Help, a returning Player is dead set on playing a Succubus...but we cant have anythin

[GrayDeath]

As the Title says: A long time friend, who was out of country for years, has come back a month ago, and is no settled enough to want to return to our running Game.

And he is dead set on playing a Succubus, because he wanted to do so for quite some time.

Problem? Well, aside from the bad mechanics (Until I get something better I am assuming a LA Reduction to around 2, and buyoff at ECL 10 and 15ish), which will leave him behind, there is also the problem of them being Chaotic Evil.
Now we arew aware that we can handwave some Alignment change or other, but we would like to keep it as close to "non handwavy as possible.

So I am asking the Pllayground for help with the following 3 things:

1.: Find a Way to get the Character to non CE Alignment (Evil is fine, chaotic is too, jsut the Combo is not).

2.: Suggest CLasses and/or Combos that help reduce its underpowerdness

and lastly

3.: Suggest if our Idea of setting LA to 2 and allowing buyoff will be enough.


For your Info, I and anpother Co DM, the Group has Alignments between true Neutral and Lawful Evil atm, and with a very optimized Initator Gestalt, a Mystic THeurge and a Psion is rather powerful.

Thanks in advance.

[Scots Dragon]

A succubus can undergo an alignment change without too much violation of the lore, as seen with the succubus paladin (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20050824a), which eliminates the issues there.

[singera]

To be fair succubi are of the center demons the most lawful leaning of the lot as to blend in they have to follow laws on the surface, as for the class/race iv always felt a gish sorcerer works decently useing the 6 outsider hitdice instead of fighter esk classes

[Sian]

well ... they're only 'always' CE ... not ALWAYS ...

case in point: Succubus Paladin (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20050824a)

[Demidos]

To bypass the suckiness of having so many RHD (don't only look at LA and forget they have to take these!), it is likely ideal to use a PRC or other ability that gets a fresh start in some way, or scales off character level rather than class level.

Some examples of this include -

Tome of Battle -- For a melee build, Tome of Battle is very friendly to late starts into something. A level of, say, barbarian to get pounce, maybe a level of fighter if you need another feat, and then straight crusader would be a fine melee build, even if it would be weaker than a straight tome of battle class.

Chameleon, Ur-Priest, Fiend of Possession -- These three classes all offer a reset of your abilities, and give you huge flexibility, spellcasting up to 9th level spells in 10 levels, or strange possession abilities, respectively. Fiend of Possession will likely require the most adjudication of the three, despite being the simplest, as some of the abilities are not clearly spelled out, but all three give a decent fresh start that will allow the character to catch up to most single classes characters by 12-15th level or so. Edit: To enter Chameleon, you will need the human heritage feat. Other than that it should be pretty straightforward entry, and pretty quick given all your racial hit dice!

[Calthropstu]

Alignment can be explained via backstory, if he can come up with a good reason she should have an alignment shift, then let him. He'll have to fight CE tendencies, but let him try.

Rule that the succubus has lost access to its charm/dominate abilities as well as the demonic enhancements of its stats, removing the monster hd and a fair portion of its stat bonuses, replacing with class levels and stat boosts on par with other pc races.
Let him keep the alter self, lower charm person to 3x per day and drop the la to 2 and you have a succubus sorcerer with few innate abilities but a significant power boost.

Alternatively, he could play an Alu fiend or half fiend template character which can be better explained.

[Morphic tide]

The Alignment subtypes mean they will always count as those alignments, so even if the character isn't Chaotic Evil, the rules continue treating them as one. In addition to their actual Alignment, so they should under all circumstances avoid being Lawful Good, because they will then count as every Alignment mechanically, which causes problems. However, they have the rather useful option of being able to grab Alignment-restricted classes based on the Succubus subtyped Alignments.

I recommend Crusader, as they'll have 2nd level Maneuvers to start with owing to their (full-BAB) RHD counting as half-levels for what Maneuvers they can pick. Possibly Smite to Song Paladin to use their inflated Charisma score for oodles of things, including health via Lay on Hands.

[Telonius]

I'd suggest asking the player what about the race is most important to him. If it's the stat boosts and the powers, well, no getting around that. He has to pay for it if he wants it. If it's just the flavor of "sexy seductress with batwings and a tail," there are other ways to get that. Half-Fiend and (Lesser) Tiefling are good starting points for less Level Adjustment. Savage Species has a progression for them as well.

[SirNMN]

Sanctify the Wicked F: Traps evil creature in a diamond
for one year, then releases it as a sanctified creature
Book of exalted Deeds
turns them to what ever the alignment of the good creature that cast the spell was

[Jowgen]

My suggestion: Half-Fiend, with the half-fiendish variety (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060630a) rules for Succibi in play. The LA is still nothing to sneeze at, but it's worlds better than trying to make a succubus work, and you can still work in most of the cool Succubus stuff in. Combine with the Half-Fiend savage progression rules if you wanna optimise even further.

[gorfnab]

Over on the minmax boards there is a whole line of fairly well balanced homebrew savage monster progressions by a poster named oslecamo. In the campaign I'm currently running all of the players are using oslecamo's savage progression monsters. One of players is using this Succubus (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=1104.0) progression from there and it's actually fairly decent.

[GrayDeath]

A succubus can undergo an alignment change without too much violation of the lore, as seen with the succubus paladin (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20050824a), which eliminates the issues there.

We know it happened, but it is also very very unusual.
A Method allowing for a more....shall we say "realistic" CHange would be appreaciated.
And no, we dont use BoED (as I and my Co DM are of the opinion a LOT of the Good in there is horribly evil).




To bypass the suckiness of having so many RHD (don't only look at LA and forget they have to take these!), it is likely ideal to use a PRC or other ability that gets a fresh start in some way, or scales off character level rather than class level.

Some examples of this include -

Tome of Battle -- For a melee build, Tome of Battle is very friendly to late starts into something. A level of, say, barbarian to get pounce, maybe a level of fighter if you need another feat, and then straight crusader would be a fine melee build, even if it would be weaker than a straight tome of battle class.

Chameleon, Ur-Priest, Fiend of Possession -- These three classes all offer a reset of your abilities, and give you huge flexibility, spellcasting up to 9th level spells in 10 levels, or strange possession abilities, respectively. Fiend of Possession will likely require the most adjudication of the three, despite being the simplest, as some of the abilities are not clearly spelled out, but all three give a decent fresh start that will allow the character to catch up to most single classes characters by 12-15th level or so. Edit: To enter Chameleon, you will need the human heritage feat. Other than that it should be pretty straightforward entry, and pretty quick given all your racial hit dice!

Hmmm, actually that mightr be one of the very very few cases where an Ur-Priest would actually be allowed in our games, good find!

As for the ToB: he doesnt really want a martial Character, so thats a no.




I'd suggest asking the player what about the race is most important to him. If it's the stat boosts and the powers, well, no getting around that. He has to pay for it if he wants it. If it's just the flavor of "sexy seductress with batwings and a tail," there are other ways to get that. Half-Fiend and (Lesser) Tiefling are good starting points for less Level Adjustment. Savage Species has a progression for them as well.

Stupid me, we already did, jsut forgot to mention it.

In the order from most to elast important, his Top 3:

1.: Being a "real Succubus regarding In World/Setting Reasons (ergo a Member of the Race that is Succubi in the Setting, which, since we didnt use them yet, so far IS variiable...)

2.: Having a Succubuses SLA`s/LEvel Drain Abilities, especially the CHarm effects and the Alter Shape.

3.: having a Succubuses massive CHarisma.

He also wants the other bonuses, but is willing to forgo them if its the better option.

Overall we already thought about making it a Caco FIend or similar, but decided it would be to far from what he wants.




Over on the minmax boards there is a whole line of fairly well balanced homebrew savage monster progressions by a poster named oslecamo. In the campaign I'm currently running all of the players are using oslecamo's savage progression monsters. One of players is using this Succubus (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=1104.0) progression from there and it's actually fairly decent.

THat is actually not a bad progression.
Especially with the Stacks with Caster" CLasses.
I myself would be OK with the Homebrew, but my Co DM vastly prefers printed material, so I am still thankful for other ways. :)

[Florian]

Half-Fiend Beguiler and be done with it.

[Pyromancer999]

If the actual mechanics are up for grabs, why not go with the Fey'ri? +2 LA, no racial HD, and has most of what you want(though not all at once),save a Charisma bonus, which is easy to swap out.

Failing that, there is a Succubus progression in Savage Species, if I remember right.

[hamishspence]

The Alignment subtypes mean they will always count as those alignments, so even if the character isn't Chaotic Evil, the rules continue treating them as one. In addition to their actual Alignment, so they should under all circumstances avoid being Lawful Good, because they will then count as every Alignment mechanically, which causes problems.

The Abyssal Heritor feat Ordered Chaos in Fiendish Codex 1, treats "counting as another alignment as well as your actual one" as a bonus rather than a penalty:

"Spells and effects that are keyed to your alignment affect you as if you were chaotic, as well as your actual alignment. For example, you become immune to spells such as chaos hammer and word of chaos, you could wield an anarchic weapon without fear of gaining a negative level, and you could take the Primordial Scion feat despite its chaotic alignment prerequisite"


If you applied that logic to the LG demon's Chaotic subtype (and their Evil subtype) then they'd be immune to chaos spells designed to target Lawful alignment but be harmless to the Chaotic, even if they happen to be Lawful.

