D&D 5E Is Charm Monster too good?

[DND_Reborn]

Another aspect where "the stars aligned" in this circumstance is the fact that cyclops only speak Giant and the caster happened to know the language. Not something you would expect that often. So, being able to communicate the request in this instance was pretty unique.

The DM ruled issuing a quick request was a bonus action.

By comparison, FYI, "too powerful" compared to other 4th level spells and other charm spells. It has phenomenal upside (1 hour, no concentration, no repeated saves, no material component). Even with advantage, the average creature has maybe a 50/50 chances of saving overall. With such a long duration, it definitely is powerful to remove one target from the fight, even if you can't convince it to aid your side afterwards. It took what should have been a moderate encounter and made it less than easy.

Now, part of this could be our play style as well. We often only have one or maybe two encounters between a long rest (unless we are doing a dungeon crawl or in a hot spot). The side effect of this means our characters can unload their best stuff without too much fear of being in trouble later on (it does happen occasionally, but not very often).

 

[MarkB]

So, the only effects of this spell are that:

• The creature can't directly attack the caster.
• The caster has advantage on Charisma (Persuasion) checks against the creature.
• The creature considers the caster to be its friend.

It doesn't change the creature's attitude to any of the caster's allies - if it was hostile to them before, it still is.

It doesn't change the creature's attitude to any of its own allies - if it was friendly to them before, it still is.

In most cases, the best you would reasonably be able to hope for during combat is that the creature chooses to sit out the fight, rather than having to choose between fighting its new friend or its existing friends.

 

[DND_Reborn]

That is interesting. I don't think our DM gave the player advantage on the CHA check... I'll have to ask. It changes the odds, however.

Since the target is friendly, the reaction table in the DMG indicates a DC of 20 (or higher) would resolve with the target accepting "significant risk or sacrifice to do as asked." Attacking your "old" friend to protect your "new" friend would fall under significant risk or sacrifice--at least to our DM and table. If the check had been worse, then it would probably have just sat out as you suggest.

But that is also the difference between rules and rulings I suppose.

 

[5ekyu]

This is the key aspect: what does the DM require to call for the persuassion check. In my games I allow knowledge checks as a bonus action, but any kind of diplomacy that calls for a check requires an action. Taking 2 actions to turn a creature to your side in a game where 3-4 rounds of combat are the norm isn't overpowered by any means. If the DM allowed the check as part of the spell or on the same turn, that can be very powerful, especially if you go before the monster.

Not too long ago, a tiefling was being grappled by two dwarves who had orders to capture but not seriously hurt her. So she cast charm person on both, got one of two, who immediately loosened his grip a might.

Then she made a 20+ on her charisma checks getting turning "boys boys plenty to go around" to "hey can it be just me and you" to one-on-one "lets go over there, where we can be private while they sort it out" etc.

Wound up being a "whole of the fight" for her but it worked great and generated a great many great lines.

This would have gone differently had their irders been different or they not been quickly hired thugs with no particular loyalty to... Well... Anyone.

 

[5ekyu]

That is interesting. I don't think our DM gave the player advantage on the CHA check... I'll have to ask. It changes the odds, however.

Since the target is friendly, the reaction table in the DMG indicates a DC of 20 (or higher) would resolve with the target accepting "significant risk or sacrifice to do as asked." Attacking your "old" friend to protect your "new" friend would fall under significant risk or sacrifice--at least to our DM and table. If the check had been worse, then it would probably have just sat out as you suggest.

But that is also the difference between rules and rulings I suppose.

Except for the advantage, it sounds spot on with rules, except for three GM options - which means its fine.

1 social exchanges are not automatically one actions at all. So a quick 1 action command as opposed to discussion with back and forth might get a no chance or at least disadvantage.

2 The traits and nature of the NPCs may make some options not possible. If this was a relative they liked or loyal to, the attack the other might not be possible at all regardless of check. Then again it might give disad countering the advantage for less strong feelings, or other.

3 Regardless of request/order, how the target responds is up to them. Maybe it grabs the other, telling it and your allies to stop fighting instead of helping your allies kill its partner.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Except for the advantage, it sounds spot on with rules, except for three GM options - which means its fine.

1 social exchanges are not automatically one actions at all. So a quick 1 action command as opposed to discussion with back and forth might get a no chance or at least disadvantage.

2 The traits and nature of the NPCs may make some options not possible. If this was a relative they liked or loyal to, the attack the other might not be possible at all regardless of check. Then again it might give disad countering the advantage for less strong feelings, or other.

3 Regardless of request/order, how the target responds is up to them. Maybe it grabs the other, telling it and your allies to stop fighting instead of helping your allies kill its partner.

Good points. I wouldn't be surprised if the DM negated the advantage on the CHA check for charm due to the hasty interaction to get the cyclops to attack the other ones--so it would have been a straight check (no adv or disadv).

Since the other was already half dead due to the other PCs attacking it, I would have been an interesting interaction if the charmed cyclops had tried to "step in" to stop the fighting. Honestly, I don't even know if the DM entertained that thought or not...

 

[MarkB]

Good points. I wouldn't be surprised if the DM negated the advantage on the CHA check for charm due to the hasty interaction to get the cyclops to attack the other ones--so it would have been a straight check (no adv or disadv).

If the cyclops's ally was telling it not to listen to the PC, that could also be modeled as giving disadvantage to the check.

 

[DND_Reborn]

If the cyclops's ally was telling it not to listen to the PC, that could also be modeled as giving disadvantage to the check.

It could be, but I don't think that is enough to give disadvantage. If the other cyclops was a brother or something, then maybe, but of course that is entirely up to the DM.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I wouldn't allow a persuasion check to convince someone to attack another current friend. Would you attack a friend if another one asked you to really nicely?

 

[Gladius Legis]

Seems to me that the player mentioned in the OP is trying to do things with Charm Monster that would only work with Suggestion.