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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bret" data-source="post: 166028" data-attributes="member: 713">I think that giving away all your items would count as "forced to take actions against their nature" and give a new saving throw. If you don't think this is against a normal persons nature, let me be the first to volunteer to relieve you of all your material possessions. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> If the character wouldn't normally do something for a good friend, then I would think it is against their nature.Interesting enough, it doesn't say that the spell ends if given obviously self-destructive orders. It says "Obviously self-destructive orders are not carried out."Since you have to have a language in common with the subject in order to give detailed orders, I don't think you automatically know the victims abilities.I think the situation gets a bit more interesting when you look at casting this spell on someone with a strong code.If you dominate a Paladin can you:1. Force him to commit a chaotic act (lie, cheat, make a rude gesture in the King's direction, etc)? This would violate their code of conduct.2. Force him to commit an evil act (slay a defenseless person, frame an innocent for a crime, etc)? If done willingly, this would normally require a 9th level cleric with Atonement to fix it. If the action would require an Atonement I think it would be considered harmful if not self-destructive.3. Run away from a battle? What if doing so would obviously result in another characters death? Here I think it gets to be a much tougher call.</blockquote>

Verification