And immune to evil spells designed to target the Good but not work on the Evil.

"Immunity trumps vulnerability" would make such a character much better.

[ApologyFestival]

The alignment debate really strikes me as trying to fix a nonexistent problem. When a type of creature always has a particular alignment, exceptions do still exist. They are unique, one-in-a-million characters, but they do exist. In other words, they are player characters. Savage Species (page 110) does have a brief aside on this. It was the first book I looked to regarding this. I imagine there are many similar entries in other books.

A Lawful Good succubus player character could have been converted by powerful magics; perhaps saved from death by a merciful paladin and been forever changed by the experience; discovered the ultimate fate that awaited those of a Chaotic Evil bent and gone "Aw, *hell* no!"; or, they could just be the astoundingly rare succubus that has a social conscience and is inherently good. If it makes good storytelling sense, run with it.

To answer your second and third question, the Succubus monster class in Savage Species (page 195) lasts for 12 levels and is probably a good place to start. It seems powerful enough at a glance to roll with most groups and does not have any level adjustment.

[Quertus]

Was it 2e or 3e where demons would prove themselves the paragons of Chaos by spontaneously becoming (chaotic) Good? This might be a properly fluffy solution to your alignment problem.

EDIT: Helm of Opposite Alignment, Sanctify the Wicked, and Mind Rape are also good mechanical options.


The Abyssal Heritor feat Ordered Chaos in Fiendish Codex 1, treats "counting as another alignment as well as your actual one" as a bonus rather than a penalty:
"Immunity trumps vulnerability" would make such a character much better.

I've never read the rules myself, but this is the way we've always played it.

[Quertus]

In the order from most to elast important, his Top 3:

1.: Being a "real Succubus regarding In World/Setting Reasons (ergo a Member of the Race that is Succubi in the Setting, which, since we didnt use them yet, so far IS variiable...)

2.: Having a Succubuses SLA`s/LEvel Drain Abilities, especially the CHarm effects and the Alter Shape.

3.: having a Succubuses massive CHarisma.

He also wants the other bonuses, but is willing to forgo them if its the better option.

Overall we already thought about making it a Caco FIend or similar, but decided it would be to far from what he wants.

I myself would be OK with the Homebrew, but my Co DM vastly prefers printed material, so I am still thankful for other ways. :)

So, you have several options.

You can homebrew a Succubus for your setting, and pick a LA (and HD) that make it actually playable, and balanced with the group. The downside is, the co isn't happy about the idea of homebrew.

You can play a Gestalt game, with the Succubus progression only taking one side, allowing the player to be useful, even if less so than the other gestalt characters. This is especially good idea if the game starts at low level, or won't last long after the Succubus', what, 12 levels?

Or you could have the player play a former Succubus who is in a new, much more manageable RAW body.

If you use Savage Species, the new body will have average physical stats, but the player can keep their old mental stats. He'll keep his Chr, and be a (former) "real" Succubus, losing the other abilities (unless the new form has them).

If you use True Mind Switch, well, it's about the same as the Savage Species transformation, but you get the actual physical stats of the individual you switched with, IIRC. AFB.

[Falontani]

I understand party alignment and all, but why not allow a Chaotic Evil succubus into the group who has masters that are forcing it to not attempt to murderhobo the party, but to infiltrate the party and assist the party because it knows that some day way down the line that the party will attempt to do X and the demon overlord can do Y to the succubus to get the succubus to do Z. Or that's demon overlord's plan.

Something that I've used in the past is that all fiends with a master (that could grant warlock powers) can count 1/2 their RHD as warlock levels for EB and invocations

[hamishspence]

I've never read the rules myself, but this is the way we've always played it.

For some reason, TV Tropes's Ascended Demon article suggests that it's supposed to be played the opposite way - take full damage from anything that damages relevant alignment:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AscendedDemon


A Dungeons & Dragons web article famously had a succubus paladin named Eludecia. Here are the stats, and here is the adventure. Notably, not only does she refuse to use her "evil" powers, but as a being who is Lawful Good but Made Of Chaotic Evil she counts as every alignment at the same time, and thus suffers from both Good Hurts Evil and Allergic to Evil (and Chaos Hurts Law and Law Hurts Chaos). Being Good Sucks indeed.

That said, this was before FC1 - maybe with FC1 setting the precedent, the reverse could be applied.

[tadkins]

This thread got me to wondering; what would happen to a Good-aligned succubus if they were killed in the Material plane? Like where would she go?

[Florian]

This thread got me to wondering; what would happen to a Good-aligned succubus if they were killed in the Material plane? Like where would she go?

Depends on the cosmology you use. In most cases, outsiders do not have a separation of body and soul, being basically created from raw soul-stuff themselves (this is why regular rez magic fails with them). So: Nowhere. Puff and gone.

[tadkins]

Depends on the cosmology you use. In most cases, outsiders do not have a separation of body and soul, being basically created from raw soul-stuff themselves (this is why regular rez magic fails with them). So: Nowhere. Puff and gone.

I thought what happened was that outsiders reform on their home plane. I might be mixing up fantasy universes though.

I figured with a good-aligned succubus she'd have either a new home plane (a good one) or she'd still reform in the Abyss but probably find herself in a ton of trouble as soon as it happened.

[hamishspence]

I thought what happened was that outsiders reform on their home plane. I might be mixing up fantasy universes though.

In theory, I think they'd simply be reincarnated in the Abyss - possibly as a less powerful demon, based on Fiendish Codex 2 (page 9).

I think the only way to avoid this would be to cease qualifying as a demon by magic - maybe through that Savage Species ritual that replaces the Evil subtype with the Good subtype. Presumably Eludocia doesn't do this because she "wants to make it on her own" - possibly thinking that the [Evil] subtype will just fade away if she becomes Good enough.

Resetting the "native plane" of an Extraplanar creature probably requires magic - maybe Wish, Limited Wish, or Miracle could do it, depending on the DM?

In most cases, outsiders do not have a separation of body and soul, being basically created from raw soul-stuff themselves (this is why regular rez magic fails with them). So: Nowhere. Puff and gone.

At least in 3e, only killing a demon or devil on its home plane, kills it permanently. Other outsiders however, may be covered by the "soulstuff diffuses back into plane" detail from Complete Divine.

Complete Divine page 130
The souls of outsiders and elementals are so intrinsically tied to the essence of their home plane that they evaporate into the fabric of the plane rather quickly. That's why it takes a true resurrection spell to bring them back from the dead; the magic must sift through the plane and reconstitute their dispersed souls.

MM extends the list of spells that can do it:

Spells that restore souls to their bodies, such as raise dead, reincarnate, and resurrection, don’t work on an outsider. It takes a different magical effect, such as limited wish, wish, miracle, or true resurrection to restore it to life.

And Spell Compendium adds the Revive Outsider spell.

[SimonMoon6]

For the alignment issue, here's what I'd do:

Have in her backstory a moment where she tried on a magic helmet, which happened to be a helmet of opposite alignment, and wouldn't you know it, she happened to roll a 1 on her saving throw. She is now Lawful Good.

That's what I want to do if any DM is every crazy enough to let me play a Succubus Paladin.

[RoboEmperor]

I played a successful succubus in a really high-op game. The key here is "at-will charm monster". Levels, Hit-die, class levels, skills, and feats be damned. I was brought in via Planar Ally and I waived the payment.

At-will charm monster absolutely destroys games. You enslave the entire encounter, creating your own mini-army, and you set them against enemies that have mind-protection.

I didn't do it alone though. I had the party wizard use planar binding to call a bunch of outsiders that didn't have mind-affecting protection/immunity. Call, charm, break circle, repeat. Stack Charm Monster on top of Charm Monster until you have like a thousand charm monsters on the creature to protect them against dispel magic. Area Dispels don't do jack and targeted dispels can't dispel all of them.

Can it be defeated? Yes, after all, protection from x cast on the charmed creature will free it no matter how many charm monsters are on there, but we didn't fight that many spellcasters.

With Ethereal Jaunt I was literally untouchable. And with Greater Teleport they literally had to one shot me to kill me, which never happened.


Depends on the cosmology you use. In most cases, outsiders do not have a separation of body and soul, being basically created from raw soul-stuff themselves (this is why regular rez magic fails with them). So: Nowhere. Puff and gone.

Fiendish Codex I directly states an outsider's body and "essence" (soul) are separate. If the demon dies its essence returns to the abyss and you can do anything you want with the body, provided it doesn't roll a death throe that destroys it.

[Quertus]

I played a successful succubus in a really high-op game. The key here is "at-will charm monster". Levels, Hit-die, class levels, skills, and feats be damned. I was brought in via Planar Ally and I waived the payment.

At-will charm monster absolutely destroys games. You enslave the entire encounter, creating your own mini-army, and you set them against enemies that have mind-protection.

I didn't do it alone though. I had the party wizard use planar binding to call a bunch of outsiders that didn't have mind-affecting protection/immunity. Call, charm, break circle, repeat. Stack Charm Monster on top of Charm Monster until you have like a thousand charm monsters on the creature to protect them against dispel magic. Area Dispels don't do jack and targeted dispels can't dispel all of them.

