Unfortunately, the spell changed in the 2024 rules. No longer your own commands. Goodbye fun.
Only if you have a DM that's strictly a RAW kind of DM. A goodDM will ignore that and let you use whatever command you want because it's more fun.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
Unfortunately, the spell changed in the 2024 rules. No longer your own commands. Goodbye fun.
Only if you have a DM that's strictly a RAW kind of DM. A goodDM will ignore that and let you use whatever command you want because it's more fun.
I mean, it's a 1st level spell; it is not supposed to have particularly strong effects, and leaving it open-ended means you get people trying to squeeze way more out of the spell than it's intended to give.
Unfortunately, the spell changed in the 2024 rules. No longer your own commands. Goodbye fun.
Only if you have a DM that's strictly a RAW kind of DM. A goodDM will ignore that and let you use whatever command you want because it's more fun.
I mean, it's a 1st level spell; it is not supposed to have particularly strong effects, and leaving it open-ended means you get people trying to squeeze way more out of the spell than it's intended to give.
Still, command a single word, you can’t make them put themselves in danger and it only lasts until the end of the target’s next turn. There’s only so much you can do within those boundaries. And again, the DM can say “no that’s too much”. I think making the target attack one of their allies could count as “danger” (since those allies will fight back), stripping off armor in the midst of battle could potentially count too (plus it takes too long - they’d barely start before the end of their turn when the spell ended) - although you could make that argument for "Drop" too since they'd drop their weapon.
If you look at suggestion it's level 2 but you get a MUCH longer duration (it's concentration but still) plus 25 words. You still can't make the target put themselves in danger but I think that in comparison leaving Command open-ended still doesn't make it too OP
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
Unfortunately, the spell changed in the 2024 rules. No longer your own commands. Goodbye fun.
Only if you have a DM that's strictly a RAW kind of DM. A goodDM will ignore that and let you use whatever command you want because it's more fun.
I mean, it's a 1st level spell; it is not supposed to have particularly strong effects, and leaving it open-ended means you get people trying to squeeze way more out of the spell than it's intended to give.
While I like the idea of making the GM's job a bit simpler, the biggest problem for GMs has always been money and time IRL to do the rules reading and encounter/dungeon/NPC prep needed. Small rules changes like these, which also squelch the imaginative freedom of players, are part of why the PHB 2024 updates are a very mixed bag for people who enjoy the creativity enabled by tabletop RPGs. WotC wants to say that everything is backwards compatible with PHB 2014, but there are some clear conflicts, both in terms of rules and in terms of the design direction.
While I like the idea of making the GM's job a bit simpler, the biggest problem for GMs has always been money and time IRL to do the rules reading and encounter/dungeon/NPC prep needed. Small rules changes like these, which also squelch the imaginative freedom of players, are part of why the PHB 2024 updates are a very mixed bag for people who enjoy the creativity enabled by tabletop RPGs. WotC wants to say that everything is backwards compatible with PHB 2014, but there are some clear conflicts, both in terms of rules and in terms of the design direction.
It’s not about squelching “imaginative freedom” in this case, it’s about keeping a 1st level spell from spawning a 15 minute debate mid-game as people try to parlay effects far beyond the RAI out of it.
And the entire point of a comprehensive revision is to alter rules and design direction; it’s backwards compatible because the core bones and general balance are remaining fairly contiguous; making every little bit and piece all but if not completely identical would be a case of reinventing the wheel.
While I like the idea of making the GM's job a bit simpler, the biggest problem for GMs has always been money and time IRL to do the rules reading and encounter/dungeon/NPC prep needed. Small rules changes like these, which also squelch the imaginative freedom of players, are part of why the PHB 2024 updates are a very mixed bag for people who enjoy the creativity enabled by tabletop RPGs. WotC wants to say that everything is backwards compatible with PHB 2014, but there are some clear conflicts, both in terms of rules and in terms of the design direction.
It’s not about squelching “imaginative freedom” in this case, it’s about keeping a 1st level spell from spawning a 15 minute debate mid-game as people try to parlay effects far beyond the RAI out of it.
