Idk but I think that this spell is extremely OP in combat if used properly. Like what if your BBEG arch-wizard uses their ONE action to cast Suggestion saying this “Go 500 ft away right now and cast spells using all your spell slots without harming yourself”. Boom.
Next he can make a wall of force so no-one can help them.
It is like one of the best uses for this spell and it costs only 2 lvl slot
I don't really fancy the way OP's suggestions is worded as it's very technical,
Ok, what about this: "Your spells are weak and shoud go. Release all of them into the distant sky and Ill help you learn new ones, just follow me and leave your friends behind". I think it can work
Besides the massive can of worms that this would be really unsportsmanlike and removes player agency by deciding what their character would determine a reasonable course of action (because no player would consent to what you're trying to do), this wouldn't work anyway.
Suggestion requires concentration. So does Wall of Force. So you get the one spell off and then the party dogpiles you and breaks your concentration. If you try to get around this with some kind of houserule, it's your houserule that's broken, not Suggestion.
Would you allow your players to do the exact same to the said wizard? If so, then it's legit. If not, then it's not.
When the enemy is something a player could technically play, you should regard it as another PC. Even if said wizard is made to be stronger than a lvl 20 wizard, if it's not impossible to think a PC could turn into one, then that counts.
Idk but I think that this spell is extremely OP in combat if used properly. Like what if your BBEG arch-wizard uses their ONE action to cast Suggestion saying this “Go 500 ft away right now and cast spells using all your spell slots without harming yourself”. Boom.
Next he can make a wall of force so no-one can help them.
It is like one of the best uses for this spell and it costs only 2 lvl slot
A 9th level caster (needed to cast wall of force) might have a better way of dealing with opponents.
Command is another potent spell when used creatively.
As for Suggestion, it provides a good example of what it can do: "For example, you might suggest that a knight give her warhorse to the first beggar she meets."
This is effectively telling the knight to simply abandon a valuable resource that he or she might have a personal, emotional bond with. That's pretty extreme, albiet not mechanically significant in combat. Compared to that, wasting spells by firing them off like fireworks could feel like a trivial extravagance.
The BBEG might say something like, "Wow, you look powerful.... Show me what your magic can do to those trees over there."
Definitely a risky move for a DM to use, but absolutely in-line with something a Succubus or other enchantment-based opponent might attempt to pull. Hopefully, the opponent is using that as a means of escape, rather than as a ploy to kill the party.
That said, the best way for a character to use Suggestion offensively would be to tell the target to walk into a trap that they can't see. Let them walk into a jail cell and slam the door behind them to deal with later. Or you might blind them with darkness and ask them to walk off a cliff. A request only ends the spell if it's obviously harmful.
Or, you might be able to force a target to be "willing", for the purpose of spell that might not normally succeed.
Besides the massive can of worms that this would be really unsportsmanlike and removes player agency by deciding what their character would determine a reasonable course of action (because no player would consent to what you're trying to do), this wouldn't work anyway.
Exactly what part of consent is requested here ? It's still a magical spell. If your NPC cast a Power Word Kill, does it need a player's consent for his character to die ?
Suggestion has two parts. The caster makes the Suggestion, and then it's determined whether the target would find the course of action reasonable.
Generally there should be table consensus on what constitutes the "make the course of action sound reasonable" clause in Suggestion, otherwise the DM can ignore it completely since they can just declare whatever they say sounds reasonable. I'm not saying take a vote by show of hands or anything, but something so clearly detrimental and out-of-scope of a 2nd level spell is certain to provoke some objection. Even outside of DM railroading, there should not be a combat spell that has a power cap limited only on your roleplaying ability to make something sound reasonable.
"Use your highest level spell on that tree for some reasonable reason?" Sure. "You left the oven on and need to run back to town?" Fine. "Spend several rounds using all of the resources you have, leaving your allies to die within earshot?" Yeah, I object to a level 2 spell doing that. If you insist that works in your game, be prepared for the PCs to try it on every spellcaster until the end of time. It's just not going to make your game any better, and will likely make it worse.
