I wonder how they handle this spell in languages such as German that can have extremely long and complex words that would be a sentence in English?
wiedergutmachen!
The key is that whatever word you choose, they're only going to spend one turn doing it. So even if you come up with a word that means "engage on a pilgrimage to your homeland so that the gods will not visit their wrath upon our flocks" the end result is still going to be a single turn of running.
You are correct. The spell doesn't say anything about allies. That's why it gets abused. The best test I know for Command is to use just the word (it can only be one word, something with a hyphen does not count as one word) without context and see if you can figure out what the person would do. If they fail the save, they do it, if they do not...
Approach. The target moves toward you by the shortest and most direct route, ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet of you. That works just fine.
Drop. The target drops whatever it is holding and then ends its turn. That also works fine.
Flee. The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means. That's fine too.
Grovel. The target falls prone and then ends its turn. That one is confusing. Why drop prone? You can grovel while standing.
Halt. The target doesn't move and takes no actions. A flying creature stays aloft, provided that it is able to do so. If it must move to stay aloft, it flies the minimum distance needed to remain in the air. That's fine as well.
The spell itself can inflict no damage. The only negative thing that spell can do is make people drop prone, and I question that. If they fail their save, they do as they are told, if they make it, the spell has no effect. When an ally is getting harmed, ask yourself, how well do they like their ally? The Command spell can't make them stop thinking. It takes a much more powerful spell for that, it's called Dominate Person and that is a 5th level spell. So if there is any room for interpretation, and they like their ally at all (people usually do, or they don't call them "allies" though there are exceptions) they will probably react poorly.
In case players tried to "enhance" the one-word-rule and suggested things like: 1. Show the target a written command that is longer than one word and then say "comply!" 2. Show them a map and say "go!"
Would you as DMs allow shenanigans like this? I appreciate your opinions!
In case players tried to "enhance" the one-word-rule and suggested things like: 1. Show the target a written command that is longer than one word and then say "comply!" 2. Show them a map and say "go!"
Would you as DMs allow shenanigans like this? I appreciate your opinions!
In the first case it would depend on the written command, but most likely they would spend the turn reading it, then act normally on their next turn. In the second case it's not a whole lot different from flee.
In case players tried to "enhance" the one-word-rule and suggested things like: 1. Show the target a written command that is longer than one word and then say "comply!" 2. Show them a map and say "go!"
Would you as DMs allow shenanigans like this? I appreciate your opinions!
In the middle of a fight it is going to be difficult to get the target to stop long enough to see any paperwork.
In case players tried to "enhance" the one-word-rule and suggested things like: 1. Show the target a written command that is longer than one word and then say "comply!" 2. Show them a map and say "go!"
Would you as DMs allow shenanigans like this? I appreciate your opinions!
No i wouldn't. The target must follow the command to comply but is not compelled to do what's written on a paper or map, only to your verbal command.
Agreed you can not command a creature to attack their allay by pointing at who you want to attack.
One word I will have to try sometime is "teleport". No destination can be given so they could teleport 10 ft away but they have used up their action and a high level spell slot. Any other spells that are good to command like this.
In case players tried to "enhance" the one-word-rule and suggested things like: 1. Show the target a written command that is longer than one word and then say "comply!" 2. Show them a map and say "go!"
Would you as DMs allow shenanigans like this? I appreciate your opinions!
These are both subsets of the same shenanigan, which is redefining a command before you give it. For example:
"Hey, you! You in the hat! When I say "fribjab", I mean "dump the contents of your backpack out onto the ground!"
Cast Command. The command is "fribjab".
Trying to rule on this runs into immediate problems, because the spell provides absolutely no guidance on how to handle any command not listed in the spell - even a simple command like "kneel!" may not get the target to kneel, because all commands not explicitly listed are subject to "the DM determines how the target behaves". There's literally no guidance beyond this - for example, does the target telepathically know what you mean, or does it have to interpret what you mean? Spell offers no clarity at all, so there's no clear-cut RAW answer here.
My point is that the answer I'm about to give you is just, like, my opinion. This spell has to be completely subject to DM fiat, because its own spell description says it is. Feel free to rule differently from how I do.
My ruling would be that the above shenanigans work, but the spell absolutely does not convey anything telepathically, and furthermore, the specific commands in the spell are the only ones that override a general ruling of letting the target interpret the command (which is why "Drop" miraculously doesn't accidentally make targets go prone). So in your specific two examples, here are my rulings:
The target will spend their action on Search to read the command, to ensure they can correctly comply. They will also spend movement to get close enough to read it. If they have enough movement left and/or can legally use their bonus action to comply, they will proceed to do so.
Depends on the target. Some will piss themselves, since that will be the first meaning they think of for "go". Some will go to the map (i.e. move to the map holder). Some will do nothing, because they can't read maps, and the spell fizzles if you give a confusing command. Etc. Certainly some might respond by spending their movement going towards the destination on the map.
