Are these things legal? (suggestion, geas, and planar binding troubles)

[gogogome]

I'm just gonna list all of the things my "problem" player is doing.

1. Upon lesser planar binding a succubus, he casts lesser geas on her to make her serve him for free forever. He claims the following:
a. Geas can refrain a creature from an activity. That activity is disobeying him.
b. The geas forces the creature to perform some service, which is be his loyal subordinate for the duration of the geas.
c. Language is abyssal, so no word-play or word-lawyering to thwart him.
d. Exact phrasing is either "Do nothing except follow my instructions" or "Serve me as my loyal subordinate"

2. He planar binds a Bebilith and casts geas/quest to make it serve him forever.
a. Bebiliths don't have spellcraft, so he doesn't know what spell the wizard is casting at him, so the wizard can cast his hour long geas/quest and the bebilith will just stand there, doing nothing, because he doesn't know what the wizard is doing, or whether or not blocking his ears will do anything.

3 He planar binds a marilith.
a. Succubi have telepathy, so blocking ears won't stop her suggestion spell from taking effect.
b. Succubi have at-will suggestion, and due to the above reason, eventually her suggestion will go through, even if it takes 20 attempts.
c. The wizard informs her that she may walk the material plane if and only if the wizard places a geas on her.
d. The suggestion is "Let the wizard place a geas on you and serve him for a short while. It's a small price to pay to be able to walk the material plane and cause chaos and destruction."

Are these legal? He's basically using enchantment spells to bypass the charisma check, have a 100% success chance, and enslave the demons indefinitely, with them never returning to the abyss.

The other players don't have a problem with what he's doing because we lack a tank/melee character, but I just want to be sure these are legal, and if I'm forgetting something. This group is a long term group, so if I rule on this, it's gonna be "permanent" so I want to be absolutely sure.

[Bad Wolf]

I think so. But you could always send in Inevitables to mess him up for flouting the intrinsic laws of calling spells.

[NecessaryWeevil]

I suppose you could try to argue thusly:

The maximum duration of planar binding is one day per caster level if you "assign some open-ended task that the creature cannot complete through its own actions." "Serve me forever" is not a task that can be completed, since "forever" is not a finite period of time. Therefore, after one day per caster level, *poof* the outsider vanishes as the spell ends.

[lord_khaine]

Well.. to start with i would think that casting a spell at his summoned demon would disturb his calling diagram, allowing his demon to escape back home or attack the caster.

As for the actual geasing.


1. Upon lesser planar binding a succubus, he casts lesser geas on her to make her serve him for free forever. He claims the following:
a. Geas can refrain a creature from an activity. That activity is disobeying him.
b. The geas forces the creature to perform some service, which is be his loyal subordinate for the duration of the geas.
c. Language is abyssal, so no word-play or word-lawyering to thwart him.
d. Exact phrasing is either "Do nothing except follow my instructions" or "Serve me as my loyal subordinate"

To start with i would say this is one of the open ended tasks the subject cant complete, and so he would only have the demons service for one day per caster level.
That the language is abyssal does in no way prevent word lawyering for screwing him over.

And oh my gods.. the possibilities that lies in a command like either "Do nothing except follow my instructions" or "Serve me as my loyal subordinate"
I am pretty sure he would start to hate the whole deal when his summoned demons started standing around like robots, or began bumping into doors ect because he had nor orderet them to open said door. Force him to micro manage his demons to the most absurd degree as they abuse the "Do nothing" part, and wait for him to leave something open ended in place like "attack my enemies", and then fly off during the night to suddenly find some more enemies to attack.

And if he though that was troublesome then wait for his reaction to when his succubus/marilith servant decides to give him what he wanted, and begins serving him loyally? (for a demon). Because im sure he would apriciate a morning meal of 7 virgin hearts.. or that they disposed of the rest of the party for him, since they are obviously a threat to his power...?

[Deophaun]

In general, yes. The geas will have to be renewed every CL days. Abyssal... um... I need to see where he's getting that. I doubt it, for starters, because it's a language born of chaos, so why there wouldn't be uncertainty in its interpretation? So, as I see it, "do nothing except follow my instructions" would fail, as Outsiders need to breathe, and being forbidden from doing so trips the "acts that would result in certain death" clause.

Of course, now you've got an uncontrolled succubus on your hands, and she could well play the part of happily geased servant right up until it's time to backstab you. Yeah... that marilith you thought the succubus bent to your will? It's not actually working for you...

[Doctor Awkward]

1. Geas is extremely powerful, in that by the rules the subject is incapable of disobeying it. However if it involves an open-ended task (for example, "Be my unquestioning servant) then the duration applies, which is one day per caster level.

2. Geas is also mind-affecting, and a compulsion enchantment effect, and is thus trivially easy to bypass. A Protection from [PC's Alignment] spell will do that just fine.

3.
c. Language is abyssal, so no word-play or word-lawyering to thwart him.
Uh, what? Says who? And furthermore...


d. Exact phrasing is either "Do nothing except follow my instructions" or "Serve me as my loyal subordinate"
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
He thinks that will keep him safe?

Do nothing except follow my instructions.
Succubus: "As you wish. What is your instruction?"
Player: "Well, serve me."
Succubus: "In what capacity?"
Player: "Uh. Keep an eye out for threats."
Succubus: "Of course."
*after the succubus watches the party get ambushed by bandits*
Player: "Why didn't you warn us when you saw them?"
Succubus: "That was a threat?"
Player: "Of course!"
Succubus: "I apologize. I could simply would have charmed their leader any time you asked me to. They were never any threat to me."
Player: "All right, fine! Anything that is threatening to me! Keep watch while we get some sleep."
Succubus: "Of course."
*after a party member is killed in his sleep by a hydra*
Player: "Why didn't you wake us when you saw it?!"
Succubus: "It was not threatening you."
Player: "Then next time warn me, no wait, warn EVERYONE in the party any time you see something that could be a threat to us!"
Succubus: "..."
Player: "Do you understand?"
Succubus: "Yes."

*later when the party is attempting to be stealthy*
Succubus: *at the top of her lungs* "Master! There are six cultist guards in the room just ahead of you!"

You get the idea. Repeat the above processes until the player dies. Even instructions like "Destroy those enemies" don't prevent the succubus from doing everything in her power from ensuring the player gets caught in the crossfire, like standing right next to him when the enemy sorcerer attempts to cast fireball on her.

And finally, once the Planar Binding spell ends, the creature goes back home. Now the lower planes has one more denizen that has a vested interest in seeing the character dead.

[Troacctid]

Sounds like your player is going to a lot of trouble to come up with shenanigans that allow him to do the exact same thing he could easily do without shenanigans. It's not as if Planar Binding requires payment. Heck, if your goals are in accord with the fiend's, they might even agree to serve you without a check, and then all you're doing by adding magical compulsions is pissing them off and making them want to sabotage you.

[Grek]

Lesser Geas has a duration of one day/level. Once the duration runs out, the succubus is free to turn on the caster. Ditto for the Bebilith.

A marilith is not a valid target for planar binding. You need greater planar binding for that. Otherwise, it's subject to the same rule as with the other geasa: It only lasts one day per caster level.

"Do nothing except follow my instructions" is a clearly suicidal order. It would require that the demon stand still as others attack and kill it. "Serve me as my loyal subordinate" is less clear.

Things you'll want to make a ruling on for yourself:
-Does casting a spell across a calling diagram disturb the diagram? If yes, the geas step will most likely allow the sucubus to escape if the would-be binder does not physically and magically restrain it first.
-Does "Accept a Geas to serve the caster?" count as a suicidal order? If so, you cannot use a suggestion to force this.
-Does "Serve me as my loyal subordinate" qualify as a suicidal order? If so, you cannot make a geas of that.

[Darth Ultron]

1.Lesser planar binding a succubus.
A.Well, first off the succubus would get a save and a spell resistance check vs the lesser geas.
B.It's not 'forever', it's only for one day a level.
C.No word play? LOL....oh, please.
D."Do nothing except follow my instructions", so sure the caster could have a 'robot' that does nothing unless instructed to by the caster. Oh, so many word twists. The caster says ''attack that paladin'' and the succubus hops over and punches the paladin once. They were give a single one time instruction to 'attack' and they did so. They can also attack in the weakest and most non lethal way, as the command was just to ''attack'' and not to ''kill''. Any succubus can subvert any commands given.

"Serve me as my loyal subordinate" Even more fun. This lets the succubus serve the way she wants to....the inhuman chaotic evil demon way... She could, for example, slaughter anyone who even spoke in a loud voice to her lord. She would always pick the most vile, evil, corrupt and dark way to do any task. She can really make herself more trouble then she is worth.

2.He planar binds a Bebilith and uses geas for service of one day per level.
A.Yup, the Bebilith will just wait for the spell to be cast...and make it's saving throw.

