I want to ask regarding a certain spell that seems to be OP if not explained correctly: The COMMAND spell. I have a level 4 Cleric (Warpriest) who uses this often, but I was given corrections by the DMs to how this works. I do want to ask clarification if did I get the functionality of this spell wrong with the following statements:
• I know that using the COMMAND spell to inflict damage to self or to others is not allowed (such as BETRAY, DROWN, etc.)
• According to the DMs, you can only use the commands indicated on the COMMAND spell description on PHB 223 (APPROACH, DROP, FLEE, GROVEL, HALT). But as I have read from the spell description "You might issue a command other than one described here. If you do so, the DM determines how the target behaves." If so can you invoke someone to do a command even if it is against the target's will? (like making a target SWIM on the nearest body of water)
• I've tried using words to get the enemy to concede like SURRENDER, UNDRESS, SHEATH. Does it go with DM's discretion to choose that the target will not do those commands even if it didn't violate the "NO HURTING" and "CAN'T DO THINGS THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE"?
• Can you use the COMMAND spell on allies to give it a free turn like using the words ATTACK, RETREAT, DEFEND, and the like?
I think reading through the spell itself answers most questions. Command specifically states the effect takes place on the target's next turn, so you can't give out free turns with it.
Beyond that, the listed commands should all work every time. When you speak one word that differs from that list then it's up to the DM to interpret it. Technically the DM should allow any word, and interpret it fairly. It may be worth pointing out the wording in spell to your DM - refusing other words entirely is a house rule from your DM that alters the spell from its intended state.
Since this only works for one turn, having it surrender probably won't do much on its own. Next turn, when in control of itself again, it should carry on. However, having the enemy's leader surrender for a turn may cause its minions to also surrender (and probably be very confused) until the leader comes back to their senses, and asks them to carry on. It's still up to the DM to interpret anything like this, but definitely keep in mind that Command's effects are one-turn only.
My favorite Command word is 'confess', which can either lead to gaining plot info/secrets or hilarity depending on the situation and interpretation.
By the spell description, any one-word command will work, and the target will spend their next turn doing it. So long as it doesn't hurt the target and is possible, the target should do something in response to the command if it fails its Wisdom save.
If I were DMing, I would allow "surrender" to function basically like "grovel" and "sheathe" to work like "drop". For "undress", I'd have them start to undress, but generally removing armor takes more than one round, so it wouldn't do much. Having the target do nothing because you didn't give one of the commands in the text would not be in line with the way the spell is stated to work. However, the effect only lasts one round. So they'd surrender on their next turn, and then immediately get up and start attacking again.
You can target your allies with the spell, but the target still does not do anything until their turn, so no free attacks, clever as that is.
I never really considered using it on allies before, and it's a great idea I'm going to have to steal. Bloodthirsty player diving in to danger/doesn't want to retreat? Command them to retreat.
It's certainly a good solution for that Charmed or dominated party member that's trying to hurt your cleric, and they'll thank you later!
A charmed party member would not try to hurt your cleric in the first place if that party member didn't want to. It does raise an interesting question about using command on a target who is affected by dominate person though. Which spell would have priority?
The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect—such as the highest bonus—from those castings applies while their durations overlap.
I interpret this to mean that a 5th level spell would have a more potent effect than a 1st level spell. You would not be able to command someone who is under the control of Dominate Person because the spell description states, "Until the end of your next turn, the creature takes only the actions you choose, and doesn't do anything that you don't allow it to do." You could command someone who is under the effect of Charm Person because there's no contradiction in effects there.
The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect—such as the highest bonus—from those castings applies while their durations overlap.
I interpret this to mean that a 5th level spell would have a more potent effect than a 1st level spell. You would not be able to command someone who is under the control of Dominate Person because the spell description states, "Until the end of your next turn, the creature takes only the actions you choose, and doesn't do anything that you don't allow it to do." You could command someone who is under the effect of Charm Person because there's no contradiction in effects there.
I disagree with that interpretation. That rule states the same spell cast Command and Dominate Person are not the same spell.
