I'm not usually one to trot out simulationist excuses, but did real knights outside of Disney movies actually bond with their horses like pets? I was under the impression that it was much more of a utilitarian relationship and if anyone would have bonded with the horse it would have been the squire or horse trainer who did all the other stuff aside from riding on it.
At any rate, Suggestion has a time limit. There's nothing stopping the knight from buying the horse right back from the beggar the minute the task was completed. Even if its worded in a way it expires 8 hours later, it just takes some time and money to track it down and buy it back. The spell is not "you lose your cherished pet forever" unless the DM specifically decides that's what happens afterwards.
Suggestion requires that the course of action seem reasonable to the target. Now, some people may limit that to the case of the example: they can't be made to do anything suicidal. But I am a littlr more strict.
I basically treat it as a nat 20 Persuasion roll. It's not an automatic success, if you suggest a course of action contrary to their alignment or bonds. It might be, if you also have a high bonus to Persuasion.
If you allow even actions contrary to the NPCs interests, it's too powerful for a 2nd level spell. You could basically skip a whole adventure by Suggesting the BBEG to hand over the MacGuffin.
That would make the spell entirely useless - Enhance Ability is also 2nd level. 1 hour of advantage on Persuasion checks plus all other Charisma checks is 100% of the time a better idea than "make a Persuasion check; your target knows you are casting a spell and can make a DC 17 Arcana check to realize it's the Suggestion spell specifically, in which case your Suggestion fails, and then your target also makes a Wisdom save, and on a success, your spell slot did nothing, but on a failure, your Persuade check automatically rolls a 20".
Auto-30 on a Persuade check is arguably worth a level 1 spell, since Disguise Self is functionally auto-30 on an ability check (Disguise Kit), but the inability to pre-cast it so witnesses can't simply identify the spell would still cripple it; even as a level 1 spell, it would need to be like Guidance, with the ability to pre-cast the use, and then burn it later, so the casting isn't witnessed by your target if you take steps to prevent it. No way is any sane caster bothering with a level 2 spell for auto-20 on a Persuade check.
I'm not usually one to trot out simulationist excuses, but did real knights outside of Disney movies actually bond with their horses like pets? I was under the impression that it was much more of a utilitarian relationship and if anyone would have bonded with the horse it would have been the squire or horse trainer who did all the other stuff aside from riding on it.
Not in every case, but with most I would bet on it. Look at equestrian competition (jumping courses, etc). The riders and horses have been with each other for a long time and in the case of jumping, a firm level of trust needs to be built.The riders took their horses to Japan for the Olympics. That's not even taking into account life and death combat and chaos.
Even if it's purely utilitarian, a good warhorse is not easy to come by.
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?"
Suggestion requires that the course of action seem reasonable to the target. Now, some people may limit that to the case of the example: they can't be made to do anything suicidal. But I am a littlr more strict.
I basically treat it as a nat 20 Persuasion roll. It's not an automatic success, if you suggest a course of action contrary to their alignment or bonds. It might be, if you also have a high bonus to Persuasion.
If you allow even actions contrary to the NPCs interests, it's too powerful for a 2nd level spell. You could basically skip a whole adventure by Suggesting the BBEG to hand over the MacGuffin.
That would make the spell entirely useless - Enhance Ability is also 2nd level. 1 hour of advantage on Persuasion checks plus all other Charisma checks is 100% of the time a better idea than "make a Persuasion check; your target knows you are casting a spell and can make a DC 17 Arcana check to realize it's the Suggestion spell specifically, in which case your Suggestion fails, and then your target also makes a Wisdom save, and on a success, your spell slot did nothing, but on a failure, your Persuade check automatically rolls a 20".
If that's what they had said, then yeah, Enhance Ability would be better. But you completely invented your entire second clause, which is really the only part that's even a little bit unreasonable.
Auto-30 on a Persuade check is arguably worth a level 1 spell, since Disguise Self is functionally auto-30 on an ability check (Disguise Kit), but the inability to pre-cast it so witnesses can't simply identify the spell would still cripple it; even as a level 1 spell, it would need to be like Guidance, with the ability to pre-cast the use, and then burn it later, so the casting isn't witnessed by your target if you take steps to prevent it. No way is any sane caster bothering with a level 2 spell for auto-20 on a Persuade check.
