The Best Way to Dispute a DM

[Celebrim]

Last night my DM (a fairly inexperienced one - I'm the usual DM for the group) subjected my character to a pretty bad interpretation of the Charm Person spell. His evil NPC wizard cast it during a fight and told my character to run away from the battle. The DM said that for the next hour I was going to run away at top speed, leaving my companions to die in the fight.

Ack!?!? All charm person does IMO is make you see the fight as a tragic misunderstanding between your very close friends. You start treating the NPC wizard as a close friend and ally, but you don't stop treating your other friends as close friends and allies. Under those circumstances, the last thing you would want to do is run away, I'd think. You might try to grapple one of your other friends to keep him from attacking the NPC wizard, or you might try to call a truce to talk things over. But the NPC wizard can't act too aggressively, or you'll be perfectly in your rights playing the character to end up tackling him to stop the fight.

Your 'new friend' could try to suggest you 'Go get help' or something of that nature, but that requires he win an opposed Charisma check. Your new friend can't suggest you do something that you simply wouldn't normally do.

So yeah, this is DM who is not reading the rules and you got screwed over. A suggestion spell can sort of accomplish that, "You need to go get help!", with a failed saving throw might result in that provided that the nearest help really was an hour away. Dominate Person can definately accomplish that. Charm Person isn't nearly as powerful, although it can get this result if the DM jumps through more hoops (and you get a second chance to 'save').

I told him that according to the rules that I should at least get a +5 bonus to the roll (since my character wouldn't normally leave his companions during a fight). I also told him that my interpretation would be that the spell automatically wouldn't work because he and his allies were attacking the party.

Ok, you are wrong on both of those counts though. You don't get a bonus to save just because you don't want to do what the evil NPC wants you to do, primarily because Charm Person doesn't let anyone give you orders but also because that's just not in the rules and now you are arguing on the grounds of what you think is fair or realistic. That's a bad basis for confronting a DM. You do get a +5 bonus to save if at the time of the spell, the Wizard was attacking you or your allies. However, don't argue for that bonus if the Wizards very first action was to Charm you, because then arguably you were threatening the Wizard but the Wizard hadn't yet actively threatened the party. Don't try to stand on debateable ground. Wheenver there is clear room for debate, the DM is always right and you just have to live with that or find a different DM.

I also told him that it doesn't control me like a dominate person spell would.

Quite correct.

At any rate, my character is removed from the climactic battle of the scenario; the group is in a dire situation without my character; and (perhaps worst of all) I have to sit there with nothing to do because of a bad rules interpretation.

What I told him was "I think you're not reading that correctly. We can discuss it after the combat." Do you think I should have raised more of a stink about it and stopped the game until he got this right? (He tried the same manuever on the party's barbarian too after he got my character - luckily the barbarian saved or it would have been really bad.)

That is the correct way to handle it. You don't want to turn this into a contest between you in the DM. You want to act like you are on the same side - all playesr in the game. And you don't want to be seen as challenging the DM's authority or trying to take over the game. Don't raise a stink or get all defensive. Approach the DM privately after the combat or at whatever the next break in the game is and try to get him to see your side of it. The DM can actually get the result he wants, he just didn't go about it in the right way.

But to be honest, I disapprove of even the result that he wants because it removes you from the game. That would be bad enough in a situation he has little control over, but in a situation where he has complete flexibility as to the result achieved, I'd think he'd be better off saying something like, "Protect me! This is all a big misunderstanding.", and you busy yourself trying to disarm, pin, or otherwise thwart your friends without harming them while the wizard busies himself trying to subvert the minds of as many party members as possible.

 

[Pbartender]

Let's not forget to set fire to his gaming terrain and minis.

"I don't care what you're mother told you... Violence solves all sorts of things."

 

[Nimloth]

My 2 cents

The best way to dispute the call? Do the following in private and in a non-confrontational manner;
1- With facts, read the spell carefully to him and tell him how you interpret it.
2- Ask, "Do you really want us to be able to use it that way?"

If he insists that the npc's can use it that way, but you can't. Take his DM privileges away.

 

[kitsune9]

"I don't care what you're mother told you... Violence solves all sorts of things."

Particularly when you strike first and hard.

 

[frankthedm]

primarily because Charm Person doesn't let anyone give you orders

Charm does allow the giving of orders, but with an opposed charisma check.

The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if it were an automaton, but it perceives your words and actions in the most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do.

His evil NPC wizard cast it during a fight and told my character to run away from the battle.

What actions had the NPC wizard and his obvious allies already taken in that combat?

 

[Lidgar]

What a strange coincidence, we had almost the exact same situation happen in our group a few nights ago, although it was a Suggestion spell, not Charm Person.

The affected player did argue a bit about it - but in the end let it go to keep the game rolling. Suggestion, as a 3rd level spell, should be more effective at removing a single entity from combat for a longer duration. But as written, it could remove the person for hours if the suggestion could not be completed. In this case, the main beef was the DM (who is very experienced) did not give us much detail on what the suggestion was other than, "you should flee". So our fighter flees the area, trying to get back to base camp, over a day away. In the end it was two dead, two fled. Again, it was the climatic final battle. Kind of a bummer.

In general as a DM, I try to be very careful about charm/compulsion spells, as they are probably the spells that require the most interpretation and subject to overpowered use (prior to 3e it was my experience that illusions fell into this category). Note there is a difference between the two as well - I believe Suggestion is a Compulsion, while Charm Person is (obviously) a Charm. Another reason why in the OP's case, that seems like a poor/overpowered use of a 1st level spell.

 

[Celebrim]

It seems some are ignoring that Charm allows the giving of orders, but with an opposed charisma check.

