If I were to cast Charm person on someone, then attempt to cast Feign death on them (While informing them that I am going to cast it, and that they need to be willing to have it cast upon them), would it count as them being willing to have it cast on them, and would the effect go though?
Per RAW, it's a bit unclear, but I would say yes. I would also say that it would take some convincing, and would not work as a combat tactic, for instance.
If you want to go extremely by the book, you could simply try to persuade the character to accept to have the spell cast on himself, and you get advantage on the skill check for that.
Casting Charm Person results in the target regarding you "as a friendly acquaintance". Ask yourself; If one of your friendly acquaintances came up to you and asked if you were willing to be put into a "cataleptic state that is indistinguishable from death" for the next hour, would you be willing? Personally, no. I would need to be convinced of the benefit of placing myself in such a compromised position - and convincing me would not be easy, even for a very friendly acquaintance. Good roleplay coming up with a reason to convince the target, plus a good roll on persuasion/deception, it might work. In combat? Not a chance.
I'm with RegentCorreon. If you can charm someone, you have a reasonable chance of convincing them to go along with it (ability check), but it's definitely not guaranteed. And being in combat makes it much harder--perhaps impossible.
That’s fair, so if it's a buff like Haste or something similar, then they would probably accept out of combat, but if it puts them in a comprising position like Feign death or something similar, especially in combat, it probably wouldn't work. Thanks for the input
Although, I think phrasing it as "Is it ok for me to cast a spell on you that will give you resistance to all physical damage?" or something similar, provided you make a successful deception or persuasion check, would sound reasonable enough for it to work?
The part that some folks might be missing is the target thinks the caster is friendly. But if the caster is part of a party, the target may still view them with hostility so will absolutely not accept a spell to be cast on them. Charm person doesn't make them stupid, they still know your friends mean them harm, so will not compromise their safety.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
A charmed creature still determine if its willing or not to do anything. Being friendly doesn't automatically make people willing, but it may facilitate it.
charmed and charm person is not mind control (which oddly enough would also disqualify "willing" IMO) but it does place a creature in a suggestible state, since they will regard you as friendly and you will have advantage on social interaction (of which persuasion would be considered). Outside of combat, I'd probably allow Charisma (persuasion) or similar check to convince them to be the willing target of a spell like feign death, but other more beneficial spells might not need a check at all.
In combat when the creature is surrounded by other perceived hostiles, it might be a much harder check (or checks), couched in the promise that you (the caster) would defend them. so a higher DC persuasion followed by a deception check would be appropriate at my table for that.
charmed and charm person is not mind control (which oddly enough would also disqualify "willing" IMO) but it does place a creature in a suggestible state, since they will regard you as friendly and you will have advantage on social interaction (of which persuasion would be considered). Outside of combat, I'd probably allow Charisma (persuasion) or similar check to convince them to be the willing target of a spell like feign death, but other more beneficial spells might not need a check at all.
In combat when the creature is surrounded by other perceived hostiles, it might be a much harder check (or checks), couched in the promise that you (the caster) would defend them. so a higher DC persuasion followed by a deception check would be appropriate at my table for that.
Charm Person is literally mind control - it controls the target to regard the caster as a friendly acquaintance. Charmed is also mind control - it prevents the charmed from attacking the charmer or targeting them with harmful abilities or magical effects.
The core of why this matters is that you're absolutely right about the core of how the spell would interact with "willing". Outside of combat - which will often require you to come up with a way to hide the casting of the spell - it will seriously buff your ability to Persuade someone to be willing, as coercing them to be friendly, rather than indifferent, effectively reduces the DC by 10 (DMG p245) on top of giving advantage on the check. Inside combat, it depends on the target's Arcana check and prior circumstances - if it recognizes the spell, you being a friendly acquaintance won't really help you get them to accept the spell, just as you wouldn't let an ally cast that on you during combat normally, but if it doesn't, then a friendly acquaintance is casting a spell of unknown nature on them, so the question is what they remember this acquaintance doing in the past. A friendly acquaintance who's usually a jerk to you, you're not going to accept spells from, just like you would assume that one friend from high school who loved punching you in the groin is probably going to do so again, and you need to focus on combat right now. A friendly acquaintance who's never done anything to you, you have no reason to refuse spells from.
charmed and charm person is not mind control (which oddly enough would also disqualify "willing" IMO) but it does place a creature in a suggestible state, since they will regard you as friendly and you will have advantage on social interaction (of which persuasion would be considered). Outside of combat, I'd probably allow Charisma (persuasion) or similar check to convince them to be the willing target of a spell like feign death, but other more beneficial spells might not need a check at all.
