it isn't an autowin.