Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
That's the spike growth doing damage not command itself which I admit wouldn't be possible in 2014 because it does harm it and I probably should have added directly to my older post
Extended signature
except with allowing i guess you can call it indirect damage it opens up a lot more versatility. I've seen it way too many times in games so far through walls of fire, spike growth spells, natural hazards found on many maps etc. it is imo much more powerful now in 5.5 whether or not you owned a thesaurus in 5.0
Yeah, that's exactly it.
Let's take the Hill Giant as an example: a CR 5 (1800 XP) creature with -1 on it's Will Saving Throw. It's supposed to be an almost impossible battle for a party of 3 characters lvl 3 (a hard encounter would be 1200 XP for them).
Now, a Bard will issue the "Grovel" command for the creature to lose it's turn AND become prone from a 60feet distance. With the bard having a 16 CHA - which is not high at all - their save DC will be 13.
The Hill Giant will have to roll 14+, so it has a 35% chance of succeeding the save. And that's not considering that the Bard could have the College of Eloquence (TCoE) subclass, where they could have used their bonus action to subtract 1d6 from the Hill Giant's result. So, let's be honest? This makes it VERY UNLIKELY for the giant to not prone itself and end it's turn on every single round of a supposed more than deadly encounter.
And the Bard could to this for 6 full rounds (3 with Unsettling Words), using all of their spell slots.
"Oh but before in 2014 / 5e it was way more powerful" - it wasn't. If the Bard didn't speak Giant, that's it, the spell wouldn't work. Now it does work, which doesn't make any sense, but with less creative options.
"Oh but Tasha's Hideous Laughter is stronger because it stays while the Bard concentrates" - it isn't. In the scenario described, the Hill Giant would make 2 saving throws with advantage when taking damage from the other 2 PCs. Which would give it a more reasonable chance to act and basically OHKO the Bard from a distance with it's ranged attacks.
The spell is completely broken, folks, and I haven't seen a single logical answer that convinces me otherwise.
It's broken*^, surely.
*against single target fights
^as long as your enemies have low Wis saves
A good DM can either find a monster that withstands a round or two of taking hits so it gets a turn or two in the fight still without being under Command's influence or send in multiple monsters in a way that still allows Command to be impactful if the caster chooses to use it but doesn't completely invalidate the fight.
There's a very and I mean very easy way to fix that is comprehend languages for 2014 and yes command was more powerful in 5e because we had versatility as almost everyone here has said at least once but whatever
Extended signature
No CC spell is really broken in 5.5e, because Legendary Resistances. And as far as I know, the only way to CC an enemy with LRs is to cast Summon Undead (Putrid), and then Ray of Sickness, and pray they aren't immune to the Poisoned or Paralyzed condition. CC is only effective in deadly fights in tier 1, where anybody can get swatted like a bug if the wind blows the wrong way. After that, the vast majority of BBEGs will laugh at your attempts to control them.
So you're saying that a good DM should never use a Hill Giant, unless the party is leveled up enough to fight multiple Hill Giants? :P Which for sure, as a group, will be drowned in stillness from an upcast of Command?
Of course the only way to bypass this without doing homebrew is by having multiple weaker opponents, which is not a trademark of a good DM - it's literally the only way to DM in the 5.5 edition. It's a design flaw. The Command spell just highlights this in the most overpowered way.
Spending an extra action & spell slot to cast comprehend languages is fair for Command to work. Not having it cast before a battle against a Hill Giant would at least give the poor giant a chance to attack. D&D is a TTRPG focused on combat, and the power level in 5.5/2024 is around action economy. Having it the way that it was before would make the spell more powerful for creative users, and less powerful in the beginning of a battle.
I disagree.
First dragon to have Legendary Resistance has CR 13. And like, using it against a Hold Monster? Of course, makes total sense! 1 legendary resistance for a level 5 spell slot. Having to use it against Command? Eerr... How long will the dragon be OK with losing it's turn and being chopped to death with attackers having advatange 'cause it's prone, until it decides to start using it and eventually become vulnerable to higher spell slot control spells?
Also, if I'm not mistaken, lowest CR to have legendary resistance is 5 with an Unicorn - which isn't a "monster" you usually throw at the players. After the Unicorn, the lowest CR is 10 with an Aboleth.