Since the DC to discern the disguise is your spell save DC, it's actually functionally an auto-8 on an ability check, which feels appropriate to a 1st-level spell slot.
Its my understanding that the cost of upkeeping a warhorse was the medieval equivalent of an upper class mortgage, I'd wager they were probably pretty near and dear :)
I think that Quin has a good point that the spell has to be more effective than a mere succesful Persuasion check, but I think they are overlooking that the spell comes with a certain level of reliability that a Persuasion check doesn't. If I ask a guard to bring a note to a prisoner and not read it or tell anyone, and roll my Persuasion, the DM might say... "they nod and agree, take the note, and walk away." Was I successful? Will they carry through with the promise? Will they cheat and read it anyway, even just out of curiosity if not a desire to betray me? No way to tell! (other than maybe a final Insight on them after they agree, which isn't mind reading and is fallible).
But if I make that same request using Suggestion, there are certain drawbacks (they know I cast a spell, so even if they fail and are bound to the letter of the request, they're probably not happy; its a second level spell slot; the caster needs to concentrate all day long until task is complete), but also certain advantages: the caster knows whether they failed their wisdom saving throw and whether the spell is still in effect while concentrating, and during that time that the spell is active, they know that nothing has changed to take that guard off task. The guard has no wiggle room to violate any of the requests, to the extent that the spell is up, the caster is certain that they are not reading the note, are not telling anyone, and are in the process of delivering it.
I would agree that Suggestion might almost make more sense as a first-level spell, because taking a chance that someone will be forced to comply with a "reasonable" demand that they know was magical for up to 8 hours, but leaving them free to violate the spirit of the rule or retaliate afterwards, is usually going to be less useful than just asking them politely with a skill check. It kind of suffers the Friends drawback, of being technically-useful, but actually a mistake in almost any context where what the subject does after the spell is meaningful. If Suggestion didn't have components, or left the subject believing that they made the choice themself, it would be probably a lot more useful...
If Suggestion didn't have components, or left the subject believing that they made the choice themself, it would be probably a lot more useful...
Unlike Friends and Charm Person, there is nothing in Suggestion saying that the target is aware of being influenced. It's not clear how visible manipulating a material component when there are no somatic components is, it may be something you can sleight of hand (the verbal component is the actual suggestion).
If Suggestion didn't have components, or left the subject believing that they made the choice themself, it would be probably a lot more useful...
Unlike Friends and Charm Person, there is nothing in Suggestion saying that the target is aware of being influenced. It's not clear how visible manipulating a material component when there are no somatic components is, it may be something you can sleight of hand (the verbal component is the actual suggestion).
For a group playing with the XGtE optional rule, any spell with a component of any type is "perceptible" spellcasting (but doesn't necessarily give away what spell was cast or on whom). Does "perceptible" imply "automatically detected"? Can a "perceptible" spell be hidden with Sleight of Hand or Deception or Stealth (at the risk of one more gatekeeping check to render the spell useless?)? XGtE doesn't go into that.
I think a Suggestion, worded well, might get the king to give away the physical crown. But I don't think authority over a kingdom can be irrevocably transfered in 8 hours. Even if the king thought it was reasonable while under the spell, after it wore off he'd reassert his authority, and his lieutenants would accept his legitimacy.
It doesn't even need 8 hours. The spell ends once the task is completed.
Quite right, which is why Suggestion is intrinsically more powerful if you give a suggestion that can't be completed. "Sit down" is a lot less powerful than "sit down until you finish counting and count to infinity".
"Sit down," is likely to be a lot more reasonable to the target than "Sit down until you finish counting and count to infinity."
"Run to the next town," could sound reasonable in the appropriate circumstances.
How many here would allow Suggestion to cause an enemy to exit combat and run away, effectively banishing it self?