Besides the massive can of worms that this would be really unsportsmanlike and removes player agency by deciding what their character would determine a reasonable course of action (because no player would consent to what you're trying to do), this wouldn't work anyway.
Exactly what part of consent is requested here ? It's still a magical spell. If your NPC cast a Power Word Kill, does it need a player's consent for his character to die ?
It's just not going to make your game any better, and will likely make it worse.
Yeah I agree. Such use can only lead to PCs trying to abuse every single spell they have. Suggestion should sound reasonable but “giving your warhorse to a random guy” makes as much sense as “make the sky burn with your spells”
Would you allow your players to do the exact same to the said wizard? If so, then it's legit. If not, then it's not.
Hmm I believe that it is not how this game works. You can’t allow someone something and not allow this to others. Still BBEG can have: counter spell/ legendary resistance/ someone dispelling it/ just making a good save. Your evil guy should always prepare based on abilities and spells that players bring into the battle
Suggestion requires concentration. So does Wall of Force. So you get the one spell off and then the party dogpiles you and breaks your concentration. If you try to get around this with some kind of houserule, it's your houserule that's broken, not Suggestion.
Oh I totally forgot about concentration on wall of force. Still it is pretty good with
I get that Suggestion is a magic spell that should be able to make characters do what they normally wouldn't - otherwise the person casting wouldn't need to cast it - they could just ask.
That said - it is a level 2 spell and should absolutely be treated as such. It's not Dominate Person.
I hate the example of the Knight and the warhorse because on its face, it utterly violates the stipulation that the suggestion must be reasonable. It might be reasonable to suggest to a knight, because knights are honorable and have vows they have made to their order and such, to donate all her money to the first beggar she sees. The knight would reason that the beggar needs the money more than she does, and she can always get more, and the beggar can't. So this is a reasonable if not necessarily normal thing for her to do.
It is NOT reasonable to give a beggar a war horse. War horses are trained for battle. They are temperamental and hard to control because they are war horses. This is not some horse from a local farm that you can use as a pet or to plow a field. It is a combat beast, and the beggar would be likely to be hurt or even killed by the war horse because a beggar would not know how to control it. Additionally, a beggar would not have stables in which to keep it, a paddock in which to put it out to pasture, money to buy grain to feed it, etc. The only conceivable thing a beggar could do with a war horse, assuming it didn't kill him before he led it into town and find a buyer, would be to sell it. In which case it is far more reasonable to just hand the beggar money instead.
Now, if the Suggestion was, "Go and sell your war horse, and give the money to the first beggar you see" -- OK, much more reasonable. "Sell what you have and give the money to the poor" is an extreme but not unheard of form of charity, and a member of a Knightly Order might feel honor bound to do such things.
But "give some poor person who has no means of keeping it and will probably be killed by it the first time he attempts to ride it your war horse" is utterly unreasonable, and although it may be RAW, as a DM, I would rule such a suggestion is absurd, not reasonable. This is a case in which the book is just plain wrong, IMO.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I'd have thought a better use is "That bloke standing right next to you is really a doppelganger. Fireball the bastard before he kills the lot of you!" Then watch the hilarity as the rest of the party scatter.
I have to say that the only two times I've wheeled suggestion out on adventurers it failed miserably. The first time it got counterspelled. The second time it was dispelled as soon as I mentioned one of the fighters feeling ants clambering about under his armour and he really needed to get out of it NOW.
The best uses I've seen of it from players have all been altering perceptions rather than outright commands. That worked especially for a sorcerer with silent spell. The player was very adept at dropping suggestions into the conversation and getting his own way. It didn't always work, for example trying to do it during a reception held in a palace warded by an arch-mage to make anyone casting a spell glow bright pink. He was about as popular as an incel discovered in a nightclub with Rohypnol.
The major problem of trying to use it on spellcasters is that they'll often have a decent wisdom save. Throw elves with advantage on saves against charm spells into the mix and you might as well say sod it and cast web instead.
I'd have thought a better use is "That bloke standing right next to you is really a doppelganger. Fireball the bastard before he kills the lot of you!" Then watch the hilarity as the rest of the party scatter.