So, in your reasoning, level 1 to 10 is tier 1 of play? :P And until then, the DM either always opts for several opponents, or watches as Command destroys the battlefield?
I believe the game designers of 5.5 did a terrible job allowing Command to work with every single creature, even if it's immune to Charmed, even if it doesn't understand the language, even if it's DEAF.
IMO the only real counters to Command are: 1) Legendary Resistance; 2) Good Wis ST; 3 ) Multiple opponents; 4 ) Dick environments where all enemies are hidden by darkness and the spellcaster can't see them;
3) and 4) are actually cool to have a couple of times, but if it HAS to become a rule for challenging combats, then the spell is broken. But 1) only really start happening around higher PC levels... And 2) if it's not a demon or a fairy, or a BABOON, which has more Wis ST than a Hill Giant, good luck throwing increasingly strange creatures into your campaign's biome.
I said "deadly" encounters. In tier 2, I wouldn't consider an encounter below CR 10 "deadly".
Ah, man, I don't know... You said "CC is only effective in deadly fights in tier 1". In this tier, CC is not effective, it's broken. After that, with LR, high STs and MR, it's effective but not broken.
And that's okay, Control Mages should be very dangerous when allowed to act in the battlefield. Casting Tasha's Hideous Laughter and the monster failing 3 ST's per turn, 2 of them with advantage? Cool, merit to the lucky players. But casting Command each turn, giving it 1 straight roll ST per round? No downsides? No extra requirements? Ehh...
Comprehend languages has a duration of 1 hour it doesn't need to be cast during combat in 2014 also you could just have it from a feat at 4th level if you really want then you don't need to spend a spell slot
Extended signature
The third one isn't as much of a problem in 2014 because you could just command your target to betray their own which forces two enemies to attack each other and wearing down their HP a bit
There's also a few other potentially useful command options here's a list: Surrender,pardon,Dismiss,Confess,Drink,Disembark/Overboard/Dive,Betray,Land/Fall
Extended signature
Hmmm... In 2014 you couldn't command it to "betray their own forces", just "betray". If the monster was tasked to capture the players, it could understand the betrayal as killing instead of capturing, for example. If the monster had no allegiance whatsoever with it's peers, betray could not do anything at all. Now, if it was used on a hobgoblin with a hobgoblin captain close, then yes, it would be a powerful and smart use of the spell and work as intended.
And I think this is wonderful! It's one of the magic opportunities the players have to overcome a difficult challenge through smart thinking, which could also lead to everybody laughing from a not-so-smart thinking :)
Better than 2024's "Hey Mr Undead immune to exhaustion and charmed that doesn't speak my language! Grovel :D And next turn you'll grovel AGAIN. Until you die or get really lucky on your Wis ST, which is usually pretty low."
I don't know that feat, but would a paranoid control mage cast the spell every 1 hour while venturing in the wilderness, dungeon, etc.? If yes, okay, the player really wants to command anything on their first round of combat, and they're "paying" for that by expending their spell slots. Fine by me!
Also, even if everyone's super stealthy and careful, and the control mage only uses it after seeing or hearing the enemy, casting a spell is a loud and obvious magic action. There were no surprise rounds on 2014, and if by casting it the enemies would take notice, initiative starts and the control mage has already used his/her action.
Besides... Casting comprehend languages once, in the perfect scenario, is already good enough for me, because it makes the Command spell less "free for all". In my lvl 3 example, the bard would now only have 5 commands, not 6. And they would have to know that spell. Beautiful as well.
Now your just being absurd and skewing it to favor your narrative of 2024 being better
first: thanks for confirming you don't know anything about 5e because there are a bunch of feats that let you cast a first level spell without a spell slot once per long rest such as the 5 magic initiates,fey touched and shadow touched
Second: No one is going to spam that spell 24/7 but they can however anticipate potential conflicts such as them noticing the entrance of a dungeon or something
Third: nobody even mentioned surprise and besides surprise can be inflicted on several individuals of the opposing party so all in all that isn't bad
Fourth: spell casters can always fall back to cantrips if they run out of spell slots which they are prone to do at low levels
Fifth: most mages do a prep round at the start of combat to do supplemental spells like haste,blur,mirror image hell even expeditious retreat
Sixth:if your that worried about spell usage choose a more useful spell to fit the situation like most mages do
Extended signature
Okay I feel like we went in a much more heated direction than the forum intended. Command isn’t broken by any means, you want to halt a group of enemies in their tracks? Hypnotic Pattern. You want to cripple an enemy for several rounds? Hold Person.