3.He planar binds a marilith.....lol.
A.Between the spell resistance and save, the succubus suggestion has little chance of ever working.
B.Sure it suggestion might work....maybe.
C.The marilith does not care what the wizard says....and she has sense motive +23!
D.Most demons would take this offer of fun and evil and chaos and destruction. (See above)

So how does the wizard get this 100% success? Planual binding does not say ''all bound creatures have no SR and don't get saves''.

But sure, the wizard could have a demon or two to cause him endless evil, chaos, pain, and destruction.

[gogogome]

The player is planning on renewing the geas 1day before the duration.

I do plan on using my enemy's magic circle to free some of the demons during a fight

I don't want to go lawyering with the exact phrasing of the geas. It'll just be a huge debate and in the end, and he's gonna get his way with some giant list of commands/instructions, etc. So if the geas allows slavery like this, then he's gonna get his way so we agreed not to be nitpicky about the exact phrasing. He said to me either allow it or don't, instead of doing this lawyer stuff, and I agreed.


Things you'll want to make a ruling on for yourself:
-Does casting a spell across a calling diagram disturb the diagram? If yes, the geas step will most likely allow the sucubus to escape if the would-be binder does not physically and magically restrain it first.

If you can cast dimensional anchor on the creature after you call it (RAW says you can), I don't see why any other spell would disrupt it. Do you have any rules that says spells have some sort of shockwave or something?


-Does "Accept a Geas to serve the caster?" count as a suicidal order? If so, you cannot use a suggestion to force this.

He phrased it so that it's a condition to walking the material plane, and I think it's actually quite genius to think of that.


Sounds like your player is going to a lot of trouble to come up with shenanigans that allow him to do the exact same thing he could easily do without shenanigans. It's not as if Planar Binding requires payment. Heck, if your goals are in accord with the fiend's, they might even agree to serve you without a check, and then all you're doing by adding magical compulsions is pissing them off and making them want to sabotage you.

He has 8 charisma, and he doesn't want to roll a 1 and have it escape, so he devised this stuff to use will saves instead of charisma checks.



2.He planar binds a Bebilith and uses geas for service of one day per level.
A.Yup, the Bebilith will just wait for the spell to be cast...and make it's saving throw.

3.He planar binds a marilith.....lol.
A.Between the spell resistance and save, the succubus suggestion has little chance of ever working.
B.Sure it suggestion might work....maybe.
C.The marilith does not care what the wizard says....and she has sense motive +23!
D.Most demons would take this offer of fun and evil and chaos and destruction. (See above)

So how does the wizard get this 100% success? Planual binding does not say ''all bound creatures have no SR and don't get saves''.

But sure, the wizard could have a demon or two to cause him endless evil, chaos, pain, and destruction.

Succubi's saves aren't stellar. He casts true casting and then lesser geas, which has like 70% chance of succeeding. If he fails he has other spells to prevent ear blocking.

Geas/Quest has no saving throw, unlike lesser geas.

You're right that the SR and save make it almost impossible to succeed, but it can succeed and she has infinite attempts, so it's just a matter of minutes before it succeeds.

So it's a general consensus that geas does achieve slavery, but the problem with this method is word play, which I agreed not to do.

Alright thanks for your inputs everyone!

[KillianHawkeye]

Seems like it's worth pointing out that geas/quest is subject to spell resistance, which is possessed by many outsiders (including the succubus and marilith). And as far as I can tell, the spellcaster does not automatically know if he fails to bypass SR if the spell in question has no immediate, obvious effect.

[Doctor Awkward]

He said to me either allow it or don't, instead of doing this lawyer stuff, and I agreed.

I don't like telling people how to run their own games, but this was a pretty asinine thing for him to say to you.
Here is the proper response to that:

"So, a conditional requirement of me ruling in my own game that you can planar bind some demons and use geas to keep them as permanent loyal servants, something which has precisely zero precedent in the rules, is that I am not allowed to use yours or your characters inability to safely order them into effective service against you.
Okay, have it your way.
No."

Unless you are fine with him having an infinite number of summoned demons under his control.


If you can cast dimensional anchor on the creature after you call it (RAW says you can), I don't see why any other spell would disrupt it. Do you have any rules that says spells have some sort of shockwave or something?

No, there is no RAW basis for something like this.
It's a house-rule frequently suggested by people who hate Planar Binding.
EDIT: Or rather, hate the lack of thought the designer's put into the Planar Binding spell.


He has 8 charisma, and he doesn't want to roll a 1 and have it escape, so he devised this stuff to use will saves instead of charisma checks.
Then he's doing it wrong.
Eagle's Splendor (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/eaglesSplendor.htm) is a Wizard spell. Circlet of Persuasion (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#circletofPersuasion) is a thing. A scroll of Moment of Prescience (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/momentOfPrescience.htm) will cost him 3,000 gp.
All of this stuff is core. It's not that hard to reach a point where the demon doesn't even get to roll.



Geas/Quest has no saving throw, unlike lesser geas.

But it is still subject to SR. The spell is As Lesser Geas except where noted. No entry for SR. SR still applies.


So it's a general consensus that geas does achieve slavery, but the problem with this method is word play, which I agreed not to do.

Alright thanks for your inputs everyone!


Ayep.

G'luck.

[Zweisteine]

There are two main posts in here. The second one is more practical, I think, and the first more philosophical. Read both.

First up, because I reference it later, there's this:
A Marilith could just as easily pretend to be under the suggestion. And anything forced to serve would exploit any loopholes it can in its rules, even where the player thinks they've covered everything. And don't let the player just add "as I intend it" to the end of every order, either.

But back to the main post:

Well, if I knew the player to be a good PT optimizer (which I won't define; it would take too long*), I would allow it.

Then, of course, someone would notice. Probably the demon in charge of the ones he stole. I mean, Mariliths are important. If one just disappeared for eight months, someone is bound to notice. Maybe, demons don't usually care, but special circumstances require special measures.

I've been reading HPMoR (http://hpmor.com) lately, and one of the author's rules of fanfiction applies here: (Emphasis not mine.)

Rule One: If you do anything to increase the protagonist's power, or make their life easier, you must also amplify their opponent or add extra difficulties to their life. You can't make Frodo a Jedi unless you give Sauron the Death Star. Otherwise, even if it is well-written in all other ways, your story will suck because the reader will know to expect an unending string of easy victories, leading them to neither wonder or care about what happens next. The Mary Sue is not defined by her power being too strong, but by her challenges being too easily overcome.

So if the player tries to break the system, have his enemies do the same.

Well, maybe don't go that far, but said enemies should notice. I'd bet the reason nobody hears about mighty wizards doing this sort of exploitation of binding and enchantment is because every time someone tries, someone comes and erases them from history.

Or you could just give all his intelligent enemies permanently-bound demons to match his own as soon as they fight him once. That's closer to the "give Sauron the Death Star" solution. Just don't do it right away. Give him a few battles with which to celebrate his cunning strategy, before suddenly he is fighting an enemy with the same power. And the enemy, if evil, could have made a deal with some archdevil to get the servants, so his summons will perform their orders as he intends. (A good enemy could have done the same with angels.)

Or the enemies could figure it out and start throwing Remove Curse at the summons.

Also, permanently binding a creature is likely an evil act, even if it's a demon. Hell, just summoning a demon is an evil act (via casting an [evil] spell.)


*Being a "good practical-theoretical optimizer" involves not being malicious, and just wanting to do big exploitative things to the rules (not the DM) for fun.


Subpost

Important part:
In all honesty, if this is standard fare for the player, do not allow it.

If you want to allow it, here are some suggestions on how to limit it with RAW and/or RAI (mostly RAI and RADMI):


1. Upon lesser planar binding a succubus, he casts lesser geas on her to make her serve him for free forever. He claims the following:
a. Geas can refrain a creature from an activity. That activity is disobeying him.
b. The geas forces the creature to perform some service, which is be his loyal subordinate for the duration of the geas.
c. Language is abyssal, so no word-play or word-lawyering to thwart him.
d. Exact phrasing is either "Do nothing except follow my instructions" or "Serve me as my loyal subordinate"

3. He planar binds a marilith.
d. The suggestion is "Let the wizard place a geas on you and serve him for a short while. It's a small price to pay to be able to walk the material plane and cause chaos and destruction."

1a. Disobedience is not an activity, per se. It's more a large set of activities, and thus not a valid command.
1b. See above.
1c. How does abyssal prevent treachery? It's not a language known for its magical qualities of truth or anything...
1d. The first command there is open at the "nothing." See note 1 below. The second can be exploited, but less so. And do succubi truly have a concept of loyalty?

3d. See 1a. Also "it's a small price to pay" is a lie if it's eternal servitude. Make him roll a bluff check, even if it's just to annoy the player a little bit.


