Command questions aside, I'm ok with this level of party planning and coordination resulting in 18d6 (~63) nonmagical bludgeoning damage at the cost of:
strict positioning and timing constraints
two 1st level spell slots
a 3rd level spell slot
a use of Inspiration
a sorcery point
There are plenty of things it won't work on, plenty of things that would resist the damage, plenty of battlefields that don't have that kind of headroom, the whole thing goes bust if they save against Command, etc.
Command questions aside, I'm ok with this level of party planning and coordination resulting in 18d6 (~63) nonmagical bludgeoning damage at the cost of:
strict positioning and timing constraints
two 1st level spell slots
a 3rd level spell slot
a use of Inspiration
a sorcery point
There are plenty of things it won't work on, plenty of things that would resist the damage, plenty of battlefields that don't have that kind of headroom, the whole thing goes bust if they save against Command, etc.
Right, my main objection is the use of Command. Otherwise go ahead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
At 3rd level the combination of Hold Person, Inflict Wounds(2nd), and Path to the Grave can achieve 16d10 damage (avg. 88 necrotic).
At 5th level, that can be upcast for 20d10 (avg. 110 necrotic).
As for the OP:
Would your interactions trigger an AOO for the victim, thus allowing them to grapple the Thunder Step caster to avoid the fall?
The caster technically triggers voluntary movement, causing them to leave the victim's threat area. (The process of deliberately falling ought to be considered "intentional" in the same way that jumping includes both the up and the down.)
You are conveniently ignoring the 'unless the command is directly harmful to it' which implies some level of conscious thought is allowed. Directly harmful is left undefined, so the results there will likely vary between DM's.
Being willing is not something the target can follow because it is 2 words. And even then simply 'be willing' is too much like 'obey.' Again, if that works there is no one word limit. 'Obey' then follow that by 'Surrender and be my unquestioning slave until the end of time.'
"Directly harmful" is pretty well defined. It allows for things that are indirectly harmful. Conscious thought doesn't play into this, as Sage Advice says "... command forces you to suddenly do something you didn’t intend." So it's your body resisting itself from jumping into a fire with "self-immolate" by instincts, not consciousness. Also, yes, hyphenated words are single words by English standards, so it would work if it wasn't directly harmful.
"Be willing" is a state of being, and a command can induce that state with a single word. Also, this spell last for 6 seconds, not the end of time, so these commands are involuntary impulses that they follow for that moment.
Is there a reason it must be Command - wouldn't spells like Suggestion or Dominate be better choices for making somebody "willing"? If you're not in combat, Friends and Charm Person/Monster might be better.
I wouldn't allow it through Command, but would with other spells, and unless using Dominate, you'd only manage it once (as after that, they'll be aware of the trick and not be willing and I would not allow anything short of Dominate 'force' willingness, because it wouldn't fit the definition of "willing"). So, it's not overpowered when you consider other options characters can get with less resources/teamwork. So, not a huge thing, really.
Command is too limited to do what you want it to do. Charm Person, Suggestion, or Dominate have much a more broad usage.
Curious how you get the 180 feet? I must have missed something, please restate.
This is meant as a combat combo. Friend, and Suggestion don't work in combat that well, as listening to your enemy becomes more unreasonable. Dominate Person is 5th level spell, so there's better spells and combos at level 9. Charm Person wouldn't work because it only thinks the caster is friendly, so there's no reason for the target to believe the Thunder Step caster is friendly. The target also has advantage on the save in combat, so that sucks. Might work as a way to do it solo, but the advantage you're fight sucks. Command is perfect for combat because you just need a single moment where a person becomes willing.
Again, as stated in the title, this is for level 5 players. If you have access to level 5 spells, use the microwave combo or something.
Command questions aside, I'm ok with this level of party planning and coordination resulting in 18d6 (~63) nonmagical bludgeoning damage at the cost of:
strict positioning and timing constraints
two 1st level spell slots
a 3rd level spell slot
a use of Inspiration
a sorcery point
There are plenty of things it won't work on, plenty of things that would resist the damage, plenty of battlefields that don't have that kind of headroom, the whole thing goes bust if they save against Command, etc.
That's why it's best if the person casting Command goes first; it's like dominos after that.
At 3rd level the combination of Hold Person, Inflict Wounds(2nd), and Path to the Grave can achieve 16d10 damage (avg. 88 necrotic).
At 5th level, that can be upcast for 20d10 (avg. 110 necrotic).
As for the OP:
Would your interactions trigger an AOO for the victim, thus allowing them to grapple the Thunder Step caster to avoid the fall?
The caster technically triggers voluntary movement, causing them to leave the victim's threat area. (The process of deliberately falling ought to be considered "intentional" in the same way that jumping includes both the up and the down.)
