How to protect merchant from mind control?

[whswhs]

It seems to me that, if we compare magic with the overt use of physical force, there are at least three broad categories of force users:

* There are users of force on a large scale that can't be concealed; they tend to become rulers, at least unless someone even bigger objects.

* There are users of force on a small scale whose use is somewhat casual and may be overlooked, at least until they go too far and gain the attention of the rulers: street thugs, barroom brawlers, and so on.

* There are users of force who are more skilled and more professional, and who take precautions against their identities becoming public: hit men and the like.

Mages might be any of the three: rulers, probably established in dark towers or the like; petty mages who are overlooked because they don't do a lot of harm; and mages who are seen as enough of a threat to be the target of mobs or rulers, who need to be secretive.

With mages, there's also a fourth possibility: The wizardly analog of a high-end super who can destroy an army alone and unaided. They might either be tolerated by sheer necessity or exterminated in desperation. There isn't a real world analog of this category that I can think of, though there are fictional versions such as Captain Nemo.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by whswhs

It seems to me that, if we compare magic with the overt use of physical force, there are at least three broad categories of force users:

You seem to be missing a category: people who make use of force on behalf of someone else, usually a ruler.

[The Colonel]

Originally Posted by Varyon

I'm not certain what you're referencing with the date rape drugs, but I'd say anything that (safely) knocks someone out is on its own morally neutral, while emotional manipulation is on its own similar, albeit arguably a bit darker (somewhere between knockout and memory manipulation). In all these cases, what you use it for is a much larger determinant on if it's morally good, neutral, or evil. Of course, that's just my personal opinion. For reference, I do think mind control is more evil than any of the above, and you need a pretty good reason (or consent of the controlled) to get it up to neutral, and very good one to get it north of that.

I've no doubt a deep dive into the Potterverse is full of horrors, however.

I meant the "love potions" ... which strike me as the sort of thing that ought to be severely punished by ... well, anyone really.

As a counter example to the Potterverse treatment, I would offer the Dresdenverse (different Harry, same line of work) where a character unknowingly uses mind effecting magic in an attempt to save several lives, causes (literally) horrific fallout and only escapes capital punishment through some legally dubious means. In universe it is emphasised that, even with the best of intentions, mind altering magic is dangerous and without them it is an abomination.

Originally Posted by Anthony

You seem to be missing a category: people who make use of force on behalf of someone else, usually a ruler.

I would guess that they are, as implied, an extension of group 1 (the rulers themselves) as they are either morally contiguous or have drifted into another group.

[The Benj]

On the mundane side, it does seem like the most likely things would be guards who are on the lookout for the boss acting weird, and deals going through complications that mean you can't buy big-ticket items on the spot, but require a cooling-off period to let magic wear off.

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Anthony

You seem to be missing a category: people who make use of force on behalf of someone else, usually a ruler.

I subsumed those under "the ruler using force." It's hardly possible for a person in a realistic setting to use force on a large scale without having a lot of other people using force on their behalf, after all.

[RGTraynor]

A bunch of issues floating around that few GMs and fewer campaigns think about, let alone address.

For one thing, unless you toss the demographic assumptions set forth in various GURPS products out the window, there are not all that many mages out there, and far fewer capable of enchantment. If mages are as common as blacksmiths -- and that's quite an assumption -- then you have maybe 20 in a hefty sized city of 10,000. (That 10,000 city, by the bye, would be the third or fourth largest city in England throughout the whole medieval era.) That total includes apprentices, full-time healers, the head of the local mages guild, teachers, researchers, detectives, adventurers, court wizards, mages-for-hire and fussy old coots who just want to putter in their gardens and not be bothered. There just aren’t enough enchanters out there (at least without reworking the game’s assumptions, Magery levels, specialization requirements and enchanting rules) to put anti-mind control brooches in the hands of merchants ... or if you do have circles of enchanters punching them out, what they’re NOT doing is creating enchanted anything else. Zero sum here.

For another, look. In any sane magical society, there’d have to be a bunch of spells that are at the least illegal to cast except in the rulers’ service, and probably illegal to know at all. What ruler in his right mind would allow wizards to learn Invisibility, or Strike Barren, or half the Mind Control and Necromantic lists ... or Possession? (Heck, a medieval England with no concrete proof that magic existed, never mind worked, still made so much as casting a horoscope of a ruler a treasonous crime.) I’d expect that a Mages’ Guild would require its members to take a magical oath to follow the rules.

But if the mage insists on learning Possession anyway? Sure, so he got his hands on the spell illegally. And its use is a crime. So enforce it. We know that the spell description sets forth that the victim knows what’s happening to him, even if the culprit can’t be directly identified. Except ... -1 per hex for a Regular spell. Exactly how high do I have to pump that skill level to get that off at any distance? (Never mind explaining away how I went limp when the spell went off.)

The same applies to the various Mind Control spells that might apply. Forgetfulness, Daze, Foolishness ... even if they were legal, I suppose their use to rip off merchants would fall under the same heading as the fighters using their swords to rip off merchants: straight up banditry. Punishable as such, if caught. And the Mages Guild real interested in doing so.