Note 1
If he uses that one, the succubus will do nothing he doesn't say, except maybe breathe. Interpret this as the succubus wishes. The intent of the order allows the succubus to act alone, but she is not bound to do anything that is not a direct order to her. And she can interpret orders as she sees fit, within the wording's constraint. See last bullet.
The succubus will not answer his questions, unless explicitly ordered to do so ("I order you to respond to me whenever I address you.")
A command of "cast suggestion" should do nothing, because Succubi have no spells, only SLAs. He'd need to say at least "use your natural magical suggestion ability" to..." (This one isn't as nice as the other suggestions.)
Do not use this next one to the full extent possible.
The succubus must be addressed explicitly. "You" or "Succubus" will not do, even if nobody else is present. He'll have to get her name to give the order to obey commands aimed at "succubus."
DO NOT use the next one at all.
"Instructions" is poorly-defined. The succubus has no need to obey "commands," only "instructions."
The succubus should see this loophole, but she will not act on it immediately, or he will give her a clearer order.

Also, remember the limitations of planar bindings. Assuming he's setting up a summoning circle via magic circle against evil with a dimensional anchor beforehand, nothing can break the line, or it will fail.

This is my favorite scenario:
When he has the marilith in the circle, he orders the succubus (who has, until now, obeyed well) to use "suggestion on the marilith." The succubus proceeds to move forward and break the magic circle (even if previously ordered not to, because new order overrides old, unless explicitly stated otherwise), intending to kiss the marilith, which conveys a suggestion effect. Then the marilith is free to teleport out and do whatever. The marilith has a readied action to do so, because the succubus telepathically informed the marilith of this plan.

Oh, and if he keeps doing it over and over? He'll eventually summon an advanced marilith. Preferably a high-ranking servant of Shaktari, Queen of Mariliths.


Subpost 2

I think so. But you could always send in Inevitables to mess him up for flouting the intrinsic laws of calling spells.
I can only think of one inevitable whose domain this falls under. The Dee-Em Fiaut


Oh, and come back and tell us how this ends up, okay?


EDIT:
Why doesn't he just do this?

Planar binding
Dominate monster (via scroll/wand/whatever if not high enough level otherwise)


But seriously? Don't allow it. It doesn't matter how, but don't. If he does dominate monster directly, it's okay, and you can have fun having his mindslaves cause chaos for him. (And remember they get saves with bonuses when ordered things like "do not resist my recasting dominate monster on you.")

[Troacctid]

Honestly, I find it pretty hard to get indignant when the end result of the trick is exactly the same and even arguably worse than if there was no trick. Planar Binding is already binding. Once you add extra compulsions and make it clear that the servitude is going to be permanent, you're only encouraging the fiend to try and subvert you so that they can end their service, because you've established yourself as their enemy rather than their customer.

[Milo v3]

Wouldn't abyssal make getting screwed over wordings much much more likely than in earth languages, because the DM can decide that x word in abyssal also means y word in abyssal whenever they want? Doesn't even need to stay consistent because this is a language developed by living malevolent chaos.

[meschlum]

Geas and Suggestion are Mind-Affecting, and Compulsions. Magic Circle against Evil / Good protects its target from compulsion effects. Mariliths have Unholy Aura always on, so they are immune to compulsions (from good sources, anyway). Is the wizard neutral? Does the Marilith have an item / potion of Protection from Evil because it lives in an environment where lots of evil beings try to control its mind?

Enjoy!


Planar Binding lasts 1 day / level. Demons are not able to return to the Prime without being summoned, so investing all that effort into geasing them into service won't help - they'll head home after level days anyway. Getting the same demon when you cast another summoning spell is only likely if you know its true name - and giving away a true name is pretty much a suicidal order, especially given that the wizard has demonstrated a willingness to abuse it.


A summoned being cannot damage the circle, directly or indirectly. It still can use its ranged spells and summons to wreack havoc. While the caster is warming up for a geas, the succubus gets 1 attempt per round to cast Suggestion - "I'll serve you willingly if you come into the circle with me". If the wizard uses Protection from Evil to avoid he suggestions, then why can't the demons do the same? Fair is fair, after all. Also, enjoy being pelted with telekinesis and blade barrier effects while you try to bind the marilith. Don't forget that they can summon allies, who could appear outside the circle (and set forth to kill and wreck everything) or inside it (and crowd out its occupants due to size constraints, perhaps). Dimensional Anchor might help against this.


Does the wizard have a Dimensional Anchor up? Because if not, the demons will simply teleport away.


A geas can be ignored if the target is willing to accept some penalties. Set up the wizard into a dangerous situation, ignore the geas for the critical round needed to kill him, party! Or just be affected by thegeas and still refuse the deal offered via Planar Bindng. You're stuck with increasing penalties for a few days, but the wizard runs the risk of rolling a 1 at some point, and then you're free. It makes for a few bad weeks, but you can reciprocate by doing as much damage as possible to the summoning site and wreck the wizard's lab. Or sabotage his future circle making efforts.


More to the point, the succubus is likely to go along with a lot of this, because their purpose is seduction and corruption. Having the wizard cofident that he's in control is more or less exactly where she wants him to be. And then she can get to work on making him utterly dependent on her, on addictive abyssal concoctions that give him power as long as he's using them, offer up some names of demons that'll work for him without all the complicated setup so long as they get a few mortals to devour from time to time, make 'improvements' to the summoning circle so it works better (by not working at all and getting the summoned demons to play along)... Putting yourself in a position where you believe you can trust a succubus to help you out with your long term plans is technically known as "Asking for it".


In practical terms, the wizard wants to get a Dominate Monster effect out of Geas, and that's not legit.


What is the wizard trying to do with the Planar Binding?

If it's a way to acquire free meatshields, it's a clever route (and could be worse: do the abve with Efreeti to get piles of Wishes) and just talk it over with the player - free means it'll involve a cost in time (spend days wrangling demons), resources (get some tasty virgins to keepthe demons appeased), or risk (demons break free at the worst moment). It's clever, so something should come out of it, but consequences exist.

If it's a way to get free power (wishes, high level spells, etc.), then it's worse for the game and the side effects should be more signfiicant. At the very least, any opposition they face will start doing the same - except possibly wth the forces of Good - and face a lower cost because they can state their goal is to stop the one who started it all. Plus, they get to do things wrog and flood the world in demons by accident. It's the gentleman's agreement: if you do this, then so do the others.

If it's a way to get free fluff: "Fear me, for I am the master of a dozen demons and have a spiffy hat to boot!", then the cost can be fairly low. High level characters are awesome, and it's just some time and resources spent on setting the scene as desired. I once used Leadership to get a horde of hundreds of lizards, just because. They're a pain to herd, but that wasn't the point.

[lord_khaine]

If you can cast dimensional anchor on the creature after you call it (RAW says you can), I don't see why any other spell would disrupt it. Do you have any rules that says spells have some sort of shockwave or something?

He can cast the Dimensional anchor if he uses the planar binding like normal, but that has its own set of problems.

Alternatively you can use a magic circle to make the casting more safe, but that has a specific clause that you can cast dimensional anchor on it, and that anything breaching the cirle will release the creature inside.

[Deophaun]

Dimensional Anchor might help against this.
I'm curious as to where the "might" comes from?

Alternatively you can use a magic circle to make the casting more safe, but that has a specific clause that you can cast dimensional anchor on it, and that anything breaching the cirle will release the creature inside.
Nope. It has to disturb the circle, not breach it.

[Jack_Simth]

I'm just gonna list all of the things my "problem" player is doing.

1. Upon lesser planar binding a succubus, he casts lesser geas on her to make her serve him for free forever. He claims the following:
a. Geas can refrain a creature from an activity. That activity is disobeying him.
b. The geas forces the creature to perform some service, which is be his loyal subordinate for the duration of the geas.
c. Language is abyssal, so no word-play or word-lawyering to thwart him.
d. Exact phrasing is either "Do nothing except follow my instructions" or "Serve me as my loyal subordinate"

Oy. You've got a lot of reading to do.
Start with Lesser Planar Binding (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/planarBindingLesser.htm), from which the rest of that line inherits.
1) The spell has a direct save and SR (although the SR can be avoided, which he's probably doing). If he doesn't beat the target's initial will save, he's wasted a few spell slots... but can try again if he's prepared more.
2) The creature gets an immediate Charisma check to attempt break free before anything else happens. The DC is going to be very high (he's got Greater Planar Binding in there for the Marilith, so he's got a caster level of at least 15, meaning his DC of 15+1/2 Caster Level + Charisma modifier = 22+Cha mod or better; if he's using a Diagram (he should be), the DC is 5 points higher (27+Cha mod or better). It's unlikely that the critter will break free (Succubus has a +8 Charisma modifier only, so if Mr. Problem Wizard has a Charisma of 10, she's rolling 1d20+8 vs. a DC of 27+ if he's doing it right; the Beblith and Maralith are hosed on escape attempts... but see further down).

