Ok I'm curious how people view this scenario: Sorcerer uses suggestion to make Arcane armorer remove armor mid fight. Now, arcane armor can't be removed by force and suggestion has to be reasonable, so an artificer with 17 intelligence (10-11 being average in dnd) would probably see this as harmful. However, since the act isn't technically harming them or means they'd be harmed and they are the ones removing it, does this work or would you rule this is removal by force?
Depends on how you define achievable. But my instinct in that very narrow circumstance is yes they could remove the armor, and similarly if someone has an armor that allows them to remove it with an action as well they can as well. If it takes like a minute or something I can see it being reasonable for a DM to say its not really achievable to try to take off armor while also trying to dodge blows. Just physically it would require too much coordination. But with 25 words you could get them to stop fighting and remove their armor and as long as your side also stops fighting it would be achievable.
2024 suggestion doesn't have to "not be harmful," it has to "not obviously deal damage." Removing armor does not deal damage. Just as telling someone to go outside without sunscreen is not synonymous with telling them to stand in fire, so too is telling them to remove armor not synonymous with telling them to themself be stabbed.
It is obviously risky and not a particularly good idea, but that is fine for the spell.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
That’s what DM adjudication of RAW vs RAI is for- keeping your head submerged when your lungs are screaming for air is rather different from taking off armor. As with every mind control spell between Command and Dominate, the exact borders are fuzzy and need DM rulings to keep them within the proper scope.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
I'd say that suggestion involves something that obviously deals damage to the target: if the creature dies because its Exhaustion level reaches 6, its HP drops to 0.
But... I agree changing "reasonable" to "achievable" was unfortunate.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
I'd say that suggestion involves something that obviously deals damage to the target: if the creature dies because its Exhaustion level reaches 6, its HP drops to 0.
But... I agree changing "reasonable" to "achievable" was unfortunate.
“Reasonable” is a lot more subjective, though, so it makes it hard to set a specific range of performance. Although it doesn’t help in general that to a certain degree spells like these are simply impossible to balance because their effects center on qualitative elements.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
I'd say that suggestion involves something that obviously deals damage to the target: if the creature dies because its Exhaustion level reaches 6, its HP drops to 0.
But... I agree changing "reasonable" to "achievable" was unfortunate.
Does it? I thought they just die. You can die without dropping to 0 hp.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
I'd say that suggestion involves something that obviously deals damage to the target: if the creature dies because its Exhaustion level reaches 6, its HP drops to 0.
But... I agree changing "reasonable" to "achievable" was unfortunate.
“Reasonable” is a lot more subjective, though, so it makes it hard to set a specific range of performance. Although it doesn’t help in general that to a certain degree spells like these are simply impossible to balance because their effects center on qualitative elements.
Agree. People even argued the example in the 2014 version of the paladin giving away their warhorse didn’t meet the “reasonable” requirement as a trained for combat warhorse to an unfamiliar handler could be dangerous to your average citizen and unreasonable that a paladin in good conscience would do it.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
I'd say that suggestion involves something that obviously deals damage to the target: if the creature dies because its Exhaustion level reaches 6, its HP drops to 0.
But... I agree changing "reasonable" to "achievable" was unfortunate.
Does it? I thought they just die. You can die without dropping to 0 hp.
Yeah, you're right. Exhaustion level 6 is instant death. But isn't that damaging the creature?
Anyways, I think this isn't a very productive debate. Each DM should rule how they want to play this spell because the interpretation is pretty open. Maybe that's intentional?
Yes, you can use Suggestion to have someone remove their armor (but it is going to take a significant amount of time to do so, but does effectively remove them from the fight).
As for the 'not obviously deal damage' bit - I would suggest that anything that is likely to result in sure death, qualifies.
Suggesting that someone submerge themselves and remain underwater for as long as they can, would be a reasonable suggestion. Suggesting that they drown themselves, would not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I’ve seen suggestion as the end of all combat, role playing, and often exploration
”Obey all my commands for the next eight hours”
Dictate afterwords ‘Don’t attack me or my allies’, ‘Do not speak unless spoken to’, ‘Tell me what the cult is planning’, ‘Lead me to the vault or BBEG’, ‘Submit to these manacles and blindfold’, ‘Submit to this saving throw’, etc.
