Tallifer
Hero
Forsooth. This is one of the chief principles I retain from 4th Edition as I run my campaign now in 5th Edition. Monsters can do surprising things.
D&D 5E 5e completely nerfed charm - for YOU, anyway
Forsooth. This is one of the chief principles I retain from 4th Edition as I run my campaign now in 5th Edition. Monsters can do surprising things.
superstition
First Post
Charm Person in 5e is certainly disappointing. In 1e is was super powerful. I think this calls for a case of middle ground.
Set aside previous editions and judge 5E's charm person on its own merits: What's wrong with it? It's a perfectly good 1st-level spell.
It's a first-level spell.
There should be a more powerful enchantment spell, at a higher level. Such as a 2nd level "Suggestion" spell, for example. How about that?
I find it interesting that the person who initially expressed such interest in stronger PC-usable influence magic, has dropped out of the conversation. I think that's as much as I can say, within the EN World bounds of respect, and within the nuance of my own social skills, such as they are.
Well, it has been a year and a half. Charm person may have been nerfed from previous editions, but animate thread remains as potent as ever.
Oh, so it is. Post #60 was in early 2016, post #61 was recent (mid-2018).
Still, Morlock's participation ended in 2016 and there were several posts afterwards, before the thread went dormant. I wonder if Morlock was satisfied with the extent to which other people contributed to the advancement of his goals... you know, as in the outcome of successful persuasion, or the outcome of successful magical influence. (shrug) I will probably never know.
Anyways, at no point as a 5E DM, have I thought "this could be a better story, if only the PCs could cast the Imperious Curse (a la Harry Potter)".
If that level of control were widely available, then the question of which NPCs could cast it, would become significant; would cities be ruled by those who can cast it, or by someone using magical control over the designated, enthroned rulers? If the PCs start at first level, and approach 9th level, are there NPCs who take active measures to enthrall any arcane casters who hit level 9, to co-opt them *before* they can start assembling their own faction of thralls? Who has "Un-Nerfed Enthrall" in their spellbooks, and how willing is any wizard to let another wizard copy that spell from one book to another?
Would human society become a magocracy, ruled by arcane casters (whether openly or otherwise)? If the setting involves a god or gods, would they be okay with magocracy or would they raise objections? Would paladins have a particular role in society, since at level 6+ they become harder to keep under control?
Still, Morlock's participation ended in 2016 and there were several posts afterwards, before the thread went dormant. I wonder if Morlock was satisfied with the extent to which other people contributed to the advancement of his goals... you know, as in the outcome of successful persuasion, or the outcome of successful magical influence. (shrug) I will probably never know.
Anyways, at no point as a 5E DM, have I thought "this could be a better story, if only the PCs could cast the Imperious Curse (a la Harry Potter)".
If that level of control were widely available, then the question of which NPCs could cast it, would become significant; would cities be ruled by those who can cast it, or by someone using magical control over the designated, enthroned rulers? If the PCs start at first level, and approach 9th level, are there NPCs who take active measures to enthrall any arcane casters who hit level 9, to co-opt them *before* they can start assembling their own faction of thralls? Who has "Un-Nerfed Enthrall" in their spellbooks, and how willing is any wizard to let another wizard copy that spell from one book to another?
Would human society become a magocracy, ruled by arcane casters (whether openly or otherwise)? If the setting involves a god or gods, would they be okay with magocracy or would they raise objections? Would paladins have a particular role in society, since at level 6+ they become harder to keep under control?
The target knows they were charmed. It is a blunt instrument unsuitable for most long term social scenarios.
Fanaelialae
Legend
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.
Caliburn101
Explorer
I don't have my rulebook in front of me - is it castable at higher level? If it is, does it scale very badly?
I know it's weaksauce, but what is the solution compared to the other duration based spell effect changes?
I know it's weaksauce, but what is the solution compared to the other duration based spell effect changes?
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.
Similar Threads