Here's a good idea. it's 3 level 2 spells, or 2 level 3 spells and a 1 level 1 spell, so it's more costly, but does the damage. It also requires 3 actions, mine is 2 action and 2 reactions, so one can debate the action economy of the two. Caster do have to get in melee range, where my idea doesn't keep the one caster in range after casting Thunder Step, and the Command caster never needs to be in range. Mine also, possibly, allows you to make your target a projectile to fall on their friend. You still make a good point.
As for AOO, no. The description of AOO specifically address this, oddly enough: "You can avoid provoking an opportunity Attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don’t provoke an opportunity Attack when you Teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your Movement, action, or Reaction. For example, you don’t provoke an opportunity Attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe’s reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Playing D&D is more than playing according to RAW but, by all means use the creative idea if it suits you. Don't expect everyone to back it. To counter your opinion, doing something just because it can be done by RAW via loopholes or otherwise, doesn't make it creative or even a good idea to put into play. It's called a hypothetical. Yes, your idea falls in this classification because it is stretching the limits of what may be possible with many opinions on whether this is good or bad. It also requires several judgement calls that you make in its favor that not all would agree on, whether this really is RAW at all.
Are all the characters involved irrevocably evil? Go ahead, enact your plan. If not, maybe honorbound characters would frown heavily on this plan, I know mine would. How far do you think you can push creative ideas before either the players or the DM call cheese? This decision is going to be incumbent on the people you play with. In any case, it's should be obvious to all that you are trying to go well beyond what most find standard application of an ability and inevitably, there will be a difference of opinion. You did post this in Discussion so, you will get an equal measure opinion and rules related responses.
I'm not sure what honour has to do with killing your enemies in a game that has magic. Is Hold Person evil/dishonourable because it doesn't allow the enemy to harm you? It sure doesn't make for a fair fight. Your idea of honour makes no sense when applied to magic.
Imagine playing D&D and someone is upset that you're using a spell, as written, in a creative way. If players and GM get upset over it then that's a boring group. I'd hope, instead, that they return creativity with their own creativity. It's a fantasy world of creativity. How sad must a group be if you can only use spells in ways others have already came up with. Such a limited mindset with a concrete thought process.
It's one 2nd level spell and one 1st level spell. The other is a class feature of Grave Clerics. Upcasting Inflict Wounds only exceeds the fall damage by a much greater margin. Hold Person never needs to be upcast at all.
It is achievable at nearly half the character level, and with Quicken Metamagic, it can all happen in just two turns.
Re: Gravity
There will be some serious push back against this if anyone tries to exploit "falling" as part of aerial combat, rather than "flying down". The game rules really weren't written for 3D combat.
Edit: Either way, the point of my post was to illustrate that your Fall damage tactic is within reasonable damage outputs, so it doesn't warrant extreme scrutiny. If a DM allows it, then it's not going to break anything inherently. However, you'll want to be careful of similar methods being used against you.
It's one 2nd level spell and one 1st level spell. The other is a class feature of Grave Clerics. Upcasting Inflict Wounds only exceeds the fall damage by a much greater margin. Hold Person never needs to be upcast at all.
It is achievable at nearly half the character level, and with Quicken Metamagic, it can all happen in just two turns.
Re: Gravity
There will be some serious push back against this if anyone tries to exploit "falling" as part of aerial combat, rather than "flying down". The game rules really weren't written for 3D combat.
Edit: Either way, the point of my post was to illustrate that your Fall damage tactic is within reasonable damage outputs, so it doesn't warrant extreme scrutiny. If a DM allows it, then it's not going to break anything inherently. However, you'll want to be careful of similar methods being used against you.
You can't cast 2 spells on the same turn unless one is a cantrip, so quicken spell doesn't make it work with only 2 people, unless your sorcerer with quicken spell (level 3 sorcerer is needed for Metamagic) is also your grave cleric. In that case, You're level 5. The grave cleric, as a variant human, could also have Metamagic Initiate feat to make it work at level 3. The feat isn't worth it, IMO, so let's assume 3 PCs at level 3, maybe 2 PCs at level 5 with multiclassing. Still, a lot easier to pull off. But can you use your target as a projectile, propelled by gravity to hurl at an enemy? My idea might allow it. It could also allow the target to aim for my allies, so that would be a funny reverse card.
Falling is part of aerial combat. Don't fly too close to the sun, Icarus. The fall is deadly.
If my DM used my idea against me, I'd find it fun. However, my party already has Feather Fall, so it wouldn't work, unless that was counter spelled.
'Obey' still is going to be riddled with problems. The creature is obligated to fulfil your one-word command, not anything else. What does 'obey' mean in context? To enter a state of obedience, or to merely to obey as a discrete action? The latter is fulfilled by merely not resisting the one-word command 'obey'. The former is complicated by turn order. The creature doesn't actually obey until its turn starts. Even if it is in a state of obedience to you at that point, it wasn't before its turn and won't be when your turn comes around again. It's not that I expect a creature to try to rules lawyer its way out of command or anything, but the spell just isn't set up for complex actions. And ultimately, you require three things of a hostile creature whose mindset isn't geared toward your party's needs or convenience.
i) Target the player who will cast thunder step. ii) Move to them. iii) Go with them willingly.
