Protection from XXX vs Charms and Compulsions

sfedi

First Post
What effects encompass "to exercise mental control over the creature"?

From the SRD:
This spell wards a creature from attacks by evil creatures, from mental control, and from summoned creatures. It creates a magical barrier around the subject at a distance of 1 foot. The barrier moves with the subject and has three major effects.
First, the subject gains a +2 deflection bonus to AC and a +2 resistance bonus on saves. Both these bonuses apply against attacks made or effects created by evil creatures.
Second, the barrier blocks any attempt to possess the warded creature (by a magic jar attack, for example) or to exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment (charm) effects and enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, such as dominate person). The protection does not prevent such effects from targeting the protected creature, but it suppresses the effect for the duration of the protection from evil effect. If the protection from evil effect ends before the effect granting mental control does, the would-be controller would then be able to mentally command the controlled creature. Likewise, the barrier keeps out a possessing life force but does not expel one if it is in place before the spell is cast. This second effect works regardless of alignment.
Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Good summoned creatures are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.

So, what specific spells are nullified?
Does Protection from Evil cancel the effects of:
Sleep?
Charm?
Harpy's Song?
All spells and effects Enchantment (charm) and Enchantment (compulsion) ?
Only Dominate/Control like spells/effects?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Only Dominate effects, such as a vampire's domination.

Sleep and a harpy's Captivate do not exercise control of the victim, but implant a specific compulsion. Charm does not control the victim either and does not grant any special mental communication from the caster to the victim.
 

Starglim said:
Charm does not control the victim either and does not grant any special mental communication from the caster to the victim.

The FAQ clarified this sentence to mean:

1. Enchantment (Charm) effects, and
2. Enchantment (Compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject.

... as opposed to

1. Enchantment (Charm) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, and
2. Enchantment (Compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject.

So Charm Person, as an Enchantment (Charm) effect is blocked, and Dominate Person, as an Enchantment (Compulsion) effect that grants the caster ongoing control over the subject, is blocked, but Sleep, as an Enchantment (Compulsion) effect that does not grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, is not blocked.

-Hyp.
 


Hypersmurf said:
Oops! The thread closure here was completely accidental.

Carry on!

-Hyp.
(Moderator)
Heh, I was wondering about that--I figured you were so sure you were right that no more discussion was necessary :p

(For the record, I agree)
 

Bah. The reference to Enchantment (Charm) effects was simply intended to clarify the meaning of "exercise mental control over the creature", and the example outside the parenthesis should take precedence. Once again the FAQ adds an unnecessary reinterpretation that very much extends the power of a well-known effect - a first-level spell, at that. However if we accept the FAQ, Protection spells also block the effect of the harpy's song, which is a charm.
 

Starglim said:
Once again the FAQ adds an unnecessary reinterpretation that very much extends the power of a well-known effect - a first-level spell, at that.

Now, in this case, I think the FAQ is exactly fulfilling its function - taking an ambiguous statement, and saying "This is the way it should be read".

It's not creating a new rule; it's not contradicting the text; it's just saying "When you read this sentence aloud, put the emphasis here".

All it's doing is explaining that the clause "that grant ongoing control" applies to the item in the list that it immediately follows, not to every item in the list. Which is a perfectly normal way to read the sentence.

The FAQ isn't doing anything odd here; it's just clarifying how the sentence should be read.

The original sentence would have the same meaning, but be less ambiguous, if it were written "including enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, such as dominate person, and enchantment (charm) effects".

-Hyp.
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top