Using multiple enemies and the environment isn’t just a counter to Command it’s a prerequisite to good encounter design. Any dm who's ever used a lone enemy often figure out that the party kills it really damn quickly, which is a problem beyond a single spell.
Comprehend languages lets you understand them. It doesn’t let them understand you or speak their language. For that you want tongues.
Forgot about that thanks for pointing it out
Extended signature
According to this SRD Monster Stat Analysis, the Wisdom Save for a CR 5 monster averages out at +1. Did you deliberately pick a favorable scenario, rather than an average one? I'm surprised you didn't pick a Red Slaad for the -2 Wisdom Save. Would you like me to run your calculations against an Astral Elf Star Priest's +8 Wisdom Save?
Now, the Hill Giant has effectively lost its turn but any attack from more than 5 feet away has disadvantage. Ranged attacks will hit 42.25% of the time and melee attacks will hit 87.75% of the time but puts you in melee range if the Hill Giant succeeds on its save.
But what exactly do you think happened in 2014 when the Bard issued a Command to grovel?
The spell has a 65% chance of success in a favorable scenario and 55% chance in an average scenario (+1 Will Save at CR 5). That's actually poor odds for a spell. Attacks and spells are balanced around a 65% success rate. The fact that you have to target particularly vulnerable enemies or expend extra resources to make the spell succeed is not a selling point. Add to that the fact that in order to benefit from the giant being Prone, you have to be adjacent to it ... it is very dangerous if the spell doesn't work.
That hill giant has a 65% chance of being prone for one turn, a 42.25% chance for two consecutive turns, and a 27.46% chance for three consecutive turns. This makes it VERY UNLIKELY for the giant to be prone for the entire encounter. If it succeeds on its save, it gets to multiattack you.
How frequently language played a factor depended on the individual campaign, but it's not like Giant was restricted and if you don't speak a specific language, there are ways around it. One such way would be Universal Speech from the College of Eloquence. Of 41 CR 5 entries in 5.24, 5 have telepathy where a receiving creature can respond telepathically and 14 that speak Common. That is almost 50% where language already didn't matter.
Now, the spell is as much force of personality as anything else. The spell's utility is not restricted based on your race and background choice. The spell can now be balanced based on what it does.
You can take a target out of a multi-creature encounter for multiple rounds with Tasha's Hideous Laughter, you can't with Command. In addition, if the target fails the save on Tasha's incapacitated and prone is worse than just prone. Tasha's can end concentration, Command can't. If you have a method to increase the chance a target will fail the save, it can be worth it to try against a spellcaster (who typically have higher than normal Will saves).
Also, Tasha's Hideous Laughter prevents Reactions while Command doesn't. Running by the Groveling Hill Giant still gets you an attack of opportunity, even if it is at disadvantage, but you can run laps around the laughing Hill Giant with impunity.
You overestimate the chance of an enemy failing the saving throw multiple turns in a row. Tasha's is victim the same deteriorating chances of consecutive failed Will Saves, but at least with Tasha's each saving throw is covered by one spell slot as opposed to one slot per save.
If you don't attack the enemy before their next turn, a failed save against Tasha's Hideous Laughter will cost the enemy at least one turn. Any time spent attacking that target may give them a save at advantage, but a success doesn't end the prone condition until the target's next turn.
You haven't provided any convincing logical arguments that it is broken. You seem to be pinning your argument on an example that is exceptionally skewed in favor of spells with Wisdom saves rather than an average encounter. In addition, your argument assumes a much higher chance of continuously succeeding than is actually mathematically likely.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Okay, I think you totally misunderstood me. I've opened this thread to say that I think Command is broken on D&D 5.5. I think the 2014 version is better. I prefer the 2014 version. It has more creative options and it has a pretty strong requirement which doesn't exist in 2024 anymore.
Beautiful, this statement actually makes the 2024 version of the spell more over-powered than we were originally thinking.