Depends on how dutiful they are. If there are serious consequences for desertion, then no. If they are a true believer in the cause, then no. As I said, I treat it as a nat 20 Persuasion. Most Persuasion checks to defect will be 20 or more. More often 25 - 30. Occasionally if it’s a mercenary, then maybe as low as 15. But even a mercenary won’t change jobs on a whim.
I don’t think you can just say, “Run.” This isn’t Command, which is more powerful but more limited and shorter duration. You would have to give them a plausible reason why they should leave.
The spell involves the caster telling the target what to do. After 8 hours the soldier is going to be hunting down that caster - or reporting that caster to his superiors!
Sure, but if you kill off a group of guards, there's a good chance the superiors are going to find out about it anyway within 8 hours. You and your party are going to be long gone.
Obviously, if you need there to be no witnesses, then Suggesting someone to run isn't what you want. Maybe Suggest that the soldier go wait at the crossroads for you to meet him. And then show up and finish him off.
Suggestion requires that the course of action seem reasonable to the target. Now, some people may limit that to the case of the example: they can't be made to do anything suicidal. But I am a littlr more strict.
I basically treat it as a nat 20 Persuasion roll. It's not an automatic success, if you suggest a course of action contrary to their alignment or bonds. It might be, if you also have a high bonus to Persuasion.
If you allow even actions contrary to the NPCs interests, it's too powerful for a 2nd level spell. You could basically skip a whole adventure by Suggesting the BBEG to hand over the MacGuffin.
That would make the spell entirely useless - Enhance Ability is also 2nd level. 1 hour of advantage on Persuasion checks plus all other Charisma checks is 100% of the time a better idea than "make a Persuasion check; your target knows you are casting a spell and can make a DC 17 Arcana check to realize it's the Suggestion spell specifically, in which case your Suggestion fails, and then your target also makes a Wisdom save, and on a success, your spell slot did nothing, but on a failure, your Persuade check automatically rolls a 20".
Auto-30 on a Persuade check is arguably worth a level 1 spell, since Disguise Self is functionally auto-30 on an ability check (Disguise Kit), but the inability to pre-cast it so witnesses can't simply identify the spell would still cripple it; even as a level 1 spell, it would need to be like Guidance, with the ability to pre-cast the use, and then burn it later, so the casting isn't witnessed by your target if you take steps to prevent it. No way is any sane caster bothering with a level 2 spell for auto-20 on a Persuade check.
Not sure why Suggestion would fail if they know the spell is being cast.
I also don't think advantage is better than an auto-20. Sure, if you're wanting to make a bunch of checks, then use Enhance Ability. But if you want this single check to have the best chance, use Suggestion.
ABC spell is useless because XYZ other spell is better than it in some situation is rarely a valid argument.
Why do you say Disguise Self is an auto-30? "To discern that you are disguised, a creature can use its action to inspect your appearance and must succeed on an Intelligence (Investigation) check against your spell save DC." It's an auto-whatever-your-spell-save-DC-is.
If Suggestion didn't have components, or left the subject believing that they made the choice themself, it would be probably a lot more useful...
Unlike Friends and Charm Person, there is nothing in Suggestion saying that the target is aware of being influenced. It's not clear how visible manipulating a material component when there are no somatic components is, it may be something you can sleight of hand (the verbal component is the actual suggestion).
I thought it was fairly obvious from the opening sentence that you are verbally (the VERBAL component) telling the target what to do:
You suggest a course of activity (limited to a sentence or two) and magically influence a creature you can see within range that can hear and understand you
Thus there is clearly a "perceptible effect" - the instructions being issued.
Neither friends nor Charm Person have any mention of providing verbal instructions, thus the additional information in the spell has been added to let the target know after the fact.
I thought it was fairly obvious from the opening sentence that you are verbally (the VERBAL component) telling the target what to do:
The subject of the spell heard you make a suggestion, and the suggestion seemed reasonable at the time. If, in retrospective, the suggestion is obviously unreasonable, you'd probably suspect magic, but suggestions are supposed to at least seem plausible, and there's nothing inherently suspect about agreeing to do something that was proposed to you.
