Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Khur" data-source="post: 505358" data-attributes="member: 5583">Hmmm....Excellent analogy from the book. As I said before, there's no reason to assume that a mage must be seen casting the spell at all, as you pointed out. That depends on circumstances.However, the stories and novels based on WotC properties are supposedly notorious for throwing out the magic system of D&D in favor of drama or action. (As, perhaps one should be for the purposes of story in one's home campaign. In the d20 world, there are alternative magic systems though.)In one story I remember reading vaguely, three great wizards of Faerun (Elminster, Storm Silverhand, and Khelben Arunsun methinks) fought a single other wizard, whose name I forget. The story says they fought for days, sometimes retreating when exhausted after contesting for all of the daylight hours. Do you know how impossible this is, if each even cast one prepared spell per minute using the D&D system, even considering the use of wondrous and other magic items? (Alternate rules exist, once again, that make such epic battles of magic possible.)Can we consider the precedents set by these stories relevant to a rule discussion on charm spells? I think they serve as examples of how the spell might be used for flavor and high drama, or even as models upon which to base an alternate rules system, but are risky territory for rules assertions.Still, I think the important element of your anecdote is that a charmed person may be convinced (after the fact) that their new friend had only good intentions. They may continue to believe this after the magic wears off, especially if nothing particularly untoward happens while the spell is in effect. This idea has perfect relation to an earlier anecdote about Monte Cook's Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil (a character continues to be the friend of an evil cultist after the charm wears off).A friend who hasn't posted here suggests that charm person creates a psychological gap, into which the enchanter can insert his or her will. My friend says that after the spell is over, the person so affected remembers the gap, even if there was nothing "big" inserted there (like an action contrary to the victim's nature). Thus, my pal supposes, everyone always remembers the unnatural nature of the charm, at least as an uncanny, "Wow, why was I so open to doing things for that person an hour or so ago?"I say that gap is only perceived if it's breached by something too big (something allowing a new saving throw). Otherwise, only the suggestions of the enchanter matter in what the victim thinks after the spell in over.Many here seem to agree with that idea, as does some of the anecdotal evidence. Interesting.Thanks!<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

Verification