Now look at Magic Circle Against Evil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicCircleAgainstEvil.htm).
1) Assuming he's actually using the calling diagram (he really should be)... nothing is stated about whether or not a spell cast into the circle disrupts the diagram, although it is stated that the diagram is very easily disturbed... which means it's the DM's call on whether or not a targeted spell cast into the diagram disrupts said diagram. You say he's abusing the rules and disrupting the table? Well, you can call it either way, although you should discuss it with him first (the way to deal with a problem player is NOT in game, but out of game, as it's the player that's the problem, not the character). But this Wizard needs to burn a lot of spells on each attempt ([Lesser,Greater] Planar Binding, Magic Circle Against [Evil,Chaos], Dimensional Anchor [all three noted critters have either Plane Shift or Greater Teleport as at-wills])
2) As noted by others, these spells inherit from Protection from Evil, which includes the clause: "Second, the barrier blocks any attempt to possess the warded creature (by a magic jar attack, for example) or to exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment (charm) effects and enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject, such as dominate person). The protection does not prevent such effects from targeting the protected creature, but it suppresses the effect for the duration of the protection from evil effect. 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. Likewise, the barrier keeps out a possessing life force but does not expel one if it is in place before the spell is cast. This second effect works regardless of alignment." (emphasis added) - Mr. Wizard is using an Enchantment Compulsion spell in such a way as to get ongoing control over the subject. Oh yes, and Ms. Marilith has Unholy Aura as an at-will (as do pretty much all of the higher-end Demons and Devils), and that ability inherits the same clauses if you dig far enough; she's uncontrollable in this manner.

Next look at Lesser Geas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasLesser.htm), from which Geas/Quest inherits: "If the instructions involve some open-ended task that the recipient cannot complete through his own actions the spell remains in effect for a maximum of one day per caster level. A clever recipient can subvert some instructions" - he's trying to turn that into forever? Nope, not going to fly. As many have noted: They may let him think so, however - ESPECIALLY Ms. Succubus, seeing as how corruption of that nature is her schtick.

2. He planar binds a Bebilith and casts geas/quest to make it serve him forever.
a. Bebiliths don't have spellcraft, so he doesn't know what spell the wizard is casting at him, so the wizard can cast his hour long geas/quest and the bebilith will just stand there, doing nothing, because he doesn't know what the wizard is doing, or whether or not blocking his ears will do anything.
Well, Spellcraft may very well be trained only... but casting is described as pretty obvious. Plus, of course, the same notes on the use of the various spells involved with Ms. Succubus apply.

3 He planar binds a marilith.
a. Succubi have telepathy, so blocking ears won't stop her suggestion spell from taking effect.
b. Succubi have at-will suggestion, and due to the above reason, eventually her suggestion will go through, even if it takes 20 attempts.
c. The wizard informs her that she may walk the material plane if and only if the wizard places a geas on her.
d. The suggestion is "Let the wizard place a geas on you and serve him for a short while. It's a small price to pay to be able to walk the material plane and cause chaos and destruction."

It will, in point of fact, be a short while. Especially if Ms. Succubus decides that having Ms. Marilith in her debt is useful. Anything can disrupt the diagram and free Ms. Marilith.

And, of course, if Ms. Succubi is giving the Suggestion Telepathically, Mr. Wizard has no idea what the real suggestion is, now does he? Nor does he know whether or not it actually worked (Ms. Succubi gets the information, sure... but not Mr. Wizard direct. Who's to say whether or not a Chaotic creature with Bluff as a standard maxed-out skill might lie! Oh yes, and don't forget: A caster level of 12 on the Suggestion vs. Ms Maralith's SR 25 may need far more than the 20 expected attempts).


Are these legal? He's basically using enchantment spells to bypass the charisma check, have a 100% success chance, and enslave the demons indefinitely, with them never returning to the abyss.

Not as he's apparently interpreting them, no.


The other players don't have a problem with what he's doing because we lack a tank/melee character, but I just want to be sure these are legal, and if I'm forgetting something. This group is a long term group, so if I rule on this, it's gonna be "permanent" so I want to be absolutely sure.

...

You do realize that if he's not hurting anyone else's fun in doing this, then he's not really being a problem player in doing this. If you want to get rid of the wiggly bits, you could just point him at the Huge Elementals. Pathetic Charisma, no teleportation effects, no SR (and thus, no need for a Calling Diagram or Dimensional Anchor), boatloads of HP, and with one simple spell to boost the opposed Charisma check (Moment of Prescience - which he CAN'T have as a banned school, as it's Divination), two boosting items (Circlet of Persuasion and a Cloak of Charisma+6) and the base 10 charisma Mr. Wizard-15 is rolling 1d20+21 vs. Mr Elemental's 1d20+0. Roll two 95% chances (elemental's +5 or +7 Will save vs. Greater Planar Binding, avoid the nat-1 on the Charisma check) for your meatshield for the next 15 days.

[Dairuga]

I don't want to go lawyering with the exact phrasing of the geas. It'll just be a huge debate and in the end, and he's gonna get his way with some giant list of commands/instructions, etc. So if the geas allows slavery like this, then he's gonna get his way so we agreed not to be nitpicky about the exact phrasing. He said to me either allow it or don't, instead of doing this lawyer stuff, and I agreed.



The thing about Geas, is that the exact phrasing -matters-. That is essentially the main sthick of the spell. You enforce a command, according to its wording. If people want to use Geas to enslave forces of destruction, jumping beureucratic hoops is the only thing stopping them from achieving complete success with this. By agreeing that he automatically succeeds on all his enslaving commands you are agreeing to let him run rampant with this. By which it means, you are choosing to let him get away with it all. If he goes overboard, do what anyone else would do and tell him that if he takes things overboard, that the exact wording will matter, or the forces he abuses (if he does abuse them), that they will start doing everything in their power to break his slavery. Gentleman's agreement. The player is not a ****, and you don't **** him over.




He has 8 charisma, and he doesn't want to roll a 1 and have it escape, so he devised this stuff to use will saves instead of charisma checks.



His character is not good at dealing with people, nor is he very strong-minded about persuading people. So he wants to succeed by cheating the system. Good for him. But it is a big warning flag, and is generally the first step to getting whacked over the game with a Dm rulebook.




Succubi's saves aren't stellar. He casts true casting and then lesser geas, which has like 70% chance of succeeding. If he fails he has other spells to prevent ear blocking.


Firstly, True casting does not work like that. It only works for 1 round, and one round only. It specifically states that the next spell you cast if cast within one round, gets the bonus. To cast a Lesser Geas, you first have to chant for ten minutes to complete the casting. A spell is not considered "Cast" when you start chanting it. It is considered cast at the end of its casting time, if it has not been interrupted. Thus the duration of True Casting has already expired, and it gets no boost to its caster roll.

Secondly, while a Succubi doesn't have stellar saves, it does not have to sit completely still and let itself be geased. After all, when they are planar bound, they are given three methods of escaping. One is by pitting their Spell resistance against an opposed caster level check of the circle that binds them. Another is dimensional travel. A third, and the best way to have your demons fight your player, is to simply contest their Cha against your player's. Even if he employs a Calling Diagram to make his PLanar binding even more secure, a demon can always, once per day, use their Charisma to attempt to break free. No demon would, if they detest the player, or detest being controlled (Forces of Chaos often value Freedom over authority, and would loathe to be controlled), they can, as soon as they are called, and see the player chanting, simply attempt to break free.





You're right that the SR and save make it almost impossible to succeed, but it can succeed and she has infinite attempts, so it's just a matter of minutes before it succeeds.



"Infinite" attempts is not a thing. Sure, she can attempt to cast it an infinite times per day, but usually, a succeeded will save is felt as a tingling in the target's head. They know when they succeed will saves. Thus, any demon would know someone is trying to mess with their heads. And proceed to murder whatever is causing it (Spellcraft can give more accurate results / information in what is going on). No one would wait around forever, or infinitely, if they are actively being violated / abused / cast magic at.

Furthermore, a Marilith has a whooping 18 Int. That's a metric ****ton, in the world of demons and monsters. They are exceedingly deadly, and exceedingly clever. For demons that have lived for tens and hundreds of years, you don't need Spellcraft to know that when something is ****ing with your head, you cut it down. The succubus casts suggestion. It fails. The marilith cannot identify that suggestion has been cast, but it -can- identify that the succubus is saying specific phrases over and over and over and over and over again, and that these words are accompanied by the tingle of a succeeded will save. Put two and two together, because 18 d int, and you realize that something is ****ing with your head, and the other demon is most likely the culprit.

Now, however, if she is still inside the magic circle and is unable to cross the circle, it might indeed enforce slavery trough the suggestion spell. And while the Marilith will indeed eventually fail, it will only open up for discussion. The suggestion is "The wizard is doing a reasonable thing, you should should take this chance", which might translate into her simply bargaining with the wizard. About the terms and agreements of the Geas. If he refuses to do so, or if he makes a grossly unfair geas, the marilith has every reason to be mad, and to do anything it wants to thwart the wizard and cut his head off at the first opportunity. Which is usually why people are careful with Geas, because if they take it too far, it will bite them in the ass.




So it's a general consensus that geas does achieve slavery, but the problem with this method is word play, which I agreed not to do.

Alright thanks for your inputs everyone!