Squeezing all three things into a single word is unlikely. You'd have to rely on the idea that the creature, contextually, can piece together enough of your intentions, or that a) a brief utterance is enough to anchor the command to a more complex and specific means of execution, and b) that the power of command actually creates a compulsion that strong and clear for that one word that counts as the actual command.
If I were your DM, maybe I'd want to work with you to pull it off for the sake of entertainment. I just get the nervousness around opening up 'command' as it's a potentially brutal spell if it's limitations are circumvented. Maybe I'd let the 'teleport' rationale work out, or a similarly instructed 'accompany', but I think ordinarily, I wouldn't bind the creature to act beyond the one-word command to the letter of the command. That other stuff isn't part of the spell.
Obey might not work. Teleport would probably be better. For it to work, it really only needs two things, one thing really if the party sets this up properly:
i) understand that the command word is geared towards Thunder Step caster. ii) target has a path, that is not directly harmful to the target and can move there, to include their dash movement, if needed.
With this being a planned combo, requirement ii should easily be completed by the party's setup.
Being willing is included in the Command spell. They're compelled to want to teleport. Moving to the caster is expected, as they're going to complete their interpretation of the command, and inconvenience, short of a directly harmful path, isn't a valid reason for the compulsion not to work.
With the command word "teleport" the only ways for it to not work, besides a directly harmful path to the Thunder Step caster, is another source of teleportation or not knowing Thunder Step caster is a source of teleportation.
"That other stuff isn't part of the spell." Please specify what "stuff" you mean.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
'Obey' still is going to be riddled with problems. The creature is obligated to fulfil your one-word command, not anything else. What does 'obey' mean in context? To enter a state of obedience, or to merely to obey as a discrete action? The latter is fulfilled by merely not resisting the one-word command 'obey'. The former is complicated by turn order. The creature doesn't actually obey until its turn starts. Even if it is in a state of obedience to you at that point, it wasn't before its turn and won't be when your turn comes around again. It's not that I expect a creature to try to rules lawyer its way out of command or anything, but the spell just isn't set up for complex actions. And ultimately, you require three things of a hostile creature whose mindset isn't geared toward your party's needs or convenience.
i) Target the player who will cast thunder step. ii) Move to them. iii) Go with them willingly.
Squeezing all three things into a single word is unlikely. You'd have to rely on the idea that the creature, contextually, can piece together enough of your intentions, or that a) a brief utterance is enough to anchor the command to a more complex and specific means of execution, and b) that the power of command actually creates a compulsion that strong and clear for that one word that counts as the actual command.
If I were your DM, maybe I'd want to work with you to pull it off for the sake of entertainment. I just get the nervousness around opening up 'command' as it's a potentially brutal spell if it's limitations are circumvented. Maybe I'd let the 'teleport' rationale work out, or a similarly instructed 'accompany', but I think ordinarily, I wouldn't bind the creature to act beyond the one-word command to the letter of the command. That other stuff isn't part of the spell.
Obey might not work. Teleport would probably be better. For it to work, it really only needs two things, one thing really if the party sets this up properly:
i) understand that the command word is geared towards Thunder Step caster. ii) target has a path, that is not directly harmful to the target and can move there, to include their dash movement, if needed.
With this being a planned combo, requirement ii should easily be completed by the party's setup.
Being willing is included in the Command spell. They're compelled to want to teleport. Moving to the caster is expected, as they're going to complete their interpretation of the command, and inconvenience, short of a directly harmful path, isn't a valid reason for the compulsion not to work.
With the command word "teleport" the only ways for it to not work, besides a directly harmful path to the Thunder Step caster, is another source of teleportation or not knowing Thunder Step caster is a source of teleportation.
"That other stuff isn't part of the spell." Please specify what "stuff" you mean.
This isn't about whether 'willingly' fits when a person is under command. It's that the decision to go willingly is itself an action. So it's one more thing you've tried to compound into one word. By 'other stuff' I mean actions which are neither in the one-word command, nor obligate in order to fulfill the one-word command. If you say, 'I want you to use the door' and then use command to command 'exit', if the creature fails to save, then it has to exit, but that doesn't mean it has to use the door just because that's what you intended.
"It's that the decision to go willingly is itself an action." No, it's not an action. "Willing" is a state of mind. Command creates the state of mind. If it was an action, casting it regularly would cause the other PC to not have an action on their turn or would require their reaction to join the teleportation.
