You suggest a course of activity—described in no more than 25 words—to one creature you can see within range that can hear and understand you. The suggestion must sound achievable and not involve anything that would obviously deal damage to the target or its allies. For example, you could say, “Fetch the key to the cult’s treasure vault, and give the key to me.” Or you could say, “Stop fighting, leave this library peacefully, and don’t return.”
The target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or have the Charmed condition for the duration or until you or your allies deal damage to the target. The Charmed target pursues the suggestion to the best of its ability. The suggested activity can continue for the entire duration, but if the suggested activity can be completed in a shorter time, the spell ends for the target upon completing it.
On a failed saved can you tell an armed target "Surrender your weapons to me for the fight is over, sit on the ground here till sunset." or "Throw away your weapons and fight me unarmed" , or "Your spell focus and materials are cursed, throw them away"
So gather the weapons before attacking the charmed target.
It seems to fit with the given examples, but the only one who can definitively answer is your DM. Mild mind control like this is always a touchy subject in TTRPGs because there's always a fudge factor of personal interpretations of scope/limits.
One thing about the spell is that the suggestion must sound reasonable, but only at the time of casting. if you tell someone to stand still for eight hours, and then proceed to have your artificer build a nuclear bomb above their head. they still must follow your instructions until you damage them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm just your everyday dungeon master. Ignore that jar full of souls. And those bones in the corner are just props, don't worry. I'm definitely NOT a lich. Definitely.
Yes, I like beholders. Yes, I curated an exquisite personality for commoner #2864. Yes, my catchphrase is "are you sure?"
The wording no longer uses the word "reasonable" in 2024. It uses the word "achievable". This is a key differentiation and makes the spell much easier to adjudicate.
"Surrender your weapons and sit here until sunset" is perfectly achievable and does not obviously deal damage to the target or their allies, therefore it is a perfectly valid Suggestion. Ditto "Fight me unarmed." "Throw away your spell components" is valid even without the curse line.
If the suggested action is achievable and would not cause the target to incur damage in the doing, you can do it. A Suggestion to "turn your coat and fight on our side" is achievable but would result in obvious damage to the target's allies - the spell fails. A Suggestion to "Open a portal to the other side of the world, step through, and never return" or " become a sheep and go eat grass for a few hours" is not achievable for most targets - the spell fails.
The thing the DM needs to adjudicate is what counts as 'obvious damage '. The spell explicitly states you can use it to cause enemies to stop fighting, or to act peacefully against their interest. A Suggestion to "wait calmly while we assemble our Volo's Traveling Guillotine" does not necessarily directly incur damage, but it's pretty clear obeying that order would be damaging; I would rule the spell failed. Similarly, you can order someone to stop fighting or do something that puts them at disadvantage in battle, but ordering someone to undertake an act that would clearly result in you slaughtering them like pigs in a sty would be a hard sell.
The spell is intended to reward creative play. Telling the evil wizard to "find a quiet corner, sit down, and peacefully think about your life choices" is much funnier than trying to fish for an edge case that lets you tell the evil wizard to kill himself without failing the spell. As is Suggesting a henchman "sheathe your blade and spend some time talking to us about the honest benefits of switching employment."
Thanks for the great reply, just one more example. If someone did mold earth and created a 3x6x6 hole and told someone "Quickly take cover waiting in this hole by laying down." would that work?
Again, the criteria is "is the action achievable?" and "will the action incur harm to the target or their allies?"
"Jump in this hole" is an achievable action, so it passes that bar. "Will the action incur harm" is the one your DM will have to rule on, since it's blind-idiot obvious the intent is to bury the target alive in the Mold Earth hole and that constitutes some pretty severe harm. As a DM, I would err on the side of "an intelligent, thinking target can tell they're being told to set themselves up for mage-assisted suicide, and as such ordering them to jump in a hole you're clearly planning to fill right back in next turn would constitute 'obvious harm'."
Spells like this, as Ace stated, will always involve an element of DM fiat and judgment calls. What I would suggest is asking your DM to let you know when you cast Suggestion if your given Suggestion will result in the spell failing. As a trained spellcaster, your character would know the limitations of the spell within their world and have better sense for which Suggestions are fine, which are borderline, and which are clearly going to fail. The DM can help fill in the gap between your world knowledge and your character's world knowledge.
I would also look beyond trying to use Suggestion as simply a dodgy instant-kill spell. That really is its most boring use, so many spells in D&D exist to do damage and win fights already. Why try and make this one another one?
As a rule of thumb, don’t try and come up with some clever way to make a target suicide or otherwise bypass the process of combat while killing them. This is a 2nd level spell, it’s a mental nudge not a shove.
Mind Control spells like this definitely need to be more restrictive then the 2024 version, however I'd say a good basis for this spell is Obi-Wan in Star Wars Episode 4: A new hope. Being like "These are not the droids you're looking for." It's not an overtly over powered form of mind control, it's just putting a simple idea into somebody else's head. Now I'd say disarm should work since a 2nd level mind control spell should be able to achieve what a 1st level mind control spell can already do (Command).
Personally play style wise, I prefer a bit of flare, but that is hard in 25 words. So instead of: Throw away your weapons and fight me unarmed
Be more like: You are stronger and can only prove your worth as a guard by fighting bare fist, drop your weapons to handle these weakling adventurers
This is play style, but I just feel like it should be more like inserting an idea into the enemies head that isn't going to be entirely counter-intuitive to what they are already thinking, this is more subtle but not everybody who uses this spell could do this, so it's fine if they don't but I think it's better if they can that they do. Just gives more to work with as a DM, rather than have NPC carry out action basically as a robot for no real reason other than a counter-intuitive suggestion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
First the spell:
You suggest a course of activity—described in no more than 25 words—to one creature you can see within range that can hear and understand you. The suggestion must sound achievable and not involve anything that would obviously deal damage to the target or its allies. For example, you could say, “Fetch the key to the cult’s treasure vault, and give the key to me.” Or you could say, “Stop fighting, leave this library peacefully, and don’t return.”
