Charm Person

[STARP_Social_Officer]

Iku Rex, I'm confused. You seem to be trying to make a number of different points. So let me ask you some hypothetical questions. I think we might be on the same page, and just arguing around the topic.

1. You're hiding in a bush. You cast Charm Person on Joe down the block. Does he get +5 to his save?
2. You're talking to Joe. You and Joe are acquaintences. You cast Charm Person on him. Does he get +5 to his save?
3. You're talking to Joe. You and Joe are acquaintences. You cast a Silenced, Stilled Charm Person on him. Does he get +5 to his save?
3. You're arguing with Joe. You and Joe are enemies (he stole your girl). You cast Charm Person on him. Does he get +5 to his save?
4. You're arguing with Joe. You and Joe are enemies (he stole your girl). You cast a Silenced, Stilled Charm Person on him. Does he get +5 to his save?
5. You are dueling Joe to the death. You cast Charm Person on him. Does he get +5 to his save?
6. You are dueling Joe to the death. You cast a Silenced, Stilled Charm Person on him. Does he get +5 to his save?

Calypso

In my view:
1. No
2. No
3. No
4. Yes
5. Yes
6. Yes

It's not whether Joe can tell you're casting a spell that gives him the bonus. It's due to the fact that to suddenly turn someone's attitude from hostile or threatened to friendly is quite difficult.

 

[calypso15]

By the way, I misnumbered my questions and didn't notice until you replied. And since I seem to have no way of sending anyone a message, I'm forced to post this to ask: Could you fix your post to reflect the proper numbering?

Calypso

 

[Vegepygmy]

FWIW, I agree with calypso15.

1. No
2. No
3. No
4. No
5. No
6. Yes
7. Yes

 

[Iku Rex]

calypsoe15, this is, like Skip says, an area of the rules that requires DM adjudication. That said, MNSHOs.

1. It depends. Joe can't be threatened by me if he doesn't realize I'm there. Of course, if casting the spell causes Joe to spot me (listen check possibly followed by spot check?) he's likely to feel threatened by the mage lurking in the bushes, chanting and waving his hands at him.

2. It depends. Do your acquaintances routinely brandish lethal weapons in mid-conversation? On the other hand, if Joe knows me he might be mollified by my assurances that the spell I'm about to cast is completely harmless. (Bluff check?)

3. It depends. IMO, probably "no", but according the 3.0 Tome and Blood's expanded rules for the spellcraft skill "there's no mistaking the concentration magic requires". Bluff/sense motive check maybe, with a bonus or penalty depending on the victim's familiarity with magic.

4. Yes.

5. Same as [3], though any bluff check is likely to be more difficult. If the argument is sufficiently heated he might be worried about attack "in general", making it a clear "yes".

6. Yes.

7. Yes.

 

[kjenks]

Races of Stone has a rule for an alternative skill use: Sleight of Hand to disguise spellcasting. This really helps when casting charm or illusion spells.

Against an opponent with no Spellcraft ranks, the spellcaster could also use Bluff: "Excuse me just a second while I cast a Divination spell to figure out what to do next."

 

[calypso15]

Alright. My answers are:

1. No, unless he makes a Spot/Listen check.
2. No, unless he makes a Spellcraft check.
3. No.
4. Yes.
5. No.
6. Yes.
7. Yes.

Calypso

 

[Infiniti2000]

There are plenty of ways to cast a charm spell without the target getting the bonus.

There are none if what you said is true: "Casting charm person on someone is an attack."

There's no gray area in that at all.

There's no issue about the target's perceptions or not. It's an attack spell (so you claim, and fwiw I agree), no ifs, ands, or buts about it. If you attack, the target gets a +5. The target need not be aware of it or anything--there's no such language that requires awareness.

That said, I don't play charm person that way. The charm person spell/SPA/Su itself isn't an 'attack' for purposes of the +5 bonus, though it would make you visible.

 

[calypso15]

There's no issue about the target's perceptions or not. It's an attack spell (so you claim, and fwiw I agree), no ifs, ands, or buts about it. If you attack, the target gets a +5. The target need not be aware of it or anything--there's no such language that requires awareness.

That said, I don't play charm person that way. The charm person spell/SPA/Su itself isn't an 'attack' for purposes of the +5 bonus, though it would make you visible.

And that would be the Ridiculous Test (tm) I mentioned. If Charm Person is an attack, then the target always gets +5 to the save, thereby obviating the need to specify special circumstances for the bonus. If that was true, it would instead say "The target receives a +5 bonus to his save against Charm Person."

Calypso

 

[Kieperr]

If casting Charm Person is considered an attack, even wheen the opponent is unaware, then every time you cast it the opponent would gain the +5 bonus to the save.

From the SRD:
"Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack."

So yes, you can cast Charm Person without granting the +5 bonus. In order to gain the bonus the opponent must be aware of the threat or attack.

 

[Iku Rex]

There's no issue about the target's perceptions or not. It's an attack spell (so you claim, and fwiw I agree), no ifs, ands, or buts about it. If you attack, the target gets a +5. The target need not be aware of it or anything--there's no such language that requires awareness.

Charm person is an attack. That's not up for debate with regards to the RAW. "All spells that opponents resist with saving throws, that deal damage, or that otherwise harm or hamper subjects are attacks."-- SRD

As calyposo15 points out, the intent is obviously not that all targets of charm spells get the bonus. My conclusion is that the target gets the bonus if it's aware of the attack or is threatened by the caster. To me that's as close to the RAW as you get and it makes sense conceptually. (Want someone to be your friend? Don't freak him out with aggressive or threatening behavior. )

That said, I don't play charm person that way. The charm person spell/SPA/Su itself isn't an 'attack' for purposes of the +5 bonus, though it would make you visible.

Agreed, actually.

Side question (for anyone): Do you call for initiative rolls when a PC or NPC starts casting a spell at someone? And if you don't "count" a charm spell as an attack for the purpose of the bonus, is a suspicious PC or NPC still not "under attack" as it dives for cover in fear for its life after winning initiative?