But... again, why would it be reasonable to suspect that someone who has not been out of your sight for 3 days in this dungeon, is now suddenly a doppelganger?
If the party has been facing multiple shape-shifted enemies in this dungeon, then yes, 100% reasonable. If they have never even met a doppelganger before and might not even know what one is, then I'm not sure why it would be reasonable to assume someone in the party who you have known for a long time and who has not been out of your sight long enough to be replaced, would suddenly now be a doppelganger.
Maybe I'm being overly strict in my interpretation of the word "reasonable" (especially given their example, which is thoroughly UN-reasonable to me).... But I wouldn't even try to suggest this to the party while playing an enemy NPC, unless there was some sort of logical foundation as to why it would be reasonable for this to be happening.
So what is a "reasonable" suggestion? You are in a fight with an enemy spellcaster. He turns to your spellcaster and suggests, "It is pointless to cast spells at me, as I will just counterspell them -- you should use your dagger instead." To me, that is reasonable. You know he is a spellcaster. It is not out of line that he can counter your spells. If he can, it would waste a spell slot to try and attack him with a spell (at least potentially, depending on conditions, like spell level and whatnot). And if you have a dagger, it might well be more practical to stab him with it than try to cast a spell at him.
Or maybe, "This battle is turning against you. It would be safer to find somewhere to hide than keep fighting." If, in fact, it is a tough battle (NOT reasonable if it is one goblin vs. 6 level 10s and the other 20 goblins are dead on the floor).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
So basically anything that is not immediately, directly harmful is reasonable?
Not by my interpretation. I also don't think the book's interpretation would support that position either, as the example of giving away the war horse to the beggar used a knight, not say an assassin or a thief.
If suggestion could work for "anything that does not directly harm you", why would they stipulate "that is reasonable." Not directly harming you is specific enough that no further additional information would be needed.
My definition of "reasonable" is rather more restrictive than what the people who wrote the PHB seem to use as its definition, but I think both they and I would agree that just "not directly harming yourself" is not the same thing as "doing something that seems reasonable." Lots of things don't directly harm you but are completely UN-reasonable to do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
So basically anything that is not immediately, directly harmful is reasonable?
It's not a question of BEING reasonable, just sounding reasonable, which is not the same thing at all. And therefore yes, as per the spell description, if you can phrase it in a reasonable manner, attacking your friends is perfectly fine, just make it sound reasonable by pretending that they are traitors, that they have been charmed or converted or replaced.
"There is a monstrous parasite that has made it's way into your stomach, you must cut it out now or you will die." Reasonable?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The spell specifically states that any attempt to make the target harm itself "ends the spell." So whether it sounds reasonable or not, it would end the spell to tell someone to cut out something from its own abdomen.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Idk but I think that this spell is extremely OP in combat if used properly. Like what if your BBEG arch-wizard uses their ONE action to cast Suggestion saying this “Go 500 ft away right now and cast spells using all your spell slots without harming yourself”. Boom.
Next he can make a wall of force so no-one can help them.
It is like one of the best uses for this spell and it costs only 2 lvl slot
Suggestion:
How could you possibly word such a Suggestion and make it sound like a reasonable thing to do?
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Ok, what about this: "Your spells are weak and shoud go. Release all of them into the distant sky and Ill help you learn new ones, just follow me and leave your friends behind". I think it can work
Besides the massive can of worms that this would be really unsportsmanlike and removes player agency by deciding what their character would determine a reasonable course of action (because no player would consent to what you're trying to do), this wouldn't work anyway.
Suggestion requires concentration. So does Wall of Force. So you get the one spell off and then the party dogpiles you and breaks your concentration. If you try to get around this with some kind of houserule, it's your houserule that's broken, not Suggestion.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Would you allow your players to do the exact same to the said wizard? If so, then it's legit. If not, then it's not.
When the enemy is something a player could technically play, you should regard it as another PC. Even if said wizard is made to be stronger than a lvl 20 wizard, if it's not impossible to think a PC could turn into one, then that counts.
