A question about when spells end upon caster death

[Anubis]

Okay, if a person casts a spell with a duration (Charm Person, Wall of Fire, etc.) and is then killed, do all of those spells immediately end? (For instance, an evil wizard charms your paladin and then is killed by the rest of the party. Does the paladin immediately lose the charm effect or does he now attack his party members for killing his "friend"?)

Also, what happens to spells on people directly that can be seen (Invisibility, Displacement, etc.) when those recipients die? Do these spells end upon the death of the recipient? (For example, when the party kills a fighter who had become invisible, does he become visible?)

This stuff isn't covered anywhere in the rules, yet it is of GREAT importance, especially considering spells like Charm Person (does the charmed go for revenge), Insanity (can cause LOTS of trouble), and Invisibility (how do you know he's really dead?). It's annoying.

 

[skymage]

i don't have anything offical to back this up but i think my opinion might help.

if the target of the spell dies and is no longer a leagal target
ex improved invisability can't target objects so the fighter can be seen. invisibility on the other hand can target objects so then you can't see him.

as for spells that target others i don't see any reason why they would go away unless they require concetration.

so the charm would still be in effect.

i don't see why a paladin would seek revenge for the caster. he is still freinds with the party after all so unless the caster already convinced him to attack i don't think he would attack out of nowhere, but if the caster talked the paladin into defending him then i think he would continue to attack.

hope that helps. none of it is offical but it's how my group and i handle it.

 

[candidus_cogitens]

I agree with skymage on all counts.

Once a spell is cast, the dweomer is present, regardless of what happens to the spellcaster. So, in most cases, the spell would stay in effect. But the death of a the spell's target could potentially disrupt the dweomer.

As for the charm person issue ... i think it is a different matter altogether. The spell would still be in effect, but it is not a powerful enough spell to make a paladin kill his friends in any case. As soon as the paladin felt a twinge of an urge to strike a friend, he would immediately get another saving throw, with a HUGE circumstance bonus.

 

[Al]

The spell ends when the spell ends, irrespective of when the caster dies, IMO.

One time, the evil sorceress charmed a PC before dying. The PC then proceeded to have her 'best friend' raised.

Of course, the PCs caught up with her later and killed her for good.

 

[dcollins]

There is no rule anywhere in the core books that suggests spells end when the caster dies. Thus, that is not sufficient criteria for a spell effect to end.

In fact certain abilities need to specially note that they end upon caster incapacitation, if that is the case. Consider the treant's spell-like ability of "Animate Trees" (MM p. 178).

 

[Anubis]

Great. Thanks for the help, everyone. With the exception of the paladin getting another save with a huge bonus (which isn't even implied in the rules), you have brought up very good points and clarified things nicely for me.

 

[candidus_cogitens]

Great. Thanks for the help, everyone. With the exception of the paladin getting another save with a huge bonus (which isn't even implied in the rules), you have brought up very good points and clarified things nicely for me.

What I should have said, if I had consulted the spell description, is that the paladin would get an opportunity for an opposed charisma check, not a second saving throw.

"You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince him to do anything he wouldn't ordinarily do."

It is certainly reasonable to modify such an opposed check with a significant circumstance bonus if you try to order a paladin to attack a friend, something that would go against the very grain of his being.

It also states that any threat to the subject from you or your friends immediately breaks the spell. It would not be unreasonable for a paladin to view a threat against one of his devoted friends to be also a threat against him. In that case, it might be reasonable for a DM to rule that the spell would immediately be broken if you ordered him to attack a friend. My suggestion, that he be given a second saving throw, is a more conservative way of adjudicating the matter.

 

[haakon1]

After all these years, my players directly asked me this, and I decided to look for an official ruling. Thanks everyone.

My ruling. A PC under a Leucrotta's Lure effect (which is like Mass Domination) gets an second saving throw when the caster dies. Otherwise, it's final suggestions still seem like a great idea.

For what it's worth, playing 3.5e D&D, running Temple of Elemental Evil (a 1e AD&D adventure), and took the Leucrotta rules from Pathfinder 1. Multi edition answers and the perfect answers for me.

 

[CapnZapp]

Have a necromancy like Haakon

 

[glass]

That is some impressive necromancy. This thread is nearly an adult!

_
glass.