"If you say, 'I want you to use the door' and then use command to command 'exit', if the creature fails to save, then it has to exit, but that doesn't mean it has to use the door just because that's what you intended. " With you logic, if I commanded "approach" the target wouldn't approach me. The target would only approach whatever it wanted to approach. It just has to approach anything. We know by the examples that the Command spell forces your target to interpret what you want from the command, to the best of their abilities, and to do so in a manner that is not directly harmful to the target. The target doesn't get to maliciously comply with the command. The target follows the command to the what it thinks the caster wants.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Playing D&D is more than playing according to RAW but, by all means use the creative idea if it suits you. Don't expect everyone to back it. To counter your opinion, doing something just because it can be done by RAW via loopholes or otherwise, doesn't make it creative or even a good idea to put into play. It's called a hypothetical. Yes, your idea falls in this classification because it is stretching the limits of what may be possible with many opinions on whether this is good or bad. It also requires several judgement calls that you make in its favor that not all would agree on, whether this really is RAW at all.
Are all the characters involved irrevocably evil? Go ahead, enact your plan. If not, maybe honorbound characters would frown heavily on this plan, I know mine would. How far do you think you can push creative ideas before either the players or the DM call cheese? This decision is going to be incumbent on the people you play with. In any case, it's should be obvious to all that you are trying to go well beyond what most find standard application of an ability and inevitably, there will be a difference of opinion. You did post this in Discussion so, you will get an equal measure opinion and rules related responses.
I'm not sure what honour has to do with killing your enemies in a game that has magic. Is Hold Person evil/dishonourable because it doesn't allow the enemy to harm you? It sure doesn't make for a fair fight. Your idea of honour makes no sense when applied to magic.
Imagine playing D&D and someone is upset that you're using a spell, as written, in a creative way. If players and GM get upset over it then that's a boring group. I'd hope, instead, that they return creativity with their own creativity. It's a fantasy world of creativity. How sad must a group be if you can only use spells in ways others have already came up with. Such a limited mindset with a concrete thought process.
I hear you loud and clear. This is just a difference of playstyles. We are not a power gaming group always on the lookout for max damage combos. While we do try to use abilities creatively, most of us are also trying to play heroes...uh...heroically? If you posted in rules, this comment wouldn't even be included.
I've already conceded that from a mechanical standpoint, you definitely make a compelling case in favor of your idea. The only sticking points rules wise is what I mentioned from the start. The semantic discord here is what constitutes "direct harm" as per the phrasing of the Command spell. It is somewhat ambiguous, and therefore subject to different interpretations. In my mind, you find many ways to justify or divorce an action from the context of "direct harm". This is just a lack of accountability to me. It's like the old RPG joke: "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop". No, it's actually the spellcaster that drops you that kills you. This is NOT indirect harm.
Secondly, as I also mentioned from the start and others have backed more recently; Command is not being seen as a best choice for many of us as a spell that compels a target to become a willing victim of your plan.
I hear you loud and clear. This is just a difference of playstyles. We are not a power gaming group always on the lookout for max damage combos. While we do try to use abilities creatively, most of us are also trying to play heroes...uh...heroically? If you posted in rules, this comment wouldn't even be included.
I've already conceded that from a mechanical standpoint, you definitely make a compelling case in favor of your idea. The only sticking points rules wise is what I mentioned from the start. The semantic discord here is what constitutes "direct harm" as per the phrasing of the Command spell. It is somewhat ambiguous, and therefore subject to different interpretations. In my mind, you find many ways to justify or divorce an action from the context of "direct harm". This is just a lack of accountability to me. It's like the old RPG joke: "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop". No, it's actually the spellcaster that drops you that kills you. This is NOT indirect harm.
Secondly, as I also mentioned from the start and others have backed more recently; Command is not being seen as a best choice for many of us as a spell that compels a target to become a willing victim of your plan.
I'd say people play adventurers. Still, being "heroic" is a matter of subjectivity and more so in a world of magic. Burning people is a war crime in our world. In D&D, Fireball is almost a staple spell in any Wizard or Sorcerer's spell list. Burn them alive with a fireball or drop them from the sky, which one is more "heroic"? Apply the literal effects that your magic would cause and your party of heroes don't seem too heroic anymore. Burn your enemies with fire. Do psychological warfare and use physic damage. Scar their skin with acid damage. destroy their hearing and cause internal bleeding with thunder. Fry them with lightning. A magic world is sort of brutal when you actually think what you're "heroically" doing to your enemies. In summary if you want to be heroic, only use martial classes, I guess. Magic casters can only buff and heal, damaging enemies with spells is vile. How inane?
Simply, the target doesn't know where the Thunder Step will go. Say you're a GM and you didn't know the whole plan and you allowed Command to work as caster intended, wouldn't you be surprised that Sorcerer say "I teleport 180 feet above me"? I would be, and that's what makes it indirect harm in this case, not knowing the results.