And the entire point of a comprehensive revision is to alter rules and design direction; it’s backwards compatible because the core bones and general balance are remaining fairly contiguous; making every little bit and piece all but if not completely identical would be a case of reinventing the wheel.
It's BOTH squelching creativity while claiming DMs need to make as few decisions as possible when the real problem is DMs don't have enough time to prep. The REAL problem for DMs is time and money. It takes time to understand the rules and to see how they can and should be applied. A lot of stuff can be answered by going on rules forums like this one, doing some reading, and thinking about how they want to do something. It's actually educational b/c it helps GMs to think more not just about the HOW of the rules, but the WHY of the rules, which is useful in many areas of life, not just RPGs.
A literal one-word command is never going to be as OP as a 2nd level mind control spell like Suggestion.
If we the players just accept every single instance of the devs nerfing spells or abilities to save 5 or 10 minutes for GMs, then we might as well just accept the A.I. future of computerized GMs. Who needs to sell the game to GMs when there are plenty of people willing to accept a less creative end product who are just fine being players on a digital tabletop with minimal or no direct human input after the module is uploaded in the software? Do you see where this is going? We do not have to roll over and accept it just b/c the devs said, "This is the new version of the popular game you've played for the last decade or more. You will buy it because it's still popular and you will not complain about it because there's a few improvements here and there. Now hand over that money."
While I like the idea of making the GM's job a bit simpler, the biggest problem for GMs has always been money and time IRL to do the rules reading and encounter/dungeon/NPC prep needed. Small rules changes like these, which also squelch the imaginative freedom of players, are part of why the PHB 2024 updates are a very mixed bag for people who enjoy the creativity enabled by tabletop RPGs. WotC wants to say that everything is backwards compatible with PHB 2014, but there are some clear conflicts, both in terms of rules and in terms of the design direction.
It’s not about squelching “imaginative freedom” in this case, it’s about keeping a 1st level spell from spawning a 15 minute debate mid-game as people try to parlay effects far beyond the RAI out of it.
And the entire point of a comprehensive revision is to alter rules and design direction; it’s backwards compatible because the core bones and general balance are remaining fairly contiguous; making every little bit and piece all but if not completely identical would be a case of reinventing the wheel.
A literal one-word command is never going to be as OP as a 2nd level mind control spell like Suggestion.
Exactly my point. It's a single word and it only lasts 1 turn. There's not much you can do with that. I'm not sure what single word command that compels somebody to do something non-harmful for 6 seconds would be considered OP. I'd love to see an example. But a good GM will allow commands outside RAW for the fun aspect, and a good player is not going to derail the game to argue over, literally, one word.
Plus, the GM can always veto it. If it devolves into a 15 minute debate then that's another issue and maybe the GM needs to talk to the player and say "hey look, this is my ruling and it's not up for debate" or can fall back on RAW and say these are your options.
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
I've used shit. DM had them drop pants and get into a shitting position. Hilarious.
"Attack" should make them attack someone next to them, or "magic" to cast some spell.
Unfortunately, the spell changed in the 2024 rules. No longer your own commands. Goodbye fun.
playing since 1986
Only if you are playing a 2024 campaign!
I've used Shush, Follow, Strip, Surrender, Eat, Drink, Drop, Jump, Run, and more. Those are the most common for me though.
I think we need to address a problem here: Exhibit c. (strip)
WHAT THE HECK IS WRONG WITH YOU?
(Jk, Jk. Although I do need to know why that came into play)
Roll for Initiative: [roll]1d20+7[/roll]
Proud member of the EVIL JEFF CULT! PRAISE JEFF!
Homebrew Races: HERE Homebrew Spells: HERE Homebrew Monsters: HERE
MORE OF ME! (And platypodes/platypi/platypuses) (Extended signature)
XD It's not anything like that. It's more for like during battle, to get the enemy to get rid of their armour and stuff like that.
Although the DM was toying with the idea of taking it a little more literally....
Ok phew I thought you were using it for more... nefarious reasons.
