12
\$\begingroup\$

The level 2 Wizard Enchantment tradition feature, Hypnotic Gaze, does the following:

Starting at 2nd level when you choose this school, your soft words and enchanting gaze can magically enthrall another creature. As an action, choose one creature that you can see within 5 feet of you. If the target can see or hear you, it must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw against your wizard spell save DC or be charmed by you until the end of your next turn. The charmed creature's speed drops to 0, and the creature is incapacitated and visibly dazed.

Would a person affected by Hypnotic Gaze scream for help?

From my reading of the ability, there is nothing preventing the charmed creature from realizing its condition and screaming for help.

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • \$\begingroup\$ I am not sure whether this is 2 questions or one. Them being "would the target realize their situation?" and "can the target vocalize?". \$\endgroup\$
    – Szega
    Jan 6 '20 at 10:21
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Szega there is nothing in the ability preventing the target from vocalizing \$\endgroup\$ Jan 6 '20 at 10:23
  • \$\begingroup\$ The way this is worded it would entirely depend on the creature and how the DM or player wants to run that creature. We can't tell you if a creature would scream for help because it would depend on how the DM or player wants to run the personality of that creature. \$\endgroup\$ Jan 6 '20 at 10:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ Didn't say there was, but the way it is worded it was not clear to me if it was part of the question or not (nothing preventing A and B). \$\endgroup\$
    – Szega
    Jan 6 '20 at 12:10
28
\$\begingroup\$

Probably not

Remember that there is no flavour text in 5e, everything written describes what is actually happening. So from your quote:

your soft words and enchanting gaze can magically enthrall another creature.

Oxford dictionaries defines enthrall (using definition 1) as:

capture the fascinated attention of

This, to me, heavily implies that the affected creature is so pre-occupied by the wizard that it wouldn't occur to that creature to "scream for help" (assuming the creature is one who is capable of screaming or requesting help, since a Giant Frog probably wouldn't be able to, for example; I'm going to assume that you're mostly talking about humanoid creatures here).

To further support this, @Theik added in a comment:

In addition, somebody who is 'visibly dazed' is clearly not in the mental state to be screaming, even if you want to ignore the whole enthralled part. Somebody screaming bloody murder isn't "visibly dazed".

Yes, it's true that, mechnically, all that happens is:

The charmed creature's speed drops to 0, and the creature is incapacitated and visibly dazed.

which doesn't prevent vocalising anything, and therefore this is all narrative and subject to the DM, but if the DM were to bear the word "enthrall" in mind, they may well come to the same conclusion I have above.

\$\endgroup\$
7
  • \$\begingroup\$ +1, beat me to it, I was posting pretty much the exact same answer. In addition, somebody who is 'visibly dazed' is clearly not in the mental state to be screaming, even if you want to ignore the whole enthralled part. Somebody screaming bloody murder isn't "visibly dazed". \$\endgroup\$
    – Theik
    Jan 6 '20 at 11:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Theik Good point, I've added that to my answer, it strengthens the argument. \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Jan 6 '20 at 12:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ Why doesn’t D&D 5e have the dazed condition? So why doesn’t #DnD 5e have the dazed condition? It goes from 0 to stunned & stunned is DEVASTATING. I like the idea of a status effect that only allows one action on turn & no reactions, but doesn’t incapacitate. Maybe @mikemearls could answer this one for me? I remember this from testing – we found it rolled up to become the same as losing your speed. It worked well in 4e because that edition had a lot of off-turn action, but we tried to cull those options to speed up play. — Mike Mearls (@mikemearls) December 30, 2018 \$\endgroup\$
    – Mindwin
    Jan 6 '20 at 18:57
  • \$\begingroup\$ "all that happens" -- that contradicts your earlier "no flavour text". Mechanically, the creature is "visibly dazed" and has its attention "captured". Also, charmed. \$\endgroup\$
    – Yakk
    Jan 6 '20 at 21:08
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @GuillaumeF. I think you may be missing Theik's point; imagine what a "visibly dazed" person looks like, they are not in the state of mind to scream for help. It's not that they aren't capable in terms of their voice being affected directly, it's more that they are not in the right state of mind to even attempt it. \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Jan 7 '20 at 8:13
2
\$\begingroup\$

No, an affected person would not scream for help.

This ability allows the Enchanter to create an effect that sets the charmed condition. According to that condition,

a charmed creature can't attack the charmer or target the charmer with harmful abilities or magical effects.

Screaming for help, while technically not an 'ability', could certainly be construed to be harmful to the Enchanter.

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ There is no mechanical connection between this feature and the charm person spell beside the fact that they both impose the charmed condition. The part you quote is above that and unique to the spell. \$\endgroup\$
    – Szega
    Jan 6 '20 at 12:08
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ This is not a version of it, as it is not dependent on it, nor is it a modification of it. They are completely separate effects. \$\endgroup\$
    – Szega
    Jan 6 '20 at 12:11
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Charmed does not make you consider the charmer your friend. The charm Person spell gives them the charmed condition AND they now regard you as a friend. Just like how Hypnotic Gaze makes you incapacitated AND sets your speed to 0. That does not magically mean everything that makes something incapacitated sets their speed to 0 because they share a condition. \$\endgroup\$
    – Theik
    Jan 6 '20 at 12:17
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ "This ability allows the Enchanter to create an effect similar to the Charm Person spell." This is a false statement. Beyond the fact that they both impose the charmed condition, they otherwise do not resemble each other at all. Rules from charm person, which are specific to that spell, do not have any relation to this unrelated class feature. \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Jan 6 '20 at 12:22
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I'm still not totally sure about this answer, but the latest edit at least makes me remove my -1, since it's now an interpretation of "harmful", rather than a false comparison. \$\endgroup\$
    – NathanS
    Jan 6 '20 at 12:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.