Can it be defeated? Yes, after all, protection from x cast on the charmed creature will free it no matter how many charm monsters are on there, but we didn't fight that many spellcasters.

With Ethereal Jaunt I was literally untouchable. And with Greater Teleport they literally had to one shot me to kill me, which never happened.

Charm Monster <> Dominate Monster. This would likely have been a rather ineffective - or, at least, rather difficult to implement - tactic. Now, coupled with broken levels of gating and a GM that runs monsters that will stick around and help their friends rather than kill the obnoxious summoner, it's rather brokenly strong.

That and, when I played a Troll, I usually took a dirt nap 1st round of combat. I haven't done the math, but I imagine you'd have died most battles at my tables, if the monsters had targeted you.

[Malimar]

In my game, all LAs are halved (unless they're already +1), which reduces the succubus to +3, not quite as extreme as LA+2. But in the case of the succubus, even +2 is probably underpowered in a combat game, and probably even +3 is overpowered in a social game. (Inevitability agrees with you on +2, though he appears to lean towards a high +2 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21076335&postcount=238).) A revised monster class with the change to +3 can be found here (http://highseas.wikia.com/wiki/Outsiders#Succubus_Demon) if you want to use it.

I also house-rule that you don't need to finish a savage monster progression before taking levels in other classes; instead:
A character is not required to finish their monster class progression before entering another class; however, a character may not have more class levels than monster levels unless their monster class progression is complete. Once you have completed your progression in a monster class, the “empty levels” that do not add hit dice may be reduced like level adjustment.

I allowed a succubus character in a game with the above rules, and he's still a bit underpowered as it's not much of a social campaign, but half of that is Battle Dancer levels and the other half is he's in a party with a ghaele/cleric who is pretty overpowered using the same rules.

[RoboEmperor]

Charm Monster <> Dominate Monster. This would likely have been a rather ineffective - or, at least, rather difficult to implement - tactic. Now, coupled with broken levels of gating and a GM that runs monsters that will stick around and help their friends rather than kill the obnoxious summoner, it's rather brokenly strong.

They're charmed. They have to be our friends.


That and, when I played a Troll, I usually took a dirt nap 1st round of combat. I haven't done the math, but I imagine you'd have died most battles at my tables, if the monsters had targeted you.

Ethereal Jaunt ensures they can't target you first, that and the wall of charmed creatures.

In anycase though we had a lot of precautions. Worst case scenario we just all teleport out. We only did this once, against a guy who used Break Enchantment (removes all of the thousands of charm effects on a creature with one casting!) but unless the DM is specifically out to get you, only NPCs that can research your party can employ Protection from Evil and Break Enchantment. And even then Ring of Counterspells work wonders.

Except those creatures with at-will magic circle or the like. When they started popping out I had the wizard bind me some creatures with ranged attacks like Mature Nabassu's at-will enervation.

[ericgrau]

As the Title says: A long time friend, who was out of country for years, has come back a month ago, and is no settled enough to want to return to our running Game.

And he is dead set on playing a Succubus, because he wanted to do so for quite some time.

Problem? Well, aside from the bad mechanics (Until I get something better I am assuming a LA Reduction to around 2, and buyoff at ECL 10 and 15ish), which will leave him behind, there is also the problem of them being Chaotic Evil.
Now we arew aware that we can handwave some Alignment change or other, but we would like to keep it as close to "non handwavy as possible.

So I am asking the Pllayground for help with the following 3 things:

1.: Find a Way to get the Character to non CE Alignment (Evil is fine, chaotic is too, jsut the Combo is not).

2.: Suggest CLasses and/or Combos that help reduce its underpowerdness

and lastly

3.: Suggest if our Idea of setting LA to 2 and allowing buyoff will be enough.


For your Info, I and anpother Co DM, the Group has Alignments between true Neutral and Lawful Evil atm, and with a very optimized Initator Gestalt, a Mystic THeurge and a Psion is rather powerful.

Thanks in advance.
#1: Not really an issue. There are already rare exceptions. Solved with backstory and remembering that LG Succubi still ping as CE to detect spells (and also ping as LG).

#3: Yes, higher optimization groups should always reduce LA across the board. And since you and the CO DM is onboard, why is power even a concern? Set it where you like. LA 3 is a good starting point, and depending on how much power you need you could go as low as LA 0. Run some mock fights with final builds against monsters if you're unsure. Or something with hide or greater invisibility to charm spam from an unknown location.

#2. A succubus has:
- SR, resistances, telepathy, tongues (also, telepathy+tongues). Good defenses, nice communication.
- +16 cha.
- Out of combat energy drain chain. A bit niche on an adventurer.
- *At will* charm monster, detect thoughts, ethereal jaunt, greater teleport. All of these are super cray cray for at will. The other 2 omitted are good too, but the abuse of these 4 overshadows them.
- Change shape is ok for RP.
- Outsider HD. While not the greatest those 6 HD do give 3 good saves, full BAB and d8 HD.

Build Options:
"0". Regardless of the build her defenses, travel and communication abilities are useful. Greater teleport mid fight a la dimension door, or to overcome dungeon obstacles. Ethereal jaunt to walk through a wall and peek in the next room. Sneak back onto the material plane and talk to one person in that room telepathically without alerting others. Potions/wand of invisibility are helpful here. Etc.

1. Charm spammer. The cha and charm monster lend itself extremely well to this. Also remember that SLAs have no verbal nor somatic component, so it's hard to tell where the charm is even coming from. Combine this with the fact that detect thoughts often works through doors, and she can pick out targets before they get the +5 save bonus for being threatened/attacked. Even with the +5, optimization can overcome this drawback for the insane benefit gained by an army of friends. Every non-mindless monster you throw at the party becomes a potential teammate. And even when fighting mindless foes she can use her new friends to help. Meanwhile shapechange to avoid scaring the locals.

Pick up quicken spell like ability by 8 total [RHD+class levels] to spam it twice a turn in combat.

Since SLAs are listed among special attacks, she can use ability focus for a +2 to the DC. Cha optimization likewise helps, and there are probably other DC boosters out there.

As for class the player can do option 2 below or play something that survives well and can fight for when the player can't spam charm monster against any of the enemies. Some kind of melee for example. Or something that works well with a group of "friends", such as a buffer. Like war weaver or bard.

2. Cha focused builds. Many, many things in D&D are cha based. Too many to mention. Succubis paladin is one, plus there are 100 other ways. For casters she unfortunately has the high ECL to deal with. But if the player wants a sorcerer or some such, here's an easy to use house rule:

Effective arcane caster level, including spells known/per day, is increased by 1 per 2 other levels. Divine caster level is increased by 1 per 4 other levels (to avoid super gishes, since divine casters are already part gish). These bonus levels may not exceed real levels. For example assuming an LA 2 6 HD succubus sorcerer 4 would cast as a sorcerer 8 at ECL 12. Not the greatest, but fairly good and she does have other abilities. Plus her spells have a +6 to save DC (+8 minus being 2 levels behind). This house rule replaces eldritch knight, mystic theurge and the like; they are no longer available to someone using this rule.

Even taking casters off the table, there are plenty of non-caster ways to use cha. I think you can search for old threads on this.

[Calthropstu]

They're charmed. They have to be our friends.

1: They have to be YOUR friend. Not the summoner. They might give you asking them not to kill the wizard some regard, but I wouldn't push it.
2: They are your FRIEND, not SLAVE. When was the last time one of your friends followed you around all day doing anything you asked them to do?
They might help you out for a bit, or hang out for a while, but ultimately they will leave. Also, they are likewise completely unbound to each other.

The way I see that going is this:

Called monster 1: That succubus is awesome, my bestest friend ever. Wish she'd ditch that ******* wizard.

Called monster 2: Yeah, but he's pretty strong and she seems to like him.

Called Monster 14: Eh, we could take him. She might get upset but she'll understand, she's our friend!

Called monster 5: Hmmm, that would work... let's pin the blame on Called monster 9. I hate that guy.

(One genked wizard later)

"Who killed the wizard?"
9
9
9
9

9: "What? How dare you accuse me.

(One epic called monster free for all later)

The succubus stands alone, her party dead, her charmed allies dead, the outsiders either dead or returned... Sounds like something a succubus would engineer.

[RoboEmperor]

-snip-

You just need to constantly keep an eye on the guy and keep passing your charisma checks. Needless to say, all fiends are not allowed within city limits.

In anycase I was just mentioning that a Succubus, as-is, can be someone that can pull her weight with some teamwork at all levels, even with her devastating LA and RHD. It's when you try to turn her into a fighter does things go bad, because even the monster entry says "succubi are not fighters."

Also, there's no reason for a paladin succubus to fight CR-appropriate monsters. You know she can't win, so drop her a few tiers. Let her mingle with the lower CR and PCs even though she'll probably never level up.

[GrayDeath]

#1: Not really an issue. There are already rare exceptions. Solved with backstory and remembering that LG Succubi still ping as CE to detect spells (and also ping as LG).

