Dominate trick?

[Devigor]

If a kobold sorcerer cast dominate person on itself, would that let it vie for control using opposed charisma checks if another caster used the same spell on it?

I could see this being used directly as a defensive spell, if this works. Better to use it on someone else, but if you are not going for the instant "I Win" button, or the enemy isn't humanoid (in this case), then mayhaps?

[Ninane]

The wording of the spell is such that it limits, or at least heavily implies, that the subject and the caster are two different people.

[Flickerdart]

"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..."

You can't actually redirect the spell once you give yourself an order. And if you don't give yourself an order, there's no opposed Charisma check. And you can't countermand the order you are given with your own, because "give yourself an order with the Dominate spell" is not a permissible action while you are directed by another command.

[Chronos]

So you dominate yourself and give yourself the order "Act as you normally would as though you were not under the effect of a domination spell". You then spend all of your time carrying out that order. If someone attempts to get you to do anything else with another dominate spell, then the orders given via the two spells are in conflict, and you get to roll the opposed check.

[Telok]

So you dominate yourself and give yourself the order "Act as you normally would as though you were not under the effect of a domination spell". You then spend all of your time carrying out that order. If someone attempts to get you to do anything else with another dominate spell, then the orders given via the two spells are in conflict, and you get to roll the opposed check.

The problem as I see it is that the domonated being loses free will and must be commanded to do things. Thus once the Dominate is cast the target waits for commands before acting. This means that the kobold would Dominate himself and then wait for himself to give orders, which he can't do because he hasn't been ordered to do so.

On re-reading the spell it dosen't say either way what the target does without commands, only what happens when commands are given. Looks like it's up the the DM.

[Milodiah]

...you do remember that counterspells are a thing, yes? And if you're trying to re-Dominate yourself, then you've got the spell prepped. Just go for it.

[kellbyb]

I would just use Protection from X. Stops dominate dead in its tracks, has other benefits, and is only a 1st-level spell.

[Venger]

So you dominate yourself and give yourself the order "Act as you normally would as though you were not under the effect of a domination spell". You then spend all of your time carrying out that order. If someone attempts to get you to do anything else with another dominate spell, then the orders given via the two spells are in conflict, and you get to roll the opposed check.

At a certain level of optimized play, it's assumed everyone does this. It's one of the areas sorcerers (normally) outshine wizards since their chas tend to be higher.

[JeenLeen]

At a certain level of optimized play, it's assumed everyone does this. It's one of the areas sorcerers (normally) outshine wizards since their chas tend to be higher.

What is the benefit of this trick over using Protection from X (or Mind Blank)? I would think at a high-op game, people would go for straight immunity rather than a trick that still leaves them vulnerable.

[Venger]

What is the benefit of this trick over using Protection from X (or Mind Blank)? I would think at a high-op game, people would go for straight immunity rather than a trick that still leaves them vulnerable.

You would have both in case protection from (foo) and/or mindblank was dispelled.

The advantage of walking around dominated is, in an RP heavy game, it can be used to escape responsibility from unsavory actions (e.g. I didn't mean to do (thing) I was dominated, officer!) it's only a DC 15 sense motive to see someone's dominated, and there's no RAW way to determine who the caster is, so you can just blame zombie mind control for all your various crimes as an adventurer. the deeandee twinkie defense.

[JeenLeen]

You would have both in case protection from (foo) and/or mindblank was dispelled.

The advantage of walking around dominated is, in an RP heavy game, it can be used to escape responsibility from unsavory actions (e.g. I didn't mean to do (thing) I was dominated, officer!) it's only a DC 15 sense motive to see someone's dominated, and there's no RAW way to determine who the caster is, so you can just blame zombie mind control for all your various crimes as an adventurer. the deeandee twinkie defense.

Ah! Very good points, especially the latter of justifying ill actions. Thank you.

[Venger]

Ah! Very good points, especially the latter of justifying ill actions. Thank you.

My pleasure. I've actually seen this used as a justification not to ban enchantment once or twice. it's a cute little trick.

[atemu1234]

I feel like it would backfire somehow. As with wish, this all depends on the wording.

[137beth]

You would have both in case protection from (foo) and/or mindblank was dispelled.

