Using Charm Person spells on PC's, like to hear your thoughts...

[Epicurus88]

So, from both a player and DM perspective...

Tell me how you feel about having Charm Person cast upon PC's.

Annoying? Unfair? Role-play opportunity? More fun than you can imagine? Good excuse to swing your sword at that annoying player's PC?

Me, as a DM, I'm hesitant to use Charm Person against PC's, but dang it, it's a damn useful spell and I can't justify NOT using it against the players most times... but it nearly takes their character out of their hands. I mean, I know Charm Person dosn't turn them into commandable automatons but I totally expect any PC to meta-game it while charmed which really undercuts the power of the spell. And there really isn't any way to enforce the charm without railroading the charmed player. It seems to my mind that any PC can always find SOME rationalization/justification to 'bypass' the charm.

So I guess what I'm really asking is... if I have my villians charm my players PC's, what should I expect?

 

[Thanee]

No problem. I expect the player to act accordingly then.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hand of Evil]

What is fair for the players to do, is fair for the DM to do. It is no different from feats and skills, it is a tool to be used and expect players to role-play it.

Note: This is why I as a DM have defined 'mind control' as an evil act in my house rules.

 

[Caius]

there always is a chance for a save and I find it rather interesting when the character learns an NPC just tried to charm them. they better watch out lol.

I recently had a compulsion placed on my elven female wizard/cleric as she had the habit of tossing area of effect spells in like the last round simply to do some damage the minotaur and half-or but then the arch-mage who had hired them was sick of treating all these wounds so the compulsion was placed to not throw any spells that you know would directly hurt the other pc's. not only did it really make for some good roleplaying for myself but it actually made me go and change a lot of my spell list so I'd be able to still participate and not break my compulsion. I've only ever used about one third the spells and now I'm using spells I would have normally passed over to start with. I enjoy it.

but back to charm person, when my DM uses it on a PC it's always just as a PC would use it on an NPC, to either stop them from attacking, gain information or do anything other reasonable thing. but we have a rule not to use charm to have that PC or NPC try and kill someone, we don't find that really fair even though it's completely allowed.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I have no problem with it. It always amuses me when the barbarian-fighter-rogue talks about using his Drive By (Spring) Attack to inflict 30+ points of damage while avoiding being hit in return only to fail his saving throw vs a 1st level spell due to his low will save.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

My expectation is that the PCs will try and play the charm as best they can. Of course they can find loopholes, especially since I've shown them how you can work around a charm when they've used it on NPCs.

In my last session, the party charmed the officer of a group of guards who were going to search the party. The officer declared that the party could not be the ones they were looking for, but the sergeant kept telling him that they fit the description personally, and suspected that something was wrong, so he took it upon himself to hold up the party. The party tried to get the officer angry at his sergeant for not obeying orders, but all that happened was the officer got confused, until one of the PCs said something stupid that turned it into a fight.

The players were upset that they could not avoid the fight, and felt that I nerfed their spell. My response was that a good sergeant does not blindly follow orders when he suspects something is wrong, and that the spell had its effect since it effectively kept the officer, who was the highest level opponent, out of the fight due to his confusion.

 

[Fenes]

I do not see any problem with the spell Charm person - after all, as I see it, is it not as if the PC gets controlled, he simply gains a new friend. He does not suddenly feel less friendship and loyality to his other friends, nor feels any more violent than usual.

A good baseline is "act as if the NPC who charmed you were a trusted party member - now, even if your party asked you to, would you really attack your king?"

Now Dominate Person... that can be problematic.

 

[MerakSpielman]

A PC who's charmed is a kind of fun situation. If a battle is going on, as far as they're concerned two groups of trusted friends are trying to kill each other.

In one game I DMed the dwarven barbarian was charmed, saw all of her friends going at it, and came to the conclusion that we were having some sort of fun, free-for-all, full-contact party, and she happily waded in, attacking both sides with impunity.

I had a Druid who was charmed Entangle the whole area so his friends would stop fighting and they could work this out peacefully.

 

[Goblyn]

I'm with Fenes on this. Charm is not Dominate, and sometimes makes for some interesting roleplaying in the midst of battle. Just as long the player of the charmed PC as well as the DM are in agreement of what Charm does.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

Now Dominate Person... that can be problematic.

IMO, It less problematic, since the player can't interpret and twist the charm. They just have to do what they're told.

Of course, usually, Dominate is less fun for the player

AR