What happens when you Dominate yourself?

[Solophoenix]

Looking at the Spider Curse spell in the Spell Compendium, it turns a humanoid subject into a Drider-like creature (with various buffs), and gives you control over the result as Dominate Person.

What happens if I cast this spell on myself? Have I just found a 24hour/level buff? Or does dominating my own mind not work?

[Norin]

What if you make a simularcum and make that cast Spider Curse on you!?

That means you control the simularcum, and the simularcum dominates you! :smallbiggrin:

I think that's like dividing by zero, and would not work.

[NichG]

I always thought it might be an interesting (but comparatively expensive) trick to have a friendly mage Dominate you pre-emptively (especially since it has such a long duration) to protect you from mental attacks. Conceivably, that friendly mage could be yourself!

[Andreaz]

My tables have always decided that such loops just whiff or work with no visible effect.

[Umbranar]

Doesnt this mean you lose all free will and do only the neccesary to survive aka eat and sleep? It works this way on a target that does not get any mental commands.

[Andreaz]

Doesnt this mean you lose all free will and do only the neccesary to survive aka eat and sleep? It works this way on a target that does not get any mental commands.You can run with that too. Your brain stops and says "Sir, orders sir!" to an absent driving force.

[Umbranar]

You can run with that too. Your brain stops and says "Sir, orders sir!" to an absent driving force.

Thinks its more fun that way, besides the next day the control ends because you have to concentrate on the spell once per day to maintain control. And a protection from X on the spot ends the effect temporary.

[Ashtagon]

You can run with that too. Your brain stops and says "Sir, orders sir!" to an absent driving force.

That's how I'd rule it.

[Solophoenix]

I've always pictured Domination as the subject being fully lucid and aware of their actions, just not in control of them any more, hence the saving throw when ordered to do something against its nature, the mind in the background just starts fighting hard enough that they might just win back control.

So in the case of self-domination, it would just be that mind in the background, controlling the body, just through a more roundabout means of connection.

So far this is the only example I've seen where self-Domination would be helpful, other than to ward against enemy Domination. Are there others?

[supermonkeyjoe]

I can see self-domination being used as a way for lazy or unfocused wizards to get things done, possibly even for overcoming phobias:

RAW says you can chose to fail the initial save but can you willingly fail the save against carrying out an act that is against your nature?

[Psyren]

RAW says you can chose to fail the initial save but can you willingly fail the save against carrying out an act that is against your nature?

That's a bit odd - if you're so willing to commit a certain act that you voluntarily forego your save, how is it against your nature?

[ThiagoMartell]

http://www.citymanga.com/files/images/hunter_x_hunter/227/06.jpg

Maybe something like this.

[Psyren]

http://www.citymanga.com/files/images/hunter_x_hunter/227/06.jpg

Maybe something like this.

Whatever that is, I can't see it at work, sorry :smalltongue:

[Kelb_Panthera]

I can't really see dominate working like "you're a puppet on a string." The fact that clever targets can subvert orders and that all targets get an extra save when asked to do something against their nature strongly suggests to me that it's more "You're my slave and must follow my orders" reinforced by magic.

I definitely like the idea of casting dominate on yourself as a form of defense against the same. I'd layer it after more concrete effects, but it's a good backup if protection from X gets dispelled. A command as simple as "ignore any orders given by <caster that hits you with dominate>" would force an opposed cha check every time that caster gave you an order.

...... actually, this could make for a very solid infiltration trick into an enclave of some thrall-herd (not the class) creature or character.

[Darth Stabber]

I can see self-domination being used as a way for lazy or unfocused wizards to get things done, possibly even for overcoming phobias:

Utility I never thought of. I've had a sorcerer use it on himself preemptively to be able to make a charisma check vs. The likely dominator (a wizard bbeg). Worked pretty well since the wizard had crappy charisma, allowing me to dispel it with first action.

[nedz]

Extreme self control ?
Possibly useful if you needed to lose weight or something ?

It might cause you to hesitate and waste a lot of move actions however.

Changing your instructions or giving a dominated creature a new command is the equivalent of redirecting a spell, so it is a move action.

Also I'm not seeing how it protects you against a second dominate ?

[Andreaz]

Also I'm not seeing how it protects you against a second dominate ?Multiple mind controls conflict.

[Darth Stabber]

Extreme self control ?
Possibly useful if you needed to lose weight or something ?

It might cause you to hesitate and waste a lot of move actions however.


Also I'm not seeing how it protects you against a second dominate ?

If you are controlled by two different dominators then conflicting commands require an opposed charisma check. If you are a sorcerer, chances are you are going to win against anything but another charisma caster.

[nedz]

If you are controlled by two different dominators then conflicting commands require an opposed charisma check. If you are a sorcerer, chances are you are going to win against anything but another charisma caster.

Only if the commands conflict. Though it's situational — it's more likely that they overlap. Explicitly commanding yourself reactively against an incoming command would be questionable.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Which is why you take a move action to command yourself to ignore any commands given by the guy who lands a dominate effect on you. After that, every command he gives will conflict with the command you gave yourself, forcing a cha check.

Might be a good idea to try and word it so you can pretend to follow along with commands given, so you don't blow your cover.

I really don't see this as cheesy, because it's so very easily circumvented. If the other guy realizes you're under a dominate effect you cast yourself, all he has to do is command you not to command yourself and win one cha check. Bam! defense negated. Then he just dispels it while you're powerless to stop him.

