D&D 5E Charm, the evil spells

[Fanaelialae]

This is a poor example, and misses the mark. The case in point refers to intervening in an individual's selfhood, and compromising the integrity of their consciousness.

Better - but still inadequate examples - might include lobotomizing psychiatric patients, unsanctioned anaesthesia, spiking someone with LSD without their consent, or administering large doses of lithium sulfate to Alzheimer's sufferers in order to pacify them. How do you feel about those?

It depends on the context.

Spiking someone's drink at a bar is obviously evil.

Tranquilizing someone who has a gun to a child's head? Absolutely not evil (leaving aside the fact that this sort of thing really only works on tv because they'd have time to pull the trigger before the tranq kicked in).

Although, if you think that prison doesn't compromise one's selfhood I daresay you haven't known anyone who has spent significant time there. I have some friends who spent years behind bars, and based on my conversations with them, I think they would strongly disagree with your opinion.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

Charm spells are no more evil than any other spell, or action, in the game mechanics that impact the actions of another NPC or char. Killing an NPC guard with a thrust of my Arcane Trickster's Rapier is actually less evil that using Suggestion to say "You look tired, go have a nap at home."

So if we are to rid the game of static ASI's because that is racist in RL, and we are to rid the game of playing chars because they have below average stats, because that is ableist in RL, and we are to rid the game of Charm spells, because that upsets people with consent issues in RL, what is next, remove all violence from D&D, because that traumatizes people in RL?

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Although, if you think that prison doesn't compromise one's selfhood I daresay you haven't known anyone who has spent significant time there. I have some friends who spent years behind bars, and based on my conversations with them, I think they would strongly disagree with your opinion.

I'm not going to argue about the morality of incarceration - which I tend to view as a largely counterproductive proposition in any case.

But it's not really the same as overriding a subject's immediate control of their body and actions, is it?

 

[Fanaelialae]

I'm not going to argue about the morality of incarceration - which I tend to view as a largely counterproductive proposition in any case.

But it's not really the same as overriding a subject's immediate control of their body and actions, is it?

A prison guard tells you to put your hands on the wall and spread your legs for a cavity search. You really don't want to. But you do it because you know that you'll catch a beat down if you don't. And the cavity search will still happen.

In what meaningful sense is that not "overriding a subject's immediate control of their body and actions"? Your choices are to comply and suffer, or refuse, suffer/be forced to comply, and suffer.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

A prison guard tells you to put your hands on the wall and spread your legs for a cavity search. You really don't want to. But you do it because you know that you'll catch a beat down if you don't. And the cavity search will still happen.

I'm sorry?

Are you now trying to establish charm person ≡ body cavity searches in prison?

It seems an odd tack to take.

In what meaningful sense is that not "overriding a subject's immediate control of their body and actions"? Your choices are to comply and suffer, or refuse, suffer/be forced to comply, and suffer.

Emphasis mine.

You just answered the question yourself.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

A prison guard tells you to put your hands on the wall and spread your legs for a cavity search. You really don't want to. But you do it because you know that you'll catch a beat down if you don't. And the cavity search will still happen.

In what meaningful sense is that not "overriding a subject's immediate control of their body and actions"? Your choices are to comply and suffer, or refuse, suffer/be forced to comply, and suffer.

Do you apply real world cases to all aspects of your D&D game? I really want to know. Do you believe that the entire game should be viewed through the lens of some segment of today's society, and all the parts that may cause someone emotional discomfort, excised from the game?

 

[Fanaelialae]

I'm sorry?

Are you now trying to establish charm person ≡ body cavity searches in prison?

It seems an odd tack to take.


Emphasis mine.

You just answered the question yourself.

I think it was you who made the claim that charm person would be considered evil by modern people. I then made a comparison between mind control and incarceration. The former doesn't really exist in RL, while the latter does and is generally accepted by the majority of modern folk as not evil, even if many contemporary people (myself included) believe there are very serious issue with the system itself.

You honestly think that because you have the illusion of choice, rather than literally no choice, that makes it somehow better? Suffice it to say that I think you couldn't be more wrong.

 

[jgsugden]

If you're going to speak in absolutes in this thread, I recommend spending a little time reading philosophy. There are a lot of ways to look at this world, and few absolute answers on morality. Cultural views differ, as do the views within a culture over time. Further, the world (real and our fantasy worlds) are often too complex for absolute rules to do us perfect service. It is easy to adopt an absolte view. It is hard to really understand and support it.

 

[payn]

If you're going to speak in absolutes in this thread, I recommend spending a little time reading philosophy. There are a lot of ways to look at this world, and few absolute answers on morality. Cultural views differ, as do the views within a culture over time. Further, the world (real and our fantasy worlds) are often too complex for absolute rules to do us perfect service. It is easy to adopt an absolte view. It is hard to really understand and support it.

Lot of consequentialism going on in here, which usually goes along with absolutes.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Do you apply real world cases to all aspects of your D&D game? I really want to know. Do you believe that the entire game should be viewed through the lens of some segment of today's society, and all the parts that may cause someone emotional discomfort, excised from the game?

No, not at all. The game is a game, and the real world is the real world.

The discussion arose because someone made the claim that real world people would consider mind control unequivocally evil. Since mind control doesn't exist in the real world, I drew parallels to something that I feel is similar enough that is real, the prison system.

I, personally, believe that violence and killing are wrong. Yet I have no issues with my characters slaughtering hordes of monsters in game. On the rare occasion that I play an evil character, my characters have even been known to harm innocents. Because it's only a game and no actual people were actually harmed.