Charm person vs. monster charm

[AxeMental]

If you had a harpy say take control of a PC (or any of the other monsters that can control PCs) would you allow an MU in the group to then cast charm person on that effected PC to regain control? Or do you think "monster charm or equiv." trumps the Charm Person spell. Kind of reminds me of two clerics turning and controlling undead against each other back and forth.

[deathsdj]

No. Monster charm is better than a charm person spell.

Cheers!

MJW

[genghisdon]

monster charm is generally better ,but I'd consider it.

Harpies, in particular, don't have standard charm ability IMO. It's all "come to me" & allowing one to be killed/eaten. Very powerful, but quite limited too.

[Guy Fullerton]

I agree with the others. Harpy charm isn't a standard charm, and is an "okay, I'm going to just stand here while you kill me" sort of effect.

(Though there's room to interpret a harpy charm-by-touch as being different from the harpy draw-you-in-via-song power. Especially since AD&D harpies are sort of a muddle-up between classic harpies and classic sirens.)

But the greater question isn't really relevant. Most monster charms are just a normal charm spell effect (though not actually a spell, of course), and AD&D charm isn't a "somebody gets complete control over you" power. It just makes you feel like you're somebody's trusted friend (see the spell). If two different creatures/casters put a normal charm on you, the second one doesn't cancel the first one. The second one just makes you compelled to _also_ see the second creature/caster as a trusted friend. So if the two creatures were telling you conflicting things (e.g., bad things about one another), you'd still have to do your best to heed and protect them _both_.


(If you view the monster manual entries from the perspective of OD&D or Holmes Basic, where charm really is more of a complete control sort of effect, then the answer changes a bit. Given that there was no published Players Handbook version of the charm spell when the Monster Manual was released, I'm sure many people interpreted monster charm as more like complete control.)

[BlackBat242]

The 1e AD&D definition of "Charm Person" specifically says the following:
Charm Person or Mammal (Druid)

Thus a charmed person would not obey a suicide command, but might believe the druid if assured that the only chance to save the druid's life is if the creature holds back an on-rushing red dragon for "just a round or two".

Charm Person (Magic-User)

Except as described above* this spell is the same as the second-level Druid spell charm person or mammal (q.v.) but the magic-user can charm only persons.....
All other comments regarding spell effects apply with respect to persons.

* the stat block


There is no way to define a "let me kill you" power as anything OTHER than "complete control"!

That is exactly a "suicide command"... something neither version of Charm Person is capable of forcing!


Since the Op specifically mentioned harpies, then the answer is:
"Monster Charm" does overpower Charm Person.

Only if the description of the specific "monster" charm specifically says it will not make the charmed person endanger his own life does "Monster Charm" equal Charm Person.

[Guy Fullerton]

Since the Op specifically mentioned harpies, then the answer is:
"Monster Charm" does overpower Charm Person.

Only if the description of the specific "monster" charm specifically says it will not make the charmed person endanger his own life does "Monster Charm" equal Charm Person.

Logically, that doesn't seem to follow.

Clearly the _harpy's_ charm is stronger than charm person. But that doesn't mean _all_ monster charms are stronger than charm person. Each monster charm could/should be evaluated on its own. Just because one monster's charm say (or pretty strongly implies) it's s "stand there and die" charm, doesn't mean all monsters' charms work that way.

[EOTB]

As per DMG pg 65, I think it's safe to say that "all monsters' charm powers are more powerful than the Charm Person character class spell(s)". That doesn't mean they are all as powerful as the Harpy, which seems to be so strong they can damage the victim at will until it is dead.

[Guy Fullerton]

Oh wow, it didn't occur to me at all to look for insight in the DMG! (I hang my head in shame.)

This passage is cool in that it brings some of the OD&D charm legacy into AD&D, and also leaves things somewhat open as to which creatures would qualify for the more powerful charm. It stands to reason that a lamia or marilith might actually operate just as per the spell (i.e., not be the more powerful sort).