#3: Yes, higher optimization groups should always reduce LA across the board. And since you and the CO DM is onboard, why is power even a concern? Set it where you like. LA 3 is a good starting point, and depending on how much power you need you could go as low as LA 0. Run some mock fights with final builds against monsters if you're unsure. Or something with hide or greater invisibility to charm spam from an unknown location.

#2. A succubus has:
- SR, resistances, telepathy, tongues (also, telepathy+tongues). Good defenses, nice communication.
- +16 cha.
- Out of combat energy drain chain. A bit niche on an adventurer.
- *At will* charm monster, detect thoughts, ethereal jaunt, greater teleport. All of these are super cray cray for at will. The other 2 omitted are good too, but the abuse of these 4 overshadows them.
- Change shape is ok for RP.
- Outsider HD. While not the greatest those 6 HD do give 3 good saves, full BAB and d8 HD.

Build Options:
"0". Regardless of the build her defenses, travel and communication abilities are useful. Greater teleport mid fight a la dimension door, or to overcome dungeon obstacles. Ethereal jaunt to walk through a wall and peek in the next room. Sneak back onto the material plane and talk to one person in that room telepathically without alerting others. Potions/wand of invisibility are helpful here. Etc.

1. Charm spammer. The cha and charm monster lend itself extremely well to this. Also remember that SLAs have no verbal nor somatic component, so it's hard to tell where the charm is even coming from. Combine this with the fact that detect thoughts often works through doors, and she can pick out targets before they get the +5 save bonus for being threatened/attacked. Even with the +5, optimization can overcome this drawback for the insane benefit gained by an army of friends. Every non-mindless monster you throw at the party becomes a potential teammate. And even when fighting mindless foes she can use her new friends to help. Meanwhile shapechange to avoid scaring the locals.

Pick up quicken spell like ability by 8 total [RHD+class levels] to spam it twice a turn in combat.

Since SLAs are listed among special attacks, she can use ability focus for a +2 to the DC. Cha optimization likewise helps, and there are probably other DC boosters out there.

As for class the player can do option 2 below or play something that survives well and can fight for when the player can't spam charm monster against any of the enemies. Some kind of melee for example. Or something that works well with a group of "friends", such as a buffer. Like war weaver or bard.

2. Cha focused builds. Many, many things in D&D are cha based. Too many to mention. Succubis paladin is one, plus there are 100 other ways. For casters she unfortunately has the high ECL to deal with. But if the player wants a sorcerer or some such, here's an easy to use house rule:

Effective arcane caster level, including spells known/per day, is increased by 1 per 2 other levels. Divine caster level is increased by 1 per 4 other levels (to avoid super gishes, since divine casters are already part gish). These bonus levels may not exceed real levels. For example assuming an LA 2 6 HD succubus sorcerer 4 would cast as a sorcerer 8 at ECL 12. Not the greatest, but fairly good and she does have other abilities. Plus her spells have a +6 to save DC (+8 minus being 2 levels behind). This house rule replaces eldritch knight, mystic theurge and the like; they are no longer available to someone using this rule.

Even taking casters off the table, there are plenty of non-caster ways to use cha. I think you can search for old threads on this.


Hmmmm.... that looks doable. No real Homebrew, just reduced LA and semi stacking Levels like for Initiators.
THat might be qhat we were looking for....thanks!

Still open for suggestions&Tips though, you cant have too many ^^

[Quertus]

They're charmed. They have to be our friends.

No, they have to be your - and only your (singular) - "friend". Note that some D&D languages explicitly lack this word...


1: They have to be YOUR friend. Not the summoner. They might give you asking them not to kill the wizard some regard, but I wouldn't push it.
2: They are your FRIEND, not SLAVE. When was the last time one of your friends followed you around all day doing anything you asked them to do?
They might help you out for a bit, or hang out for a while, but ultimately they will leave. Also, they are likewise completely unbound to each other.

The way I see that going is this:

The succubus stands alone, her party dead, her charmed allies dead, the outsiders either dead or returned... Sounds like something a succubus would engineer.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I'd expect at my tables.

So, OP, how does Charm work at your table?

[ericgrau]

They're not just your friend, they're your "trusted friend and ally". They won't just leave you. They're a teammate now. Even though they might not like your other allies, a few charisma checks can help. If your allies were attacking them this is hard, but then attacking from them ends the spell anyway. If you're fighting random foes in a dungeon you've never seen before and say "Hello friend, these are my friends too" it's perfectly reasonable for them to become friends with your friends. It should usually work for just about anything except reoccurring villains. And even then, maybe.

It's not dominate, but it is quite explicitly an ally grabber and pretty crazy good. Also "It might be convinced that something very dangerous is worth doing." Like your other allies controlled by real people it won't run into every danger. Protecting your from random encounters is pretty much a given. Plot stuff might require giving the monster some motivation and/or charisma checks like any reasonable person. He might go at least to protect you. But you can always sideline your new friends for later if you get stuck with a conflict of interests.

The nixie monster entry gives some reasonable uses of charm. The nixie makes the charmed creature to do some heavy labor, guard duty, etc. and then orders him leave before the spell expires. By the MM wording like "orders" this sounds like the DM over-extending the spell into dominate, but actually it isn't. These are perfectly reasonable requests to make from a trusted ally.

Yeah, the simple answer is ask the OP and his co DM how they rule it, that helps set the succubus' power, and then you adjust the LA accordingly. Higher if stronger, lower if weaker.

[RoboEmperor]

The nixie monster entry gives some reasonable uses of charm. The nixie makes the charmed creature to do some heavy labor, guard duty, etc. and then orders him leave before the spell expires. By the MM wording like "orders" this sounds like the DM over-extending the spell into dominate, but actually it isn't. These are perfectly reasonable requests to make from a trusted ally.

Throwing these kinds of quotes won't really accomplish anything. It's one of the main reasons I moved away from spells like charm and suggestion. If a DM hates minionmancy he's gonna bring in some really weird interpretations and call his fiat as RAI.

If you always pass the Charisma check Charm is actually better than dominate because the creature does NOT try to thwart you, at all, and uses its creativity for you. Dominate is for the no charisma. For high charisma Charm > dominate.


1: They have to be YOUR friend. Not the summoner. They might give you asking them not to kill the wizard some regard, but I wouldn't push it.
2: They are your FRIEND, not SLAVE. When was the last time one of your friends followed you around all day doing anything you asked them to do?
They might help you out for a bit, or hang out for a while, but ultimately they will leave. Also, they are likewise completely unbound to each other.

Take this reasoning for example. Charm is not diplomacy. It is a mind-affecting spell that specifically and directly says you can make the creature do something it wouldn't ordinarily do if you pass the charisma check. So there is no way either of these points are valid. And once you shove this rule in your DM's face along with the glossary's expansion on the limits of charm, he's gonna tell you to stfu.

And then when you go into a debate using real life examples, you tell him that if there is a friend you highly respect and feel lucky to be friends, you'd sacrifice a great deal of your time for him, because I've personally have. And then there's the examples of teases making stupid men do all their stuff for her just by sweet talking them. And then the DM ends up telling you to stfu.

And then when you find a DM that uses Charm as it should, as in Calthropstu's 1: and 2: forcing a charisma check instead of an immediate I'm-gonna-kill-your-friends-and-there-is-nothing-you-can-do-to-stop-it, other people say that DM is playing the game wrong. I mean I agree that his 1: and 2: should induce a charisma check so that low charisma characters' mileage out of this spell is severely limited, but that's not what he's saying, he's saying that creature is gonna kill your friend, charisma check be damned, and any other way of playing the NPC is playing the game incorrectly even though we have official uses of the spell (like that nixie one) that shows it is just as good as dominate.

BTW, with the Succubi's at-will charm monster, anytime she fails her charisma check she can just recast charm monster infinitely until she passes. I think Succubi's LA and ECL are apt for a PC, because you need to be around 12+ to fight enemies that are immune to mind-affecting (excluding undead)

[GrayDeath]

WHile I am running it, I am ruliung it thus:


Case 1: Only the charmed Monster and the Charmer: Trusted Friend, does whatever is not terribly dangerous without much thinking, creatively tries to help the caster. No real Danger of Failure as long as "Commands"/Requests are remotely normal.

Case 2: Multiple Charmed Mosnters and the Caster: Inter-Frinedship Rivalrly, especially with incompatible alignments, will occur. It happens all the time.
Depending on how the caster solves them (Charisma Chaecks/Sending some away/etc) he has to spend a lot of his effort to keep his friends friendly overall, but it will work. Takes more effort the mroe and the less compatible there are (I once had a Player of a Lawful Neutral Sorcerer runa round with a Devil and a Celestial....fun times^^).

3.: The Permanently increasing" Circle of Friends: Suddenly being told to be friendly to wildly foreign monsters WILL tax the spell to its limits.
THat case will likely work less than half the time, and even then need effort.


As for my CO-DM: he tends to be more lenient but less consistant than me....

[P.F.]

Honestly, in many ways detect thoughts + tongues/telepathy + diplomacy + bluff > charm monster.

When you have the opportunity to know what a monster really really wants, and the ability to convince it you can help or are already helping it, it really is your friend, without the hour/level duration. Adding an at-will suggestion to the mix just makes it that much more potent, if you want to get them to do something they otherwise wouldn't. And, if that fails, you can always try the charm monster.

