Charm Person effects poll

[Mordorandor]

I lean toward and adjudicate in the same spirit as dicebro. “Let the Wizard have this,” because that makes 1st-level Wizards dangerous. The target comes under the complete influence of the Wizard. To “balance” the spell, the target gets a saving throw (it’s not a sleep spell, by any means) and if it’s unsuccessful, I count the new NPC ally as one of the Wizard’s special hirelings, the total of which is limited by the Charisma score (or some such random die mechanic) of the Wizard, and whose actions/reactions are influenced by dice (morale checks, etc.).

[dwayanu]

The description of the effect is, “If the spell is successful it will cause the charmed entity to come completely under the influence of the Magic-User.”

I read that as meaning the subject is not merely (as in later editions) of a trusting and protective disposition, but is effectively a zombie-like puppet.

This is certainly in keeping with much literary and cinematic source material.

I think it may indeed have been the original intent. The Supplement I addition of a periodic save to break the spell seems probably predicated on its being otherwise too powerful, which is less warranted with the more subtle effect later stipulated (which is in its own right a ‘nerfing’).

I feel fine with having both variations existing in the same campaign.

With the truly complete domination version, my rule is firstly that the caster must concentrate on controlling the other figure instead of just telling it off to take independent action. Without that, the subject takes no action. Secondly, when the subject is beyond the spell’s range it regains volition until the caster again asserts control.

With the more subtle influence version, range is relevant only to giving instructions. The subject will continue to follow those even when beyond the spell’s range. With this version, I’ll give a save to resist something that is — even when viewed in the most favorable way — too contrary to the subject’s nature. In a case of extreme conflict, I’ll even let that automatically end the spell.

[dicebro]

Here is a solution. Referees are encouraged to modify the text of the rules, So, if the charm person spell is bothersome, simply cross out the word “will” and pencil in the word “may”.

[howandwhy99]

It depends on if it is an NPC/monster or a PC. NPC behavior is scripted for the players to game. Think of them like maze games. Charm changes your starting location for the game, but any outcome is still possible. Surrender (death) is likely the hardest to convince an NPC of, and attacking allies a close second. Fleeing is easier and defending their new found close friend likely the easiest.

PCs are under their own choices but are told how they view the charmer. Taking actions not considered appropriate toward a close ally, based on alignment, means some rolls will need to be made if the players attempt them. Failure means not performing the action, but success will likely affect alignment status, even severely. Generally speaking, the other players do see through this even if they are not let in on the ruse. But it's still best to roll and explain it to the charmed player in private IMO.

Spellcasting on creatures when others are in sight, like during group combats, will change their behaviors too. They can speak and act to help their charmed friend. These can divide the charmed one's allegiances at the least.

[Elphilm]

Personally speaking, Mike Mornard decisively settled the matter of charm person for me. "The person is now your new best friend. They are NOT your mindless slave. That's how Dave and Gary both played it."

For me, reports of how Gygax and Arneson actually ran the game always trump whatever is written in the books, because there are so many instances where the text is ambiguous and/or difficult to parse. You can always quibble that maybe Mornard isn't the most reliable source 50 years after the fact, but once you make that move, you enter the realm of speculation and personal taste just like the rest of us.

"That's how Dave and Gary both played it" is a very strong statement, and I see no reason to doubt Gronan. For my money, acodispo's "expedited hiring process" interpretation on the first page of this thread is the best and cleanest implementation of charm person, and the most faithful to the original intent of the spell, as reported by Mornard.

[algebraicvariety]

In a flash of inspiration, I've written this in my book: "treat as a hireling with Loyalty 18".

[Piper]

May 14, 2024 2:02:52 GMT -6 algebraicvariety said:

In a flash of inspiration, I've written this in my book: "treat as a hireling with Loyalty 18".

… and as if the hiring player has CHA 18.

Basically? I played this as if the charmed person has a near stalker level of attachment to the caster. There isn’t much the charmed person won’t do for the person to whom they are enthralled, but there are some limits. Even more fun? Sometimes the devoted player will, in their desire to help the person they “worship,” do really poorly thought out actions.