In combat when the creature is surrounded by other perceived hostiles, it might be a much harder check (or checks), couched in the promise that you (the caster) would defend them. so a higher DC persuasion followed by a deception check would be appropriate at my table for that.
Charm Person is literally mind control - it controls the target to regard the caster as a friendly acquaintance. Charmed is also mind control - it prevents the charmed from attacking the charmer or targeting them with harmful abilities or magical effects.
The core of why this matters is that you're absolutely right about the core of how the spell would interact with "willing". Outside of combat - which will often require you to come up with a way to hide the casting of the spell - it will seriously buff your ability to Persuade someone to be willing, as coercing them to be friendly, rather than indifferent, effectively reduces the DC by 10 (DMG p245) on top of giving advantage on the check. Inside combat, it depends on the target's Arcana check and prior circumstances - if it recognizes the spell, you being a friendly acquaintance won't really help you get them to accept the spell, just as you wouldn't let an ally cast that on you during combat normally, but if it doesn't, then a friendly acquaintance is casting a spell of unknown nature on them, so the question is what they remember this acquaintance doing in the past. A friendly acquaintance who's usually a jerk to you, you're not going to accept spells from, just like you would assume that one friend from high school who loved punching you in the groin is probably going to do so again, and you need to focus on combat right now. A friendly acquaintance who's never done anything to you, you have no reason to refuse spells from.
To me, actual mind control is more akin to the dominate spells, like dominate monster, where you actively direct the actions of another being and they have no control to stop you. Those spells would not be "willing" at my table because it is not the being in question making the decision. Charm Person is more like glamouring (at least in the context of the OP question); the changing perception of others and influencing mind, but not actually controlling it. They are still making decisions for themselves, but their perception of others has been altered to regard the caster differently than they normally would. It's functionally no different than a person with poor sight and hearing mistaking the caster for a different being they are friendly with; the lack of (or altered) perception creates a situation where the target is not acting they way they might, but it isn't actually controlling the targets choices (except if they try to harm the caster)
It's a semantics question, but an important one regarding "willing" and the ability to choose to do something. "Willing" implies 1) the ability to make a choice, and 2) the ability to make the choice you want to make. A charmed creature is only limited by #2 in regards to harming the caster, and charm person changes nothing about that. The dominate spells, however, strips #1 from the target (and #2 by default), because they can't make any choices at all while the caster is controlling them.
A charmed creature still determine if its willing or not to do anything. Being friendly doesn't automatically make people willing, but it may facilitate it.
Yeah. The charmed condition, outside of specific additional effects some abilities/spells that charm also apply, only makes the charmed target unable to attack/target you with harmful effects and give advantage on social checks with them. And then charm person has them regard you as a friendly acquaintance. Not a loved one, not a best lifelong friend, not a comrade in arms you've been to hell and back with, nothing that implies implicit blind trust in you. So something as drastic as feign death is probably outside of the scope of what a friendly acquaintance would allow, advantage or not.
Dominate person? I'd allow it. Charm person I probably wouldn't have help with that unless the target was already someone that trusts you enough to consider it (to allow persuasion) already and then give you advantage on it from the charm spell.
Now if you want to use deception and tell them you're casting something DIFFERENT and less drastic, that might work....depending on where the DM falls with the meaning of 'willing' on feign death, ie can you trick them into willingly accepting the spell by lying about what it will do, or do they have to understand what they're in for?
Now if you want to use deception and tell them you're casting something DIFFERENT and less drastic, that might work....depending on where the DM falls with the meaning of 'willing' on feign death, ie can you trick them into willingly accepting the spell by lying about what it will do, or do they have to understand what they're in for?
You won't find many tables actually requiring the target to have full knowledge of the spell in order to be willing - PCs rely on being able to buff each other in combat without a whole conversation about what spell is being slung. In general, people treat "willing" as if the spell asks the target "do you allow this?", and the target has to answer "yes" to qualify as willing. Deep weeds like "do they really understand what yes means, here?" are typically taken to be beyond the scope of magical mind-reading. A much finer question is whether a creature totally unable to know a spell is being cast on it (e.g. by being unconscious or petrified, but there are other ways - e.g. Subtle Spell + blinded for a spell that doesn't require Touch) can be offered the spell prompt (if not, they're automatically unwilling, since they can't answer yes).
Dominate person? I'd allow it. Charm person I probably wouldn't have help with that unless the target was already someone that trusts you enough to consider it (to allow persuasion) already and then give you advantage on it from the charm spell.
A Dominate person does its best to obey your commands, so it would even be less counting as willing (not concensual) but forced or compelled by magic to do so.
Willing; of or relating to the will or power of choosing
Dominate person? I'd allow it. Charm person I probably wouldn't have help with that unless the target was already someone that trusts you enough to consider it (to allow persuasion) already and then give you advantage on it from the charm spell.
A Dominate person does its best to obey your commands, so it would even be less counting as willing (not concensual) but forced or compelled by magic to do so.
Willing; of or relating to the will or power of choosing
Dominate Person makes the target effectively willing. Nothing in the spell even implies they know they are being controlled, at least while the spell is still running.
The spell doesn't say the target is effectively willing. Willing in plain english is having the power of choosing, exactly the contrary of being dominated into doing something.
Dominate person? I'd allow it. Charm person I probably wouldn't have help with that unless the target was already someone that trusts you enough to consider it (to allow persuasion) already and then give you advantage on it from the charm spell.
A Dominate person does its best to obey your commands, so it would even be less counting as willing (not concensual) but forced or compelled by magic to do so.
Willing; of or relating to the will or power of choosing
Dominate Person makes the target effectively willing. Nothing in the spell even implies they know they are being controlled, at least while the spell is still running. They do not even get a new save at all unless they take damage. Kill their beloved family while their family sleeps? Obeyed without resistance, question or granting them any new save chance(s). Being ordered to accept a spell being cast on them is well within that parameter. Now if the spell does damage to them, they would get a fresh save, but after the damage.
It isn't Charm Person. With Dominate you literally can order someone to jump off a cliff or to jump into a dragon's jaws.
It's not "effectively" willing, its only "observably" willing, in that you can observe their body obeying. But observations of body can be wrong, because "willing" is a state of mind, not body. the requirement of "willing" is not from the observation of the caster who (barring detect thoughts) cannot know the targets mind, it is from the DM or player, who knows the NPC (or PC) mind and body
Charm Person can make someone "effectively" willing, because while they might not have made that choice in "normal" (ie non-charmed) circumstances, their mind is still the one making the choice; the only difference is in the perception of the people/persons around them is promoting one choice more effectively.
The spell doesn't say the target is effectively willing. Willing in plain english is having the power of choosing, exactly the contrary of being dominated into doing something.
Dominate Person does literally nothing if it can't force the target to be willing to do things:
"You can use this telepathic link to issue commands to the creature while you are conscious (no action required), which it does its best to obey."
If you order the target to pick up a pizza and they aren't willing to pick up the pizza, they won't pick up the pizza, because willing means "prompt to act or respond".
If you order the target to be willing to try a slice of pizza, the spell requires they do their best to obey, which requires that they accordingly become willing, because willing is consent-based - becoming willing is as simple as making a choice.
You don't even need Dominate Person - Suggestion likewise has to cover "willing" or the spell might as well not exist.
The spell doesn't say the target is effectively willing. Willing in plain english is having the power of choosing, exactly the contrary of being dominated into doing something.
Dominate Person does literally nothing if it can't force the target to be willing to do things:
"You can use this telepathic link to issue commands to the creature while you are conscious (no action required), which it does its best to obey."
If you order the target to pick up a pizza and they aren't willing to pick up the pizza, they won't pick up the pizza, because willing means "prompt to act or respond".
If you order the target to be willing to try a slice of pizza, the spell requires they do their best to obey, which requires that they accordingly become willing, because willing is consent-based - becoming willing is as simple as making a choice.
You don't even need Dominate Person - Suggestion likewise has to cover "willing" or the spell might as well not exist.
That spell overrides will, it makes it irrelevant. It doesn’t make you willing.
The spell doesn't say the target is effectively willing. Willing in plain english is having the power of choosing, exactly the contrary of being dominated into doing something.
Dominate Person does literally nothing if it can't force the target to be willing to do things.
Can the target refuse to obey a command? If not it's not what i'd call willing. It works because it's compelled to obey commands, not because it force them to be willing.
The spell doesn't say the target is effectively willing. Willing in plain english is having the power of choosing, exactly the contrary of being dominated into doing something.
Dominate Person does literally nothing if it can't force the target to be willing to do things:
"You can use this telepathic link to issue commands to the creature while you are conscious (no action required), which it does its best to obey."
If you order the target to pick up a pizza and they aren't willing to pick up the pizza, they won't pick up the pizza, because willing means "prompt to act or respond".
If you order the target to be willing to try a slice of pizza, the spell requires they do their best to obey, which requires that they accordingly become willing, because willing is consent-based - becoming willing is as simple as making a choice.
You don't even need Dominate Person - Suggestion likewise has to cover "willing" or the spell might as well not exist.
I also find it interesting that you selected the 1 definition out of 4 that doesn't specifically mention a state of mind. Here are the other three:
Inclined or Favorably Disposed (note that this is what charm person would make you)
Done, Borne, or Accepted by choice or without reluctance
of or relating to the will or the power of choosing.
What aspect of dominate person would at all come close to any of the above three? Nothing in the spell dictates your disposition, nothing in the spell indicates that the targeted creature actually has choice (it must obey, or it is actively controlled like a puppet, neither of those imply free will or choice), and the point of the spell is to specifically override the will. I'll even note that the order you gave in #2 is not the targets choice, you made it for them.
Should a similar order to #2 be given to a dominated creature regarding accepting a spell that required a willing target, the spell would still fail.
If I were to cast Charm person on someone, then attempt to cast Feign death on them (While informing them that I am going to cast it, and that they need to be willing to have it cast upon them), would it count as them being willing to have it cast on them, and would the effect go though?
The proud owner of over 8000 hours in Terraria.
Send help pleasePer RAW, it's a bit unclear, but I would say yes. I would also say that it would take some convincing, and would not work as a combat tactic, for instance.
If you want to go extremely by the book, you could simply try to persuade the character to accept to have the spell cast on himself, and you get advantage on the skill check for that.
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
Casting Charm Person results in the target regarding you "as a friendly acquaintance". Ask yourself; If one of your friendly acquaintances came up to you and asked if you were willing to be put into a "cataleptic state that is indistinguishable from death" for the next hour, would you be willing? Personally, no. I would need to be convinced of the benefit of placing myself in such a compromised position - and convincing me would not be easy, even for a very friendly acquaintance. Good roleplay coming up with a reason to convince the target, plus a good roll on persuasion/deception, it might work. In combat? Not a chance.
I'm with RegentCorreon. If you can charm someone, you have a reasonable chance of convincing them to go along with it (ability check), but it's definitely not guaranteed. And being in combat makes it much harder--perhaps impossible.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
That’s fair, so if it's a buff like Haste or something similar, then they would probably accept out of combat, but if it puts them in a comprising position like Feign death or something similar, especially in combat, it probably wouldn't work. Thanks for the input
The proud owner of over 8000 hours in Terraria.
Send help pleaseAlthough, I think phrasing it as "Is it ok for me to cast a spell on you that will give you resistance to all physical damage?" or something similar, provided you make a successful deception or persuasion check, would sound reasonable enough for it to work?
The part that some folks might be missing is the target thinks the caster is friendly. But if the caster is part of a party, the target may still view them with hostility so will absolutely not accept a spell to be cast on them. Charm person doesn't make them stupid, they still know your friends mean them harm, so will not compromise their safety.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
A charmed creature still determine if its willing or not to do anything. Being friendly doesn't automatically make people willing, but it may facilitate it.
charmed and charm person is not mind control (which oddly enough would also disqualify "willing" IMO) but it does place a creature in a suggestible state, since they will regard you as friendly and you will have advantage on social interaction (of which persuasion would be considered). Outside of combat, I'd probably allow Charisma (persuasion) or similar check to convince them to be the willing target of a spell like feign death, but other more beneficial spells might not need a check at all.
In combat when the creature is surrounded by other perceived hostiles, it might be a much harder check (or checks), couched in the promise that you (the caster) would defend them. so a higher DC persuasion followed by a deception check would be appropriate at my table for that.
Charm Person is literally mind control - it controls the target to regard the caster as a friendly acquaintance. Charmed is also mind control - it prevents the charmed from attacking the charmer or targeting them with harmful abilities or magical effects.
The core of why this matters is that you're absolutely right about the core of how the spell would interact with "willing". Outside of combat - which will often require you to come up with a way to hide the casting of the spell - it will seriously buff your ability to Persuade someone to be willing, as coercing them to be friendly, rather than indifferent, effectively reduces the DC by 10 (DMG p245) on top of giving advantage on the check. Inside combat, it depends on the target's Arcana check and prior circumstances - if it recognizes the spell, you being a friendly acquaintance won't really help you get them to accept the spell, just as you wouldn't let an ally cast that on you during combat normally, but if it doesn't, then a friendly acquaintance is casting a spell of unknown nature on them, so the question is what they remember this acquaintance doing in the past. A friendly acquaintance who's usually a jerk to you, you're not going to accept spells from, just like you would assume that one friend from high school who loved punching you in the groin is probably going to do so again, and you need to focus on combat right now. A friendly acquaintance who's never done anything to you, you have no reason to refuse spells from.