Yes, Geas achieves slavery. Which is why it is a good spell. The reason every dog and their owner isn't using it is because it tends to come around and bite them in the ass for abusing it, which every DM has a right to do. While he might or might not ruin your campaign with it, letting people go buck wild with it might end up being a regretful decision.

So with a few parting words, as have already been stated; a simple amulet of "Protection against evil / good" costs a monster 3000 gp roughly, and will permanently protect them against Geas. Similar for Mind Blank and suchlike. It is easy to thwart Mind-affecting spells if you try, so a wizard that relies wholly on them might find his day growing sour when his demons are no longer geased. Because most likely, they will dogpile him.

[One Step Two]

I am going to toss a couple more concepts into the ring, ones that have to do with the fact that he succeeds his little song and dance.

Firstly, Succubi, Bebiliths and Mariliths don't just lounge around in the Abyss waiting for summons, they're usually doing things under the scrutinization of their superiors, especially a Marilith. If they go missing for a long time, someone or something is going to come looking. Bam! Instant plot hook, involving a very annoyed Balor.

Alternatively, let's say a wizard succeeds. The geas won't let the Succubus disobey him, but she can still tempt the hell out of him. "Oh, you wish to summon a Bebilith Master? May I suggest the Demon Tzanjaxis? He's well versed in Dark knowledge, he will surely enhance your power." Make use of that awesome bluff skill. And your wizard now summons a Bebilith who has dabbled in sorcery, and has ranks in knowledge (arcane) and spellcraft. Or plays an even longer game, "Master, if you summon the Marilith Shalkor she will certainly be more biddable than any other, knowing her name gives you more power." While omitting the fact that the Marilith in question is the current concubine of Orcus.

[Troacctid]

On further reflection, I think it's a bad idea to let the player get away with an all-encompassing geas and handwave away any potential lawyering the subject might try to do to get around it. In this individual scenario, it wouldn't be overpowered, since it's just doing what planar binding already lets you do. However, it sets a dangerous precedent. Geas isn't supposed to do that. You get one command that they must follow. If that command is vague and nonspecific, the subject can and should exploit whatever loopholes they can to get out of it (at least as much as their Int score allows). Unless they accepted the geas knowingly and in good faith, in which case they could try and exploit loopholes, but they would choose not to.


A geas can be ignored if the target is willing to accept some penalties. Set up the wizard into a dangerous situation, ignore the geas for the critical round needed to kill him, party! Or just be affected by thegeas and still refuse the deal offered via Planar Bindng. You're stuck with increasing penalties for a few days, but the wizard runs the risk of rolling a 1 at some point, and then you're free. It makes for a few bad weeks, but you can reciprocate by doing as much damage as possible to the summoning site and wreck the wizard's lab. Or sabotage his future circle making efforts.

That's not true. Following the geas is compulsory. Hence why it's a mind-affecting compulsion. The penalties only apply if the subject is prevented from complying--for example, if they are captured and restrained so that they cannot perform the task.

[Zweisteine]

Alternatively, let's say a wizard succeeds. The geas won't let the Succubus disobey him, but she can still tempt the hell out of him. "Oh, you wish to summon a Bebilith Master? May I suggest the Demon Tzanjaxis? He's well versed in Dark knowledge, he will surely enhance your power." Make use of that awesome bluff skill. And your wizard now summons a Bebilith who has dabbled in sorcery, and has ranks in knowledge (arcane) and spellcraft. Or plays an even longer game, "Master, if you summon the Marilith Shalkor she will certainly be more biddable than any other, knowing her name gives you more power." While omitting the fact that the Marilith in question is the current concubine of Orcus.
This is just about perfect.


And as someone said earlier, even if they did submit to his control for a time, they'd gladly take the chance to turn on him when he is weakened. The penalty for breaking a Geas isn't as bad as it looks.

Important to remember: The player never gets to see his bound creature's statblocks, and never rolls for them, even after establishing control.

[One Step Two]

This is just about perfect.

Thanks :smallbiggrin:


And as someone said earlier, even if they did submit to his control for a time, they'd gladly take the chance to turn on him when he is weakened. The penalty for breaking a Geas isn't as bad as it looks.

Important to remember: The player never gets to see his bound creature's statblocks, and never rolls for them, even after establishing control.

Both these points are super important too. The Demons are your creatures, the PC just thinks they are calling the shots. These are beings of billions of years of age who have had to serve under the yoke of masters far more malicious and repugnant than some upstart wizard. They are guile, deception and rebelion given form. They must do as the spell tells them but their very nature is to subvert and corrupt as surely as the wizard needs to breathe.

Follow up questions for OP:
Does the Wizard have any ranks in sense motive? The Succubus has +19 in Bluff and +12 in diplomacy. It doesn't need to lie to cajoule the wizard.

How willing are you to bend the rules to make life more interesting? While the Planar Binding limits the HD of the Demons summoned, the CR can be played around with. Something as simple as adding a template to modify it's mental scores to be more resillient to the Geas, such as the Half-Air elemental, Half-Fey or the like. Because the open interpretation of the Planar Binding, is unless the call something specific, what they get is entirely up to you, it could just be a random normal succubus, or it could be something unexpected.

[Maglubiyet]

Your player calls it "lawyering" and wants guarantees that it'll work. The only guarantees you can give about immortal chaotic evil creatures is that they WILL betray you. Every time. And usually when you least expect it.

You'd have to be insane to think you could outwit the most vile, conniving, lying, corrupt creatures in existence with a single set of commands.

[Jack_Simth]

Your player calls it "lawyering" and wants guarantees that it'll work. The only guarantees you can give about immortal chaotic evil creatures is that they WILL betray you. Every time. And usually when you least expect it.

You'd have to be insane to think you could outwit the most vile, conniving, lying, corrupt creatures in existence with a single set of commands.
Yeah... that's the other reason to go with Elementals as meatshields, rather than Demons or Devils. Plus, of course, it's harder for them to come back and haunt you.

[ericgrau]

I'm just gonna list all of the things my "problem" player is doing.

1. Upon lesser planar binding a succubus, he casts lesser geas on her to make her serve him for free forever. He claims the following:
a. Geas can refrain a creature from an activity. That activity is disobeying him.
b. The geas forces the creature to perform some service, which is be his loyal subordinate for the duration of the geas.
c. Language is abyssal, so no word-play or word-lawyering to thwart him.
d. Exact phrasing is either "Do nothing except follow my instructions" or "Serve me as my loyal subordinate"

2. He planar binds a Bebilith and casts geas/quest to make it serve him forever.
a. Bebiliths don't have spellcraft, so he doesn't know what spell the wizard is casting at him, so the wizard can cast his hour long geas/quest and the bebilith will just stand there, doing nothing, because he doesn't know what the wizard is doing, or whether or not blocking his ears will do anything.

3 He planar binds a marilith.
a. Succubi have telepathy, so blocking ears won't stop her suggestion spell from taking effect.
b. Succubi have at-will suggestion, and due to the above reason, eventually her suggestion will go through, even if it takes 20 attempts.
c. The wizard informs her that she may walk the material plane if and only if the wizard places a geas on her.
d. The suggestion is "Let the wizard place a geas on you and serve him for a short while. It's a small price to pay to be able to walk the material plane and cause chaos and destruction."

Are these legal? He's basically using enchantment spells to bypass the charisma check, have a 100% success chance, and enslave the demons indefinitely, with them never returning to the abyss.

The other players don't have a problem with what he's doing because we lack a tank/melee character, but I just want to be sure these are legal, and if I'm forgetting something. This group is a long term group, so if I rule on this, it's gonna be "permanent" so I want to be absolutely sure.
RAW maybe. RAI nope!!!!

Geas is pretty open ended so a lot of the RAW simply isn't there. You can try to debate it theoretically but that's iffy. And it's irrelevant anyway since this is for a real game. The DM is meant to have a say in spells like this because making precise rules for it would be nearly impossible. Tell the player it needs to be doing or not doing a specific activity and goal not "only do what I say". As for the fuzzy rule this falls under it's "The quest must actually be a quest." It's so open ended that you could argue that it might be lots of other things, but in the end it's up to you, the DM. And it must only be up to the DM. There simply isn't enough concrete information to do it any other way nor would this be possible in under 20 pages of spell text.

For example tell the player to make it "Fight your best with us to complete X concrete goal." For example whatever the next plot point is. The monster then tanks for the party but will run away if he's about to die. At a certain point living longer is better for the goal for future combats plus certain death is directly against the spell. There, now you have a reasonable temporary tank without breaking the game. Or however you want to handle it; point is what's reasonable is up to you and there's no good "legal" way to do this.

At that point the creature leaves the binding and it is broken. Because this task was arranged with geas rather than planar binding you have the drawback of the creature more freely doing other things. It's fuzzy but it is more towards serving a particular goal rather than serving the party with a geas instead of a binding. That's what you get for not making a reasonable deal instead.