Do you have better guidance on what happens when two spell effects are in opposition?
Here. Basically, both effects remain active, but if they are in opposition: a Contest (DMG, p 238) can be used. This is similar to how it was handled in previous editions: "If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys."
Maybe this is such an edge case that there doesn't need to be a written rule to govern it. I really can't think of a lot of situations where you have two spells in direct opposition of each other. A contest is a reasonable solution for a house rule to fill a gap. I would personally lean more toward letting the higher level spell beat the lower level spell in the rare situation where they cannot coexist.
Do you have better guidance on what happens when two spell effects are in opposition?
Here. Basically, both effects remain active, but if they are in opposition: a Contest (DMG, p 238) can be used. This is similar to how it was handled in previous editions: "If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys."
This would likely be my preferred method of doing it. It also adds a very cool moment. I can imagine one of the PCs controlled with Dominate Person, and another PC using Command as a last ditch effort to prevent something Terrible from happening... So you tell them what the baddie adds to the roll, and do the contested roll right in front of everyone where they can see it. If it fails, everyone sees it and knows and reacts. If they succeed, the whole table will go mad with excitement. Tension moments like that are my favourite part about D&D.
I have a different question but I think it should belong with this topic. As the spell specifies that it is a verbal component and the creature must speak the same language. Would it be that the target must automatically save or would the target need to be able to hear the command word?
Bit of background for the question. My character was in a pit fight and our cleric was using the Command spell to attempt to get my character to fail. DM had him roll a Stealth check to be sure that the crowd didn’t hear him cast this spell but he made me roll anyway.
Personally I feel he was in the wrong on that as my character wouldn’t be able to hear the command word but he said that “because it was “magic” it is whispered in your ear and only you are able to hear it”
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Greetings to all!
I want to ask regarding a certain spell that seems to be OP if not explained correctly: The COMMAND spell. I have a level 4 Cleric (Warpriest) who uses this often, but I was given corrections by the DMs to how this works. I do want to ask clarification if did I get the functionality of this spell wrong with the following statements:
• I know that using the COMMAND spell to inflict damage to self or to others is not allowed (such as BETRAY, DROWN, etc.)
• According to the DMs, you can only use the commands indicated on the COMMAND spell description on PHB 223 (APPROACH, DROP, FLEE, GROVEL, HALT). But as I have read from the spell description "You might issue a command other than one described here. If you do so, the DM determines how the target behaves." If so can you invoke someone to do a command even if it is against the target's will? (like making a target SWIM on the nearest body of water)
• I've tried using words to get the enemy to concede like SURRENDER, UNDRESS, SHEATH. Does it go with DM's discretion to choose that the target will not do those commands even if it didn't violate the "NO HURTING" and "CAN'T DO THINGS THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE"?
• Can you use the COMMAND spell on allies to give it a free turn like using the words ATTACK, RETREAT, DEFEND, and the like?
I think reading through the spell itself answers most questions. Command specifically states the effect takes place on the target's next turn, so you can't give out free turns with it.
Beyond that, the listed commands should all work every time. When you speak one word that differs from that list then it's up to the DM to interpret it. Technically the DM should allow any word, and interpret it fairly. It may be worth pointing out the wording in spell to your DM - refusing other words entirely is a house rule from your DM that alters the spell from its intended state.
Since this only works for one turn, having it surrender probably won't do much on its own. Next turn, when in control of itself again, it should carry on. However, having the enemy's leader surrender for a turn may cause its minions to also surrender (and probably be very confused) until the leader comes back to their senses, and asks them to carry on. It's still up to the DM to interpret anything like this, but definitely keep in mind that Command's effects are one-turn only.
My favorite Command word is 'confess', which can either lead to gaining plot info/secrets or hilarity depending on the situation and interpretation.
Site Rules & Guidelines - Please feel free to message a moderator if you have any concerns.
My homebrew: [Subclasses] [Races] [Feats] [Discussion Thread]
By the spell description, any one-word command will work, and the target will spend their next turn doing it. So long as it doesn't hurt the target and is possible, the target should do something in response to the command if it fails its Wisdom save.