RAW, the verbal component of spells like Suggestion is not the request you make, but rather some mumbo jumbo before it as you speak the incantation. The spell effect being you making a command that is obeyed doesn't make that command the verbal compoment, any more than the spell effect of Burning Hands being that you can put your hands together to shoot a fan of flame makes that somatic component two-handed.
Verbal (V)
Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren't the source of the spell's power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion.
While that combination of mystic words/sounds/pitch/resonance are arbitrary/unimportant, and a player should probably be given latitude to say "the sounds I make as the verbal component of Suggestion are "gimme a ham sandwich!""... to use Suggestion to demand a ham sandwich in that hypothetical would sound like "gimme a ham sandwich! gimme a ham sandwich!", and any other Suggestion they can will also end up preceded by gimmeahamsandwich as well.
You could interpret the knight giving away their horse as to what should be considered "reasonable". Giving away a pricey but replacable possession to a person in need? Reasonable. Giving away the crown to the kingdom to your enemy or your firstborn to a Fey Lord? Probably not reasonable.
I would say that a crown is closer to "pricey but replaceable" and a trained animal/pet is closer to family than a possession.
If the knight's horse is not their personal horse that they have had for a long time and formed a bond with, then it would be reasonable.
A kingodm isn't replacable. You do realize that "the crown to the kingdom" is a metaphor for the entire country, right? Like how "giving them the key to the city" often means not giving someone a literal key but rather to hand over control of that city to the other part. And not all knights bond with their horses, but that's beside the point.
As a dm I would totally play it this way, give me your crown, ok, I have 5 more and this is the cheap battered one.
5 mins later I am your king, no your just a guy wearing a hat.
RAW, the verbal component of spells like Suggestion is not the request you make, but rather some mumbo jumbo before it as you speak the incantation.
RAW, the verbal component of spells is unspecified other than the fact that you can't cast a spell with verbal components while silenced. It's perfectly consistent to say that you're just supposed to intone your suggestion with specific pitch and resonance.
Again, if you'll look closely, you'll se that the PHB describes that each spell with a verbal component has a "particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance." That particular-and-specific vocalization is indeed unspecified, and can be whatever your character or DM wants it to be.... but it's one particular-and-specific vocalization for that spell. Reading "particular" and "specific" as "not particular" and "changing to fit the context of what you're suggesting" is.... not RAW. Could be RAI, for all I know! But that's not the verbal component rules that were written down!
Something like the BBEG handing over the McGuffin obviously wouldn't seem reasonable.
It is a second level spell. I would rule that a suggestion that is not directly contradictory to the target's interests will take effect.
Suicide, helping to kill their comrades, directly contravening their mission... those are not reasonable.
Fleeing the battle after seeing your wizard throw a fireball, deserting on a doubt of their leader's motives, or being told "you should take this 5 gold and go home" all seem pretty reasonable.
Something like the BBEG handing over the McGuffin obviously wouldn't seem reasonable.
It is a second level spell. I would rule that a suggestion that is not directly contradictory to the target's interests will take effect.
Suicide, helping to kill their comrades, directly contravening their mission... those are not reasonable.
Fleeing the battle after seeing your wizard throw a fireball, deserting on a doubt of their leader's motives, or being told "you should take this 5 gold and go home" all seem pretty reasonable.
You can make a minion flee the battle, but you can't make the BBEG flee, even though, if you've created a balanced combat, that is by definition reasonable. My way of interpreting this is that the DC for a Persuasion check to make the BBEG give up is higher than anything you could achieve with a natural 20 and any possible bonus.
Again, if you'll look closely, you'll se that the PHB describes that each spell with a verbal component has a "particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance."
It also says "The words themselves aren't the source of the spell's power"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm not usually one to trot out simulationist excuses, but did real knights outside of Disney movies actually bond with their horses like pets? I was under the impression that it was much more of a utilitarian relationship and if anyone would have bonded with the horse it would have been the squire or horse trainer who did all the other stuff aside from riding on it.
At any rate, Suggestion has a time limit. There's nothing stopping the knight from buying the horse right back from the beggar the minute the task was completed. Even if its worded in a way it expires 8 hours later, it just takes some time and money to track it down and buy it back. The spell is not "you lose your cherished pet forever" unless the DM specifically decides that's what happens afterwards.