[Crake]

The Abyssal Heritor feat Ordered Chaos in Fiendish Codex 1, treats "counting as another alignment as well as your actual one" as a bonus rather than a penalty:

"Spells and effects that are keyed to your alignment affect you as if you were chaotic, as well as your actual alignment. For example, you become immune to spells such as chaos hammer and word of chaos, you could wield an anarchic weapon without fear of gaining a negative level, and you could take the Primordial Scion feat despite its chaotic alignment prerequisite"


If you applied that logic to the LG demon's Chaotic subtype (and their Evil subtype) then they'd be immune to chaos spells designed to target Lawful alignment but be harmless to the Chaotic, even if they happen to be Lawful.

And immune to evil spells designed to target the Good but not work on the Evil.

"Immunity trumps vulnerability" would make such a character much better.

That's not necessarily true. The question depends on the wording of the spell. Blasphemy for example, says "non-evil". If you are good and evil, you are still "evil" and are thus immune to the spell. If, however, a spell specifically targetted an evil creature, and you are good and evil, you are still affected by the spell, because you are evil. The spell "awaken sin" for example, deals 1d6 damage per CL to a single evil creature. Despite being counting as both "good and evil", you are still vulnerable to that spell, because you still qualify as "one evil creature".

[hamishspence]

That's not necessarily true. The question depends on the wording of the spell. Blasphemy for example, says "non-evil". If you are good and evil, you are still "evil" and are thus immune to the spell. If, however, a spell specifically targetted an evil creature, and you are good and evil, you are still affected by the spell, because you are evil. The spell "awaken sin" for example, deals 1d6 damage per CL to a single evil creature. Despite being counting as both "good and evil", you are still vulnerable to that spell, because you still qualify as "one evil creature".

True. The question is - does the number of things that don't punish you for being both, outnumber the number of things that do punish you for being both?

[Calthropstu]

Throwing these kinds of quotes won't really accomplish anything. It's one of the main reasons I moved away from spells like charm and suggestion. If a DM hates minionmancy he's gonna bring in some really weird interpretations and call his fiat as RAI.

If you always pass the Charisma check Charm is actually better than dominate because the creature does NOT try to thwart you, at all, and uses its creativity for you. Dominate is for the no charisma. For high charisma Charm > dominate.



Take this reasoning for example. Charm is not diplomacy. It is a mind-affecting spell that specifically and directly says you can make the creature do something it wouldn't ordinarily do if you pass the charisma check. So there is no way either of these points are valid. And once you shove this rule in your DM's face along with the glossary's expansion on the limits of charm, he's gonna tell you to stfu.

And then when you go into a debate using real life examples, you tell him that if there is a friend you highly respect and feel lucky to be friends, you'd sacrifice a great deal of your time for him, because I've personally have. And then there's the examples of teases making stupid men do all their stuff for her just by sweet talking them. And then the DM ends up telling you to stfu.

And then when you find a DM that uses Charm as it should, as in Calthropstu's 1: and 2: forcing a charisma check instead of an immediate I'm-gonna-kill-your-friends-and-there-is-nothing-you-can-do-to-stop-it, other people say that DM is playing the game wrong. I mean I agree that his 1: and 2: should induce a charisma check so that low charisma characters' mileage out of this spell is severely limited, but that's not what he's saying, he's saying that creature is gonna kill your friend, charisma check be damned, and any other way of playing the NPC is playing the game incorrectly even though we have official uses of the spell (like that nixie one) that shows it is just as good as dominate.

BTW, with the Succubi's at-will charm monster, anytime she fails her charisma check she can just recast charm monster infinitely until she passes. I think Succubi's LA and ECL are apt for a PC, because you need to be around 12+ to fight enemies that are immune to mind-affecting (excluding undead)

I don't care how good a friend someone is. I'm not uprooting myself to go on "adventures" with them, no matter how it is asked. Most people feel the same. The more you ask, the more modifiers will accumulate until it becomes literally impossible for any charisma check to succeed.

There are things you might convince a person to do. Some examples:
"Hey, drive me to Vegas and spend the weekend with me." When Vegas is a few hours away. Fairly reasonable.
More difficult: Hey, let's take a week long road trip to Vegas.
Much more difficult: Hey, let's take a month off from work and spend it in Vegas.
Nearly impossible: Let's abandon our lives here and all move to Vegas.
Not going to happen: Let's aimlessly wander around killing stuff never having a permanent home abandoning your wife and kids.

In the case of outsiders, you have to understand their very nature could direct them TOWARDS betraying their friends. Friend may even be a completely alien concept to them. Such as demons.

[Crake]

I don't care how good a friend someone is. I'm not uprooting myself to go on "adventures" with them, no matter how it is asked. Most people feel the same. The more you ask, the more modifiers will accumulate until it becomes literally impossible for any charisma check to succeed.

There are things you might convince a person to do. Some examples:
"Hey, drive me to Vegas and spend the weekend with me." When Vegas is a few hours away. Fairly reasonable.
More difficult: Hey, let's take a week long road trip to Vegas.
Much more difficult: Hey, let's take a month off from work and spend it in Vegas.
Nearly impossible: Let's abandon our lives here and all move to Vegas.
Not going to happen: Let's aimlessly wander around killing stuff never having a permanent home abandoning your wife and kids.

In the case of outsiders, you have to understand their very nature could direct them TOWARDS betraying their friends. Friend may even be a completely alien concept to them. Such as demons.

Except that the charm spell specifically states that you would, given that you failed to beat the opposed charisma check, because as someonenoone11 said, it's a magical effect that makes you do it. Hell, with charm, you could convince a paladin to kill an innocent person for you, that's how powerful charm is. This is the part of charm person that protection from evil protects you against, since it's practically dominate, but with an opposed check, rather than a save. The only limiting factor on what you cannot make someone do is suicidal, or obviously harmful actions.

Now, you can argue what "obviously harmful" means until the cows come home, and then some, but if you don't extrapolate to the nth degree, it basically comes down to no killing yourself or performing self-harm. Now, of course, going adventuring for the average joe may quite possibly be seen as suicidal, but for a seasoned warrior, perhaps not.

As for demons screwing over friends, the spell makes them treat you as a "trusted friend and ally". They trust you, they have no reason to betray you. The only kinds of demons that would betray a trusted friend and ally are ones that are chaotic stupid. Even chaotic evil people see the value of alliances, as long as they appeal to their current whims and desires. And if your current whim and desire is "This guy is amazing, I trust him!" they aren't going to betray you, that would just go against the whole nature of the spell.

Edit: Going back and reading your earlier post though, that "screwing over" would kinda make sense, since they are acting "in your best interest", at least in their own twisted sense of what that means. I guess I should read the thread through a little more thoroughly.

[RoboEmperor]

I don't care how good a friend someone is. I'm not uprooting myself to go on "adventures" with them, no matter how it is asked. Most people feel the same. The more you ask, the more modifiers will accumulate until it becomes literally impossible for any charisma check to succeed.

What modifiers? Are you house ruling something to charm? Or are you confusing charm with something else?


Except that the charm spell specifically states that you would, given that you failed to beat the opposed charisma check, because as someonenoone11 said, it's a magical effect that makes you do it. Hell, with charm, you could convince a paladin to kill an innocent person for you, that's how powerful charm is. This is the part of charm person that protection from evil protects you against, since it's practically dominate, but with an opposed check, rather than a save. The only limiting factor on what you cannot make someone do is suicidal, or obviously harmful actions.

I think you have to word it nicely though. "I've seen that guy murder his children! He must die!" or something like that instead of "Kill that innocent guy", but yeah Charm is that powerful.

[Ashiel]

Problem? Well, aside from the bad mechanics (Until I get something better I am assuming a LA Reduction to around 2, and buyoff at ECL 10 and 15ish), which will leave him behind, there is also the problem of them being Chaotic Evil.
Now we arew aware that we can handwave some Alignment change or other, but we would like to keep it as close to "non handwavy as possible.

If you don't mind using some Pathfinder content, I would suggest a tiefling dual-disciple (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/psion/archetypes/dreamscarred-press/dual-disciple/) psion, with some combination of telepath and egoist. Psionics allows minor metamorphosis which covers the basics of shapeshifting quite well, has empathic connection (basically psionic charm and is quite spammable in the charm person way), and being a psion you'll eventually have access to things like teleportation, etc.

For touching up some other succubus features, a few homebrew feats to make the tiefling more of a succubus could be in order. For example, you could have a feat that makes the tiefling alternate racial "vestigial wings" actually capable of flight like a succubus, or make a feat granting them things like the succubi's energy drain, and/or profane gifts, or create a psionic power that mirrors vampiric touch.

[Crake]

What modifiers? Are you house ruling something to charm? Or are you confusing charm with something else?



I think you have to word it nicely though. "I've seen that guy murder his children! He must die!" or something like that instead of "Kill that innocent guy", but yeah Charm is that powerful.

