D&D (2024) Playtest 8: Cantrips

[Remathilis]

So you have no problem with drugging people against their will to get your way?

Sorry man, Enchantment is the creep school of magic. People should be angry if they realize they were charmed.

Man, hope nobody brings up divination (learning your secrets and reading your mind against your will), illusion (gaslighting you into believing things that aren't real), conjuration (pressing others into slavery for you) transmutation (forcibly changing your body), necromancy (controlling you body and soul after death) and evocation (burning you to death with fire). People might get the idea that D&D magic is problematic.

 

[Remathilis]

Not at all.
Not sure why you would think that.

You're not convincing me they are any different.

Your a wizard trying to stop the return of Orcus, who will slaughter the entire sword coast and turn everyone into his undead army.

Your only lead is a cultists you captured.

What do you do?

Kill them and cast Speak with Dead.

No?

 

[mellored]

Kill them and cast Speak with Dead.

No?

the corpse is under no compulsion to offer a truthful answer if you are hostile to it or it recognizes you as an enemy

also, he just said animating dead was purely evil.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

While I agree that enchantment is creepy the freinds cantrip is hardly drugging someone. All that is does is give you advantage, you could get the same thing by good roleplaying, fancy cloths, guidance to help you say the right words.

I mean, it essentially is. It alters their perception of you much like slipping someone drugs and alcohol. Imagine I want you to sign a contract. Is there a difference between drugging you and getting you to sign in an impaired state rather than working to butter you up with a night on the town?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Man, hope nobody brings up divination (learning your secrets and reading your mind against your will), illusion (gaslighting you into believing things that aren't real), conjuration (pressing others into slavery for you) transmutation (forcibly changing your body), necromancy (controlling you body and soul after death) and evocation (burning you to death with fire). People might get the idea that D&D magic is problematic.

Most of those other schools have some non creepy use. For me, mind "assault", to use a less triggering word, is essentially always scummy.

However, to the point, no one is suggesting that people hit with a Firebolt shouldn't be upset. This whole thing popped up because people put forth the notion that using Friends and other charms on people was no big deal and shouldn't have any blowback. I disagree.

 

[mellored]

I mean, it essentially is. It alters their perception of you much like slipping someone drugs and alcohol. Imagine I want you to sign a contract. Is there a difference between drugging you and getting you to sign in an impaired state rather than working to butter you up with a night on the town?

Most "night on the town" includes alcohol. So not exactly.

This whole thing popped up because people put forth the notion that using Friends and other charms on people was no big deal and shouldn't have any blowback. I disagree.

Does mind reading have the same trigger for you?

Target makes a will save, if they fail you can read surface level emotions....

Maybe an illusion?

Target makes a will save, if they fail you create a subtle illusion in their eyes and ears that gives you a glow and makes your voice seem clearer....

 

[Yaarel]

Enchantment doesn't grant those though, nor should it. It manipulates the thoughts and emotions of others. I think Bless and Heroism are the only self target spells in the school, (and feel like a bit of a stretch).

One must sense thoughts and emotions to "manipulate thoughts and emotions".

Empathy and insight are inseparable from social skills.

Enchantment is identical to psionic Telepathy, and includes empathy and insight.

 

[WanderingMystic]

I mean, it essentially is. It alters their perception of you much like slipping someone drugs and alcohol. Imagine I want you to sign a contract. Is there a difference between drugging you and getting you to sign in an impaired state rather than working to butter you up with a night on the town?

So the mechanic I that you get ad antage so it is impossible le for you to do anything that you could not already do with a good roll. Drugging someone is taking away their free will while this is giving you a better odd that is a huge difference. This is not mind control, this is not ruffieing someone, this is not forcing someone to do something they would not normally do. It makes your words smoother, it causes you to project more confidence, it makes you seem a little more trustworthy.

 

[Chaosmancer]

The problem isn't the check, its roofieing the person beforehand. Like... it's not a good guy move to magically drug people to get them to bend to your will.

I agree it isn't a good guy move. I also would say burning someone to death isn't a good guy move either. Nor is ripping something from its home and forcing it to fight for you.

I think this is not an issue, as long as the use of the schools of magic is firmly neutral. What is evil or good is not the spell, but the application, as there can be good uses for every type of magic.

The issue I have is that people want to make an exception for Necromancy, making it the only evil school of magic, while ignoring the REALLY DARK GREY school of Enchantment. Because, enchantment is a school that has perhaps the fewest good and neutral use cases out of all of the schools of magic.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So you have no problem with drugging people against their will to get your way?

Sorry man, Enchantment is the creep school of magic. People should be angry if they realize they were charmed.

Counterpoint, it depends on the context.

If you go to an establishment advertising that they will charm you to improve your mood and reduce social anxiety, then you would not get mad at them and it isn't exactly the type of creepy you are talking about.

Is Friends being used this way? Of course not. However, something similar applies. First of all, they should never realized you charmed them. The entire point of spells like this in fiction is to avoid people figuring out you used magic at all. Secondly, it depends on the person. A conman might be furious... or he might chuckle and go "Ah, good show, good show. I have been bested at my own game."

This is why I don't want it to be defined. Because people will react based on their personality, the situation, and cultural norms. If the spell states "they will react this way" then that is just taking the tools out of my hands.