If I were DMing, I would allow "surrender" to function basically like "grovel" and "sheathe" to work like "drop". For "undress", I'd have them start to undress, but generally removing armor takes more than one round, so it wouldn't do much. Having the target do nothing because you didn't give one of the commands in the text would not be in line with the way the spell is stated to work. However, the effect only lasts one round. So they'd surrender on their next turn, and then immediately get up and start attacking again.
You can target your allies with the spell, but the target still does not do anything until their turn, so no free attacks, clever as that is.
I never really considered using it on allies before, and it's a great idea I'm going to have to steal. Bloodthirsty player diving in to danger/doesn't want to retreat? Command them to retreat.
Site Rules & Guidelines - Please feel free to message a moderator if you have any concerns.
My homebrew: [Subclasses] [Races] [Feats] [Discussion Thread]
Do that too often, and they might not stay allies, but it could work once 😅
It's certainly a good solution for that Charmed or dominated party member that's trying to hurt your cleric, and they'll thank you later!
No where does it say that you can't use Command to attack it's allies.
My only question is, how long does it last? It doesn't specify.
it specifies a duration of one round.
I use it for melee, since it means teammates get advantage on attacks and my Create Campfire still burns him if I use Grovel.
Gaius, your Signature is out dated. I had to say it, and I hate to, but Anime Swordsman is the most like Homebrew subclass on DnD beyond.
Extended Signature! Yay! https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/off-topic/adohands-kitchen/3153-extended-signature-thread?page=2#c21
Haven’t used this account in forever. Still a big fan of crawling claws.
A charmed party member would not try to hurt your cleric in the first place if that party member didn't want to. It does raise an interesting question about using command on a target who is affected by dominate person though. Which spell would have priority?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I dont know where, but I think I remember reading that a charm spell automatically fails against an already charmed person.
That prolly isnt an official rule, or else you could essentially use low-level spells as a shield against the higher level.
The command spell has nothing to do with the charmed condition.
Ah, I found a relevant rule from the SRD in the spellcasting section.
I interpret this to mean that a 5th level spell would have a more potent effect than a 1st level spell. You would not be able to command someone who is under the control of Dominate Person because the spell description states, "Until the end of your next turn, the creature takes only the actions you choose, and doesn't do anything that you don't allow it to do." You could command someone who is under the effect of Charm Person because there's no contradiction in effects there.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I disagree with that interpretation. That rule states the same spell cast Command and Dominate Person are not the same spell.
Indeed they are not. Do you have better guidance on what happens when two spell effects are in opposition?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Here. Basically, both effects remain active, but if they are in opposition: a Contest (DMG, p 238) can be used. This is similar to how it was handled in previous editions: "If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys."
Maybe this is such an edge case that there doesn't need to be a written rule to govern it. I really can't think of a lot of situations where you have two spells in direct opposition of each other. A contest is a reasonable solution for a house rule to fill a gap. I would personally lean more toward letting the higher level spell beat the lower level spell in the rare situation where they cannot coexist.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
This would likely be my preferred method of doing it. It also adds a very cool moment. I can imagine one of the PCs controlled with Dominate Person, and another PC using Command as a last ditch effort to prevent something Terrible from happening... So you tell them what the baddie adds to the roll, and do the contested roll right in front of everyone where they can see it. If it fails, everyone sees it and knows and reacts. If they succeed, the whole table will go mad with excitement. Tension moments like that are my favourite part about D&D.
Great suggestion and ruling, MattV!
I have a different question but I think it should belong with this topic. As the spell specifies that it is a verbal component and the creature must speak the same language. Would it be that the target must automatically save or would the target need to be able to hear the command word?
Bit of background for the question. My character was in a pit fight and our cleric was using the Command spell to attempt to get my character to fail. DM had him roll a Stealth check to be sure that the crowd didn’t hear him cast this spell but he made me roll anyway.
Personally I feel he was in the wrong on that as my character wouldn’t be able to hear the command word but he said that “because it was “magic” it is whispered in your ear and only you are able to hear it”