You would have to word it in a way that didn't involve it being a suicidal action, or being self harm in any way. Now, a paladin may very well see losing all his powers for performing an evil act as "self harm", so in a situation like that, yes, you may have to word it in a way that would make it see "acceptable" to his faith.... But if you had a tied up prisoner and a charmed, pious man in your basement, where nobody would hear you all (so he would have no repercussions that he might see as "self harm"), handed the pious man a dagger and said "kill him for me", there would be nothing suicidal or self harming about that action, and, with a successful opposed check, you could convince that holy, pious man who's never hurt anyone in his life to literally kill for you. That's how powerful charm is. I think people quite often don't see the terrifying power behind the spell.

[RoboEmperor]

You would have to word it in a way that didn't involve it being a suicidal action, or being self harm in any way. Now, a paladin may very well see losing all his powers for performing an evil act as "self harm", so in a situation like that, yes, you may have to word it in a way that would make it see "acceptable" to his faith.... But if you had a tied up prisoner and a charmed, pious man in your basement, where nobody would hear you all (so he would have no repercussions that he might see as "self harm"), handed the pious man a dagger and said "kill him for me", there would be nothing suicidal or self harming about that action, and, with a successful opposed check, you could convince that holy, pious man who's never hurt anyone in his life to literally kill for you. That's how powerful charm is. I think people quite often don't see the terrifying power behind the spell.

I think it's because of Pathfinder. There was some official ruling over there where such a paladin would rather commit suicide than perform the deed.

I made a thread about this around 4 years ago and everyone got mad when I presented arguments similar to yours. The glossary at the back of DMG? also says Charm is just as good as dominate.

[Crake]

If you don't mind using some Pathfinder content, I would suggest a tiefling dual-disciple (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/psion/archetypes/dreamscarred-press/dual-disciple/) psion, with some combination of telepath and egoist. Psionics allows minor metamorphosis which covers the basics of shapeshifting quite well, has empathic connection (basically psionic charm and is quite spammable in the charm person way), and being a psion you'll eventually have access to things like teleportation, etc.

For touching up some other succubus features, a few homebrew feats to make the tiefling more of a succubus could be in order. For example, you could have a feat that makes the tiefling alternate racial "vestigial wings" actually capable of flight like a succubus, or make a feat granting them things like the succubi's energy drain, and/or profane gifts, or create a psionic power that mirrors vampiric touch.

3.5 already has a egoist ACF that functions like the changeling's minor change shape (sounds like what minor metamorphosis is supposed to be), and it also has the outsider wings feat which would allow a tiefling to grow wings capable of flight like a succubus. Even at will charm is attainable through some warlock levels, or alternatively, grabbing half fey would give you wings (they're butterfly wings, but I'm sure you could convince your DM to let them be bat wings isntead), instead of picking up the feat, some scaling SLAs, of which charm person at will is gained at level 1, combined with an egoist's minor change shape to basically give you a very succubus-y feel for 0RHD, +2 LA (go lesser tiefling, you lose the outsider type, but that lets you pick up half fey instead), and you can go straight psion all the way, or wilder if you'd prefer to have a charisma focus.


I think it's because of Pathfinder. There was some official ruling over there where such a paladin would rather commit suicide than perform the deed.

I made a thread about this around 4 years ago and everyone got mad when I presented arguments similar to yours. The glossary at the back of DMG? also says Charm is just as good as dominate.

Yeah, it's an understandable stance, as losing all your paladin powers could very easily be seen as self harm. It's almost along the lines of purposefully energy draining yourself, though not quite, since you don't lose the HD etc, just the class features. Of course, whether a paladin would rather commit suicide than perform the deed is a stupid thing to say, simply because whether that's the case or not depends on the paladin. After all, paladins have fallen in the past, to say that every paladin ever would rather commit suicide would be to say that no paladin ever has fallen for any reason, because they'd all rather just commit suicide.

[Calthropstu]

What modifiers? Are you house ruling something to charm? Or are you confusing charm with something else?



I think you have to word it nicely though. "I've seen that guy murder his children! He must die!" or something like that instead of "Kill that innocent guy", but yeah Charm is that powerful.

The raw modifiers mentioned in the core rule book or dmg. Everything gets circumstance modifiers, including charisma checks. Most of those are left up to the gm to decide.
And yes, what YOU think is best and what THEY think is best will rarely be the same. And you can't make an opposed charisma check for something you're not privy to.

If your demon "friend" suddenly decides it would be cool to go and eat some babies and he will only be gone a moment and just suddenly disappears because teleport at will...

[Rogthnor]

Might check out Falls From Grace from plabescape.

[Raven777]

"Good is not nice, polite, well-mannered, self-righteous, or naive, though good characters may be some of these things."
— Dungeons & Dragons, The Book of Exalted Deeds

But if Good is not nice, Evil is not a jerk. Just let your friend be Chaotic Evil. Chaotic means they value their personal freedom and reject authority. Evil means they value their own to the detriment of others. Chaotic Evil then just means they value being able to do whatever they want while answering to no one regardless of anyone else. They can still be affable. They can still make and value friends. They can still abide by any law when they choose to. They can still help anyone if they feel like it. They can even honor their word when it suits them. And they can definitely save the world. That's why Chaotic Evil is the best alignment, even better for a player character. It's the quintessential player character given form. It is unbound, neither by law nor anyone. It leaves you free to try stuff. Just roll with it.

Unless your friend himself sets out to cause trouble, everything will be just fine.

[Crake]

The raw modifiers mentioned in the core rule book or dmg. Everything gets circumstance modifiers, including charisma checks. Most of those are left up to the gm to decide.
And yes, what YOU think is best and what THEY think is best will rarely be the same. And you can't make an opposed charisma check for something you're not privy to.

If your demon "friend" suddenly decides it would be cool to go and eat some babies and he will only be gone a moment and just suddenly disappears because teleport at will...

When did this discussion become about preventing things, rather than requesting things? I mean, honestly, if you're binding demons you have to expect some level of shenannigans, which is why I'd honestly rather suggest you bind angels, since they're a) generally powerful, and b) less prone to shenannigans.

The point (I believe) wasn't just about the bound demons though, it was about the strength of at will charm monster. As for circumstance modifiers, I can't see them applying, because when it comes to a request, most requests would just be done without question, it's only things the victim wouldn't normally do that require a charisma check in the first place. Saying there should be circumstance modifiers for things they wouldn't do would just be redundant, and there's not even a hint at the inclusion of any such modifiers, despite other spells with charisma checks involved having a clause for exactly that (see planar binding). The charisma check isn't a "diplomacy check" it's quite literally a clash and contenst of ego, hence why it's raw charisma. You vs them. If you win you aren't "convincing them" you're literally forcing your will upon them and pushing them to perform the action. Whether they really don't want to do something, as opposed to kinda not wanting to do something doesn't change the force of their personality, this isn't a shounen manga where you can overcome everything just by sheer tenacity.

[RoboEmperor]

I'd honestly rather suggest you bind angels, since they're a) generally powerful, and b) less prone to shenannigans.

1. That's evil.
2. Unlike Fiends, who don't give a damn about each other, Angels care about each other so they will come after you. I can quote RAW after RAW about how fiends really don't give a damn if you use their underlings or superiors as cannon fodder and how they blame the victim for their weakness and never come after the spellcaster, but not angels.
3. Angels have at-will magic circle or similar effects so you gotta win the charisma check in planar binding instead of using mind-affecting spells to utilize their services, and in this scenario a wizard needs to make that check instead of the succubus.
4. Angels are actually too powerful. A planetar is a gestalt fighter/cleric with 9th level spells, and you can access them at level 11 with the right feat. That's a 6 level early access to 9th level spells and he's a super fighter on top of that.

[Quertus]

WHile I am running it, I am ruliung it thus:

Well, there's your answer (regardless of whether anyone in particular agrees with it or not).

So, under these rules, is the Succubus worth the cost?

Were I in this scenario, I'd run a Succubus through some sample content, and use that to determine roughly how bad or OP it was, and go from there.


True. The question is - does the number of things that don't punish you for being both, outnumber the number of things that do punish you for being both?

Eh, 20 ant bites < 1 bull goring, IMO. It's a matter of quantity, quality, and frequency. Some spells, I see often; others, I've never seen in play.


The glossary at the back of DMG? also says Charm is just as good as dominate.

Citation need. And, by this logic, why is Charm Monster a different spell from Dominate Monster? And, of course, this is a purely academic discussion now (the best kind of discussion).

[RoboEmperor]

Citation need. And, by this logic, why is Charm Monster a different spell from Dominate Monster? And, of course, this is a purely academic discussion now (the best kind of discussion).

Dominate is Will Save, Charm Monster is Charisma check. Instead of a 2nd will save to resist Dominate, the guy gets a Charisma check (and a 2nd will save if the command is severe enough). Virtually everyone prefers Dominate Monsters because you get it's full effect without investing anything in it, and boosting your spell save DC helps everything you do and not just dominate, where as Charm is like Phantasmal Killer, it gives the guy 2 saves. Overall, only very few builds benefit more from Charm than Dominate.

