Charm do they notice ?

[Particle_Man]

maybe not. If there is a powerful leader of multiple tribes of orcs, and you dominate an orc and tell it to kill orcs of a different tribe, that would not be against the orc's nature. (Or if all orcs love each other in your world, substitute orcs and goblins for two orc tribes).

Since evil can fight evil, good can use dominate person to help that along.

 

[Jhyrryl]

For reference, 3.5 PH pg 177:

A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effect feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. For example, if you secretly cast charm person on a creature and its saving throw succeeds, it knows that someone used magic against it, but it can't tell what you were trying to do. Likewise, if a creature's saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, such as charm person, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

 

[Winternight]

For reference, 3.5 PH pg 177:

just read the rules

thanx

 

[Winternight]

For reference, 3.5 PH pg 177:

just read the rules

thanx

 

[Hypersmurf]

... he gets a new save, with a bonus even.

Cool! For some reason, when I read that, I heard Snagglepuss reading it aloud in my head...

"... with a bonus e-vuhn..."

-Hyp.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Cool! For some reason, when I read that, I heard Snagglepuss reading it aloud in my head...

"... with a bonus e-vuhn..."

-Hyp.

Excuse me if I'm confused.

 

[Dakkareth]

For reference, 3.5 PH pg 177:

Ahhrg! No more bluffing to make that wizard think, his spell worked. .eek:

Or at the very least an increase in DC for the bluff check.

 

[Zogg]

I should add in here that if you are casting the spell against other spellcasters, there's a good chance they will recognize your spell with a successful Spellcraft check!

 

[Staffan]

Ahhrg! No more bluffing to make that wizard think, his spell worked. .eek:

Or at the very least an increase in DC for the bluff check.

That rule was there in 3.0 too.

 

[LokiDR]

Nonsense. Nature in this case refers to moral nature rather than ability. Otherwise, the restriction is largely meaningless.

It is against a good fighter's nature to murder his comrades. It's probably against any lawful character's nature to betray their allies. (Although depending upon the cause, LN or LE characters might well betray companions who weren't allies or friends). It's against any non-evil character's nature to rape anyone or to murder an innocent. Etc. Etc.

Fighters fight. Your LN fighter is dominated and told to fight his old companions. Follow orders and fighting seem to be well within that characters nature. That might be different if he were told to cut their throats in the middle of the night.

From where I sit, only if the character has previously chosen not to the demanded action in the past can it be considered "against their nature".