D&D 5E Charm, the evil spells

[doctorbadwolf]

So, yes or no?

Irrelevant.

 

[Fanaelialae]

It’s not terribly difficult to posit corner cases in an effort to refute a moral assertion but this is sheer infantilism. What are you? Five?

So far, you’ve suggested that charm person is no worse than having a prison guard pin you down and shove his fingers up your arse, which doesn’t lend a whole lot of weight to your position.

Don't be rude.

You seem to be having some difficulty comprehending my point so I will reiterate. Mind control can undoubtedly be used for evil. However, not all uses of mind control are evil. This demonstrates that mind control is not inherently evil.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Irrelevant.

But it was relevant when we were talking about nazis as valid targets for non-evil murder?

 

[Horwath]

The ability to object is present in one case and absent in another. Prison is incredibly dehumanizing itself, but guards with command and suggestion would be even worse.

what is the point of objecting if no one will hear it?

At least suggestion removes the strain on your vocal cords.

charm/suggestion/dominate are only evil as action suggested by those spell.

if being suggested/dominated to go to sleep at home instead of keeping watch and getting killed, that is a good action.

 

[Mirtek]

But mind control is not excusable in any way. The only enchantment I can think of that isn't outright Evil, is calm emotions, and even that is a landmine, ethically.

Using Dominate Person to make a guy kill his best friend is worse than stabbing the best friend to death yourself. Both are evil, one is much worse.

Why? IMHO that's a pure personel POV and one I can not relate two.

If two best friends attack me and I

a) kill both with my sword
b) kill both by burning them with my fire magic
c) kill both by having one kill the other with my mind controll magic and then kill the survivor

To me those methods are all just the same

Oh, and by the by, you wouldn't exactly have no legal defense you could make if you killed a serial killer that you could then prove was murdering people around you and that you could reasonably believe was going targeting you or your family next. You'd probably not get off clean, but you wouldn't be facing the same charges as you would if you murdered your neighbor for stealing your lawnmower.

Actually you would. At least in my country. Unless you can prove that an attack on your and your family was imminent your legal course of action would have been to go to the police with your evidence.

And probably even if it were imminent you would have been supposed to just leave with your family and go to the nearest police.

Only if you killed him in an attack that was already happening it would be different.

I'm thinking of the Imperius curse in Harry Potter, whose victims don't remember - or at best don't remember well - what they did while the curse was in effect.

Well, HP is horribly incoherent with that.

So Imperius is an unforgiveable curse, but love potions can be sold in joke article shop to high school students

 

[Zubatcarteira]

D&D having an uncommon love potion without even a save is pretty weird, ngl. Let's hope they don't sell it to 14-year olds like in Harry Potter.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

But it was relevant when we were talking about nazis as valid targets for non-evil murder?

Ive done all the work I’m willing to do explaining the difference. If you don’t see it, it’s because you won’t see it.

 

[FireLance]

Charms in D&D are generally manipulations, they make you feel or think differently. Drugs would be an analogous type of situation though some charms can make you feel much more specific things.

Agreed. I think the closest real-world analogue to Charm spells is being involuntarily drugged so that your judgement is impaired and you would do things that you would not normally do. So while it is bad, I don't think it is as bad as torture or death.

 

[billd91]

But it was relevant when we were talking about nazis as valid targets for non-evil murder?

To add to the complexity, what kind of Nazis are we talking about? SA thugs or civil servants who joined the Nazi party so they could continue to work? Concentration camp guards who freely volunteered for the job or ”volunteers” who were former Soviet POWs and guarding a camp was better than being starved to death?
I know, people think Nazi is so clear these days, but even that identity isn’t entirely devoid of moral complexity.

So what am I getting at? Issues like this aren’t entirely amenable to black and white/evil and good analysis. And even if you apply some kind of axiomatic reasoning to it, your axiom is probably more idiosyncratic than a widely held truism and will miss a lot of subtlety.

 

[payn]

You probably wouldn't like a particular character I once played, then.

She was a Dryad (thus had charm as an innate racial ability) Bard (thus had charm as a baked-in class ability) with both Charisma and Comeliness (yes, this campaign was the one time we ever used 7 stats) off the charts meaning anyone she tried to charm was at massive penalties to their saving throws.

Needless to say, her usual MO was all charm all the time. We did T1 Hommlet, and our approach ended up being to have my Bard charm an entire town full of Kobolds (over 500 of them!) and sic them on the dungeon, then mop up what was left. That she also spoke Kobold helped immensely here.

Easiest dungeon ever.

Broken as hell, mind you, but fun to do once.

I may think of this as evil (and I do), but that doesn't mean I wouldn't like the character and certainly doesn't mean I wouldn't allow it in my games.