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
That would make the spell entirely useless - Enhance Ability is also 2nd level. 1 hour of advantage on Persuasion checks plus all other Charisma checks is 100% of the time a better idea than "make a Persuasion check; your target knows you are casting a spell and can make a DC 17 Arcana check to realize it's the Suggestion spell specifically, in which case your Suggestion fails, and then your target also makes a Wisdom save, and on a success, your spell slot did nothing, but on a failure, your Persuade check automatically rolls a 20".
Auto-30 on a Persuade check is arguably worth a level 1 spell, since Disguise Self is functionally auto-30 on an ability check (Disguise Kit), but the inability to pre-cast it so witnesses can't simply identify the spell would still cripple it; even as a level 1 spell, it would need to be like Guidance, with the ability to pre-cast the use, and then burn it later, so the casting isn't witnessed by your target if you take steps to prevent it. No way is any sane caster bothering with a level 2 spell for auto-20 on a Persuade check.
Not in every case, but with most I would bet on it. Look at equestrian competition (jumping courses, etc). The riders and horses have been with each other for a long time and in the case of jumping, a firm level of trust needs to be built.The riders took their horses to Japan for the Olympics. That's not even taking into account life and death combat and chaos.
Even if it's purely utilitarian, a good warhorse is not easy to come by.
"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
If that's what they had said, then yeah, Enhance Ability would be better. But you completely invented your entire second clause, which is really the only part that's even a little bit unreasonable.
Since the DC to discern the disguise is your spell save DC, it's actually functionally an auto-8 on an ability check, which feels appropriate to a 1st-level spell slot.
Its my understanding that the cost of upkeeping a warhorse was the medieval equivalent of an upper class mortgage, I'd wager they were probably pretty near and dear :)
I think that Quin has a good point that the spell has to be more effective than a mere succesful Persuasion check, but I think they are overlooking that the spell comes with a certain level of reliability that a Persuasion check doesn't. If I ask a guard to bring a note to a prisoner and not read it or tell anyone, and roll my Persuasion, the DM might say... "they nod and agree, take the note, and walk away." Was I successful? Will they carry through with the promise? Will they cheat and read it anyway, even just out of curiosity if not a desire to betray me? No way to tell! (other than maybe a final Insight on them after they agree, which isn't mind reading and is fallible).
But if I make that same request using Suggestion, there are certain drawbacks (they know I cast a spell, so even if they fail and are bound to the letter of the request, they're probably not happy; its a second level spell slot; the caster needs to concentrate all day long until task is complete), but also certain advantages: the caster knows whether they failed their wisdom saving throw and whether the spell is still in effect while concentrating, and during that time that the spell is active, they know that nothing has changed to take that guard off task. The guard has no wiggle room to violate any of the requests, to the extent that the spell is up, the caster is certain that they are not reading the note, are not telling anyone, and are in the process of delivering it.
I would agree that Suggestion might almost make more sense as a first-level spell, because taking a chance that someone will be forced to comply with a "reasonable" demand that they know was magical for up to 8 hours, but leaving them free to violate the spirit of the rule or retaliate afterwards, is usually going to be less useful than just asking them politely with a skill check. It kind of suffers the Friends drawback, of being technically-useful, but actually a mistake in almost any context where what the subject does after the spell is meaningful. If Suggestion didn't have components, or left the subject believing that they made the choice themself, it would be probably a lot more useful...
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Unlike Friends and Charm Person, there is nothing in Suggestion saying that the target is aware of being influenced. It's not clear how visible manipulating a material component when there are no somatic components is, it may be something you can sleight of hand (the verbal component is the actual suggestion).
The PHB is explicit that spells with "perceptible effects" are perceived, but Suggestion isn't that, you're right.
For a group playing with the XGtE optional rule, any spell with a component of any type is "perceptible" spellcasting (but doesn't necessarily give away what spell was cast or on whom). Does "perceptible" imply "automatically detected"? Can a "perceptible" spell be hidden with Sleight of Hand or Deception or Stealth (at the risk of one more gatekeeping check to render the spell useless?)? XGtE doesn't go into that.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
"Sit down," is likely to be a lot more reasonable to the target than "Sit down until you finish counting and count to infinity."
