Philotomy Jurament
First Post
Sure; it's a matter of interpretation (which is one of the things I like about OD&D -- it leaves a lot of room for interpretation and preference). How much influence is "complete influence?" Personally, I typically don't go for outright control, either, but I allow a lot of room in that direction (especially if I deem the victim to be "weak minded"). For more potent control, the (OD&D) magic user should use hold person:Again, the words are "complete influence", not "complete control".
The Men & Magic description of hold person reads:
A spell similar to a Charm Person but which is of both limited duration and greater effect. It will effect from 1-4 persons. If it is cast at only a single person it has the effect of reducing the target's saving throw against magic by -2. Duration: 6 turns + level of the caster. Range: 12".
Note that the only real description of the effect is "similar to Charm Person...[with]...limited duration and greater effect;" nothing about paralyzation, et cetera. Referees often interpret this to mean that hold person is a charm-like "complete influence" as well, but even more potent. In other words, hold person gives the magic user a "hold" on the victim. I know that some OD&D referees interpret charm person as being powerful, but limited influence (but with the indefinite duration), and hold person as being complete domination or control (but with limited duration).
There's also at least one published example of OD&D hold person being used in a dominate/control manner. The Judges Guild adventure "Night of the Walking Wet (Realm of the Slime God)" includes an enemy that uses hold person to force PC victims to walk forward and touch something they probably shouldn't...
Last edited: