I'm posting about an event that occurred in our last game--and then a subsequent email from our DM. I'm curious how others would rule in this situation. I'm a player who think DMs absolutely have a right to make a call as they see fit. However, we do sometimes lobby for a certain outcome if we feel the rules allow it. 

We are playing through some of the "extra" missions in Storm King's Thunder after having completed the overall main quest. Cleaning up the loose ends of the other rebellious giants on behalf of Lord Hecaton. Our party of 4 plus one ally was in the Hill Giant chief's longhouse, having brought a small herd of cattle as a gift of food in order to help us lobby her. We were attempting to convince her to talk to Hecaton rather than continue rebelling against the ordining. It seemed to be going pretty well until she just said, screw you guys and sicced her crew on us.

I cast Charm Monster on the Chief, and she completely whiffed the save so I cried out immediately for her to tell her crew to stand down, and we should continue talking. She called them off, and I convinced her to just go talk to Hecaton. She blew her conch shell and was teleported away. We left peacefully after that.

Later, our DM sent an email saying that he revisited how Charm Monster would work, and thinks it should have gone differently. Although the Chief would see ME as a friend, she would not have seen any of my allies as a friend. So she would have told them to not attack me but to keep attacking the rest of my party. I think I likely could have still convinced her to blow the conch shell a few rounds later, so the end result would probably have been the same. However, he changed his mind after the fact...for future reference if I used the spell again in a similar way in the future.

Would Charm Monster on a leader cause them to agree to cease attacking a whole party when requested to do so by their new best buddy? Or would they tell their troops to lay off just the caster of the spell and keep attacking the rest of them? What do you think? 

Quote from Lyxen >>

Honestly, it should not be a change from the DM's part, he is right, and the spell is pretty explicit: "The charmed creature is friendly to you." So that does not include your friends, and the Chief could very well have told her minions to slaughter your friends and spare you because she likes you, but only you.... And it might also be that the minions realise that you have cast a spell and charmed her and target you anyway. Or just make "an honest mistake", because they are chaotic for example.

Another thing for your DM to consider is that the spell lasts only one hour, and then: "When the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you." This means that it is very possible that she does not do what you ended up discussing because she realises that she was tricked.

Charm spells are very powerful, but are not necessarily good solutions long term and even short term... They are always better when there is no one around, and subtle spell is a very, very good option for them as well.

Good to know. They were all kind of dumb...(Hill Giants) so they likely had no idea what was going on. She was easy to convince once charmed so it only took a few minutes to get rid of her. In this case, blowing the magic conch spell teleported her to the king's HQ so she was totally out of the picture at that point. King Hecaton would set her straight. Or just straight up slaughter her for her rebellion. 

Quote from Lyxen >>

Quote from AGreaterMonster>>

Quote from Lyxen>>

Honestly, it should not be a change from the DM's part, he is right, and the spell is pretty explicit: "The charmed creature is friendly to you." So that does not include your friends, and the Chief could very well have told her minions to slaughter your friends and spare you because she likes you, but only you.... And it might also be that the minions realise that you have cast a spell and charmed her and target you anyway. Or just make "an honest mistake", because they are chaotic for example.

Another thing for your DM to consider is that the spell lasts only one hour, and then: "When the spell ends, the creature knows it was charmed by you." This means that it is very possible that she does not do what you ended up discussing because she realises that she was tricked.

Charm spells are very powerful, but are not necessarily good solutions long term and even short term... They are always better when there is no one around, and subtle spell is a very, very good option for them as well.

Good to know. They were all kind of dumb...(Hill Giants) so they likely had no idea what was going on.

That's what I surmised, which is why I did not insist on that point, but you should be careful casting it amongst troops who can think a bit more than hill giants... :)

She was easy to convince once charmed so it only took a few minutes to get rid of her. In this case, blowing the magic conch spell teleported her to the king's HQ so she was totally out of the picture at that point. King Hecaton would set her straight. Or just straight up slaughter her for her rebellion. 

The DM will probably know best what happens at this stage, but you might remind him about the one hour limit and the fact that she will remember being charmed, it could create interesting developments anyway... :)

 

..the Chief is supposed to be the LARGEST Hill Giant in history. But also the most obese. She weighed 22,000 lbs. She couldn't move off her cart. So basically she was going to show up at King Hecaton's court like a beached whale LOL. Thanks for the tips, I'll definitely have to be thoughtful in future uses. 

Sure charm monster only makes her friendly toward you, but you would have to be pretty twisted chaotic evil to try to kill your friend's allies.

And given the charmed condition, I imagine you can easily convince her to spare your friends anyway.

Yes the DM is always right, but we'd like them to be righter.

It would be a situational thing if I were your DM.  What did I think of the relationship you had before the spell was cast?  What did I think of the party's relationship with the boss?  Exactly what did you say?  What are the real motivations of the boss?  How do I think the boss would have treated another friend in a similar situation, one that didn't need to use a Charm spell to enjoy the same level of trust with the boss?

I'd have to know more about your situation to understand why the chief went that way to begin with, and at the end of the day this would only be some thoughts on how I might handle it as your DM.

I suspect you have friends that have their own "click".  How would you treat your friend's friends in a similar situation?

Quote from DxJxC >>

Sure charm monster only makes her friendly toward you, but you would have to be pretty twisted chaotic evil to try to kill your friend's allies.

And given the charmed condition, I imagine you can easily convince her to spare your friends anyway.

That's what I had though too. Although Hill Giants are considered Chaotic Evil so it's possible she would have attacked my friends anyway...that's what my DM decided in retrospect that he should have done.

Quote from Kotath >>

I think it should not give an automatic acceptance of any 'stand down' request, but would allow a persuasion roll, likely at disadvantage. Unless the party had killed any giants or showed no signs of standing down themselves. Now if the player got the party to stand down / fight only defensively first? Maybe? 

On the other hand, the wording of the spell is "If it fails the saving throw, it is charmed by you until the spell ends or until you or your companions do anything harmful to it." Now does the fact the rest of the party are fighting and presumably harming the Chief's people count as 'harmful to the Chief?' Arguably, yes (given that they are subjects of and therefore resources of the Chief) and therefore there is an argument the spell should be immediately broken, let alone denial of that request to stand down her forces. 

We had not attacked back yet, I was first in the initiative order...and I'm a very persuasive Druid so I usually have very good rolls through. I also have one of the legendary Bard Instruments that imparts disadvantage on the Charm Monster saving through. She was pretty much toast, so I understand why the DM felt he gave up the attack too easily. The rolls were lucky in that I had the first action so hit the Chief w/ Charm Monster then the Chief was up second and had the opportunity to either call off the assault or tell them to spare me only. At the time, the DM had her call it off. Regret set in later. We had not yet done anything harmful at that point.

Quote from Lyxen >>

Quote from Kotath>>

I think it should not give an automatic acceptance of any 'stand down' request, but would allow a persuasion roll, likely at disadvantage. Unless the party had killed any giants or showed no signs of standing down themselves. Now if the player got the party to stand down / fight only defensively first? Maybe? 

Killed giants, harmed giants, insulted giants, done nothing yet, there are so many possible nuances here that only the DM can tell the exact effect, it's again one of those cases where only the DM can tell and his ruling must be respected.

On the other hand, the wording of the spell is "If it fails the saving throw, it is charmed by you until the spell ends or until you or your companions do anything harmful to it." Now does the fact the rest of the party are fighting and presumably harming the Chief's people count as 'harmful to the Chief?' Arguably, yes (given that they are subjects of and therefore resources of the Chief) and therefore there is an argument the spell should be immediately broken, let alone denial of that request to stand down her forces. 

 
I mostly agree with this, just wanted to point out that, in suggestion, the "harmful" is part of that sentence: "Asking the creature to stab itself, throw itself onto a spear, immolate itself, or do some other obviously harmful act ends the spell."

So again, it is a question of interpretation and only the DM really knows about the situation, how the various creature feel towards each other and the part, it's just that it could be argued that "harmful to the chief" could really mean directly and obviously harmful to it rather than to her cohorts. So, depending on all of the factors, it might be that it breaks the spell immediately, that it is subject to a social roll, which might be with advantage because of the char, or just normal because there is a disadvantage imposed by the situation with the cohorts, or do nothing at all.

The initiative roll was definitely in my favor in the way it went down. We hadn't returned attacks yet. 

Quote from MusicScout >>

Yes the DM is always right, but we'd like them to be righter.

It would be a situational thing if I were your DM.  What did I think of the relationship you had before the spell was cast?  What did I think of the party's relationship with the boss?  Exactly what did you say?  What are the real motivations of the boss?  How do I think the boss would have treated another friend in a similar situation, one that didn't need to use a Charm spell to enjoy the same level of trust with the boss?

I'd have to know more about your situation to understand why the chief went that way to begin with, and at the end of the day this would only be some thoughts on how I might handle it as your DM.

I suspect you have friends that have their own "click".  How would you treat your friend's friends in a similar situation?

Before the spell was cast, we were having a very reasonable conversation with the Chief. She had gulped down an entire bull, one of the dozen cattle that we had brought as a gift. I was in the process of trying to convince her that talking to the King was worth her time so that the King wouldn't seek to lay her town to waste with bolts of lightning from the sky. It was a fairly rationale discussion until she just said something about hating the King and the ordining and screw you guys...ATTACK THEM! I guess her chaotic side came out? I felt up until then that I had a shot at convincing her that it was in her best interest to talk to him. 

After I charmed her...then she gave in and accepted that it was good advice. 

In my opinion, the "kicker" to using Charm Monster like this is what happens when the spell wears off. I think "the spell worked now, but you may pay for it later" has much more dramatic tension and fun than "the spell didn't work." So I tend to grant some leeway with the effects if they seem reasonable.

I think there are some circumstances in play. If you came to bargain and talked a while and then they attacked you at the order of their leader, then it would make sense that a charmed leader might call her subjects off your allies to hear you out. If you had run in and initiated combat and then charmed her halfway through the battle, or charmed her and then let your allies beat on the giants for a round before asking her to call them off, or charmed a random minion and expected him to call off everyone else, I'd likely have ruled differently.

Quote from scatterbraind >>

In my opinion, the "kicker" to using Charm Monster like this is what happens when the spell wears off. I think "the spell worked now, but you may pay for it later" has much more dramatic tension and fun than "the spell didn't work." So I tend to grant some leeway with the effects if they seem reasonable.

I think there are some circumstances in play. If you came to bargain and talked a while and then they attacked you at the order of their leader, then it would make sense that a charmed leader might call her subjects off your allies to hear you out. If you had run in and initiated combat and then charmed her halfway through the battle, or charmed her and then let your allies beat on the giants for a round before asking her to call them off, or charmed a random minion and expected him to call off everyone else, I'd likely have ruled differently.

Yes, that makes sense to me. In this case, my situation was perfect because the magic conch shell actually teleports the user to the court of the King. So I literally delivered the rebellious chief to the King to get his comeuppance. I mean, the King might possibly decide to give the Chief a second chance, but I doubt it. He had told us that we were free to either push them to speak with the King and accept the ordining or just end their lives. He was mighty pissed about the chaos. If I had to guess, the king probably had his guards chop up the 22,000 lb chief and toss his body parts into a bonfire. But...now I know my DM won't allow it to play out this way again so when we approach the Stone Giant cave, I won't be able to pull this ploy again. 

Quote from Lyxen >>

Quote from AGreaterMonster>>

Before the spell was cast, we were having a very reasonable conversation with the Chief. She had gulped down an entire bull, one of the dozen cattle that we had brought as a gift. I was in the process of trying to convince her that talking to the King was worth her time so that the King wouldn't seek to lay her town to waste with bolts of lightning from the sky. It was a fairly rationale discussion until she just said something about hating the King and the ordining and screw you guys...ATTACK THEM! I guess her chaotic side came out? I felt up until then that I had a shot at convincing her that it was in her best interest to talk to him. 

After I charmed her...then she gave in and accepted that it was good advice. 

I know that they are dumb, but especially with casting with an Instrument of the Bard at that point in time, you have to be careful because it would be very clear that you have cast an enchantment for ehr to change her mood that rapidly.

 

It would have been more obvious that I was casting a spell if I had done it during conversation. But the order of action was all after the Chief yelled, "KILL THEM!" So then we rolled initiative, I was first and strummed my instrument cast the spell and charmed her. She actually would have failed even without disadvantage. Terrible rolls. So then I shout, "Call off your Soldiers we're friends, let's talk more!" Next up in the initiative order was the Chief.  Although her troops where confused by her changing of the command, I think given they are pretty stupid, they just accepted it and did what they were told.  

