Scripting NPC actions, is this gone? Do you do it? Share how

[OchreJelly]

This also has the effect of such magic being limited to combat use which can get boring quick. Charming someone for 6 seconds to preform very limited or prescribed functions turns what was once flavorful magic into just another form of attack.

I agree with that to a point. Shorter durations do limit what can be done with charm magic, but on the other hand they have opened it up with the amount of charm spells that are available (I include psion). Psychic damage, short durations charms for attack, charms that let a creature do anything but attack and so forth. These are inventive applications beyond just confusion and dominate.

If I were to create a longer term charm-type spell I would model it after the mind-flayer "create thrall" ability.

Basically you'd have to reduce the target to zero hps (with psychic damage would make the most sense). The target is then dominated (no save) and regains enough hit points to restore it to its bloodied value. You control the creature outside of combat for menial tasks. In combat the thrall uses your economy of actions to perform actions. Give it a new save each day or anytime it clearly violates its ethics (one check per encounter).

 

[ExploderWizard]

One thing that the 4e system has done to simulate dominated creatures are by creating "thralls" for various monster types.

These essentially are charmed or controlled creatures, though there's no mechanical flag stating that these are under charm or control.

If you need an evil wizard to have some charmed guards, you can create human thralls or goblin thralls.

This example kind of proves my point that such magic is limited to combat use. Thralls are a great staple of evil masterminds but what about more subtle uses of charms? Suppose a PC wanted to charm a member of a nobles court and use him/her to gather information about the noble's illicit activities.

 

[Squizzle]

This example kind of proves my point that such magic is limited to combat use. Thralls are a great staple of evil masterminds but what about more subtle uses of charms? Suppose a PC wanted to charm a member of a nobles court and use him/her to gather information about the noble's illicit activities.

Rituals.

 

[OchreJelly]

agreed with squizzle. Maybe turn the charm person into a ritual that enchants a goblet of wine. Now you have a skill challenge to try and get the enchanted wine to the noble's lackey! Similar goal, with different mechanics not heavily dependent on save-or-die.

 

[sinecure]

This example kind of proves my point that such magic is limited to combat use. Thralls are a great staple of evil masterminds but what about more subtle uses of charms? Suppose a PC wanted to charm a member of a nobles court and use him/her to gather information about the noble's illicit activities.

I agree. An order could be given to the NPC to report back every day to a certain time and place and give over whatever info he learned that day. That's what I call scripting an NPC's behavior. Most of the time it's probably going to be useless information, but sooner or later the NPC is going to be involved in something the rules caused to happen and his reports will have some benefit to the PCs.

Not that we don't use Charm spells in combat too. Charm changes attitude, so the charmed NPC typically becomes a third party to the fight. PCs have a sort of "when I choose" Dominate effect that could or could not take effect depending upon each Saving Throw. Now it sounds like every enchantment may require a new casting with the effect only lasting a single combat round. That's not what I mean by enchantment spell. Maybe what I mean are 4E Rituals? Are there enchantment spells there?

I don't agree a more tightly scripted set of Charm spells means they are more inventive. Total control over the character is more open to invention in my opinion. Not that limits aren't possible or fun. For example, Suggestion's one-word-only control as spoken by the player or how we play the Confusion spell, a table much bigger than 3E's where the action taken has a huge variability. Sort of like Wand of Wonder, but the table is not quite so large.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Rituals.

I shall research this. Is there a charm ritual that can be subtley and quickly cast upon an individual that doesn't involve the victim having to be bludgeoned down to 0 hp to work?

 

[catsclaw227]

This example kind of proves my point that such magic is limited to combat use. Thralls are a great staple of evil masterminds but what about more subtle uses of charms?

Granted, just because the thrall is "monster" doesn't necessarily mean that they need to be in combat. They can be messengers, spies, etc. The thrall doesn't need to go into combat to be useful to a campaign.

But, regarding powers, yes, these are generally relegated to combat (though many Utility powers are quite useful outside of combat). For sake of this discussion, powers with the charm keyword are most useful in combat. I agree, and they are generally short lived.

Suppose a PC wanted to charm a member of a nobles court and use him/her to gather information about the noble's illicit activities.

Rituals. And like a previous poster said, coupled with a skill challenge, it can be quite interesting!

I wonder if Goodman's Book of Rituals supplement will have any charm related rituals?

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Can anyone tell me why?

Beacuse the few rules that could be construed as "scripting" were dumb and abuseable. And heavily ignored.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I don't agree a more tightly scripted set of Charm spells means they are more inventive. Total control over the character is more open to invention in my opinion. Not that limits aren't possible or fun. For example, Suggestion's one-word-only control as spoken by the player or how we play the Confusion spell, a table much bigger than 3E's where the action taken has a huge variability. Sort of like Wand of Wonder, but the table is not quite so large.

When did suggestion become one word? I think the one word compulsion spell was command. I would love to see your confusion table.

 

[SolitonMan]

I've played D&D since 1980 in one form or another, and none of the games in which I was involved had scripting of behavior for anyone. There was knowledge, which definitely limited the actions a character - player or not - could take. For example, a rogue couldn't just pick the pocket of a random passerby to take a specific item that the player knows the passerby possesses but of which the character is unaware. And it was always considered poor form to immediately attack a non-hostile NPC that the player knows is a servant of the dark lord when the character could have no such information.

I will spec out strategy and tactics for NPCs, but these will change as circumstances warrant, and as NPC abilities allow. Ultimately I try to think of my NPCs in the same way I think of a character I'm playing - actions should be based on motivations and abilities. Smart NPCs won't stick around to be sword fodder for players if they can escape, and strike back at a time more to their liking. Event stupid NPCs will look to preserve their lives if able, although some are fanatical to their causes and will absolutely fight to the death.

I'm not sure how domination/charm/etc. fits into the general concept of NPC scripting. I guess I'll find out soon, since the PFRPG beta game I'm running Friday night will likely soon involve the players encountering an aboleth.