Also



CHARM AND COMPULSION
As the strange, wolflike creature loped toward Tordek, he realized that it was a good friend that meant him no harm. But why was Mialee casting a fireball at it? He needed to stop her from doing that again. Later, things got even worse when Lidda didn’t know that the noble she was chatting up was actually a vampire. After one look into his eyes, she heard his voice in her mind, giving her orders that she obeyed without hesitation. She felt like a mere observer, trapped behind her own eyes, watching as “she” sought out her companions and invited them to a private party at the noble’s estate.
Many abilities and spells can cloud the minds of characters and monsters, leaving them unable to tell friend from foe—or worse yet, deceiving them into thinking that their former friends are now their worst enemies. Two general types of enchantments affect characters and creatures: charms and compulsions. Charming another creature gives the charming character the ability to befriend and suggest courses of actions to his minion, but the servitude is not absolute or mindless. Charms of this type include the various charm spells. Essentially, a charmed character retains free will but makes choices according to a skewed view of the world.
• A charmed creature doesn’t gain any magical ability to understand his new friend’s language.
• A charmed character retains his original alignment and allegiances, generally with the exception that he now regards the charming creature as a dear friend and will give great weight to his suggestions and directions.
• A charmed character fights his former allies only if they threaten his new friend, and even then he uses the least lethal means at his disposal as long as these tactics show any possibility of success (just as he would in a fight between two actual friends).
• A charmed character is entitled to an opposed Charisma check against his master in order to resist instructions or commands that would make him do something he wouldn’t normally do even for a close friend. If he succeeds, he decides not to go along with that order but remains charmed.
• A charmed character never obeys a command that is obviously suicidal or grievously harmful to her.
• If the charming creature commands his minion to do something that the influenced character would be violently opposed to, the subject may attempt a new saving throw to break free of the influence altogether.
• A charmed character who is openly attacked by the creature who charmed him or by that creature’s apparent allies is automatically freed of the spell or effect. Compulsion is a different matter altogether. A compulsion overrides the subject’s free will in some way or simply changes the way the subject’s mind works. A charm makes the subject a friend of the caster; a compulsion makes the subject obey the caster.
Regardless of whether a character is charmed or compelled, he won’t volunteer information or tactics that his master doesn’t ask for. If a 1st-level wizard happens to have a staff of fire, the vampire
that is compelling him doesn’t know that the wand is there and can’t tell the wizard to give him the staff or use the staff on his former friends. The vampire, however, can say, “Hand over your most powerful magic item.”

So right there, according to the bolded and underlined part, Charm is just as good as Dominate., or in some ways, superior to dominate. Oh and note that the guy gets a 2nd will save if the command is something he's violently opposed to.

So if you tell a charmed guy to kill his wife, he must first fail his will save to be charmed, lose the charisma check, and then lose the 2nd will save. But if he loses all 3, he kills his wife.

Which brings me back to my original argument: Succubi are powerful enough without needing to reduce her LA to make them playable.

[Calthropstu]

Dominate is Will Save, Charm Monster is Charisma check. Instead of a 2nd will save to resist Dominate, the guy gets a Charisma check (and a 2nd will save if the command is severe enough). Virtually everyone prefers Dominate Monsters because you get it's full effect without investing anything in it, and boosting your spell save DC helps everything you do and not just dominate, where as Charm is like Phantasmal Killer, it gives the guy 2 saves. Overall, only very few builds benefit more from Charm than Dominate.

Also




So right there, according to the bolded and underlined part, Charm is just as good as Dominate., or in some ways, superior to dominate. Oh and note that the guy gets a 2nd will save if the command is something he's violently opposed to.

So if you tell a charmed guy to kill his wife, he must first fail his will save to be charmed, lose the charisma check, and then lose the 2nd will save. But if he loses all 3, he kills his wife.

Which brings me back to my original argument: Succubi are powerful enough without needing to reduce her LA to make them playable.

Actually I'd argue that killing his wife would be aggregious self harm as anyone who has lost love or a child will attest.

[Jowgen]

To weigh in on the Charm vs Dominate, two other things that Charm has going for it is harder to detect via Sense Motive (DC 25 rather than 15) and that according it explicitly leaves the subject's free will intact (decisions are just skewed by a changed perception of the caster), even when "harsh" commands are given via the opposed charisma mechanic.

[atemu1234]

This thread got me to wondering; what would happen to a Good-aligned succubus if they were killed in the Material plane? Like where would she go?

I made a prestige class centered on the 'risen fiend' concept a while back. I wonder if I ever posted it... well, in any case, by RAW, the fiend would still reform on its home plane, regardless of alignment. Now, what other demons might do to a Good-aligned demon is... questionable, at best.

[Crake]

Dominate is Will Save, Charm Monster is Charisma check. Instead of a 2nd will save to resist Dominate, the guy gets a Charisma check (and a 2nd will save if the command is severe enough). Virtually everyone prefers Dominate Monsters because you get it's full effect without investing anything in it, and boosting your spell save DC helps everything you do and not just dominate, where as Charm is like Phantasmal Killer, it gives the guy 2 saves. Overall, only very few builds benefit more from Charm than Dominate.

Where in charm does it say that the subject is ever entitled to a second saving throw at any point in time?

[RoboEmperor]

Where in charm does it say that the subject is ever entitled to a second saving throw at any point in time?

In the quote I gave


• If the charming creature commands his minion to do something that the influenced character would be violently opposed to, the subject may attempt a new saving throw to break free of the influence altogether.

It's 2nd one below the bolded part of the quote.


Actually I'd argue that killing his wife would be aggregious self harm as anyone who has lost love or a child will attest.

Yeah i could see this reasoning. In fact I agree with it. But you're wrong about charmed creatures not being the caster's slave. But I do agree having a large group of incompatible creatures will result in too many charisma checks for it to be viable.

[mikelibrarian]

There's a pathfinder sourcebook that deals with a succubus class. This may be helpful. https://www.opengamingstore.com/products/monster-classes-pinnacle-and-pit

[Crake]

In the quote I gave



It's 2nd one below the bolded part of the quote.

Oh, fair enough, TIL. Honestly something that should have been made far more clear, since I've never run that before, and I've had a decent amount of charms floating about as a DM.

[GrayDeath]

Well, seems my question overall was a useful one, not just for our group. :P


At the moment we are debating between taking the Succubus as is but with LA 3 (and allowing Buyoff of one LA each at ECL 13 and 18) or doing the CLass version from the last page.

But we still are not fixed in any way, so keep the suggestions coming. :)


Oh, and as for the CE part: he himself would prefer not to be CE as he wants an atypical Succubus mind-wise, but then again, you all showed many possibilities for that, so that part can be considered clearly answered.

[Crake]

Well, seems my question overall was a useful one, not just for our group. :P


At the moment we are debating between taking the Succubus as is but with LA 3 (and allowing Buyoff of one LA each at ECL 13 and 18) or doing the CLass version from the last page.

But we still are not fixed in any way, so keep the suggestions coming. :)


Oh, and as for the CE part: he himself would prefer not to be CE as he wants an atypical Succubus mind-wise, but then again, you all showed many possibilities for that, so that part can be considered clearly answered.

If you're using the unearthed arcana buyoff system, the buyoff levels should be at 9, 15 and 18 class levels. So with the succubus' 6HD, and 3LA, the first buyoff should be at ECL18, which would then become ECL 17, the second buyoff would be at ECL23, which would then become ECL 22, and the final buyoff at ECL 25, which would then become ECL 24.

If you're just homebrewing it though, then just do whatever.

[Calthropstu]

In the quote I gave



It's 2nd one below the bolded part of the quote.



Yeah i could see this reasoning. In fact I agree with it. But you're wrong about charmed creatures not being the caster's slave. But I do agree having a large group of incompatible creatures will result in too many charisma checks for it to be viable.

If their free will is intact, they aren't a slave. The more unreasonable your requests, the more likely they are to say "nah man, but hey catch me at the pub tomorrow and we'll have a drink. Good luck with (stupid request) though, I hope it works out for ya..."

We disagree on the premise fundamentally, though agree on some points. Luckily we likely don't play at the same tables so it probably doesn't matter. But I have had this convo at a table before and I tried arguing your side of the equation (I really wanted that person to surrender to me instead of killing her)

And he argued it was aggregious self harm to surrender rather than fight to the death. Not the first time I have had people tell me stuff like that either in regards to charm.

To me, any request the charmer makes has to pass a simple test: Would I do it for my best friend?
If the answer is no, needs a check. The more far fetched the request, the more modifiers pile up. It seems a good interpretation, and works RAW.

[Crake]

To me, any request the charmer makes has to pass a simple test: Would I do it for my best friend?
If the answer is no, needs a check.

Seems to line up so far.


The more far fetched the request, the more modifiers pile up. It seems a good interpretation, and works RAW.

This is the bit where, as far as I can tell, you're wrong. If the request is something they are "violently opposed to" (not including suicidal requests or requests involving self harm) the penalty isn't modifiers on the opposed charisma check, it's actually another save to end the charm effect, exactly like dominate. That's in addition to an opposed charisma check.


And he argued it was aggregious self harm to surrender rather than fight to the death. Not the first time I have had people tell me stuff like that either in regards to charm.

I'm sorry you had to play with someone that stubborn that they would make that argument just to get their way. I cannot imagine a world where surrendering is more self harmful than fighting to the death.