To me, actual mind control is more akin to the dominate spells, like dominate monster, where you actively direct the actions of another being and they have no control to stop you. Those spells would not be "willing" at my table because it is not the being in question making the decision. Charm Person is more like glamouring (at least in the context of the OP question); the changing perception of others and influencing mind, but not actually controlling it. They are still making decisions for themselves, but their perception of others has been altered to regard the caster differently than they normally would. It's functionally no different than a person with poor sight and hearing mistaking the caster for a different being they are friendly with; the lack of (or altered) perception creates a situation where the target is not acting they way they might, but it isn't actually controlling the targets choices (except if they try to harm the caster)
It's a semantics question, but an important one regarding "willing" and the ability to choose to do something. "Willing" implies 1) the ability to make a choice, and 2) the ability to make the choice you want to make. A charmed creature is only limited by #2 in regards to harming the caster, and charm person changes nothing about that. The dominate spells, however, strips #1 from the target (and #2 by default), because they can't make any choices at all while the caster is controlling them.
Yeah. The charmed condition, outside of specific additional effects some abilities/spells that charm also apply, only makes the charmed target unable to attack/target you with harmful effects and give advantage on social checks with them. And then charm person has them regard you as a friendly acquaintance. Not a loved one, not a best lifelong friend, not a comrade in arms you've been to hell and back with, nothing that implies implicit blind trust in you. So something as drastic as feign death is probably outside of the scope of what a friendly acquaintance would allow, advantage or not.
Dominate person? I'd allow it. Charm person I probably wouldn't have help with that unless the target was already someone that trusts you enough to consider it (to allow persuasion) already and then give you advantage on it from the charm spell.
Now if you want to use deception and tell them you're casting something DIFFERENT and less drastic, that might work....depending on where the DM falls with the meaning of 'willing' on feign death, ie can you trick them into willingly accepting the spell by lying about what it will do, or do they have to understand what they're in for?
You won't find many tables actually requiring the target to have full knowledge of the spell in order to be willing - PCs rely on being able to buff each other in combat without a whole conversation about what spell is being slung. In general, people treat "willing" as if the spell asks the target "do you allow this?", and the target has to answer "yes" to qualify as willing. Deep weeds like "do they really understand what yes means, here?" are typically taken to be beyond the scope of magical mind-reading. A much finer question is whether a creature totally unable to know a spell is being cast on it (e.g. by being unconscious or petrified, but there are other ways - e.g. Subtle Spell + blinded for a spell that doesn't require Touch) can be offered the spell prompt (if not, they're automatically unwilling, since they can't answer yes).
A Dominate person does its best to obey your commands, so it would even be less counting as willing (not concensual) but forced or compelled by magic to do so.
Willing; of or relating to the will or power of choosing
The spell doesn't say the target is effectively willing. Willing in plain english is having the power of choosing, exactly the contrary of being dominated into doing something.
It's not "effectively" willing, its only "observably" willing, in that you can observe their body obeying. But observations of body can be wrong, because "willing" is a state of mind, not body. the requirement of "willing" is not from the observation of the caster who (barring detect thoughts) cannot know the targets mind, it is from the DM or player, who knows the NPC (or PC) mind and body
Charm Person can make someone "effectively" willing, because while they might not have made that choice in "normal" (ie non-charmed) circumstances, their mind is still the one making the choice; the only difference is in the perception of the people/persons around them is promoting one choice more effectively.
Dominate Person does literally nothing if it can't force the target to be willing to do things:
"You can use this telepathic link to issue commands to the creature while you are conscious (no action required), which it does its best to obey."
Definition of willing.
So, immediate problems:
You don't even need Dominate Person - Suggestion likewise has to cover "willing" or the spell might as well not exist.
That spell overrides will, it makes it irrelevant. It doesn’t make you willing.
Can the target refuse to obey a command? If not it's not what i'd call willing. It works because it's compelled to obey commands, not because it force them to be willing.
I also find it interesting that you selected the 1 definition out of 4 that doesn't specifically mention a state of mind. Here are the other three:
What aspect of dominate person would at all come close to any of the above three? Nothing in the spell dictates your disposition, nothing in the spell indicates that the targeted creature actually has choice (it must obey, or it is actively controlled like a puppet, neither of those imply free will or choice), and the point of the spell is to specifically override the will. I'll even note that the order you gave in #2 is not the targets choice, you made it for them.
Should a similar order to #2 be given to a dominated creature regarding accepting a spell that required a willing target, the spell would still fail.