As I've countered, Command is still the best spell for it, unless you're level 9 and have Dominate Person, but that defeats being at level 5. Even then, Command is arguably the best spell, as you save a 5th level spell. The other spells simply aren't effective in combat as Command, which is designed for combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
I've already conceded that from a mechanical standpoint, you definitely make a compelling case in favor of your idea. The only sticking points rules wise is what I mentioned from the start. The semantic discord here is what constitutes "direct harm" as per the phrasing of the Command spell. It is somewhat ambiguous, and therefore subject to different interpretations. In my mind, you find many ways to justify or divorce an action from the context of "direct harm". This is just a lack of accountability to me. It's like the old RPG joke: "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop". No, it's actually the spellcaster that drops you that kills you. This is NOT indirect harm.
Secondly, as I also mentioned from the start and others have backed more recently; Command is not being seen as a best choice for many of us as a spell that compels a target to become a willing victim of your plan.
Simply, the target doesn't know where the Thunder Step will go. Say you're a GM and you didn't know the whole plan and you allowed Command to work as caster intended, wouldn't you be surprised that Sorcerer say "I teleport 180 feet above me"? I would be, and that's what makes it indirect harm in this case, not knowing the results.
As I've countered, Command is still the best spell for it, unless you're level 9 and have Dominate Person, but that defeats being at level 5. Even then, Command is arguably the best spell, as you save a 5th level spell. The other spells simply aren't effective in combat as Command, which is designed for combat.
Again, I see your point. I've snipped down to what I feel is most relevant.
Let's discuss the big whoop de doo of your plan mechanics and why you are getting so much resistance.
You want to allow a lvl 1 spell to effectively disarm a targets saving throw against any follow up(potentially, that is the case. The fact you chose Thunder Step is irrelevant in the big picture of what exploit opportunities this logic brings to the table) that requires a save. You do realize that a saving throw is practically an autonomic response? You could be unconscious/incapacitated and still make a save against something that doesn't require you to move. Even with no awareness, you don't willingly fail saves.
Your shenanigans are really no different than the following example:
The Mage tells the target, "I want to cast the Fly spell on you, will you allow it?".
"Sure", says the target.
"Har Har Har, I lied. I cast Thunder Step, enjoy the flight...into the pavement!"
Now, the target agreed to accepting the Fly spell. Does that mean that they just lowered their defenses to any incoming attack? I would say no but, you seem to be saying yes. This is the root of the argument whether you see it or not.
With the command word "teleport" the only ways for it to not work, besides a directly harmful path to the Thunder Step caster, is another source of teleportation or not knowing Thunder Step caster is a source of teleportation.
"If the target can't follow your command, the spell end."
If you tell a creature to teleport when it doesn't have the ability to do so, it ends the spell.
One point you have also been ignoring is that if the creature is hostile nothing stops it from attacking the caster. Nothing is stopping it from moving farther than 5 feet away.
"To go willingly" is an action. Just cutting out one word and pretending that's what I am talking about is silly. You might as well have cut out the word 'to' and said it was an infinitive marker, not an acton. It's not in contention that if the creature goes, it is willing for the purpose of thunder step. It's that you need one word that not only gets the creature to move toward a specific person, but also encapsulates them accompanying that person when they get there.
With you logic, if I commanded "approach" the target wouldn't approach me. The target would only approach whatever it wanted to approach. It just has to approach anything. We know by the examples that the Command spell forces your target to interpret what you want from the command, to the best of their abilities, and to do so in a manner that is not directly harmful to the target. The target doesn't get to maliciously comply with the command. The target follows the command to the what it thinks the caster wants.
This isn't about the target 'maliciously' complying. It's about the extent of what you can compel, which is one word. You are trying to embed more into command than one word ordinarily covers. That isn't in the spell until you factor in the DM's discretion. It's the difference between you adding specificity that isn't part of the command, and what must naturally occur in the fulfilment of the command.
'Approach' means to close the distance, and by conventional meaning, the target of that approach going to default to the speaker or source of the message unless otherwise specified. That's not a DnD thing. That's just English. As a one word imperative, it's synonymous with 'come here' or 'come toward me'. And while Common, Elvish, Infernal (et al) may not be English, that's the language we're using as players (though if you are playing in a different language and 'approach' as an imperative means something different, rad).
Even with approach, if you specify that they dash using a route that expends their full movement instead of taking the shortest route, the command only extends to 'approach' and not your specification, unless the DM says other wise.
Teleport: (especially in science fiction) transport or be transported across space and distance instantly.
I have embed exactly what is needed for someone to be teleported. Embed in every command is implied tasks. That's just English. That's just language.
Command forces the target to follow the command word to what the target thinks the caster means, so planting a seed is an effective use of the spell, so there's less misinterpretation or lack of understanding by the target.
As far as the "'[decision] to go willingly' is an action" semantics you're forcing, it's inanity. it's an action. It's not an action. It doesn't matter because the target is willing by the implied requirements of the command "teleport". If the target has another means of teleportation, then you have argument, but you haven't. "Go willingly" isn't an action.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
With the command word "teleport" the only ways for it to not work, besides a directly harmful path to the Thunder Step caster, is another source of teleportation or not knowing Thunder Step caster is a source of teleportation.
"If the target can't follow your command, the spell end."