[Âmesang]

"Good is not nice, polite, well-mannered, self-righteous, or naive, though good characters may be some of these things."
— Dungeons & Dragons, The Book of Exalted Deeds

But if Good is not nice, Evil is not a jerk. Just let your friend be Chaotic Evil. Chaotic means they value their personal freedom and reject authority. Evil means they value their own to the detriment of others. Chaotic Evil then just means they value being able to do whatever they want while answering to no one regardless of anyone else. They can still be affable. They can still make and value friends. They can still abide by any law when they choose to. They can still help anyone if they feel like it. They can even honor their word when it suits them. And they can definitely save the world. That's why Chaotic Evil is the best alignment, even better for a player character. It's the quintessential player character given form. It is unbound, neither by law nor anyone. It leaves you free to try stuff. Just roll with it.

Unless your friend himself sets out to cause trouble, everything will be just fine.
To add to this a bit…


"Black Robe wizards embrace the cause of evil. They do not, however, hurl random fireballs at peasant's cottages (at least, not usually), since such activities would abuse and jeopardize their primary loyalty, which is to magic itself. Black Robe wizards may be cruel, but they are also selfish and cunning, and avoid open acts of violence if a more subtle way can be found…"

— DRAGONLANCE® Campaign Setting (3e), p.71
My point is, I don't see how "Chaotic Evil" has to be a complete game ender; maybe I'm biased, but I always enjoyed the idea of a CE character being vain, conceited, selfish, self-centered, egotistical—even flat-out comparing her comrades to pawns to be manipulated, tools to be used… and she'll do whatever it takes to defend them because, in her mind, she doesn't like it when someone else tries to "break her toys."

I dislike the notion that CE equals "gibbering lunatic," save for those (typically monsters) with well below average mental abilities; but as long as they possess at least average mental abilities and behave themselves in public I'd like to think such an attitude could still work, even with a likely abrasive personality; private, admittedly, would be a whole other scenario (which makes me imagine such a CE promising a victim hid life in exchange for some boon, then immediately taking the victim's life because she never said she'd let him live for very long).

[Raven777]

Just chiming in as a programmer/developper that there is a 99.99% chance that whoever wrote "egregious self harm" really only meant "physical harm" and never even gave a second thought about any kind of emotional loss or mental anguish ever being brought up as a possible match for the definition.

As far as I'm concerned I am certain that the things about Paladins rather committing suicide than killing an innocent or a husbands insurmountable grief over murdering a loved are not only outside of RAW but well outside of even RAI.

[Yogibear41]

Check out this book:

http://paizo.com/products/btpy9n89?Monster-Classes-Pinnacle-and-Pit


has a succubus monster class in it. Shouldn't be to bad if your group is decently optimized, but if they aren't it will probably outshine an average to below average character.

On the whole CE argument point, so many alignments can be played in so many ways, just because you are CE doesn't mean you are a rampaging brute bent on destroying everything in your path. Plenty of examples of characters that are CE who also happen to be the hero/anti-hero etc.

If you read books, elric from the elric of melnibone story line is CE but also the hero of the story.

If you play video games Kratos from god of war is CE as well, and he is still the hero/anti-hero.

[GrayDeath]

Check out this book:

http://paizo.com/products/btpy9n89?Monster-Classes-Pinnacle-and-Pit


has a succubus monster class in it. Shouldn't be to bad if your group is decently optimized, but if they aren't it will probably outshine an average to below average character.

On the whole CE argument point, so many alignments can be played in so many ways, just because you are CE doesn't mean you are a rampaging brute bent on destroying everything in your path. Plenty of examples of characters that are CE who also happen to be the hero/anti-hero etc.

If you read books, elric from the elric of melnibone story line is CE but also the hero of the story.

If you play video games Kratos from god of war is CE as well, and he is still the hero/anti-hero.


Someone else already recommended it.

But I usually dont buy books without checking them out first, not even for this little money, if its only for a specific Idea.

Also, Elric varies a lot. Most of the Time he fights Chaos, and tries to be less evil, and fails, which leads me to usually put him in the lower right quadrant, seamlessly shifting between anything between TN and CE.

But yeah, I know CE does not HAVE to be Drowish levels of Stupid Evil. Does not help any, as the player does not want to BE CE....

[Florian]

maybe I'm biased

Seems you are. This kind of discussion always get a bit bonkers when we're talking about "free will" (something attributed to mortals) and "outsiders" (tools created by the outer planes themselves, often out of raw soul matter without any personality).

[Quertus]

Seems you are. This kind of discussion always get a bit bonkers when we're talking about "free will" (something attributed to mortals) and "outsiders" (tools created by the outer planes themselves, often out of raw soul matter without any personality).

But remember, in at least one of the editions, demons were so dedicated to Chaos that they'd randomly become Chaotic Good. So... Take their alignment with a grain of salt.

[Crake]

Seems you are. This kind of discussion always get a bit bonkers when we're talking about "free will" (something attributed to mortals) and "outsiders" (tools created by the outer planes themselves, often out of raw soul matter without any personality).

Consider it more like instinct. Mortals have instincts, some of them quite intense and hard to overcome. For mortals, breathing is an instinct, seeking food and water when hungry is an instinct, but for a demon, being evil is an instinct. It's something they do naturally. They still have the free will to do what they will, but a human has the free will to starve themselves, or hold their breath. Most don't though.

I once saw someone post the notion that fiends, literally creatures of evil incarnate, would actually be made physically ill from performing good acts, the same way a human eating off food would be, simply because such a thing is so counter to their entire being.

[Tvtyrant]

Somewhat unrelated, but I love the suggestion of an Ur Priest Succubus. She has moved on from draining mortals to draining gods.

[Crake]

Somewhat unrelated, but I love the suggestion of an Ur Priest Succubus. She has moved on from draining mortals to draining gods.

I have a trio of binder/ur-priest/tenebrous apostates in my setting. The three classes actually fit together so damn perfectly it's mind boggling. Of course, I use some homebrew to allow the succubus to gestalt the binder 5/ur-priest 2/tenebrous apostate 5 with succubus HD6/LA6, which ends up at an ECL/CR of 15 by my homebrew's rules, thanks for reminding me, because it could help OP a lot for this issue.

It's actually a higher CR than a flat, leveled succubus (which would only have a CR of 13), despite being weaker (since the HD isn't added ontop, it's added to the side, so it's not 18HD, it's only 12HD), but it's ECL is significantly lower than the 24 that it otherwise would be. I think if there's an 11 level difference between CR and ECL, there's an issue.

@OP if you're interested, check out my sig, it's got the rules there, if you have any questions, send me a PM. The system was designed to allow players to play monstrous characters far more easily, and alongside other players, while also allowing players who are interested in doing so the option to gestalt alongside other party members.

[Tvtyrant]

I have a trio of binder/ur-priest/tenebrous apostates in my setting. The three classes actually fit together so damn perfectly it's mind boggling.

It is a stat and fluff win there. Interesting how that is the opposite way of doing evil atheists from Ethergaunts.

[Crake]

It is a stat and fluff win there. Interesting how that is the opposite way of doing evil atheists from Ethergaunts.

Yeah, they're three of my favourite NPCs in my setting, though I play them all Evil with a capital E. I actually also threw 6 levels of the Fiend of X prestige classes on each of them, so one of them is a fiend of corruption, another a fiend of blasphemy, and the last a fiend of possession, something to differentiate the three of them. They each specialize in corrupting different kinds of mortals, the blasphemy one focuses on mass corruption of weak mortals, the fiend of corruption focuses on the harder to corrupt, and more valuable souls, while the fiend of possession goes after the more "unbreakable" souls, forcing them to commit evil and breaking them through making them watch helplessly as their body and powers are used against those they love.

[Dragolord]

I realise that this is both on- and off-topic, but couldn't he just play a tiefling Beguiler with no standards?

[ericgrau]

Well, seems my question overall was a useful one, not just for our group. :P


At the moment we are debating between taking the Succubus as is but with LA 3 (and allowing Buyoff of one LA each at ECL 13 and 18) or doing the CLass version from the last page.

But we still are not fixed in any way, so keep the suggestions coming. :)


Oh, and as for the CE part: he himself would prefer not to be CE as he wants an atypical Succubus mind-wise, but then again, you all showed many possibilities for that, so that part can be considered clearly answered.
I'm against buyoff for most races, but for the Succubus it actually makes sense because it is special ability heavy (in addition to reducing LA right from the beginning). Or skip the buyoff rules and just further reduce LA at high level yourself. Either way.

Based on the special ability levels by ECL 15 you should start reducing LA. And no sooner than ECL 9. My guess is towards the upper end of that range. And eventually all LA should be gone, though that may or may not be before ECL 20. One LA each at 13 and 18 as you say probably isn't far off.

[GrayDeath]

I realise that this is both on- and off-topic, but couldn't he just play a tiefling Beguiler with no standards?

Read my post on WHY he wants to play one.

A Tiefling Beguiler fills one of 3 points partially, the other not at all, so while this is a very nice class race combo NORMALLY, it is of no help whatsoever for this thread. ;)

@LA: I thought so too. Seems the easiest solution sof ar, still, cant talk it over with the otehr GM until the weekend, so: keep it coming! :)