[bjoern]

An unwritten rule that our group has taken up over the years is this:

After every sentence in every book there is an asterics which states: if you find some useful trick using this , rather than working, it doesn't work instead.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Your player calls it "lawyering" and wants guarantees that it'll work. The only guarantees you can give about immortal chaotic evil creatures is that they WILL betray you. Every time. And usually when you least expect it.

The only thing worse is them following your command. It would be like acting out the monkey's paw except you have no way of fixing the damage she will do. Remember: a demon is not human and will react to commands radically differently than the average human. He mentions he is annoyed at someone? They're dead, whether your player likes it or not. Need subtlety and stealth for this mission? She will use her powers to interrogate whomever and doesn't really care what a mess she leaves afterwards (after all, cleaning up is her superior's job).

They mention that whenever Graz'zt leaves his realm he has to clean up the mess his subordinates leave because, though they may be loyal to him, they are the embodiment of chaos and evil and act "cruelly and chaotically" whenever he isn't around to reign them in. That will apply to your player's attempts at controlling demons.

[Doxkid]

If the party composition includes a bunch of casters then sure. Let the guy do the thing.

If the party composition includes a monk, the wizard, a rogue, a samurai, and a literal Healer then naa. Don't let him do the thing.

That simple.

[RoboEmperor]

I can out "lawyer" everyone in geas.
Geas: You will obey my instructions to the absolute best of your ability.
Now I can give the target 999999999 instructions to get the exact behavior I want.
Instructions:
1. Do not subvert my instructions. Do not try to get the better of me. You will serve me as if I am your god and the only thing you want in this entire universe is my praise.

This instruction alone should be good enough, but just to be sure:

2. You will try your absolute best to stay under my control

If the DM tries to make the geased creature stand around do nothing to stay in your control, you tell him that directly violates the 1st instruction.

If you tell me that "obeying my instructions" is not a "service", I can reword it as many times as I want, like "refrain from not obeying my instructions to the absolute best of your ability" or "refrain from disobeying my orders to the absolute best of your ability."

Now, if the DM is creative and miraculously find some air-tight method of subverting your command despite the above instructions, it doesn't matter. Add a new instruction that negates what the DM did to all your future geases, and now the DM has to think of another miraculously air-tight method of subverting your command. I had a list of instructions that was several pages long, but the 1st instruction kinda eliminated most of them.

Worst case scenario cast telepathic bonds. The End. You can't subvert commands that are not a langauge.

Anyways this will end in either the DM surrendering and letting you "dominate" helpless creatures who can't fight back or the DM getting really angry and just banning the spell outright.

This method is RAW legal, like everyone in this post said it is, and it is no more powerful than the standard way of binding outsiders, so if you have a problem with it, you have a problem with planar binding not geas/quest, because honestly, I have never, ever seen anyone use geas/quest in a game other than to use it on planar binding, ever.

If the player turns out to be breaking the campaign by playing some broken wizard instead of a fun demon enslaver, say there is an overgod in the world called Dee Em and he splatters any mortal who oversteps his boundaries. House ruling spells to negate them is stupid. House ruling spells to make them more challenging on the other hand (not as a balance issue), that's fun.

[Maglubiyet]

Worst case scenario cast telepathic bonds. The End. You can't subvert commands that are not a langauge.

A creature under geas can subvert ANY and all commands, it just takes 3d6 damage (per day, not per command) if it does. A day is an awful long time for anyone to conspire to break free, much less a manipulative seduction demon with powerful masters in the Abyss.

A summoner attempting this better not sleep...

[atemu1234]

I suppose you could try to argue thusly:

The maximum duration of planar binding is one day per caster level if you "assign some open-ended task that the creature cannot complete through its own actions." "Serve me forever" is not a task that can be completed, since "forever" is not a finite period of time. Therefore, after one day per caster level, *poof* the outsider vanishes as the spell ends.

Also, doesn't Geas have a save to resist? Trust me, Outsiders should have no issue making that save.

[Jack_Simth]

Also, doesn't Geas have a save to resist? Trust me, Outsiders should have no issue making that save.
Correct. Geas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasQuest.htm) doesn't have a save to resist. Lesser Geas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasLesser.htm) does, Geas not so much.

[atemu1234]

Correct. Geas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasQuest.htm) doesn't have a save to resist. Lesser Geas (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/geasLesser.htm) does, Geas not so much.

Hmm. Maybe it'll PO some Demon who actually can get Remove Curse cast often enough for betrayal? Or, maybe a demon will use this as an easy way to corrupt a mortal?

Also, there's nothing stopping the Succubus from loyally charming the caster, asking them to release her, and returning to the abyss with an infernal cackle.

[Boci]

I think your player is confusing abyssal with infernal. Fiendish Codex II: Tyrants of the Nine Hells says that, being the essence of law (and evil), the language of the devil's hasonly one way to say any one thing. Fiendish Codex I: Hoard of the Abyss has no such clause for abyssal, in fact I don't think it mentions the language in any detail, but logically, abyssal would be the opposite of infernal. It is likely to impossible to forge a contract in abyssal, becayse the word "the" has 27,481 meanings, including: "the,", "pineapple,", "road", "hungry,", "run,", "in", "to have fun in a guilt free way", "fart (but only as a noun)", "a shade of purple that includes tinges of both red and green", "a dish of friend fiendish shark with lemon and human birthing cord", "that," "murder me in my sleep despite any indication I give of an alternate wish of service", "to sit down unnecessarily slowly" and "spanking bench".

[Segev]

"As if you were my god and all I crave is your praise? Pardon me while I avoid you and pray to you from a distance, trusting that your omnipotence means my smug sense of self-satisfaction is your praise for me. Of course I'm not subverting your orders."

Believe it or not, Bluff works on oneself, too.

Regardless, yes, these spells are generally fine, except for the part where you're supposedly making them last forever. Even then, it's still in line with the power thereof. Planar Binding can just be cast anew when it wears off, too.

Why is this a problem, to you? This is not rhetorical; the reason you find it problematic will help us offer suggestions and analysis as to whether you need a solution or just to say "no."

[RoboEmperor]

A creature under geas can subvert ANY and all commands, it just takes 3d6 damage (per day, not per command) if it does. A day is an awful long time for anyone to conspire to break free, much less a manipulative seduction demon with powerful masters in the Abyss.

A summoner attempting this better not sleep...

Someone already pointed out geas/quest is a mind affecting compulsion spell, and the description specifically says the creature must obey the geas. There is no choice.

Subverting is like "Kill all the creatures in the dungeon." Then creature then spends 9999 years sharpening sticks to prepare to attack the dungeon. And he doesn't take any damage.

[gogogome]

Why is this a problem, to you? This is not rhetorical; the reason you find it problematic will help us offer suggestions and analysis as to whether you need a solution or just to say "no."

I just had some confusion to how the geas spell worked, and to be honest it made me feel iffy to see someone bypass the charisma check.

The player seems to be considerate to others. He said he won't slow down combat by making his wizard stay invisible and do nothing except for the occasional haste.

I do have a slight problem. He right now is using a lone vrock to fight, but the vrock seems too powerful. It has an at-will mirror image, the spore thing every 3 rounds (by the way, do those secondary spore damages stack?), and his full attack does crazy damage. And it's expendable so there's like no risk to the party. It can also fly.

Other players don't mind though as they like the protection and damage the vrock brings.

[Segev]

If the other players don't mind - and thus don't feel outclassed or rendered redundant - then I wouldn't consider it a problem. If you feel it's making fights too easy, counter by either ramping up the direct CR, or by applying more devious tactics to the enemies. Take into account whether the enemies know what to expect; if so, having some caster(s) with Banishment could wreak some havoc.

Mirror Image is good, but hardly unbeatable, as well. True Seeing, blindsight, and a few other sensory tricks can pierce it.

But yeah, while your concern over this unexpected application of magics is understandable, my biggest advice to you is to always ask yourself what it is that's actually the problem. Identify the thing that is actively going wrong, what is actually diminishing enjoyment of the game (yours or others'). Focusing on that can help identify solutions and root out causes, where focusing on "I think this behavior seems off" can lead to misidentifying problems and creating solutions that don't actually improve anything.

In this case, he IS doing some things wrong with the spells, which you should correct for the sake of rules of the game. They're detailed in earlier posts, and I think you've a grasp on them from your replies to the same. But if he's not diminishing others' enjoyment, and is only causing you some challenge-the-party-related headaches, I'd let him continue and instead ramp up the challenges somehow.

[Chronos]

You really do not want to order a demon to serve you as a loyal subordinate. A devil, maybe, but a demon's way of serving as a loyal subordinate is to wait for the perfect opportunity to betray you and reverse the roles. It's like the scorpion crossing the river: You knew what I was when you picked me up.

And even if you do manage to out-lawyer the demon, the Geas adds nothing. When the Planar Binding duration runs out, the creature automatically returns to its own plane. It might still be under a Geas to obey all of your commands, but that won't matter, since you won't have any way of issuing it commands any more. You can't even order it to return to you after it's gone, because it doesn't have any means of planar travel.

