Why is everyone so down on Charm Person?

[Noumenon]

That would be called Calm Emotions higher level spell. Stops Barbarian's from raging as well.

Cool. Bards make good babysitters!

Okay I think I am confused here, do you see nothing wrong with the that situation?

I saw the episode of Buffy where Willow mind controlled her girlfriend Tara, I understand the issue here. My point is that if you make different assumptions about charm person, it might not qualify as mind control.

All in all, I think it might be better for me to give up on redefining charm person and just rewrite it to say "you get +20 on diplomacy checks against target player."

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

All in all, I think it might be better for me to give up on redefining charm person and just rewrite it to say "you get +20 on diplomacy checks against target player."

Diplomacy doesn't (or shouldn't) work on player characters. Charm and other mind-affecting magic is the only way for a DM to directly control a PC's actions.

 

[Mephistopheles]

The morality of mind influencing spells in a game about home invasion, killing and looting. Now that amuses me.

Me too, but after what happened to the last thread that got into this territory I decided that ENWorld isn't the place to discuss it.

 

[jmucchiello]

If you really want to know how your NPCs should react to Charm Person, use the spell on the PCs to steal their gold and see how they react.

 

[Treebore]

I'm going to have to disagree with that.

You can actively dislike someone who is charismatic. Maybe you dislike their political positions. Maybe you just don't want to listen to what they say. Maybe you know that they're actually a horrible person, but since no one can prove they were behind all those murders but you know they were... Charm is more powerful than just having a high Charisma.

Top give an example, Xykon (the lich) is quite charismatic. (He's the leader of a fairly large evil horde, after all.) Roy has reasons to hate him.

If Xykon successfully charms Roy, then Xykon is Roy's best friend for 1 hour/level (barring some kind of countering magic). There is no charismatic person in the world who could do that sort of thing. A charismatic person can only indirectly influence someone's emotions, unlike a spell.

(It's so hard to give good examples, as we're not allowed to talk about politics.)

Well, the spell description obviously implies the target is still able to disagree, if they make their check instead of you. You can disagree if you want, its the right of being a DM, but you may want to consider that this spell does not turn the targets mind into a puppet on strings, it just makes them view the caster in the most favorable light possible. It is far from total control.

Don't let the mechanics (the dice rolls) hide that fact. They get the rolls because they can still disagree. You can use the dice roll mechanic, or ignore it because you wrote up the NPC and know enough of their goals and beliefs to say they would not do such actions, without a dice roll.

So if you want to make a first level spell defacto as powerful as a dominate spell, its the individual DM's perogative to do so. However I look at it as strongly influencing, not irresistably forcing the target. Which keeps me from having the issues the previous posters have mentioned.

I also take the time to decide on major, or important, NPC's religion, basic beliefs, alignment, etc... just in case they are charmed. IF nothing else I can give a bonus to any save that goes against what I determined their personality, belief's, morals, goals, etc... to be. Its my job as DM to do so when justified, and it keeps Charm Person a first level spell in effect as well as in how its labeled.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Well, the spell description obviously implies the target is still able to disagree

But they still have to be friends, even if the charming wizard killed their family or some such. That's not charisma, it's mild mind control.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I run OD&D. Here's the description of charm person from Men & Magic:

Charm Person: This spell applies to all two-legged, generally mammalian figures near to or less than man-size, excluding all monsters in the "Undead" class but including Sprites, Pixies, Nixies, Kobolds, Goblins, Orcs, Hobgoblins and Gnolls. If the spell is successful it will cause the charmed entity to come completely under the influence of the Magic-User until such time as the "charm" is dispelled (Dispell Magic). Range: 12".

Notice the main description of the effect: the victim "comes completely under the influence" of the Magic User. I interpret charm person as being a very potent spell, much more like the dangerous and deep charms of fiction, myth, and movies, rather than the "he's your best friend" effect. The Magic User could make charm person work like "he's your best friend," but he could also make it work more like domination or control (think Indiana Jones after he drinks the blood of Kali in Temple of Doom). How the charm is handled and the victim treated has a huge effect on how the victim views the affair *if* the charm is lifted (notice that it lasts until dispelled).

Personally, I find charm person to be one of more powerful spells in a low-level magic user's arsenal (its main rival being sleep).

 

[Alzrius]

Me too, but after what happened to the last thread that got into this territory I decided that ENWorld isn't the place to discuss it.

This.

I was surprised by how so many people posted vicious replies in regards to the DM who said his character uses charm person to get women into bed with him. Many of the responses were, in my opinion, needlessly acrimonious towards the OP and his players.

 

[Treebore]

I run OD&D. Here's the description of charm person from Men & Magic:



Notice the main description of the effect: the victim "comes completely under the influence" of the Magic User. I interpret charm person as being a very potent spell, much more like the dangerous and deep charms of fiction, myth, and movies, rather than the "he's your best friend" effect. The Magic User could make charm person work like "he's your best friend," but he could also make it work more like domination or control (think Indiana Jones after he drinks the blood of Kali in Temple of Doom). How the charm is handled and the victim treated has a huge effect on how the victim views the affair *if* the charm is lifted (notice that it lasts until dispelled).

Personally, I find charm person to be one of more powerful spells in a low-level magic user's arsenal (its main rival being sleep).

Again, the words are "complete influence", not "complete control".

IF people want influence to equal control its their game. Me, I am going to interpret influence as influence, not control. "Complete Influence" is still equivalent to having the target view the caster in the most favorable light possible, which is also how I remember Charm Person being described in Dragon Magazine articles about Charming and Sage Advice responses. So I will keep Charm Person relatively weak and manageable by considering it as just influence rather then complete control.

 

[Noumenon]

If the spell is successful it will cause the charmed entity to come completely under the influence of the Magic-User until such time as the "charm" is dispelled

I can see where the tradition of charm person = dominate person got started!

Many of the responses were, in my opinion, needlessly acrimonious towards the OP and his players.

There were a lot of other sexist things in my post, which was trying to deal with casual sex mechanically and as a roleplaying challenge and hence treated the women involved as stat blocks and objects. I didn't spend any time thinking about whether I was being offensive. I did get some good tips out of the thread, however, such as making your villains attracted to the PCs in order to have automatically complex, independent romantic interests.