Once we have uses with much success is undress, unless an unarmored Barbarian it spends 6 seconds undressing. Our rule is if the command has a normal way of acting you follow it. in this case a person would sheath/secure weapon and start using 2 hands to undress as they would any other time. It doesn't allow you to hinder the action by only using one hand if the action is normally 2 handed. What we are debating now is if you command a target to be silent. We've come across a boss who command word escapes(teleports) when we start winning the battle. If we silence him, he could speak it before his next turn starts as speaking is just a bonus action. The 5 examples are RAW, but drop is problematic if the user has more than one item n their hands. I am not sure why there's debate in halt unless the person is not moving. No one would assume they are talking about your diet or anything else.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I wonder how they handle this spell in languages such as German that can have extremely long and complex words that would be a sentence in English?
wiedergutmachen!
The key is that whatever word you choose, they're only going to spend one turn doing it. So even if you come up with a word that means "engage on a pilgrimage to your homeland so that the gods will not visit their wrath upon our flocks" the end result is still going to be a single turn of running.
In the spells description it does not say anything about the spell ending when you hurt the targets allies, or am I just interpreting it wrong?
You are correct. The spell doesn't say anything about allies. That's why it gets abused. The best test I know for Command is to use just the word (it can only be one word, something with a hyphen does not count as one word) without context and see if you can figure out what the person would do. If they fail the save, they do it, if they do not...
Approach. The target moves toward you by the shortest and most direct route, ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet of you. That works just fine.
Drop. The target drops whatever it is holding and then ends its turn. That also works fine.
Flee. The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means. That's fine too.
Grovel. The target falls prone and then ends its turn. That one is confusing. Why drop prone? You can grovel while standing.
Halt. The target doesn't move and takes no actions. A flying creature stays aloft, provided that it is able to do so. If it must move to stay aloft, it flies the minimum distance needed to remain in the air. That's fine as well.
The spell itself can inflict no damage. The only negative thing that spell can do is make people drop prone, and I question that. If they fail their save, they do as they are told, if they make it, the spell has no effect. When an ally is getting harmed, ask yourself, how well do they like their ally? The Command spell can't make them stop thinking. It takes a much more powerful spell for that, it's called Dominate Person and that is a 5th level spell. So if there is any room for interpretation, and they like their ally at all (people usually do, or they don't call them "allies" though there are exceptions) they will probably react poorly.
<Insert clever signature here>
You are correct, the spell's effect does not end when the target's allies are harmed.
In case players tried to "enhance" the one-word-rule and suggested things like:
1. Show the target a written command that is longer than one word and then say "comply!"
2. Show them a map and say "go!"
Would you as DMs allow shenanigans like this? I appreciate your opinions!
In the first case it would depend on the written command, but most likely they would spend the turn reading it, then act normally on their next turn. In the second case it's not a whole lot different from flee.
In the middle of a fight it is going to be difficult to get the target to stop long enough to see any paperwork.
No i wouldn't. The target must follow the command to comply but is not compelled to do what's written on a paper or map, only to your verbal command.
Agreed you can not command a creature to attack their allay by pointing at who you want to attack.
One word I will have to try sometime is "teleport". No destination can be given so they could teleport 10 ft away but they have used up their action and a high level spell slot. Any other spells that are good to command like this.
These are both subsets of the same shenanigan, which is redefining a command before you give it. For example:
Trying to rule on this runs into immediate problems, because the spell provides absolutely no guidance on how to handle any command not listed in the spell - even a simple command like "kneel!" may not get the target to kneel, because all commands not explicitly listed are subject to "the DM determines how the target behaves". There's literally no guidance beyond this - for example, does the target telepathically know what you mean, or does it have to interpret what you mean? Spell offers no clarity at all, so there's no clear-cut RAW answer here.
My point is that the answer I'm about to give you is just, like, my opinion. This spell has to be completely subject to DM fiat, because its own spell description says it is. Feel free to rule differently from how I do.
My ruling would be that the above shenanigans work, but the spell absolutely does not convey anything telepathically, and furthermore, the specific commands in the spell are the only ones that override a general ruling of letting the target interpret the command (which is why "Drop" miraculously doesn't accidentally make targets go prone). So in your specific two examples, here are my rulings:
I'd say Command does do something, but when command ends, then the person is still under the control of Dominate Person...
It doesn't make sense that a 1st level spell is completely useless and so does a 1st level spell to be more potent than dispel magic...
It's common sense
Anything not labeled on the spell description, and semantics are all at the DM's discretion
Once we have uses with much success is undress, unless an unarmored Barbarian it spends 6 seconds undressing. Our rule is if the command has a normal way of acting you follow it. in this case a person would sheath/secure weapon and start using 2 hands to undress as they would any other time. It doesn't allow you to hinder the action by only using one hand if the action is normally 2 handed. What we are debating now is if you command a target to be silent. We've come across a boss who command word escapes(teleports) when we start winning the battle. If we silence him, he could speak it before his next turn starts as speaking is just a bonus action. The 5 examples are RAW, but drop is problematic if the user has more than one item n their hands. I am not sure why there's debate in halt unless the person is not moving. No one would assume they are talking about your diet or anything else.