[Maglubiyet]

Someone already pointed out geas/quest is a mind affecting compulsion spell, and the description specifically says the creature must obey the geas. There is no choice.

Maybe this would work on some orc, but an inhuman intelligence that's spent an eternity double-dealing and making fiendish contracts herself? The description also says, "a clever recipient can subvert some instructions". We're talking about the very definition of a clever recipient.

Natural language has too many ambiguities to be able to effectively hem someone in, especially someone with alien thought processes. Previous posters have gone into that.

Even your initial geas, "You will obey my instructions to the absolute best of your ability" is full of possible intentional misinterpretations which would make any further directions useless.

For example, "you will" is an indefinite period of time in the future in english. That could be seen to mean that "someday I will", not necessarily "starting right now I will".

"My instructions" doesn't specify "only instructions directed a you" so every time he orders dinner, directs a party member or underling, talks in his sleep, or mutters under his breath could be interpreted as "my instruction".

These are trivial and petty misinterpretations, but we're talking about Tanar'ri here, what else would you expect?

I wouldn't let a player bully me into accepting this and neither should the OP. In fiction, every time someone tries to make a clever deal with infernal powers, it comes back to bite them. I would game it that way.

[gogogome]

Thanks for the advice everyone. This forum is always helpful.

[NecessaryWeevil]

You really do not want to order a demon to serve you as a loyal subordinate. A devil, maybe, but a demon's way of serving as a loyal subordinate is to wait for the perfect opportunity to betray you and reverse the roles.

Emphasis mine. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

[Boci]

Emphasis mine. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

Demons are chaos incarnate. The essence of chaos is change, its quite possible demons interpret loyalty as loyalty to the abyss and chaos, especially if you give them that order in abyssal. Just to be clear, ambushing your player with that lore is bad form, but warning them that their character knows this as they lay out their plans is pretty amusing.

[KillianHawkeye]

Yeah, see, a demon has effectively no understanding of the term "loyalty." It is literally a cosmically foreign concept to them. Those who serve others of their kind do not EVER do so out of loyalty or camaraderie or any other reason other than their boss is meaner and tougher than they are and doing what he says is (for the time being) safer than not doing so.

That's the thing about dealing with any sort of immortal being made from pure cosmic alignment-stuff; there are just going to be some aspects of their psyche that don't overlap with what we as mortal beings find normal. Telling a demon to be loyal is just like ordering an inevitable to take a vacation. They'll look at you quizzically and ask "Huh? What does that taste like?"

Of course, I guess there's always that 1-in-a-million exception like WotC's succubus who became a paladin because she found true, actual love with an angel. But then you have to ask yourself whether you, as the DM, want to give your player an exceptionally unlikely, super-unique creature to control.

[Chronos]

No, demons do have a concept of loyalty: It means following the other guy's orders until you get a chance to backstab him. By contrast, a disloyal demon would start disobeying your orders even before the backstabbing opportunity came up.

[KillianHawkeye]

No, demons do have a concept of loyalty: It means following the other guy's orders until you get a chance to backstab him. By contrast, a disloyal demon would start disobeying your orders even before the backstabbing opportunity came up.

"That word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

As I already said, that's not loyalty. That's opportunistic cowardice. Whether the demon in your example decides not to follow another demon's orders right away or waits until he has a chance to stab him in the back, at no point is it being loyal to the other demon.

Demons do not rule through the loyalty of their subjects; they rule through fear and strength and the threat of violence.

[Jack_Simth]

"That word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Exactly. That's the point. For the most part, there's no such thing as a perfect translation (at least, not between languages with a different base). Some languages simply do not differentiate between some concepts. Take, for instance, the Greek word for love (as listed by Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love#Ancient_Greek), anyway): Greek has FIVE of them, each of which means something a little bit different. English rolls them all up into one word. Compare a few usage examples:

"Of course I love Alice. She's a loyal friend."
"Of course I love Alice. She's my fiancé."
"Of course I love Alice. She's my daughter."
"Of course I love Alice. She's my liege and I would both kill for her an die for her at her command."
The first sentence in all four of those lines is the same. The word "love" is used correctly in all of them (or at least, not incorrectly). That's a single example of a difference in words between two languages that came from the same race with somewhat related cultures.

Now try to picture how much worse that could potentially be when dealing with a race that is completely alien and has an entirely different underlying value structure (Chaos, Evil, and Destruction are what they WANT), reproductive methodology (they don't so much 'pick a mate and have a child' as they 'take a few condemned souls and beat them into the form of another demon'), and basic needs ("Food? Water? Sleep? Why bother? I NEED TO KILL SOMETHING NOW!!!"). Like attempting to explain the nitty-gritty of how a computer actually works to a guy who grew up in an isolated section of the Amazon jungle with no contact with civilization... and you don't have a computer there to demonstrate: there will be concepts you cannot express in less than a decade. It's not a limitation of intelligence; it's a limitation of concept familiarity and the associated lexical symbols.

This is also a world-building thing, and completely within DM purview.

[NecessaryWeevil]

I'm going to borrow this thread to go on a slight tangent.

Some people here are saying, in essence, that you could bore your group by spending all game session listing terms and conditions to your called Outsider and they can still decide to misinterpret you. Do you, as DMs, consider this the default condition or do you mostly say, "Don't try anything extreme (like try for a permanent slave) and I won't look for ways to screw you over"?

One reason I'm asking is that I've never cast anything more complicated than Summon Monster II but now I'm suddenly playing a Malconvoker 15, teaching myself how planar binding works and then telling my DM, who is an amazing storyteller but still new-ish to the rules. So far I think we seem to be going with "Don't mess with me and I won't mess with you" but I'm wondering if the consensus is that that's how it's supposed to work. And if it isn't, do people still bother casting the spell in your campaigns?

Related questions:
Can you cast Lesser Geas and say, "your quest is to agree to my (planar binding) terms"? Is this reasonable?
Is asking for their true name reasonable?

[Boci]

I'm going to borrow this thread to go on a slight tangent.

Some people here are saying, in essence, that you could bore your group by spending all game session listing terms and conditions to your called Outsider and they can still decide to misinterpret you. Do you, as DMs, consider this the default condition or do you mostly say, "Don't try anything extreme (like try for a permanent slave) and I won't look for ways to screw you over"?

There's two issues here. The first is balance + keeping things sane and that is handled nicely with the above sentiment, but whilst I won't screw over the player, they can still do it to themselves, like trying to make a contract in abyssal. Depending on what stupid thing they are trying to do, you may get one warning, but if you ignore it, yeah, there is a chance something bad will happen. Likely I'd make an intelligence roll off, to measure the ability to make a clause airtight vs. find loopholes, giving a +2 to the one looking for loopholes if the abyssal language is used, which becomes +5 if they are a native speaker and the wizard is not.

[Jack_Simth]

I'm going to borrow this thread to go on a slight tangent.

Some people here are saying, in essence, that you could bore your group by spending all game session listing terms and conditions to your called Outsider and they can still decide to misinterpret you. Do you, as DMs, consider this the default condition or do you mostly say, "Don't try anything extreme (like try for a permanent slave) and I won't look for ways to screw you over"?
Yep. The goal of the game is fun for all. If something is interfering with said fun, it needs to be addressed (preferrably OOC). That said? Some people actually LIKE the word-lawyer game, and if everyone's on board with it... well, here's a few ways the DM can work with it.



One reason I'm asking is that I've never cast anything more complicated than Summon Monster II but now I'm suddenly playing a Malconvoker 15, teaching myself how planar binding works and then telling my DM, who is an amazing storyteller but still new-ish to the rules. So far I think we seem to be going with "Don't mess with me and I won't mess with you" but I'm wondering if the consensus is that that's how it's supposed to work.
The way it is supposed to work is whatever everyone involved has harmless fun with - whatever "harmless fun" means for everyone involved. For some, that will mean "just don't go overboard with it, and it's all good. Keep it to just one beatstick at a time and don't clog up combat with all the extra actions.", for others, that's "Oh, cool! We get to do Contract Duels! YEAH!!! Let's see how little wiggle room you can leave me, and let's see what I can do with that wiggle room." As long as everyone is on the same page, and everyone is having harmless fun, it's all good (sometimes it's all good even if they're not on the same page, provided everyone is having fun).

And if it isn't, do people still bother casting the spell in your campaigns?
See "fun". One person's fun is not the same as anothers'. There is no real "in general" for this sort of thing. Hence why one of the things I said in response to the OP was "if he's not hurting anyone else's fun in doing this, then he's not really being a problem player in doing this."



Related questions:
Can you cast Lesser Geas and say, "your quest is to agree to my (planar binding) terms"? Is this reasonable?
Is asking for their true name reasonable?
Depends on the campaign world and the specific creature. Demons are creatures of raw chaos. They hate rules (at least those applied to them) with the burning passion of a thousand fiery suns. That are on fire. And the flames: THEY BURN TOO!!! Applying rules to them is probably not going to end well.