The advantage of walking around dominated is, in an RP heavy game, it can be used to escape responsibility from unsavory actions (e.g. I didn't mean to do (thing) I was dominated, officer!) it's only a DC 15 sense motive to see someone's dominated, and there's no RAW way to determine who the caster is, so you can just blame zombie mind control for all your various crimes as an adventurer. the deeandee twinkie defense.

So when Lucius Malfoy claimed to be under the Imperious curse, he was actually telling the truth, he just didn't say who the caster was?:smallamused:

[Venger]

So when Lucius Malfoy claimed to be under the Imperious curse, he was actually telling the truth, he just didn't say who the caster was?:smallamused:

This is actually a popular canon-compatible theory. When the protagonists speak disparagingly of death eaters and their sympathizers who "claimed to be under the imperius curse" while they were collaborating, this is likely what they meant, even though, like any clever/creative use of magic, it's not anywhere textual.

[aleucard]

Biggest issue with that is, unlike with Dominate Monster/Person, the Imperius curse DOES have certain negative effects on those who've been hit with it repeatedly and for significant chunks of time. See the Crouches for this.

[Venger]

Biggest issue with that is, unlike with Dominate Monster/Person, the Imperius curse DOES have certain negative effects on those who've been hit with it repeatedly and for significant chunks of time. See the Crouches for this.

Well, yeah. That's why the implicit comment when they said "so and so claimed to be under the imperius" was that they were lying.

[Chronos]

The fantasy book Master of the Five Magics also had something like this:

The fourth form of magic the protagonist learns is sorcery, which in the book means control over others' minds. The fifth form is wizardry, which involves summoning demons with a contest of wills to force them to do your bidding. In the climactic battle, he uses sorcery on himself, and orders himself not to lose the battle of wills, before summoning a very powerful demon.

[Devigor]

Thanks for the thoughts, this is interesting. My DMs have always only allowed the Protection From X spells to keep away possession from effects like Magic Jar or special abilities. They always held Dominate and Charm spells as not being possession/owning so much as influencing/controlling effects, which haven't seemed to be affected by the Protection From X spells...

[Psyren]

Thanks for the thoughts, this is interesting. My DMs have always only allowed the Protection From X spells to keep away possession from effects like Magic Jar or special abilities. They always held Dominate and Charm spells as not being possession/owning so much as influencing/controlling effects, which haven't seemed to be affected by the Protection From X spells...

*facepalm*

Dominate Person is literally given as an example of a spell blocked by Pro:Evil in the PHB. Sometimes I wonder where these DMs come from. If they want to ban or houserule something they should just openly state that's what they're doing.

[atemu1234]

*facepalm*

Dominate Person is literally given as an example of a spell blocked by Pro:Evil in the PHB. Sometimes I wonder where these DMs come from. If they want to ban or houserule something they should just openly state that's what they're doing.

I've seen DMs that haven't opened the Player's Handbook or the Dungeon Master's Guide, so I'm not surprised.

[Yahzi]

So you dominate yourself and give yourself the order "Act as you normally would as though you were not under the effect of a domination spell".
You swiped that from a Jack Vance short story in The Dying Earth. How appropriate!

I, personally, would let Dominate be used to block Dominate. It adds a little more strategy to D&D above the standard "cast first" tactic. After all, the Dominate spell doesn't last forever; there will be times the wizard is not protected by it. It can be dispelled, etc., so its not perfect protection. But it makes your attack more than "I cast Dominate from a hidden location; if he saves, I teleport away and try again the next day."

[Chronos]

Well, I certainly didn't swipe it from Vance, as I've never read him. It's possible, I suppose, that I unknowingly swiped it from someone else who swiped it from him, but I think it more likely that it's just the sort of idea that's occurred to multiple people at multiple times.

[Sith_Happens]

The fantasy book Master of the Five Magics also had something like this:

The fourth form of magic the protagonist learns is sorcery, which in the book means control over others' minds. The fifth form is wizardry, which involves summoning demons with a contest of wills to force them to do your bidding. In the climactic battle, he uses sorcery on himself, and orders himself not to lose the battle of wills, before summoning a very powerful demon.