I'm not ignoring it. It's in the second paragraph of my response. However, leaving aside the fact that the player who is making the protest didn't get his opposed charisma check to resist (a clear violation of the rules), its worth noting that even though charm person 'let's you give orders' it is not the most correct interpretation of the spell to see it as allowing you to give the charmed person any order (provided you overmatch their charisma) or even that it allows you to make a resisted charima check to give unlimited 'suggestions' (as the 3rd level spell) to the target. It is afterall only a 1st level spell, and that interpretation would make it significantly more powerful than the third level suggestion spell and nearly as powerful as the 6th level dominate person.

The spell does not enable you to control the charmed person as if it were an automaton, but it perceives your words and actions in the most favorable way. You can try to give the subject orders, but you must win an opposed Charisma check to convince it to do anything it wouldn't ordinarily do.

Charm Person turns the attitude of the target to 'friendly'. It makes the target regard you as a trusted friend. It does nothing else to the person's mind, and everything else in the text follows from that beginning. You may try to give that person commands, but they will obey only to the extent that they would obey similar requests from other trusted friends. If you ask a friend to, "Pass you the salt.", he's probably going to do so. If you ask a friend to kill his brother, cheat on his wife, or burn his D&D collection he's probably going to be outraged even if he does regard you as a friend. That is the standard charm person is held to.

Hense the restriction that the character will not obey 'obviously harmful orders' (and frankly, I consider, 'Abandon all your friends without explanation to be one.', but that's not really the point). Charm Person gives you no magical ability to command what anyone does. It doesn't let you issue commands which diametrically oppose the characters interests even if you win the charisma check. The 'resisted charisma check' mechanic is merely an attempt to adjudicate the issue of using non-magical ordinary diplomatic persuasion to get your friend to so something. Friends will take risks for other friends, but they won't act out of character. Even if you successfully get a person to do what you want, it still doesn't ever render them an automaton.

This is the reason why I suggested that requests like, "Quick, run get help!" or "This is all a misunderstanding, protect me!" are much more likely to be obeyed IMO than a blunt command to 'Run away for an hour'. The first sort of requests are of the sort that, if a friend made them of you under the circumstances, you might imagine yourself trying your best to fulfill. But, you can't imagine any reason for simply abandoning your friends. This is important because without close supervision, a charmed person is going to act in the most obviously helpful way. A charmed person might well, "Run get help!", but you can't stop the character from coming back at the first sign of help actually turning up because the character is not rendered an automaton. You can order a charmed person to, "Protect me!", but you can't order him to do anything other than what he would normally do to break up a fight 'between his friends' or to ignore your actions if you begin taking actions that don't conform to that standard.

It's the fact that the DM didn't jump through the hoops he would probably expect the PC to jump through if the PC cast the spell that bothers me the most. Frankly, the first thing I would do in this DM's campaign is gain the ability to cast 'Charm Person' because it would be so wonderfully broken if it worked like it works for the NPCs. And the second thing I would do is leave the game if the spell didn't work for me like it worked for them and the DM failed to apologize for the bias.

 

[Celebrim]

What a strange coincidence, we had almost the exact same situation happen in our group a few nights ago, although it was a Suggestion spell, not Charm Person.

Suggestion is an extremely powerful spell in the hands of any creative player.

In this case, the main beef was the DM (who is very experienced) did not give us much detail on what the suggestion was other than, "you should flee".

While hardly creative, I think this is a valid use of the spell. The only thing I would have required of a player attempting this is that they include the reasonable reason why the target would want to flee. So, for example, "You are clearly overmatched, you should flee to save your life!", is in my opinion a perfectly acceptable suggestion and against most targets will be at least minimally reasonable and against many targets will give them a penalty on their save. If the character fails to make the activity sound reasonable in the extreme case the spell ought to fail. More typically, if the suggestion is unreasonable - such as making the above suggestion to an arrogant dragon* or a paladin sworn not to flee battle** - I award a bonus on the saving throw.

So our fighter flees the area, trying to get back to base camp, over a day away.

Bummer. On the bright side, he can turn around after the 1 hour/level duration expires...

*"I'm hardly a match for you, why don't you give me a 5 hour head start before you hunt me down and kill me. It will be more fun for you." is a very reasonable suggestion to an overconfident dragon.

**"I beg of your mercy, let me go so I can right the wrongs I've done" or "Enough! I challenge you to single combat!" is 'reasonable' for someone bound to a code of chivilry.

 

[frankthedm]

It is afterall only a 1st level spell, and that interpretation would make it significantly more powerful than the third level suggestion spell

Suggestion's level of control is weaker than Charm Person. Suggestion is 3rd level because it affects nonhumaniods and the spell can penalize saving throws. Mind affecting non humanoids is a two to four level spell bump [Daze, charm, Hold Dominate] and a one point penalty to a save is the equivalent of heightening a spell whole level.

and nearly as powerful as the 6th level dominate person

5th level. Dominate Person is Dominate Person, not merely Charm person, Greater. The spell has its ups and downs and it is up to the caster to chose which effect is more desired.

Good

• Lasts over a week
• Casting grants battle grants no save bonus
• Unlimited distance on issuing commands
• Prevents the subject from taking normal activities
• sensory input as interpreted by the mind of the subject

Bad

• Prevents the subject from taking normal activities
• Extreme commands can break the spell instantly
• One Round Casting Time.

 

[Hussar]

I solve this problem by leaving most of my rules stuff to my players. They tell me how stuff works most of the time. I have a couple of rules guru players, so, I know I can trust their judgement. I have a working knowledge of how stuff works, but, I also have zero problems with turning to my other player and saying, "Did I get that right?"

Bad things happen when DM's let their ego's get involved in rules disputes.