D&D 5E Charm, the evil spells

[Charlaquin]

If we define charm as evil, what do we define charming a large group of people to make an orderly and safe exit from a burning building or other dangerous situation to be?

Well, recent world events demonstrate that there are a lot of people who value personal autonomy more than public safety…

 

[HammerMan]

Sticking a spear in someone is forcing your will on that person, too. It's as evil as the eye of the beholder says it is. Or the nearest priest.

yeah but we have this whole self defense or defense of other loop hole on that...

If the point is that charm spells should be Evil Subtype, define Evil first. Then for kicks, see what other spells and PC actions fit into that category.

welll I think I did define this VERSION of evil if not the all evil (a bit much for the half hour of work I put in this) forceing your will over someone else.

By the way, if it's true that the Charm spell doesn't inflict the Charmed condition, reading your wall of text was worth it just for the laugh

yeah, that was weird. I mean it kinda explains that it is everything the charmed condition is but doesn't call it that...

 

[doctorbadwolf]

You're not wrong.
Just like necromancy, zapping people with lightning bolts, etc., magic can be evil if used with selfish intent or out of malice. You must let go of hatred, greed, and fear to use it safely, or the dark side, dominate your destiny it will.

Much moreso than those. Necromancy, unless we use the old model in which all necromancy requires drawing power from the negative energy plane and thus sucking life out of the world around you, is only evil if done against the wishes of the family of the deceased, and/or for evil purposes. It's like fire.

Zapping people with lightning is no different than fighting with a sword. Unless you're an absolutist pacifist, it's a little odd to call combat abilities inherently evil. Especially in a world with demons and the like sometimes needing to be dealt with.

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.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Much moreso than those. Necromancy, unless we use the old model in which all necromancy requires drawing power from the negative energy plane and thus sucking life out of the world around you, is only evil if done against the wishes of the family of the deceased, and/or for evil purposes. It's like fire.

Zapping people with lightning is no different than fighting with a sword. Unless you're an absolutist pacifist, it's a little odd to call combat abilities inherently evil. Especially in a world with demons and the like sometimes needing to be dealt with.

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.

I disagree. Many uses of mind control are unquestionably evil. However, there are applications that are not (or at least no more so than other applications of force).

Take the classic scene from Star Wars, "These are not the droids you are looking for. Move along". Was this a moral act on Obi Wan's part? Possibly not. Was it more moral than whipping out his light saber, cleaving the storm troopers in two, and potentially endangering nearby innocents? IMO, unquestionably. Was it evil? No, I don't believe it was.

Similarly, using charm to steal from a shopkeep is evil. Using charm to stop an orc from killing a child is, IMO, a very morally safe position. It is certainly no less moral than if you tried to stop the orc using violence, and arguably more moral than violent means.

 

[Amrûnril]

Much moreso than those. Necromancy, unless we use the old model in which all necromancy requires drawing power from the negative energy plane and thus sucking life out of the world around you, is only evil if done against the wishes of the family of the deceased, and/or for evil purposes. It's like fire.

Zapping people with lightning is no different than fighting with a sword. Unless you're an absolutist pacifist, it's a little odd to call combat abilities inherently evil. Especially in a world with demons and the like sometimes needing to be dealt with.

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.

Killing people with swords or lightning bolts is inherently evil, though, unless it's necessary to protect oneself or others. The game's just written around the assumption that those exceptional circumstances will arise on a regular basis. I think mind control should be viewed in roughly the same way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I disagree. Many uses of mind control are unquestionably evil. However, there are applications that are not (or at least no more so than other applications of force).

Take the classic scene from Star Wars, "These are not the droids you are looking for. Move along". Was this a moral act on Obi Wan's part? Possibly not. Was it more moral than whipping out his light saber, cleaving the storm troopers in two, and potentially endangering nearby innocents? IMO, unquestionably. Was it evil? No, I don't believe it was.

Similarly, using charm to steal from a shopkeep is evil. Using charm to stop an orc from killing a child is, IMO, a very morally safe position. It is certainly no less moral than if you tried to stop the orc using violence, and arguably more moral than violent means.

Just learning to control minds in the first place is evil. It’s the only hypothetical knowledge that is evil to obtain.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Killing people with swords or lightning bolts is inherently evil, though, unless it's necessary to protect oneself or others. The game's just written around the assumption that those exceptional circumstances will arise on a regular basis. I think mind control should be viewed in roughly the same way.

I fundamentally disagree. Not all violence is murder. All mind control is violation of Will.

 

[payn]

I disagree. Many uses of mind control are unquestionably evil. However, there are applications that are not (or at least no more so than other applications of force).

Take the classic scene from Star Wars, "These are not the droids you are looking for. Move along". Was this a moral act on Obi Wan's part? Possibly not. Was it more moral than whipping out his light saber, cleaving the storm troopers in two, and potentially endangering nearby innocents? IMO, unquestionably. Was it evil? No, I don't believe it was.

Similarly, using charm to steal from a shopkeep is evil. Using charm to stop an orc from killing a child is, IMO, a very morally safe position. It is certainly no less moral than if you tried to stop the orc using violence, and arguably more moral than violent means.

This is like that assassin that only kills bad dudes, so its actually good argument. There are degrees of bad, but bad is still bad. Some folks cant handle the fact that they are a pinch bad, and thus have to justify it as being really good. At my table, its ok to be a little bad, this contextual discussion is actually welcomed and something we do. It has hints of playing with darkness or being an anti-hero which can be compelling.

 

[toucanbuzz]

In my campaign, most spells, especially charms, are like poison, forbidden and outlawed in most societies. It's a death sentence to even pretend to cast in front of a noble.

A man can see a spear coming. He can train himself in its use, learn to defend against it, run away from it, dodge it. There's the belief I have a chance to overcome a spear. But, poison and Charms are insidious. They're the enemy you can't fight used by the coward who won't look you in the eye. It's a horrific idea akin to a personal assault: that a person can take control of your mind or emotions, even for a bit, and make you do things and think things that aren't you. It's horrible. They violate who you are.

And what type of person would want to do that? To force someone to be who and what they aren't? In the eyes of the commoner, what wouldn't that person be willing to do? Could you blame a spellcaster for the next ill-advised decision ("I didn't mean to make that deal with the merchant, I was sorcered, I was!" or "I didn't mean to get her pregnant, it was the evil witch down the street that made me do it!")

So yeah, you can easily have a campaign where magic use, especially Charms, are seen as worse than poison.

On the flipside, Charms and mind control could be an everyday expected thing. Reference Dark Sun. Mindbenders would control arena beasts for the amusement of the crowd and keep slaves in control. It was expected the Sorcerer Kings would keep them in control or that their societies would self-police so the above fears didn't become true, and the common man who minded his own business had no fear of the Mindbenders.

 

[Fanaelialae]

This is like that assassin that only kills bad dudes, so its actually good argument. There are degrees of bad, but bad is still bad. Some folks cant handle the fact that they are a pinch bad, and thus have to justify it as being really good. At my table, its ok to be a little bad, this contextual discussion is actually welcomed and something we do. It has hints of playing with darkness or being an anti-hero which can be compelling.

I think it's no more evil than the heroic tropes assumed by the game, wherein the PCs will regularly kill "evil" (oftentimes sentient) being for the cause of "good". If you want to say such killing is evil irrespective of the circumstances, then sure, mind control is also evil irrespective of how it is used. Otherwise, I disagree.