Is there any use for compulsions against protection from evil?

[King of Nowhere]

There is plenty of nice stuff with the (charm) or (compulsion) descriptor. However, all of it is blocked by protection from evil (or good, law, chaos). A single relatively cheap item granting persistent protection from evil completely shuts down most of a school of magic (yes, technically it does not stop the spell but only stops it from acting temporarily, but since the effect from the item is permanent, you get the idea). The first idea that comes to mind is dispelling, which would be effective if the protection was a spell cast, but unfortunately it is granted by an item, and dispelling an item is much less effective - not only it works for a very small time, but you must also be aware of which item is granting the bonus, which is only going to happen with a focused enemy.

So, I would want some charms to hit the group, mostly wacky homebrewed monster abilities. However, most of the group is protected with such items, and so they are totally immune. Is there any way around it? Can I hit them with something while they are protected from evil (short of just houseruling that those specific whacky abilities work regardless, which can be done but is kinda lame)?

[Elkad]

A Chain Dispel covers half the problem. Target ALL their gear, not just one thing. Of course you still have the d4 round limit, so you'll want to maximize it as well so you get the full 4 rounds.
First act after Dominating them is to tell them to drop their Protection from Evil item.



I'd go with a custom spell, but then I'm all in favor of more spells.

Anti-abjuration: Works as anti-magic shell, but only suppresses Abjuration effects.

[Drynwyn]

I would say "Don't do it", or at least "Consider doing it very carefully".

By purchasing these items, it seems like your players are sending a very clear message of "We don't want to deal with being mind-controlled- that's not a type of story that would be fun for us to participate in."

And that's honestly pretty fair! Having your cool character that you have a specific vision for mind-controlled can be a very divisive thing in RPG's. I've known a lot of players (and even DM's!) who get really bothered by it. It makes sense- you have an idea of your character as X type of person, and them getting mind-controlled into doing things drastically against their normal nature can seriously alter the tone of the narrative.

If you still think it's a good idea, Dispel Magic works- as does using mind control on the PC's at a time when they aren't wearing their nifty magical jewelry. After all, they have to take a shower at some point, right? :smalltongue:

[King of Nowhere]

A Chain Dispel covers half the problem. Target ALL their gear, not just one thing. Of course you still have the d4 round limit, so you'll want to maximize it as well so you get the full 4 rounds.
First act after Dominating them is to tell them to drop their Protection from Evil item.



I'd go with a custom spell, but then I'm all in favor of more spells.

Anti-abjuration: Works as anti-magic shell, but only suppresses Abjuration effects.

This could be a good strategy next time they fight a wizard - except, a wizard who uses a turn to dispel and object and do nothing else will soon be a dead wizard; maybe when they fight two wizards?
But it doesn't help with other monsters. See, in this specific case I have this particularly aggressive plant known as the assassin zucchini which lives in the lower planes, and they have a charm that makes people more inclined to eat zucchini; and they grow cursed zucchini that give a penalty to the saving throw against this specific effect, so that people will eventually become enslaved to the zucchini and the assassin zucchini will take over the world. This all originated from a bunch of injokes among the party, and I would prefer the taunt of cursed zucchini to be a real threat.
Another time there were cute fluffy infernal killer bunnies that required a will saving throw to hurt them because they were so cute. And I'm sure I'll come up with more of this stuff in the future :smallbiggrin: If those effects are straight-out blocked, it goes to the detriment of all the fun of the encounter.

[Calimehter]

The bunny effect you describe seems more like an abjuration effect. The Sanctuary spell is an abjuration, and is nearly identical to it. So you should be set there.

The zucchini thing is a bit tougher. Perhaps make it into some kind of alchemical compulsion . . . something in the zucchini itself rather than a magical effect, so it wouldn't be blocked by Protection from X spells. You would have to find some way to slip them the zucchini (heh) in the first place, but if the Assassin Zucchini has already managed to get a cult going, that shouldn't be too hard to manage at their next stop at any local eating establishment.

[Sagetim]

There is plenty of nice stuff with the (charm) or (compulsion) descriptor. However, all of it is blocked by protection from evil (or good, law, chaos). A single relatively cheap item granting persistent protection from evil completely shuts down most of a school of magic (yes, technically it does not stop the spell but only stops it from acting temporarily, but since the effect from the item is permanent, you get the idea). The first idea that comes to mind is dispelling, which would be effective if the protection was a spell cast, but unfortunately it is granted by an item, and dispelling an item is much less effective - not only it works for a very small time, but you must also be aware of which item is granting the bonus, which is only going to happen with a focused enemy.

So, I would want some charms to hit the group, mostly wacky homebrewed monster abilities. However, most of the group is protected with such items, and so they are totally immune. Is there any way around it? Can I hit them with something while they are protected from evil (short of just houseruling that those specific whacky abilities work regardless, which can be done but is kinda lame)?

Command still works. Protection from Evil blocks Ongoing control, so brief duration spells that have compulsion effects and what have you weasel around that by not granting Ongoing control. Command, being that it only does a one word action without an ongoing effect, skips around that, as far as I can tell.