The target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or have the Charmed condition for the duration or until you or your allies deal damage to the target. The Charmed target pursues the suggestion to the best of its ability. The suggested activity can continue for the entire duration, but if the suggested activity can be completed in a shorter time, the spell ends for the target upon completing it.
On a failed saved can you tell an armed target "Surrender your weapons to me for the fight is over, sit on the ground here till sunset." or "Throw away your weapons and fight me unarmed" , or "Your spell focus and materials are cursed, throw them away"
So gather the weapons before attacking the charmed target.
It seems to fit with the given examples, but the only one who can definitively answer is your DM. Mild mind control like this is always a touchy subject in TTRPGs because there's always a fudge factor of personal interpretations of scope/limits.
One thing about the spell is that the suggestion must sound reasonable, but only at the time of casting. if you tell someone to stand still for eight hours, and then proceed to have your artificer build a nuclear bomb above their head. they still must follow your instructions until you damage them.
I'm just your everyday dungeon master. Ignore that jar full of souls. And those bones in the corner are just props, don't worry. I'm definitely NOT a lich. Definitely.
Yes, I like beholders. Yes, I curated an exquisite personality for commoner #2864. Yes, my catchphrase is "are you sure?"
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . .-.-.-
The wording no longer uses the word "reasonable" in 2024. It uses the word "achievable". This is a key differentiation and makes the spell much easier to adjudicate.
"Surrender your weapons and sit here until sunset" is perfectly achievable and does not obviously deal damage to the target or their allies, therefore it is a perfectly valid Suggestion. Ditto "Fight me unarmed." "Throw away your spell components" is valid even without the curse line.
If the suggested action is achievable and would not cause the target to incur damage in the doing, you can do it. A Suggestion to "turn your coat and fight on our side" is achievable but would result in obvious damage to the target's allies - the spell fails. A Suggestion to "Open a portal to the other side of the world, step through, and never return" or " become a sheep and go eat grass for a few hours" is not achievable for most targets - the spell fails.
The thing the DM needs to adjudicate is what counts as 'obvious damage '. The spell explicitly states you can use it to cause enemies to stop fighting, or to act peacefully against their interest. A Suggestion to "wait calmly while we assemble our Volo's Traveling Guillotine" does not necessarily directly incur damage, but it's pretty clear obeying that order would be damaging; I would rule the spell failed. Similarly, you can order someone to stop fighting or do something that puts them at disadvantage in battle, but ordering someone to undertake an act that would clearly result in you slaughtering them like pigs in a sty would be a hard sell.
The spell is intended to reward creative play. Telling the evil wizard to "find a quiet corner, sit down, and peacefully think about your life choices" is much funnier than trying to fish for an edge case that lets you tell the evil wizard to kill himself without failing the spell. As is Suggesting a henchman "sheathe your blade and spend some time talking to us about the honest benefits of switching employment."
Please do not contact or message me.
Thanks for the great reply, just one more example. If someone did mold earth and created a 3x6x6 hole and told someone "Quickly take cover waiting in this hole by laying down." would that work?
Again, the criteria is "is the action achievable?" and "will the action incur harm to the target or their allies?"
"Jump in this hole" is an achievable action, so it passes that bar. "Will the action incur harm" is the one your DM will have to rule on, since it's blind-idiot obvious the intent is to bury the target alive in the Mold Earth hole and that constitutes some pretty severe harm. As a DM, I would err on the side of "an intelligent, thinking target can tell they're being told to set themselves up for mage-assisted suicide, and as such ordering them to jump in a hole you're clearly planning to fill right back in next turn would constitute 'obvious harm'."
Spells like this, as Ace stated, will always involve an element of DM fiat and judgment calls. What I would suggest is asking your DM to let you know when you cast Suggestion if your given Suggestion will result in the spell failing. As a trained spellcaster, your character would know the limitations of the spell within their world and have better sense for which Suggestions are fine, which are borderline, and which are clearly going to fail. The DM can help fill in the gap between your world knowledge and your character's world knowledge.
I would also look beyond trying to use Suggestion as simply a dodgy instant-kill spell. That really is its most boring use, so many spells in D&D exist to do damage and win fights already. Why try and make this one another one?
Please do not contact or message me.
As a rule of thumb, don’t try and come up with some clever way to make a target suicide or otherwise bypass the process of combat while killing them. This is a 2nd level spell, it’s a mental nudge not a shove.
Mind Control spells like this definitely need to be more restrictive then the 2024 version, however I'd say a good basis for this spell is Obi-Wan in Star Wars Episode 4: A new hope. Being like "These are not the droids you're looking for." It's not an overtly over powered form of mind control, it's just putting a simple idea into somebody else's head. Now I'd say disarm should work since a 2nd level mind control spell should be able to achieve what a 1st level mind control spell can already do (Command).
Personally play style wise, I prefer a bit of flare, but that is hard in 25 words. So instead of: Throw away your weapons and fight me unarmed
Be more like: You are stronger and can only prove your worth as a guard by fighting bare fist, drop your weapons to handle these weakling adventurers
This is play style, but I just feel like it should be more like inserting an idea into the enemies head that isn't going to be entirely counter-intuitive to what they are already thinking, this is more subtle but not everybody who uses this spell could do this, so it's fine if they don't but I think it's better if they can that they do. Just gives more to work with as a DM, rather than have NPC carry out action basically as a robot for no real reason other than a counter-intuitive suggestion.