This spell is not very different from dominate monster an 8th level spell
I’ve seen suggestion as the end of all combat, role playing, and often exploration
”Obey all my commands for the next eight hours”
Dictate afterwords ‘Don’t attack me or my allies’, ‘Do not speak unless spoken to’, ‘Tell me what the cult is planning’, ‘Lead me to the vault or BBEG’, ‘Submit to these manacles and blindfold’, ‘Submit to this saving throw’, etc.
This spell is not very different from dominate monster an 8th level spell
Way too overpowered
Only if you’re excessively liberal with what you define a “course of action” as.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Ok I'm curious how people view this scenario: Sorcerer uses suggestion to make Arcane armorer remove armor mid fight. Now, arcane armor can't be removed by force and suggestion has to be reasonable, so an artificer with 17 intelligence (10-11 being average in dnd) would probably see this as harmful. However, since the act isn't technically harming them or means they'd be harmed and they are the ones removing it, does this work or would you rule this is removal by force?
Depends on how you define achievable. But my instinct in that very narrow circumstance is yes they could remove the armor, and similarly if someone has an armor that allows them to remove it with an action as well they can as well. If it takes like a minute or something I can see it being reasonable for a DM to say its not really achievable to try to take off armor while also trying to dodge blows. Just physically it would require too much coordination. But with 25 words you could get them to stop fighting and remove their armor and as long as your side also stops fighting it would be achievable.
2024 suggestion doesn't have to "not be harmful," it has to "not obviously deal damage." Removing armor does not deal damage. Just as telling someone to go outside without sunscreen is not synonymous with telling them to stand in fire, so too is telling them to remove armor not synonymous with telling them to themself be stabbed.
It is obviously risky and not a particularly good idea, but that is fine for the spell.
2024 Suggestion is broken and should not be used RAW. For instance in 2024 rules drowning does not deal damage, so it would be completely viable RAW to suggest a creature put their head in a bucket of water until they drown.
That’s what DM adjudication of RAW vs RAI is for- keeping your head submerged when your lungs are screaming for air is rather different from taking off armor. As with every mind control spell between Command and Dominate, the exact borders are fuzzy and need DM rulings to keep them within the proper scope.
I'd say that suggestion involves something that obviously deals damage to the target: if the creature dies because its Exhaustion level reaches 6, its HP drops to 0.
But... I agree changing "reasonable" to "achievable" was unfortunate.
“Reasonable” is a lot more subjective, though, so it makes it hard to set a specific range of performance. Although it doesn’t help in general that to a certain degree spells like these are simply impossible to balance because their effects center on qualitative elements.
Does it? I thought they just die. You can die without dropping to 0 hp.
Agree. People even argued the example in the 2014 version of the paladin giving away their warhorse didn’t meet the “reasonable” requirement as a trained for combat warhorse to an unfamiliar handler could be dangerous to your average citizen and unreasonable that a paladin in good conscience would do it.
Hard to balance.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yeah, you're right. Exhaustion level 6 is instant death. But isn't that damaging the creature?
Anyways, I think this isn't a very productive debate. Each DM should rule how they want to play this spell because the interpretation is pretty open. Maybe that's intentional?
I agree with that.
Yes, you can use Suggestion to have someone remove their armor (but it is going to take a significant amount of time to do so, but does effectively remove them from the fight).
As for the 'not obviously deal damage' bit - I would suggest that anything that is likely to result in sure death, qualifies.
Suggesting that someone submerge themselves and remain underwater for as long as they can, would be a reasonable suggestion. Suggesting that they drown themselves, would not.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I’ve seen suggestion as the end of all combat, role playing, and often exploration
”Obey all my commands for the next eight hours”
Dictate afterwords ‘Don’t attack me or my allies’, ‘Do not speak unless spoken to’, ‘Tell me what the cult is planning’, ‘Lead me to the vault or BBEG’, ‘Submit to these manacles and blindfold’, ‘Submit to this saving throw’, etc.
This spell is not very different from dominate monster an 8th level spell
Way too overpowered
Only if you’re excessively liberal with what you define a “course of action” as.