What's a True Name in your campaign world? A spoken word that binds the demon to you absolutely forever? A calling card that has no other use than specifing a particular creature when casting something from the Planar Binding / Gate / Planar Ally lines? Something in between? How you answer that question changes whether or not asking for a creature's True Name qualifies as a reasonable request. Ditto for a request to agree to the Planar Binding terms. If the terms can thereafter be used to absolutely enslave the creature? Not going to be reasonable. If the basic tenant of reasonableness still applies to the Planar Binding terms even after the Geas and thus render the Geas moot? Sure. Something in between? Well, it depends.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Thanks!


whilst I won't screw over the player, they can still do it to themselves, like trying to make a contract in abyssal.


Except where otherwise noted, demons speak Abyssal, Celestial, and Draconic.

Seems like you don't have a lot of alternatives sometimes.

[Boci]

Thanks!





Seems like you don't have a lot of alternatives sometimes.

No one is forcing you to bind demons. If you want reliability, go for devils. I'd rule a contract in infernal is either an auto success or imposet a -20 penalty on any attempt to find loopholes in it. Alternatively don't give the demon a reason to do otherwise. Give it a task it will enjoy and dangle something shiny in front of it.

[RoboEmperor]

@NecessaryWeevil
DMs come in three forms.
1. New DMs allow planar binding and alternate schenanigans like geas, dominate monster, etc. because they don't know much about the game.

2. Half-experienced DMs get pissed, angry, judgmental and just outright ban anything that is not "standard play". If your wizard is not going BFC or Blaster, he's gonna ban you.

3. Experienced DMs allow alternate schenanigans because it's RAW legal, but they tell you to keep it under control otherwise he's gonna force you to play a different character. These DMs are the best DMs.

Half-experienced DMs generally have problems with everything, but they are especially sensitive to enchantment spells and player-controlled-creatures.

I had a DM throw a huge fit against a sorcerer who charmed every creature in the dungeon and then ban the enchantment school outright in all his future games.

I had a second DM where he was running a bit more political campaign who also threw a fit when a sorcerer charmed everyone into exposing the "mystery" and skipping all of the bluff checks he wanted us to do.

I had a third DM who threw a fit because the party relied on charmed and summoned creatures. We were keeping it to 1 creature per PC (there were 4 in total). He was angry because he couldn't kill any of the PCs, deemed animal handling, planar cohorts, planar binding/ally, charm/dominate as too broken, and banned them all. In fact he kept banning stuff until we were literally only left with the standard BFC and blast spells which his encounters were prepared to counter.

Anyways, regarding planar binding specifically, I've won every RAW debate against all of my DMs, and they always end the argument with "This is my f***ing game and I do whatever the f*** I want." at which point I walk.

Common RAW-fudging DMs employ to stop you from planar binding anything:
1. Magic circle protects the bound creature (which it doesn't). This is the biggest and most common "tactic" i've encountered, and I won every single one of those debates. I couldn't persuade the DM himself but all the other players took my side because I am right. If a focused outward circle protections everyone on the inside from the outside, then a focused inward circle protects everyone on the outside from the creatures inside. Anyways, I won't go indepth unless you want me to. Had this argument too many times, and only DMs who hate planar binding rule it this way. Haven't had an indifferent or impartial DM ever rule it this way.
2. Not giving a reward is an "unreasonable request". "Go fetch me a sandwich" is the request, but for some reason it's unreasonable because you didn't offer gold. By RAW reward only affects charisma modifier, and is completely independent of the request. The "unreasonable" request is for stopping requests like "kiss this toad until it becomes a prince." This essentially turns the planar binding spell into a planar ally spell, so you could obviously see how wrong the DM is. Some DMs do this to hurt your wealth to discourage you from using planar binding too much. I generally don't argue this one too much if the DM gives us the standard WBL. In exchange though, I implement really advanced stuff so my enslaved creature never dies.
3. If you bind an outsider, an interplanar strike force arrives and kills you. Their argument is "If you take an outsider away, their bosses are gonna be pissed and kill you." This is not true for a lot of reasons. With celestials or any good-aligned outsider, a strike force is reasonable but they don't outright kill you. They will at most give you a warning, and kill you only if you perform multiple offenses. For demons and devils, no, there is no strike force. Demons and devils view mortals as pathetic weaklings, and if a balor or a pit fiend is enslaved by a mortal, they blame the balor or pit fiend's weakness and punish them with a demotion ceremony. They leave the wizard alone. In fact, in the official description of pit fiends, it says that they serve mortals. At the end the mortals are manipualted into damnation, but still, pit fiends serve mortals so by official lore an archdevil won't descend from the sky and slaughter you.

In this thread, you've seen plently of examples of "geas fudging." People splitting hairs to not let you use geas as a out-of-combat-only-dominate-monster. I mean, in the above posts we have "Loyal means a totally different thing in abyssal, so a loyal demon is gonna stab you in the back." Against those people even if you compose a 10-page airtight essay in why they are wrong, they're gonna fudge another thing and it will never end.

Bottom line, if your DM is fudging stuff instead of actually debating the rules to better understand them, get a new DM or don't go the planar binding or enchantment route.

In your case you're fine. A new DM doesn't know how powerful planar binding could be, so if you just play it reasonably (1 or 2 creatures at most at a time, and don't pick the ridiculously powerful ones like pit fiend, planetar, etc.) you'll be fine. All the "difficulties" you've experienced in this thread are all people who had experienced problem players trying to break the campaign with these schenanigans. The solution isn't fudging the rules to destroy player creativity, as wizards have a million different ways of breaking the campaign, it's fixing the problem player.

[One Step Two]

I think something that gets lost in planar bindings is the wheeling and dealing. There's the straight charisma check to exert your will and bind them to you, but you can sweeten the deal with bribes or offers, appealing to their own goals and desires.

Devils will hold to their contract as dictated, but the will haggle back, they're predictable like that and it makes them reliable. However, beware when they appear on your doorstep, because they know you're amenable to a contract, and want to make as different deal.

For demons in general, short term goals are your friend. Binding a Vrock before combat to act as a shock trooper, a chance to cause mayhem and destruction should be simple, because that's what it lives for.
For long term, such a calling a succubus to act as an infiltrator has great potential, but is fraught with it's own perils. An evil character has a little leeway in this, something like allowing the demon one free day every week to pursue it's own goals, or for non-evil, bribing it for continued service to keep it from seeing a good reason to try and break free. You're a better alternative than some demonic masters out there after all.

When you're high enough and want to guarantee service, Dominate monster is your friend. Unlike the shaky ground of Geas, lesser or otherwise, a dominate monster spell guarantees loyalty.

[Deophaun]

The first sentence in all four of those lines is the same. The word "love" is used correctly in all of them (or at least, not incorrectly).
And yet, the word "loyal" was not used correctly once in the post KillianHawkeye quoted. That was the point.

Demons wouldn't have a concept of loyalty. The best they could come up with would be a synonym for "gullible," "coward," or "weak," because those are the qualities that demons understand and can exploit to make others obey them. At the same time, those words also point to the conditions where their underlings will turn on them.

[Jack_Simth]

And yet, the word "loyal" was not used correctly once in the post KillianHawkeye quoted. That was the point.Right. When someone fundamentally does not get the concept, that person is incapable of obeying the command. If a Chaos-incarnate demon does not have the concept of loyalty? Well, they can't obey the order "be loyal". They don't know what you mean, and you're going to have a hard time finding a common frame of reference to explain in the duration of the spell.

The point of the examples was that languages do not line up. Each of those "Of course I love Alice." statements can be worded unambiguously in Greek without the added context (which also makes reading some things in the original language much more humorous than the translation, because the translation loses an important distinction; the classic example of this is in Latin, as I recall). It serves to point out that it's very easy to have a disconnect. The wider the gulf between cultures, the worse the disconnect. Demons? They're rather far out there on the "alien" scale.

[Arbane]

The only thing worse than a demon trying to disobey your orders is a demon trying to FOLLOW your orders. Because they will do it in the way that makes the most sense to them and is most enjoyable.

"That village looks MUCH better decorated with entrails, don't you think, master? it's like a festival!"
"I just wanted a sandwich from the inn...."
"They kept me waiting while they made it. SUCH INSOLENCE CANNOT BE TOLERATED!"

[Maglubiyet]

Against those people even if you compose a 10-page airtight essay in why they are wrong, they're gonna fudge another thing and it will never end.

Bottom line, if your DM is fudging stuff instead of actually debating the rules
Well, presumably you're playing a roleplaying game, not a debate session, but I'm pretty sure every version of the game says something along the lines of "the DM is the final arbiter".


DMs come in three forms.
You're missing the one where the DM let's you do what you want, then plays out the logical consequences of those actions.

[RoboEmperor]

You're missing the one where the DM let's you do what you want, then plays out the logical consequences of those actions.

That's experienced DM if he's reasonable, and I was just simplifying things.

The motive for the debate matters too. If it's just some guys having fun with the lore, then no harm done, but if it's an angry DM trying to shut your playstyle down then...