[Sunrunners_Fire]

Originally Posted by Anders

So I'm thinking about running a mercantile campaign in Forgotten Realms. How do I keep the party's wizard/bard from mentally dominating all the merchants they come across?

4.) It is the Forgotten Realms. Alignment exists; Law, Chaos, Good and Evil are objective and measurable forces in the world. Using mind control to scam a merchant out of their stuff is likely to be both Chaotic and Evil. Being detectably Chaotic Evil in the lands of Good isn't going to be a pleasant experience and so should probably be avoided.

5.) It is the Forgotten Realms. Gods exist, are actively involved in the world, sometimes personally and have many motivated followers & servants. These gods have opinions, some positive, some negative, about such things. If you make a habit of it ... they will notice. They might even (instruct their people to) do something about it.

[WingedKagouti]

Originally Posted by Sunrunners_Fire

5.) It is the Forgotten Realms. Gods exist, are actively involved in the world, sometimes personally and have many motivated followers & servants. These gods have opinions, some positive, some negative, about such things. If you make a habit of it ... they will notice. They might even (instruct their people to) do something about it.

Additionally, every region has a god of merchants (currently Waukeen) who will likely not be amused if the people they govern are being exploited through mind magic. And a group of merchants who do employ such tactics will likely find that Waukeen consider them thieves and not merchants. It's worth noting that the only god Waukeen actively dislikes is Mask the god of thieves. Waukeen is more chill about assassins, betrayers, murderers, and necromancers than she is about thieves.

A group of merchants being barred from the temples of Waukeen is going to raise major eyebrows from everyone, not just other merchants or priests of Waukeen.

[hal]

Originally Posted by Anders

So I'm thinking about running a mercantile campaign in Forgotten Realms. How do I keep the party's wizard/bard from mentally dominating all the merchants they come across?

Some thoughts:

1. Magic Resistance (either natural or via items).

2. Wards of some kind.

3. Laws that make it illegal to influence citizens with mind magic (works in places like Waterdeep and Sembia where there is a strong where there's a strong legal places, maybe not so well in other places).

If this were me trying to use world building skills along with the GURPS MAGIC rules, I'd start with this:

Talisman: A magical item that grants its wearer a + bonus to defenses against a specific spell. This is a one time enchantment and then disappears.

To that talisman object, I'd have a linked enchantment to the Talisman that will permit the linked enchantment to only work if the Talisman spell is longer present (ie expired). Thus, an Anti-Control Talisman could be cast for only 15 energy, have a linked "Voices" enchantment where the voice says "You are the target of a control person spell." For a mere 90 energy, the Talisman can confer a +3 bonus to saving rolls versus Control person.

As for the next issue: One can easily require that in order for anyone to teach a "restricted" spell, they must be a member of a "Guild". All spell casters for instance, are required to pony up 2 month's pay to join the guild, upon which they become responsible for the actions of any other of the guild's members. Thus, if you have a guild of 18 people who are wizards of the Golden Eye - those 18 wizards are liable for the actions of any of its members. The guild is responsible for enforcing the laws against any of its own members lest each member be made into an outlaw - where their goods and lives are forfeit and their killers can keep their possessions.

Now for the fun part: Legality Class. You can assign any legality class you desire for any of the spells - even those with a worse legality rating than spells further down the "requisite" chain. All you need to do is make it a point that for spells with a legality class of say, 2 or lower, automatically worsen the crime's punishment if said spell is used in the commission of a crime. So you might have LC 4 spells that are almost never rendered forbidden. You may have LC 3 spells that require you get a license to know the spell at all - even if the spell is illegal to cast. Then there are those spells that are forbidden to even study unless you have the King's permission, or the realm's highest authority's permission. Legality Class 1 spells are area spells of destruction or spells of eternal damnation or spells of Demonic summoning - only to be sanctioned in use of war by authorized personnel.

Legality class 0 spells? Well, one is forbidden to even learn the spell, let alone cast it. The harshest penalties would be applied to the spell.

I would also limit spells "culpability" where it comes to causing the spell caster or spell recipient to have a benefit that a merchant might otherwise fare better against. For example, if there is a spell that raises a target's IQ during a haggling debate over the merits of a good's value - a mage with a +3 bonus is no worse than a normal person whose haggling skill is 3 higher than most people. Casting a confusion spell on someone while haggling with them may be deemed unfair or illegal - but that's largely a function of the laws, not necessarily the intent of the spells themselves.

In all? If the possession of a weapon that dishes out 3d6 damage is considered to be illegal to posses on the street, then a spell that dishes out that same level of damage probably merits a legality class 1 "weaker" than the weapon that dishes out 3d6 damage. Why? Spell suffer a penalty for range, they also cost energy to cast and thereby deplete the spell caster, whereas a steel weapon can be used over and over and over until the user is dead or ceases their activity or what have you.

Now if Talisman and Amulet spells (from GURPS MAGIC 4e) are present, then any person can purchase the Talisman for a price that works out to about what, $1 per energy point?

If Bards can engage in mind control of some sort - might not there be an ordinance that requires Bards to register with the authorities and be forbidden to play music in areas of economic activity or similar circumstances?

[benz72]

I think this leads to some grey areas. I'm going to branch off a thread on moral and legal implications of C&E and MC spells.