Quote from Kotath >>

Quote from AGreaterMonster >>

Quote from Lyxen >>

Quote from AGreaterMonster>>

Before the spell was cast, we were having a very reasonable conversation with the Chief. She had gulped down an entire bull, one of the dozen cattle that we had brought as a gift. I was in the process of trying to convince her that talking to the King was worth her time so that the King wouldn't seek to lay her town to waste with bolts of lightning from the sky. It was a fairly rationale discussion until she just said something about hating the King and the ordining and screw you guys...ATTACK THEM! I guess her chaotic side came out? I felt up until then that I had a shot at convincing her that it was in her best interest to talk to him. 

After I charmed her...then she gave in and accepted that it was good advice. 

I know that they are dumb, but especially with casting with an Instrument of the Bard at that point in time, you have to be careful because it would be very clear that you have cast an enchantment for ehr to change her mood that rapidly.

 

 

It would have been more obvious that I was casting a spell if I had done it during conversation. But the order of action was all after the Chief yelled, "KILL THEM!" So then we rolled initiative, I was first and strummed my instrument cast the spell and charmed her. She actually would have failed even without disadvantage. Terrible rolls. So then I shout, "Call off your Soldiers we're friends, let's talk more!" Next up in the initiative order was the Chief.  Although her troops where confused by her changing of the command, I think given they are pretty stupid, they just accepted it and did what they were told.  

 

 

That all sounds pretty reasonable. And the fun thing about an instrument of the Bards is that the casting can be disguised as simply performing music normally

Indeed! It's very handy, and one of the primary reasons I really zoned in on having some Charm spells in my arsenal. I'm still getting used to playing spellcasters like this Bard and a Druid (that I'm playing in a different campaign) that don't get to change their spells every day. I played Clerics previously...you really get spoiled in being able to pick new spells every day and not having to be locked in to your choices at each level up. 

Yes, she is only magically charmed to you, but you would then have advantage to persuade her to spare your allies.

Given that you can say "Wait, spare my friends!" in about 6 seconds, I would say you could do this as part of your turn as a free action.

Now, your DM might wait until the Chief's turn to resolve that, but honestly a DM can stop combat at any time and engage in diplomacy, which your spell + cry would have called for. At least, I would have ruled that the Chief at least halts her forces to hear you out since she regards you as friendly. Attacking your allies would only resume if you failed to convince her.

The spell says " The charmed creature is friendly to you." When we look up Social Interactions in the DMG, there is guidance on the difficulty for interacting with "friendly" creatures. While all of these are guidelines, Wizards is pretty particular about the language it chooses. They could have written "nice", "pleasant", etc but they chose "friendly" probably to indicate that there is specific advice for this.

I do not know enough about the module to determine if what you were asking was a no risk/sacrifice, minor risk/sacrifice, or major risk/sacrifice. But the suggested DCs are 0, 10, and 20 respectively for friendly creatures.

Quote from Praxis8 >>

Yes, she is only magically charmed to you, but you would then have advantage to persuade her to spare your allies.

Given that you can say "Wait, spare my friends!" in about 6 seconds, I would say you could do this as part of your turn as a free action.

Now, your DM might wait until the Chief's turn to resolve that, but honestly a DM can stop combat at any time and engage in diplomacy, which your spell + cry would have called for. At least, I would have ruled that the Chief at least halts her forces to hear you out since she regards you as friendly. Attacking your allies would only resume if you failed to convince her.

The spell says " The charmed creature is friendly to you." When we look up Social Interactions in the DMG, there is guidance on the difficulty for interacting with "friendly" creatures. While all of these are guidelines, Wizards is pretty particular about the language it chooses. They could have written "nice", "pleasant", etc but they chose "friendly" probably to indicate that there is specific advice for this.

I do not know enough about the module to determine if what you were asking was a no risk/sacrifice, minor risk/sacrifice, or major risk/sacrifice. But the suggested DCs are 0, 10, and 20 respectively for friendly creatures.

That sounds logical.