The bunny's effect also bypasses the protection because it doesn't grant ongoing control over the characters.

The Assassin Zucchini could also be statted as an addictive drug, which requires for saves to avoid and has withdrawal symptoms to encourage people to keep doing the drug. Open your local Book of Vile Darkness for rules on drugs.

Also, if the Zucchini is prominent in local cuisine, then it will be harder for players to avoid eating it, if they even notice it being in the food they ingest. If it's a normal part of the country's diet, then players may need to make wisdom checks to realize that something is off about the food (this is where detect poison would actually be useful, even, if you stat the food as a drug). Also, just because you've been making jokes about it out of character doesn't mean the characters would know that such a thing could even Be a threat, this is where suitable knowledge (the Planes) would be necessary to identify it as anything other than normal Zucchini.

Edit: This is also where players being picky about what they eat could actually come in to spare them from future discomfort. If they always just gloss over the matter of eating, then having some behind the screen perception or spot checks and reflexive knowledge checks for anyone trained in the skill, isn't necessarily even unfair. But if they pointedly only eat Goodberries or conjured food or what have you, then they're going to be safe from the Zucchini until someone ties them down and forces it down their throats.

[King of Nowhere]

Command still works. Protection from Evil blocks Ongoing control, so brief duration spells that have compulsion effects and what have you weasel around that by not granting Ongoing control. Command, being that it only does a one word action without an ongoing effect, skips around that, as far as I can tell.



Can anyone confirm that? because I kinda remeber being told that command was among those blocked by protection from evil, but now that you mention I'm not so sure anymore


The bunny effect you describe seems more like an abjuration effect. The Sanctuary spell is an abjuration, and is nearly identical to it. So you should be set there.



The Assassin Zucchini could also be statted as an addictive drug, which requires for saves to avoid and has withdrawal symptoms to encourage people to keep doing the drug. Open your local Book of Vile Darkness for rules on drugs.

Edit: This is also where players being picky about what they eat could actually come in to spare them from future discomfort. If they always just gloss over the matter of eating, then having some behind the screen perception or spot checks and reflexive knowledge checks for anyone trained in the skill, isn't necessarily even unfair. But if they pointedly only eat Goodberries or conjured food or what have you, then they're going to be safe from the Zucchini until someone ties them down and forces it down their throats.

those are useful tips, thank you.
By the way, the party did meet assassin zucchini in the infernal planes, so they definitely have the knowledge that they exist. I doubt they suspect some are invading the prime material plane, though

[Beheld]

The problem is that no one knows what "compulsions that grant ongoing control."

I could argue that suggestion isn't ongoing, since you state it once and that's it.

I could argue that Confusion isn't ongoing control, it's ongoing, but it's not control.

Ect.

You can finely argue about what does or doesn't constitute ongoing control a lot, it's going to come down to group consensus.

[Eldariel]

In my reading, ongoing control is stuff that grants the ability to actively control your target. Basically, Dominate Person and its ilk. Not just one time control effect (e.g. Suggestion) nor constant effects you where you can't input stuff the recipient must accept (e.g. Confusion, Irresistible Dance, etc.). I agree with Beheld - I wouldn't treat those as blocked. Stuff like Geas is also interesting - it grants a long duration task but it's a point of command, not ongoing control; the spell requires following it or stuff happens, but the caster can't exert influence after the casting of the spell. And constant item of Protection from X is a custom item anyways; it's DM purview to allow or disallow such things, and state whether they're too cheap or expensive. If you don't like such cheap total control, think twice about allowing it; active Magic Circles and such don't last all day and are much easier to work around. Well, items can always be stolen (Sleight of Hand) or destroyed (rolled 1 on save vs. AOE damage, sunder, Rust Monsters, Disjunction, etc.), so there's no guarantee the players will always be protected.

That said, don't change what the spell does midgame; be consistent and open with your players on your rules about what affects what and how it works. Remember rule zero and be clear that you don't lie to your players out of character about ability/spell effects as that tends to foster bad blood. If you've played with Prot X protecting the party from all charms and compulsions, changing that midgame without telling your players is not okay. If you feel you don't want to alter the rules (you certainly can as long as you're open with your players and let them alter their choices based on the new game they're playing) you'd need something specific to overcome it as specific trumps general. Specific anti-Abjuration effect could also work, as stated above. Perhaps a demiplane with Abjuration as a banned school too (brought to the current plane by a rift, Planar Bubble [SC] or whatever), or such things. This is D&D, infinite options exist.

Dread Witch [Heroes of Horror] can pierce fear immunities so adapting such to enchantment is also possible. Also, the game has a precedent for abilities such as Planar Binding compelling service while not being mind-affecting nor enchantment so a similar Charisma-check effect on the PCs would work. Just some ideas.

[lord_khaine]

There is plenty of nice stuff with the (charm) or (compulsion) descriptor. However, all of it is blocked by protection from evil (or good, law, chaos). A single relatively cheap item granting persistent protection from evil completely shuts down most of a school of magic (yes, technically it does not stop the spell but only stops it from acting temporarily, but since the effect from the item is permanent, you get the idea). The first idea that comes to mind is dispelling, which would be effective if the protection was a spell cast, but unfortunately it is granted by an item, and dispelling an item is much less effective - not only it works for a very small time, but you must also be aware of which item is granting the bonus, which is only going to happen with a focused enemy.

