Command Undead....overpowered?

[Thanee]

Once we used it on a Giant Skeleton with great effect.

I once used it on a dragon zombie... too bad, that one was actually a dracolich.

And yes it made its save.

Bye
Thanee

 

[shilsen]

I once used it on a dragon zombie... too bad, that one was actually a dracolich.

And yes it made its save.

Bye
Thanee

More importantly, did you make all your subsequent saves ?

 

[Nail]

My DM has just been looking at this spell and thinks it might be a bit overpowered so I thought I'd see what the consensus was.

It's NOT overpowered.

For mindless undead, it's useful; but considering that mindless undead are generally canon-fodder anyway, that's no big deal.

For other UD, it tends to fail alot; UD Will saves are very high, and the DC for a 2nd level spell is very low.

 

[Thanee]

There's always Heighten Spell.

About the cannon fodder skeletons and zombies, that's only partially true. In 3.5, these undead have received a considerable boost and can be quite dangerous now. But that still doesn't make the spell too good or anything.

Bye
Thanee

 

[mvincent]

Note that a commanded undead might still be under the control of their creator. In which case you'd have to overcome a charisma check to have them do something against their orders (resisted by the charisma of the creator). I just had to deal with this last night, and I barely was able to get a Wyvern zombie to do anything I wanted (and it still kept attacking my allies). I might as well have not cast the spell.

 

[Nail]

Note that a commanded undead might still be under the control of their creator.

I believe you're reading the spell incorrectly. Being under the control of the creator is irrelevant; the spell trumps that control.

Moreover, unintelligent undead don't require a Cha check.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I believe you're reading the spell incorrectly. Being under the control of the creator is irrelevant; the spell trumps that control.

Moreover, unintelligent undead don't require a Cha check.

He's not talking about the Cha check outlined in the spell description (which, as you note, only applies to intelligent undead).

I suspect he's referring to this:
Multiple Mental Control Effects: Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as a spell that removes the subjects ability to act. Mental controls that don’t remove the recipient’s ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

From "Evil Clerics and Undead":
Commanded: A commanded undead creature is under the mental control of the evil cleric. The cleric must take a standard action to give mental orders to a commanded undead.

So, the 'Command' function of a high-level Rebuke is certainly a mental control effect, and I see no reason why the Command Undead spell should automatically 'trump' "A commanded undead creature is under the mental control of the evil cleric".

Command Undead is not mind-affecting... but neither is Rebuke, and it's described as 'mental control', so it's reasonable to extrapolate and decide that Command Undead falls under the mental control clause as well... which means that if an evil cleric is using Rebuke to Command some undead, and you cast Command Undead on them, they're suffering Multiple Mental Control Effects, which means opposed Cha checks (between you and the cleric, not you and the undead) to arm-wrestle for dominance.

Similarly with Animate Dead: "The undead you create remain under your control indefinitely."

So if the cleric animates some skeletons, they are under his control. If you cast Command Undead on them, they are under your control also, certainly, but I don't know what it is in the spell description that makes you think they are under your control instead.

Why do you say one spell's control 'trumps' the other spell's control?

-Hyp.

 

[pawsplay]

I had a lot of fun with this little spell in my campaign. I let the PCs (mostly 6th and 7th level) acquire a minor artifact that cast control undead 2/day. Then I sent them up against a death knight. After several fruitless rounds, the wizard gave in and used the item, taking control of the death knight (who still served an evil deity). The wizard thought it would be cute to send the death knight after an old foe of theirs.... in the end, the death knight killed a tavern full of people, broke an uneasy truce with a band of orcs, and succumbed to a second control undead cast by the guy they sent him to kill... needless to say, the wizard spent several adventures atoning for an evil alignment while the group cleaned up the mess.

 

[Diirk]

... sounds more like a careless/stupid act than an evil one to me. Its not like the wizard woke up and said "hey lets send this death knight to slaughter some helpless villagers, that'd be fun!".

Pretty harsh, imo ;p

 

[Nail]

He's not talking about the Cha check outlined in the spell description (which, as you note, only applies to intelligent undead).
.....(snip)....

Why do you say one spell's control 'trumps' the other spell's control?

You are right! I withdraw my objection.