That reminds me of the later parts of Code Geass R2, when

Suzaku starts subverting his command to "live" so that it becomes a constant power-up rather than a compulsion to flee when the chips are down.

[Devigor]

*facepalm*

Dominate Person is literally given as an example of a spell blocked by Pro:Evil in the PHB. Sometimes I wonder where these DMs come from. If they want to ban or houserule something they should just openly state that's what they're doing.

Well, it is a houserule, one that was created because of the line of thought I mentioned. He has read it. He decided that no spell will counteract another spell of 2 or more levels higher in his campaigns... Which is why I usually see illusion as more powerful than it is (hooray for puns), with my distorted perspective (oh look another pun).

[Doc_Maynot]

Well, it is a houserule, one that was created because of the line of thought I mentioned. He has read it. He decided that no spell will counteract another spell of 2 or more levels higher in his campaigns... Which is why I usually see illusion as more powerful than it is (hooray for puns), with my distorted perspective (oh look another pun).

Another reason to invest in Heighten Spell Metamagic

[Yahzi]

Well, I certainly didn't swipe it from Vance, as I've never read him. It's possible, I suppose, that I unknowingly swiped it from someone else who swiped it from him, but I think it more likely that it's just the sort of idea that's occurred to multiple people at multiple times.
Given that D&D magic is basically swiped from Vance, I thought it was really clever of you to quote him when talking about D&D spells. :smallbiggrin:

If you are playing D&D and you aren't swiping from Vance, u r doing it wrong. Go read "The Dying Earth" post haste! You are in for a treat.

[Devigor]

Another reason to invest in Heighten Spell Metamagic

Exactly. There are several small rulings we have in our group that have made each of the Metamagic feats much better. Empower and Maximize are +1 and +2 for us at the base modification, because blasty wizards aren't playing gods.

Here is another question: how would a charm affect you if you were dominated? Would it mean that you would control yourself in way that would be friendly to them? I see charm as completely working around the effect by a none-too-complicated reasoning.

[Sith_Happens]

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.

If being charmed would cause you to act in a way that conflicts with your current order to yourself,* then you can make an opposed Charisma check to effectively ignore the charm. Otherwise, yes, you will be compelled to control yourself in a way that is in compliance with the charm.

* Assuming that your typical standing order is "Act as if you aren't Dominated," that does not conflict with the effects of being charmed.

[Renen]

That reminds me of the later parts of Code Geass R2, when

Suzaku starts subverting his command to "live" so that it becomes a constant power-up rather than a compulsion to flee when the chips are down.

Speaking of... Lelouch does this even better, by "mind raping" himself into forgetting his own plan while fighting a mind reader (Mao).

[Mr Adventurer]

Wouldn't this fall foul of the effects stacking rules, I.e. the new spell just replaces the old one with the new duration?

[Jack_Simth]

Wouldn't this fall foul of the effects stacking rules, I.e. the new spell just replaces the old one with the new duration?
It would, except that multiple mental control effects (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#stackingEffects) have their own category. What really wrecks the technique is that the opposed charisma check only crops up "If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously" (emphasis added) - so that order you gave yourself yesterday to act exactly as you would were you not charmed and/or dominated is not simultaneous with the order from the guy who just landed a Dominate Person spell on you successfully.

[Psyren]

It would, except that multiple mental control effects (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#stackingEffects) have their own category. What really wrecks the technique is that the opposed charisma check only crops up "If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously" (emphasis added) - so that order you gave yourself yesterday to act exactly as you would were you not charmed and/or dominated is not simultaneous with the order from the guy who just landed a Dominate Person spell on you successfully.

I would think an ongoing order is just that, ongoing, and that if you get a new one while the first one is still active then the Cha-arm-wrestling-match would commence.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I would think an ongoing order is just that, ongoing, and that if you get a new one while the first one is still active then the Cha-arm-wrestling-match would commence.Not to mention it's nearly impossible to actually receive orders simultaneously within the rules.

Edit: For everyone saying "why not just use Protection From X or Mind Blank?"
Protection from X lasts minutes/level, whereas Dominate Person lasts days/level.
Custom items of low level spells aren't always available.
Mind Blank is an 8th level spell.
So yeah.