If you tell a creature to teleport when it doesn't have the ability to do so, it ends the spell.
One point you have also been ignoring is that if the creature is hostile nothing stops it from attacking the caster. Nothing is stopping it from moving farther than 5 feet away.
Teleport: (especially in science fiction) transport or be transported across space and distance instantly. The target knows they're can be teleported by Thunder Step, so they will do what they can do be teleported.
Spell doesn't end. It has the means to teleport. It's the caster with thunder step.
Ahh, yes, it will act against the command while under the effects of Command... Does this need to be addressed?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Teleport: (especially in science fiction) transport or be transported across space and distance instantly. The target knows they're can be teleported by Thunder Step, so they will do what they can do be teleported.
Spell doesn't end. It has the means to teleport. It's the caster with thunder step.
Ahh, yes, it will act against the command while under the effects of Command... Does this need to be addressed?
Wow buddy, nice double standard here.
You say that the target will fail a saving throw and comply to be a target to follow it's given Command. It does so because it is unaware of any harm that may come to it.
Now you argue that it will teleport because it knows the Thunder Step will teleport it.
With the command word "teleport" the only ways for it to not work, besides a directly harmful path to the Thunder Step caster, is another source of teleportation or not knowing Thunder Step caster is a source of teleportation.
"If the target can't follow your command, the spell end."
If you tell a creature to teleport when it doesn't have the ability to do so, it ends the spell.
One point you have also been ignoring is that if the creature is hostile nothing stops it from attacking the caster. Nothing is stopping it from moving farther than 5 feet away.
Teleport: (especially in science fiction) transport or be transported across space and distance instantly. The target knows they're can be teleported by Thunder Step, so they will do what they can do be teleported.
Spell doesn't end. It has the means to teleport. It's the caster with thunder step.
Ahh, yes, it will act against the command while under the effects of Command... Does this need to be addressed?
The target neither knows, the caster can cast Thunder Step, nor does the target know when Thunderstep is cast, that the particular spell is Thunder Step. That would be pure meta-game knowledge.
Furthermore, all triggers are totally off, relying on meta-knowledge.
Command only forces the target to act on a one word order. Not on some multi-layered interpretation of intent and some additional suggestions by the caster and their allies.
Command words should normal one-word commands you can understand without context. Things like Teleport and Accept are beyond that scope. If you have to explain the command, it's not a one-word command, so invalid for the 1st level spell.
Yes, this will make your combo extremely difficult to pull off, and you really, really want it to, but Command isn't going to let you get around the pesky "willing" barrier. It's almost like the designers did it on purpose. Those bastards!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Command questions aside, I'm ok with this level of party planning and coordination resulting in 18d6 (~63) nonmagical bludgeoning damage at the cost of:
There are plenty of things it won't work on, plenty of things that would resist the damage, plenty of battlefields that don't have that kind of headroom, the whole thing goes bust if they save against Command, etc.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Right, my main objection is the use of Command. Otherwise go ahead.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
For context:
At 3rd level the combination of Hold Person, Inflict Wounds(2nd), and Path to the Grave can achieve 16d10 damage (avg. 88 necrotic).
At 5th level, that can be upcast for 20d10 (avg. 110 necrotic).
As for the OP:
Would your interactions trigger an AOO for the victim, thus allowing them to grapple the Thunder Step caster to avoid the fall?
The caster technically triggers voluntary movement, causing them to leave the victim's threat area. (The process of deliberately falling ought to be considered "intentional" in the same way that jumping includes both the up and the down.)
"Directly harmful" is pretty well defined. It allows for things that are indirectly harmful. Conscious thought doesn't play into this, as Sage Advice says "... command forces you to suddenly do something you didn’t intend." So it's your body resisting itself from jumping into a fire with "self-immolate" by instincts, not consciousness. Also, yes, hyphenated words are single words by English standards, so it would work if it wasn't directly harmful.
"Be willing" is a state of being, and a command can induce that state with a single word. Also, this spell last for 6 seconds, not the end of time, so these commands are involuntary impulses that they follow for that moment.
This is meant as a combat combo. Friend, and Suggestion don't work in combat that well, as listening to your enemy becomes more unreasonable. Dominate Person is 5th level spell, so there's better spells and combos at level 9. Charm Person wouldn't work because it only thinks the caster is friendly, so there's no reason for the target to believe the Thunder Step caster is friendly. The target also has advantage on the save in combat, so that sucks. Might work as a way to do it solo, but the advantage you're fight sucks. Command is perfect for combat because you just need a single moment where a person becomes willing.
Again, as stated in the title, this is for level 5 players. If you have access to level 5 spells, use the microwave combo or something.
That's why it's best if the person casting Command goes first; it's like dominos after that.