Roll for Initiative: [roll]1d20+7[/roll]
Proud member of the EVIL JEFF CULT! PRAISE JEFF!
Homebrew Races: HERE Homebrew Spells: HERE Homebrew Monsters: HERE
MORE OF ME! (And platypodes/platypi/platypuses) (Extended signature)
Only if you have a DM that's strictly a RAW kind of DM. A good DM will ignore that and let you use whatever command you want because it's more fun.
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
I've always liked "Graze", especially back in the day playing Dragonlance and casting it on the minotaur.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
I mean, it's a 1st level spell; it is not supposed to have particularly strong effects, and leaving it open-ended means you get people trying to squeeze way more out of the spell than it's intended to give.
Still, command a single word, you can’t make them put themselves in danger and it only lasts until the end of the target’s next turn. There’s only so much you can do within those boundaries. And again, the DM can say “no that’s too much”. I think making the target attack one of their allies could count as “danger” (since those allies will fight back), stripping off armor in the midst of battle could potentially count too (plus it takes too long - they’d barely start before the end of their turn when the spell ended) - although you could make that argument for "Drop" too since they'd drop their weapon.
If you look at suggestion it's level 2 but you get a MUCH longer duration (it's concentration but still) plus 25 words. You still can't make the target put themselves in danger but I think that in comparison leaving Command open-ended still doesn't make it too OP
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
Alphabetize near a stack of books.
You didn't say AUTOdefenestrate, and now they are tossing you out that very window.
Spoilsport. Boooring.
While I like the idea of making the GM's job a bit simpler, the biggest problem for GMs has always been money and time IRL to do the rules reading and encounter/dungeon/NPC prep needed. Small rules changes like these, which also squelch the imaginative freedom of players, are part of why the PHB 2024 updates are a very mixed bag for people who enjoy the creativity enabled by tabletop RPGs. WotC wants to say that everything is backwards compatible with PHB 2014, but there are some clear conflicts, both in terms of rules and in terms of the design direction.
It’s not about squelching “imaginative freedom” in this case, it’s about keeping a 1st level spell from spawning a 15 minute debate mid-game as people try to parlay effects far beyond the RAI out of it.
And the entire point of a comprehensive revision is to alter rules and design direction; it’s backwards compatible because the core bones and general balance are remaining fairly contiguous; making every little bit and piece all but if not completely identical would be a case of reinventing the wheel.
It's BOTH squelching creativity while claiming DMs need to make as few decisions as possible when the real problem is DMs don't have enough time to prep. The REAL problem for DMs is time and money. It takes time to understand the rules and to see how they can and should be applied. A lot of stuff can be answered by going on rules forums like this one, doing some reading, and thinking about how they want to do something. It's actually educational b/c it helps GMs to think more not just about the HOW of the rules, but the WHY of the rules, which is useful in many areas of life, not just RPGs.
A literal one-word command is never going to be as OP as a 2nd level mind control spell like Suggestion.
If we the players just accept every single instance of the devs nerfing spells or abilities to save 5 or 10 minutes for GMs, then we might as well just accept the A.I. future of computerized GMs. Who needs to sell the game to GMs when there are plenty of people willing to accept a less creative end product who are just fine being players on a digital tabletop with minimal or no direct human input after the module is uploaded in the software? Do you see where this is going? We do not have to roll over and accept it just b/c the devs said, "This is the new version of the popular game you've played for the last decade or more. You will buy it because it's still popular and you will not complain about it because there's a few improvements here and there. Now hand over that money."
Exactly my point. It's a single word and it only lasts 1 turn. There's not much you can do with that. I'm not sure what single word command that compels somebody to do something non-harmful for 6 seconds would be considered OP. I'd love to see an example. But a good GM will allow commands outside RAW for the fun aspect, and a good player is not going to derail the game to argue over, literally, one word.
Plus, the GM can always veto it. If it devolves into a 15 minute debate then that's another issue and maybe the GM needs to talk to the player and say "hey look, this is my ruling and it's not up for debate" or can fall back on RAW and say these are your options.
"...at worst if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat."
"Drink" while handing them a sleeping potion.