So, I would want some charms to hit the group, mostly wacky homebrewed monster abilities. However, most of the group is protected with such items, and so they are totally immune. Is there any way around it? Can I hit them with something while they are protected from evil (short of just houseruling that those specific whacky abilities work regardless, which can be done but is kinda lame)?

The actual problem here seems to be that you have let your players have persistant protection from evil to start with. There is no basic item that gives that, and with a good reason. As you seems to have learned, then it should more be priced at the line of a mind blank item.

[Beheld]

Permanent Protection from Evil is pretty easy. You just Lesser Planar Bind any of the things that always have that up at all times and tell it to follow you.

There's definitely better interaction with that then with an item though, and I think the game is better if taking out a minor ally frees up the control than if you have to look into the disarm rules.

[Zancloufer]

The problem is that no one knows what "compulsions that grant ongoing control."

I could argue that suggestion isn't ongoing, since you state it once and that's it.

I could argue that Confusion isn't ongoing control, it's ongoing, but it's not control.

Ect.

You can finely argue about what does or doesn't constitute ongoing control a lot, it's going to come down to group consensus.

I am going to have to agree with this. The spell probably should only protect against things like Domination, Possessions and ongoing charm effects. Pretty much anything that has an ongoing duration and allows one to exert control over the user with some precision.

[Zanos]

The problem is that no one knows what "compulsions that grant ongoing control."
It's a good thing that isn't the wording of the text, then.

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).
While enchantment(charm) and enchantment(compulsion) effects that grant ongoing control are specifically called out, the more general effect is any attempt to exercise mental control over the creature. Which is going to include essentially every enchantment spell.

However, you really shouldn't have allowed your players to buy continuous effect spells items. They're busted as hell.

[Eldariel]

It's a good thing that isn't the wording of the text, then.

While enchantment(charm) and enchantment(compulsion) effects that grant ongoing control are specifically called out, the more general effect is any attempt to exercise mental control over the creature. Which is going to include essentially every enchantment spell.

However, you really shouldn't have allowed your players to buy continuous effect spells items. They're busted as hell.

Mental control can be interpreted to mean just things that grant actual control, as the parentheses suggest. In effects like Confusion, the caster has no control over the target's actions. So you can't really call that exercising mental control.

Similarly "to exercise control" feels like it's only fulfilled if there's actually some duration of control granted instead of just a single command á la Suggestion or Command. Admittedly this argument feels flimsier than the first, but I have no doubt stronger ones exist. Point being, RAW can be contested and RAI seems to lean towards less total protection so tables are like to vary.

[Beheld]

It's a good thing that isn't the wording of the text, then.

While enchantment(charm) and enchantment(compulsion) effects that grant ongoing control are specifically called out, the more general effect is any attempt to exercise mental control over the creature. Which is going to include essentially every enchantment spell.

However, you really shouldn't have allowed your players to buy continuous effect spells items. They're busted as hell.

"The spell doesn't say the thing you said! If you just refuse to read then entire sentence!"

It literally says in your quote: "enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject"

[EldritchWeaver]

"The spell doesn't say the thing you said! If you just refuse to read then entire sentence!"

It literally says in your quote: "enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject"

You're leaving out "including", so those spells are not the sole ones being blocked.

[King of Nowhere]

Well, I'm going with the "only blocks stuff that allows direct mental control" from now on. Makes sense, and it's probably closer to RAI (I mean, they certainly wouldn't have introduced a first level spell that totally nullified a whole school of magic, would they?)

As for the "you shouldn't have let those items exist" argument, that could be a good idea if I run a new campaign. As it is, I thought nothing of it, there are rules for making magic items and they gave a reasonably cheap price for a persistent 1st level effect, so I just got along with it. And now I established that the items exist and are relatively cheap. I can retcon how exactly they work (it's hardly the first time we get a rule wrong and realize it at a later date), but I don't dare retconning their whole existance.

[Sagetim]

"They are busted as all hell" really depends on the kind of game you are running. Other factors are going to come into play here too, for example, if the players can craft custom amulets of protection from evil, vests of mage armor, or what have you, then limiting custom items to players would, of course, give them a leg up on the competition. And they should be allowed to have a leg up when they put time and thought and effort into innovating solutions to their problems. But that doesn't mean they have a copyright. And it doesn't mean they are the only ones who can innovate.

Since these are a given in the setting already, there's not much reason to go back on the idea now. Instead, I would suggest moving forward. Maybe have some of your more savvy npcs with custom magic items of their own, that fit their own ways of solving problems (maybe even have some full plated fighter running around claiming he has the bracers of ultimate magic, and all they really do is provide Shield, and Magic Missile respectively.) You might as well have fun with it and see how far the idea goes since the cat is already out of the bag. And your players might want to use the same rules again in later games, so having a chance to really play around with them in this manner gives you experience in finding a balance point that works to make the game fun.