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Here's a good idea. it's 3 level 2 spells, or 2 level 3 spells and a 1 level 1 spell, so it's more costly, but does the damage. It also requires 3 actions, mine is 2 action and 2 reactions, so one can debate the action economy of the two. Caster do have to get in melee range, where my idea doesn't keep the one caster in range after casting Thunder Step, and the Command caster never needs to be in range. Mine also, possibly, allows you to make your target a projectile to fall on their friend. You still make a good point.
As for AOO, no. The description of AOO specifically address this, oddly enough:
"You can avoid provoking an opportunity Attack by taking the Disengage action. You also don’t provoke an opportunity Attack when you Teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your Movement, action, or Reaction. For example, you don’t provoke an opportunity Attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe’s reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy."
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
I'm not sure what honour has to do with killing your enemies in a game that has magic. Is Hold Person evil/dishonourable because it doesn't allow the enemy to harm you? It sure doesn't make for a fair fight. Your idea of honour makes no sense when applied to magic.
Imagine playing D&D and someone is upset that you're using a spell, as written, in a creative way. If players and GM get upset over it then that's a boring group. I'd hope, instead, that they return creativity with their own creativity. It's a fantasy world of creativity. How sad must a group be if you can only use spells in ways others have already came up with. Such a limited mindset with a concrete thought process.
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
It's one 2nd level spell and one 1st level spell. The other is a class feature of Grave Clerics. Upcasting Inflict Wounds only exceeds the fall damage by a much greater margin. Hold Person never needs to be upcast at all.
It is achievable at nearly half the character level, and with Quicken Metamagic, it can all happen in just two turns.
Re: Gravity
There will be some serious push back against this if anyone tries to exploit "falling" as part of aerial combat, rather than "flying down". The game rules really weren't written for 3D combat.
Edit: Either way, the point of my post was to illustrate that your Fall damage tactic is within reasonable damage outputs, so it doesn't warrant extreme scrutiny. If a DM allows it, then it's not going to break anything inherently. However, you'll want to be careful of similar methods being used against you.
You can't cast 2 spells on the same turn unless one is a cantrip, so quicken spell doesn't make it work with only 2 people, unless your sorcerer with quicken spell (level 3 sorcerer is needed for Metamagic) is also your grave cleric. In that case, You're level 5. The grave cleric, as a variant human, could also have Metamagic Initiate feat to make it work at level 3. The feat isn't worth it, IMO, so let's assume 3 PCs at level 3, maybe 2 PCs at level 5 with multiclassing. Still, a lot easier to pull off. But can you use your target as a projectile, propelled by gravity to hurl at an enemy? My idea might allow it. It could also allow the target to aim for my allies, so that would be a funny reverse card.
Falling is part of aerial combat. Don't fly too close to the sun, Icarus. The fall is deadly.
If my DM used my idea against me, I'd find it fun. However, my party already has Feather Fall, so it wouldn't work, unless that was counter spelled.
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Obey might not work. Teleport would probably be better. For it to work, it really only needs two things, one thing really if the party sets this up properly:
i) understand that the command word is geared towards Thunder Step caster.
ii) target has a path, that is not directly harmful to the target and can move there, to include their dash movement, if needed.
With this being a planned combo, requirement ii should easily be completed by the party's setup.
Being willing is included in the Command spell. They're compelled to want to teleport. Moving to the caster is expected, as they're going to complete their interpretation of the command, and inconvenience, short of a directly harmful path, isn't a valid reason for the compulsion not to work.
With the command word "teleport" the only ways for it to not work, besides a directly harmful path to the Thunder Step caster, is another source of teleportation or not knowing Thunder Step caster is a source of teleportation.
"That other stuff isn't part of the spell." Please specify what "stuff" you mean.
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
"It's that the decision to go willingly is itself an action."
No, it's not an action. "Willing" is a state of mind. Command creates the state of mind. If it was an action, casting it regularly would cause the other PC to not have an action on their turn or would require their reaction to join the teleportation.
"If you say, 'I want you to use the door' and then use command to command 'exit', if the creature fails to save, then it has to exit, but that doesn't mean it has to use the door just because that's what you intended. "
With you logic, if I commanded "approach" the target wouldn't approach me. The target would only approach whatever it wanted to approach. It just has to approach anything. We know by the examples that the Command spell forces your target to interpret what you want from the command, to the best of their abilities, and to do so in a manner that is not directly harmful to the target. The target doesn't get to maliciously comply with the command. The target follows the command to the what it thinks the caster wants.
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
I hear you loud and clear. This is just a difference of playstyles. We are not a power gaming group always on the lookout for max damage combos. While we do try to use abilities creatively, most of us are also trying to play heroes...uh...heroically? If you posted in rules, this comment wouldn't even be included.
I've already conceded that from a mechanical standpoint, you definitely make a compelling case in favor of your idea. The only sticking points rules wise is what I mentioned from the start. The semantic discord here is what constitutes "direct harm" as per the phrasing of the Command spell. It is somewhat ambiguous, and therefore subject to different interpretations. In my mind, you find many ways to justify or divorce an action from the context of "direct harm". This is just a lack of accountability to me. It's like the old RPG joke: "it's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop". No, it's actually the spellcaster that drops you that kills you. This is NOT indirect harm.
