Circle of Protection Against Evil and Heroism

[Mildly Inept]

Hi there, just looking to clear up a minor rules dispute.

My character is a Paladin 6/Fist of Raziel 3. My DM claims that my permanent Circle of Protection Against Evil also prevents me from benefiting from positive mind-altering buffs such as a friendly heroism spell. I argue that this is not the case because Heroism does not actually compel me to do anything. Who has the right of it?

[Bovine Colonel]

Your DM should probably read the spell.

"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)."

[Mildly Inept]

That was my argument. I said Charm can make you dance and Heroism makes you a better dancer, but you can still choose to dance or not dance, so my Circle of Protection would not block Heroism but would block Charm. He retorted that it controls how well you dance. He says it's not fair that a caster could have a 9th level compulsion spell blocked by a 1st level spell. My counterargument is that a 9th level caster still has complete mastery of time, space, and the elements going for him, and thus it's not gamebreaking if they can't enslave my greatsword user at will. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I dunno. I think he might feel like my character is overpowered because I got phenomenal stat rolls and really optimized hitting things very hard but I mean, his character is an Incantarix, (he's subbing for a while because the GM wanted a turn to play,) so I kinda think we have differing interpretations of what is overpowered?

[Bronk]

Eeesh. It sounds like he equated 'control' with 'mind-affecting'... he must know he's wrong by now, but doesn't want to admit it.


He retorted that it controls how well you dance.

Heh. Other people's weapons control how well you can keep your hit point total maxed up, are you immune to monsters now? Sigh.


He says it's not fair that a caster could have a 9th level compulsion spell blocked by a 9th level spell.

I see what you mean there. Anyone who can cast a 9th level spell can also cast dispel magic too.

[Mildly Inept]

Sorry, typo. I meant to say he believes its unfair that a 9th level compulsion spell could be blocked by a 1st level spell like Circle of Protection vs Evil. My argument was that a wizard or cleric with access to 9th level spells has sufficient options to find a way to adapt to not being able to enslave the greatsword lady at will.

[Goaty14]

That was my argument. I said Charm can make you dance and Heroism makes you a better dancer, but you can still choose to dance or not dance, so my Circle of Protection would not block Heroism but would block Charm. He retorted that it controls how well you dance. He says it's not fair that a caster could have a 9th level compulsion spell blocked by a 9th level spell. My counterargument is that a 9th level caster still has complete mastery of time, space, and the elements going for him, and thus it's not gamebreaking if they can't enslave my greatsword user at will. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I dunno. I think he might feel like my character is overpowered because I got phenomenal stat rolls and really optimized hitting things very hard but I mean, his character is an Incantarix, (he's subbing for a while because the GM wanted a turn to play,) so I kinda think we have differing interpretations of what is overpowered?

Charm can't make you an unwitting mind-slave, for starters. That's dominate. Charming just makes you friendly to the caster. So if you'd normally dance for your friends, and the caster (of which you failed a WILL save against) asked you to dance, then you'd dance. If you don't normally dance for your friends... then you don't dance for the caster. Keep in mind not to be too stingy to the DM about what you'd normally to for friends. Oh, and that means that Charm can still work on you.

Second, if a wizard with 9th level spells really wants you to be his unwitting mind-slave, then he instead casts Mindrape (Book of Vile Darkness, page 99) which allows the caster to enter your cranium and change all of your "memories, alignment, personality, opinions", etc. The effect is instantaneous, so it isn't blocked by Protection from <Alignment>. You might as well roll up a new character at that point unless the party has access to a Wish or Miracle, 'coz that's what it's going to take to revive you from being an unwitting mind-slave.

Personally, I think protection from evil is probably as overpowered as your DM describes, especially for a 1st level spell. Even if it's a limited effect, any sort of a flat-out immunity shouldn't be doled out at level 1. Though heroism certainly works, because it doesn't make you do anything.

As an offhand note, you may want to optimize your character's to-hit much less if you don't want the DM not liking you like this. It comes up often in "I'm optimizing my character to have such a high AC he's unhittable" threads that the DM responds with sending in higher-CRed monsters to still be able to hit said character. Realistically, you should have at least a 25% chance of missing monsters, if not more.


Sorry, typo. I meant to say he believes its unfair that a 9th level compulsion spell could be blocked by a 1st level spell like Circle of Protection vs Evil. My argument was that a wizard or cleric with access to 9th level spells has sufficient options to find a way to adapt to not being able to enslave the greatsword lady at will.

The focused specialist enchanter begs to differ. You should never be able to negate an entire style of play with a single, low-level spell, "other options" be damned.

[Mildly Inept]

Yeah, Charm Person doesn't make you an unwitting slave, but I'm pretty sure the Circle still works against it.

I think I found some relevant information from the 3.5 FAQ:

What exactly does the second effect of protection from evil do, anyway?