[Psyren]

Only if the commands conflict. Though it's situational — it's more likely that they overlap. Explicitly commanding yourself reactively against an incoming command would be questionable.

Command yourself to only obey your own commands. Bam, everything else is an automatic conflict.

[Darth Stabber]

This is certainly a specialized case if usefulness, but it might come up once, and is unlikely to be expected.

Now dominating your BSF if you are a sorcerer is a winning use of actions if he is dominated by a non-cha caster.

[Bonzai]

As a DM, I have had situations where a minion had been dominated by two different people. Lacking any real guidence from the rules, I ruled that they were not mutually excluisive. That the target would do his best to carry out all commands given. If the orders are contradictory or mutually exclusive then he would follow the newest one given.

So the villian orders an NPC to attack the party, then a player dominates him in return and tells him to throw his sword away and sit on his hands, he will do so, and still kick and bite any player who gets too close.

As for dominating yourself, I would say that nothing happens until you give yourself an order.... "You will loose 5lbs by X-mas". In which case you must follow through with them. New Years resolutions are easy in D&D.

[Eldariel]

As a DM, I have had situations where a minion had been dominated by two different people. Lacking any real guidence from the rules, I ruled that they were not mutually excluisive. That the target would do his best to carry out all commands given. If the orders are contradictory or mutually exclusive then he would follow the newest one given.

There actually are rules for that; the controllers make opposed Charisma-checks to determine whose commands stick.

EDIT: Actual rules quote:
Multiple Mental Control Effects (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#combiningMagicalEffects): Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant. For example, a hold person effect renders any other form of mental control irrelevant because it robs the subject of the ability to move. Mental controls that don’t remove the recipient’s ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. For example, a person who has received a geas/quest spell can also be subjected to a charm person spell. The charmed person remains committed to fulfilling the quest, however, and resists any order that interferes with that goal. In this case, the geas/quest spell doesn’t negate charm person, but it does reduce its effectiveness, just as nonmagical devotion to a quest would. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

As for the OP, I'd say you just can control yourself either through the spell or through normal means, whichever you prefer.

[nedz]

Perhaps it would be helpful if someone could quote the source for the rule — I'm having trouble finding it in the SRD ?

[Eldariel]

Perhaps it would be helpful if someone could quote the source for the rule — I'm having trouble finding it in the SRD ?

I added the quote to the original post with an edit. Basically, yeah, conflicting orders = opposed Cha-check, otherwise tries to do everything as ordered.

[Glimbur]

Thinks its more fun that way, besides the next day the control ends because you have to concentrate on the spell once per day to maintain control. And a protection from X on the spot ends the effect temporary.

1) Cast Protection from X on self.
2) Dominate self (and forego the save).
3) Give self long-term orders, like "do what you normally would but ignore any magical commands from anyone else"
4) Dismiss the Protection spell.
5) Profit.

[TuggyNE]

1) Cast Protection from X on self.
2) Dominate self (and forego the save).
3) Give self long-term orders, like "do what you normally would but ignore any magical commands from anyone else"
4) Dismiss the Protection spell.
5) Profit.

Doesn't work. Protection from X blocks commands as well as the compulsion: you don't get to store up commands and then execute them later.
If the protection from evil effect ends before the effect granting mental control does, the would-be controller would then be able to mentally command the controlled creature. (emphasis added)

[Yahzi]

Since Jack Vance invented D&D's magic system, we can look to him for advice.

In one of his short stories, a character is accidentally dominated by a friend, and when she asks him how to undo the curse, he says, "Order me to behave as myself." She does so, and the spell is broken.

So I think you can dominate yourself just fine.

[Ashtagon]

Since Jack Vance invented D&D's magic system, we can look to him for advice.

In one of his short stories, a character is accidentally dominated by a friend, and when she asks him how to undo the curse, he says, "Order me to behave as myself." She does so, and the spell is broken.

So I think you can dominate yourself just fine.

Based on that logic, if you order yourself to obey your own orders, the spell would be ended automatically, and you'd lose any "protection" it may have offered.

[Slipperychicken]

Failing a save against Dominate Person means you act normally until the caster gives an order.



Once you have given a dominated creature a command, it continues to attempt to carry out that command to the exclusion of all other activities except those necessary for day-to-day survival (such as sleeping, eating, and so forth). Because of this limited range of activity, a Sense Motive check against DC 15 (rather than DC 25) can determine that the subject’s behavior is being influenced by an enchantment effect (see the Sense Motive skill description).

[...]


So really, the Dominate has no effect until you give yourself an order. If you do give yourself an order, then you carry out that order to the exclusion of all else. If you do not give yourself any orders, the duration expires at the normal rate without effect.

Without giving orders, you still maintain a telepathic bond to yourself, and could still do the Standard action to receive your own sensory input. That would be pretty freakin' trippy if you ask me.

[Twilightwyrm]

It could be a good means of faking out an opponent. Since it only takes a DC 15 Sense Motive check to determine that someone is being dominated, you could dominate yourself, giving the impression that you are dominated to those who care to pay attention. This would, incidentally, be a great alibi for getting away with various crimes, since investigators at the scene would invariably notice you are being dominated, and thus unless you are in a particularly harsh society, will not likely be charged with any crime. Might want to put some ranks into bluff for this, but clever use of it can work wonders.

[Amechra]

Dang, now I kinda want to build a character who just messes with his own head for fun and profit.

A high level caster could Dominate themselves to force themselves to pay attention, could use Mind Rape/Programmed Amnesia to remove any undesirable personality traits, could do... stuff with Mind of Another (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20030106a)...