Secondly, as I also mentioned from the start and others have backed more recently; Command is not being seen as a best choice for many of us as a spell that compels a target to become a willing victim of your plan.
This is...cheesy.
I'd say people play adventurers. Still, being "heroic" is a matter of subjectivity and more so in a world of magic. Burning people is a war crime in our world. In D&D, Fireball is almost a staple spell in any Wizard or Sorcerer's spell list. Burn them alive with a fireball or drop them from the sky, which one is more "heroic"? Apply the literal effects that your magic would cause and your party of heroes don't seem too heroic anymore. Burn your enemies with fire. Do psychological warfare and use physic damage. Scar their skin with acid damage. destroy their hearing and cause internal bleeding with thunder. Fry them with lightning. A magic world is sort of brutal when you actually think what you're "heroically" doing to your enemies. In summary if you want to be heroic, only use martial classes, I guess. Magic casters can only buff and heal, damaging enemies with spells is vile. How inane?
Simply, the target doesn't know where the Thunder Step will go. Say you're a GM and you didn't know the whole plan and you allowed Command to work as caster intended, wouldn't you be surprised that Sorcerer say "I teleport 180 feet above me"? I would be, and that's what makes it indirect harm in this case, not knowing the results.
As I've countered, Command is still the best spell for it, unless you're level 9 and have Dominate Person, but that defeats being at level 5. Even then, Command is arguably the best spell, as you save a 5th level spell. The other spells simply aren't effective in combat as Command, which is designed for combat.
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Again, I see your point. I've snipped down to what I feel is most relevant.
Let's discuss the big whoop de doo of your plan mechanics and why you are getting so much resistance.
You want to allow a lvl 1 spell to effectively disarm a targets saving throw against any follow up(potentially, that is the case. The fact you chose Thunder Step is irrelevant in the big picture of what exploit opportunities this logic brings to the table) that requires a save. You do realize that a saving throw is practically an autonomic response? You could be unconscious/incapacitated and still make a save against something that doesn't require you to move. Even with no awareness, you don't willingly fail saves.
Your shenanigans are really no different than the following example:
The Mage tells the target, "I want to cast the Fly spell on you, will you allow it?".
"Sure", says the target.
"Har Har Har, I lied. I cast Thunder Step, enjoy the flight...into the pavement!"
Now, the target agreed to accepting the Fly spell. Does that mean that they just lowered their defenses to any incoming attack? I would say no but, you seem to be saying yes. This is the root of the argument whether you see it or not.
"If the target can't follow your command, the spell end."
If you tell a creature to teleport when it doesn't have the ability to do so, it ends the spell.
One point you have also been ignoring is that if the creature is hostile nothing stops it from attacking the caster. Nothing is stopping it from moving farther than 5 feet away.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Teleport: (especially in science fiction) transport or be transported across space and distance instantly.
I have embed exactly what is needed for someone to be teleported. Embed in every command is implied tasks. That's just English. That's just language.
Command forces the target to follow the command word to what the target thinks the caster means, so planting a seed is an effective use of the spell, so there's less misinterpretation or lack of understanding by the target.
As far as the "'[decision] to go willingly' is an action" semantics you're forcing, it's inanity. it's an action. It's not an action. It doesn't matter because the target is willing by the implied requirements of the command "teleport". If the target has another means of teleportation, then you have argument, but you haven't. "Go willingly" isn't an action.
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Teleport: (especially in science fiction) transport or be transported across space and distance instantly.
The target knows they're can be teleported by Thunder Step, so they will do what they can do be teleported.
Spell doesn't end. It has the means to teleport. It's the caster with thunder step.
Ahh, yes, it will act against the command while under the effects of Command... Does this need to be addressed?
Command is the most powerful level 1 spell; change my mind.
Wow buddy, nice double standard here.
You say that the target will fail a saving throw and comply to be a target to follow it's given Command. It does so because it is unaware of any harm that may come to it.
Now you argue that it will teleport because it knows the Thunder Step will teleport it.
What a stupid(and smart?) target we have here...
The target neither knows, the caster can cast Thunder Step, nor does the target know when Thunderstep is cast, that the particular spell is Thunder Step. That would be pure meta-game knowledge.
Furthermore, all triggers are totally off, relying on meta-knowledge.
Command only forces the target to act on a one word order. Not on some multi-layered interpretation of intent and some additional suggestions by the caster and their allies.
Command words should normal one-word commands you can understand without context. Things like Teleport and Accept are beyond that scope. If you have to explain the command, it's not a one-word command, so invalid for the 1st level spell.
Yes, this will make your combo extremely difficult to pull off, and you really, really want it to, but Command isn't going to let you get around the pesky "willing" barrier. It's almost like the designers did it on purpose. Those bastards!
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.