"Run to the next town," could sound reasonable in the appropriate circumstances.
Sure, but if you kill off a group of guards, there's a good chance the superiors are going to find out about it anyway within 8 hours. You and your party are going to be long gone.
Obviously, if you need there to be no witnesses, then Suggesting someone to run isn't what you want. Maybe Suggest that the soldier go wait at the crossroads for you to meet him. And then show up and finish him off.
Not sure why Suggestion would fail if they know the spell is being cast.
I also don't think advantage is better than an auto-20. Sure, if you're wanting to make a bunch of checks, then use Enhance Ability. But if you want this single check to have the best chance, use Suggestion.
ABC spell is useless because XYZ other spell is better than it in some situation is rarely a valid argument.
Why do you say Disguise Self is an auto-30? "To discern that you are disguised, a creature can use its action to inspect your appearance and must succeed on an Intelligence (Investigation) check against your spell save DC." It's an auto-whatever-your-spell-save-DC-is.
I thought it was fairly obvious from the opening sentence that you are verbally (the VERBAL component) telling the target what to do:
Thus there is clearly a "perceptible effect" - the instructions being issued.
Neither friends nor Charm Person have any mention of providing verbal instructions, thus the additional information in the spell has been added to let the target know after the fact.
If somebody made the "suggestion" to give up my dog, I would suggest to them a reasonable place that they could put their suggestion.
Fixed.
The subject of the spell heard you make a suggestion, and the suggestion seemed reasonable at the time. If, in retrospective, the suggestion is obviously unreasonable, you'd probably suspect magic, but suggestions are supposed to at least seem plausible, and there's nothing inherently suspect about agreeing to do something that was proposed to you.
RAW, the verbal component of spells like Suggestion is not the request you make, but rather some mumbo jumbo before it as you speak the incantation. The spell effect being you making a command that is obeyed doesn't make that command the verbal compoment, any more than the spell effect of Burning Hands being that you can put your hands together to shoot a fan of flame makes that somatic component two-handed.
While that combination of mystic words/sounds/pitch/resonance are arbitrary/unimportant, and a player should probably be given latitude to say "the sounds I make as the verbal component of Suggestion are "gimme a ham sandwich!""... to use Suggestion to demand a ham sandwich in that hypothetical would sound like "gimme a ham sandwich! gimme a ham sandwich!", and any other Suggestion they can will also end up preceded by gimme a ham sandwich as well.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
As a dm I would totally play it this way, give me your crown, ok, I have 5 more and this is the cheap battered one.
5 mins later I am your king, no your just a guy wearing a hat.
RAW, the verbal component of spells is unspecified other than the fact that you can't cast a spell with verbal components while silenced. It's perfectly consistent to say that you're just supposed to intone your suggestion with specific pitch and resonance.
Again, if you'll look closely, you'll se that the PHB describes that each spell with a verbal component has a "particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance." That particular-and-specific vocalization is indeed unspecified, and can be whatever your character or DM wants it to be.... but it's one particular-and-specific vocalization for that spell. Reading "particular" and "specific" as "not particular" and "changing to fit the context of what you're suggesting" is.... not RAW. Could be RAI, for all I know! But that's not the verbal component rules that were written down!
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Something like the BBEG handing over the McGuffin obviously wouldn't seem reasonable.
It is a second level spell. I would rule that a suggestion that is not directly contradictory to the target's interests will take effect.
Suicide, helping to kill their comrades, directly contravening their mission... those are not reasonable.
Fleeing the battle after seeing your wizard throw a fireball, deserting on a doubt of their leader's motives, or being told "you should take this 5 gold and go home" all seem pretty reasonable.
You can make a minion flee the battle, but you can't make the BBEG flee, even though, if you've created a balanced combat, that is by definition reasonable. My way of interpreting this is that the DC for a Persuasion check to make the BBEG give up is higher than anything you could achieve with a natural 20 and any possible bonus.
It also says "The words themselves aren't the source of the spell's power"