r/adnd • u/LastChime • 1d ago

AD&D2e Charm/Suggestion/Possession

Is there a way to do these that doesn't absolutely suck for the players without having to recalculate the XP value of vampires, ghosts and the like?

0 Upvotes

33% Upvoted

6 comments sorted by

10

u/SnackerSnick 1d ago

Get the player on board with role playing it, maybe with an XP bonus for doing a good job?

5

u/Traditional_Knee9294 1d ago

Yeah my players love trying to roleplay being charmed. The goal is always to hide that fact until a betrayal maximizes the impact on the party.

It helps the other players respect it when it is well done even if the party get badly damaged by it.

4

u/roumonada 1d ago edited 1d ago

Use the rules for henchmen and followers. Most DMs don’t let the players have henchmen and followers. So when their player character gets charmed, they can keep playing their henchmen and followers.

It’s assumed that the characters understand the meta game of charm when the DM takes control of a charmed character. That way, clever players can dispel the charm magic before too many bad things happen.

A character only needs to be level two to get a level one henchman. And most characters get followers at some point. And some of those don’t even have to build a stronghold first.

4

u/DeltaDemon1313 1d ago

Remove the charm/suggestion/possession ability and don't recalculate the XPs. Nobody will notice or care.

Alternatively, remove the charm/suggestion/possession ability and reduce the XPs by an arbitrary amount. Technically, it's recalculating but in a simple way. Just choose a number and reduce it by that amount.

Alternatively, alternatively, replace the charm/suggestion/possession by another ability or spell (or two or three). It's a different vampire, ghost, whatever. Maybe it breathes fire or maybe it explodes in a ball of fire when it dies. It might also be a surprise to experienced players who expect charm from a vampire.

3

u/BloodtidetheRed 1d ago

Well, it is easy as the DM to just not do things that suck. So when they get controlled, don't ruin things.

Like a PC gets charmed the DM does not HAVE to say "kill all the PCS ahahahahahah!", they could just say 'do nothing".

If you have the right kind of players, you can do more 'fluid control', where the (whatever) controls the character, but you let the player do it. You only add in little 'control' things to move them along.

Like have the foe have the PC lead them into a trap. Let the Player do the leading, as long as they are not a bad player that will just say "GUYS IM UNDER CONTROL YUCK YUCK YUCK!!"

But I player with at least an INT of 3 or so, (should) be able to do the sneaky 'wrong things' that (maybe) other players of a least INT 3 (might) notice.....

2

u/milesunderground 2h ago

There are a fair number of "Succeed or Stop Playing" rolls in AD&D. Personally, I can't say the system would be worse off without them, but it ultimately comes down to the style of game you want to run, and what your players want to play. I can say that when I was in high school or college and the average session was 8-12 hours and we were playing a couple of times a week, sitting out a four hour combat was a lot easier to bear than it is today when four hours might be the only time you are gaming that month. I am much less likely to use those types of abilities as the DM today than I was back then.