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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 5886978">For me (both as player and as Gm the charm person entry gives just enough. It makes clear the person isn't under the users comman, but simply views the person as a trusted ally. What that translates into will be highly situationally dependant and dependant on the NpC's personality. This is exaclty the kind of spell you want in the GM's court for interpetation and i don't think additional mechanica (beyond those described for the saving through) would be helpful. The only part I agree with here is some additional description of what the after effects may be would be helpful (but that isn't strictly mechanical). More info can be good. What I don't want is turning a highly open ended spell like charm person into something with highky specific mechanical effects that end up confining the spell to a bonus on the battlefield or something that doesn't really follow from the concept itself but is just created to establish a consistent combat use. The other half of this is too much info is equally bad because you need to read a page of spell description before casting anything (as a Gm this can be a pain until you have memorized the spells).Don't take this as a snipe or anything Belasir, I am just curious, but this seems like an odd criticism of pre 4e editions. Since those had pretty robust descriptions of what the spells did flavorwise, whereas 4e had much shorter entries that usually supplies highly specific mechanical effects. It sounds like you are just asking for a more comprehension explanation of the spell, and if anything, 4e leaves a lot of that for the Gm and largely limits itself to the combat grid effect (not entirely but that appears to be the focus of spells under the character power entries). Pre 4e spells could be anywhere from half a column to a page or so.</blockquote>

Verification