The Sage feels your pain. While the first and third effects of protection from evil are relatively straightforward, the second is less clear. The key phrase that defines this particular effect of the spell is as follows: “ . . . the barrier blocks any attempt to . . . exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment (charm) effects and enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject . . .).”

(The spell also blocks attempts to possess the creature, but effects that accomplish this are so few as to barely be worth mentioning.)

The first part of this phrase describes the basic criteria by which the DM should judge protection from evil’s effect: If the incoming effect attempts to exercise mental control over the creature, protection from evil likely suppresses that effect. The parenthetical portion of the phrase provides two specific examples (pointed, obviously, at rules elements of the Player’s Handbook) to help judge what exactly is meant by that:

1. Enchantment (charm) effects. Simple enough--protection from evil automatically suppresses any enchantment (charm) effect, such as charm person or enthrall.
2. Enchantment (compulsion) effects that grant the caster ongoing control over the subject. This is where adjudication gets trickier, because you have to decide what “ongoing control” means. The Sage recommends a broad definition, which includes any non-instantaneous effect that prevents the target from exercising full control over its own actions.

Examples would include the obvious (such as command or dominate person), but also the less obvious, such as daze, sleep, and Tasha’s hideous laughter. Such effects would be suppressed for as long as protection from evil lasts on the target.

There are still plenty of enchantment (compulsion) effects that don’t grant the caster ongoing control over the subject. Heroism, crushing despair, mind fog, power word blind, rage, and touch of idiocy are examples. Protection from evil has no effect on such spells.

But what about mental control effects that aren’t enchantment effects, such as psionics? In such cases, the DM must use the rules and his own best judgment in concert to adjudicate the effect. Psionic powers of the telepathy discipline are the equivalent of enchantment spells, for example, and thus are affected in the same way. Nonspell effects that closely mimic enchantment spells should be treated as if they were spells of the appropriate subschool (charm or compulsion).

Anyway, thanks for the input.

[tiercel]

While Protection from/Magic Circle Against Evil is strong, it’s not “LOL Circle of Protection: Enchantment.”

Arguably PfE is a bit too strong — especially as a permanent effect — but presumably the “ongoing control” clause means that status debuffs like Bane, Confusion, Crushing Despair, Feeblemind, Hideous Laughter, Hold Person/Monster, etc will ignore PfE just fine

[Troacctid]

Heroism doesn't grant the caster any mental control over the subject, so it should be unaffected by protection from evil. I'm not sure I understand the DM's argument here—it seems like he's concerned that the spell is too strong, so he's responding by...expanding the scope of its power to include more things?

Either way, the text in the spell is actually a direct reference to the description of the Compulsion subschool in Chapter 10.

A compulsion spell forces the subject to act in some manner or changes the way her mind works. Some compulsion spells determine the subject’s actions or the effects on the subject, some compulsion spells allow you to determine the subject’s actions when you cast the spell, and others give you ongoing control over the subject.

[Mildly Inept]

I'm not sure I understand the DM's argument here—it seems like he's concerned that the spell is too strong, so he's responding by...expanding the scope of its power to include more things?

I think his take was that if the Circle blocks bad things, it has to block good things too for it to be balanced.


...but presumably the “ongoing control” clause means that status debuffs like Bane, Confusion, Crushing Despair, Feeblemind, Hideous Laughter, Hold Person/Monster, etc will ignore PfE just fine

FAQ says Tasha's Hideous Laughter would be blocked, presumably because it's a "non-instantaneous effect that prevents the target from exercising full control over its own actions." Agree on Bane, Confusion, Feeblemind, etc.

We just agreed to go by it since it's the closest thing to an official ruling we've got.

Even the FAQ said they had no earthly idea what do do with psionics, which is fine because we aren't using them anyway.

Thanks for tuning in to this week's 3.5 Constitutional Law Review.

[tiercel]

FAQ says Tasha's Hideous Laughter would be blocked, presumably because it's a "non-instantaneous effect that prevents the target from exercising full control over its own actions." Agree on Bane, Confusion, Feeblemind, etc.

We just agreed to go by it since it's the closest thing to an official ruling we've got.

Granted that the wording on PfE is open to interpretation, and you certainly want to have some sort of objective-enough ruling for a given game.... but I can't help but wonder if the logic used to argue that Hideous Laughter is blocked would also apply to Hold Person/Monster or even Confusion.

I suppose I've always seen "ongoing control" as something that is just that -- ongoing and potentially active, like the examples specifically cited (Charm, Dominate). The difference to my mind would be a spell that has a set effect, due to the spell itself, as opposed to a spell whose effect at least partially depends on how the caster chooses to direct the spell/its target AFTER casting. That's probably not a perfect line either, though...

... but it could be worse. We could be talking about adjudicating illusions!

*runs away*

[Zanos]

You can lower any special immunity you have to an incoming effect anyway.