Varielky
A 9th level caster (needed to cast wall of force) might have a better way of dealing with opponents.
Command is another potent spell when used creatively.
As for Suggestion, it provides a good example of what it can do: "For example, you might suggest that a knight give her warhorse to the first beggar she meets."
This is effectively telling the knight to simply abandon a valuable resource that he or she might have a personal, emotional bond with. That's pretty extreme, albiet not mechanically significant in combat. Compared to that, wasting spells by firing them off like fireworks could feel like a trivial extravagance.
The BBEG might say something like, "Wow, you look powerful.... Show me what your magic can do to those trees over there."
Definitely a risky move for a DM to use, but absolutely in-line with something a Succubus or other enchantment-based opponent might attempt to pull. Hopefully, the opponent is using that as a means of escape, rather than as a ploy to kill the party.
That said, the best way for a character to use Suggestion offensively would be to tell the target to walk into a trap that they can't see. Let them walk into a jail cell and slam the door behind them to deal with later. Or you might blind them with darkness and ask them to walk off a cliff. A request only ends the spell if it's obviously harmful.
Or, you might be able to force a target to be "willing", for the purpose of spell that might not normally succeed.
Suggestion has two parts. The caster makes the Suggestion, and then it's determined whether the target would find the course of action reasonable.
Generally there should be table consensus on what constitutes the "make the course of action sound reasonable" clause in Suggestion, otherwise the DM can ignore it completely since they can just declare whatever they say sounds reasonable. I'm not saying take a vote by show of hands or anything, but something so clearly detrimental and out-of-scope of a 2nd level spell is certain to provoke some objection. Even outside of DM railroading, there should not be a combat spell that has a power cap limited only on your roleplaying ability to make something sound reasonable.
"Use your highest level spell on that tree for some reasonable reason?" Sure. "You left the oven on and need to run back to town?" Fine. "Spend several rounds using all of the resources you have, leaving your allies to die within earshot?" Yeah, I object to a level 2 spell doing that. If you insist that works in your game, be prepared for the PCs to try it on every spellcaster until the end of time. It's just not going to make your game any better, and will likely make it worse.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Yeah I agree. Such use can only lead to PCs trying to abuse every single spell they have. Suggestion should sound reasonable but “giving your warhorse to a random guy” makes as much sense as “make the sky burn with your spells”
Hmm I believe that it is not how this game works. You can’t allow someone something and not allow this to others. Still BBEG can have: counter spell/ legendary resistance/ someone dispelling it/ just making a good save. Your evil guy should always prepare based on abilities and spells that players bring into the battle
Oh boy Command a Dragon to “dance” is sick!
edit: I would even allow this spell duration to be increased just coz it is hilarious
Oh I totally forgot about concentration on wall of force. Still it is pretty good with
I get that Suggestion is a magic spell that should be able to make characters do what they normally wouldn't - otherwise the person casting wouldn't need to cast it - they could just ask.
That said - it is a level 2 spell and should absolutely be treated as such. It's not Dominate Person.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
I hate the example of the Knight and the warhorse because on its face, it utterly violates the stipulation that the suggestion must be reasonable. It might be reasonable to suggest to a knight, because knights are honorable and have vows they have made to their order and such, to donate all her money to the first beggar she sees. The knight would reason that the beggar needs the money more than she does, and she can always get more, and the beggar can't. So this is a reasonable if not necessarily normal thing for her to do.
It is NOT reasonable to give a beggar a war horse. War horses are trained for battle. They are temperamental and hard to control because they are war horses. This is not some horse from a local farm that you can use as a pet or to plow a field. It is a combat beast, and the beggar would be likely to be hurt or even killed by the war horse because a beggar would not know how to control it. Additionally, a beggar would not have stables in which to keep it, a paddock in which to put it out to pasture, money to buy grain to feed it, etc. The only conceivable thing a beggar could do with a war horse, assuming it didn't kill him before he led it into town and find a buyer, would be to sell it. In which case it is far more reasonable to just hand the beggar money instead.
Now, if the Suggestion was, "Go and sell your war horse, and give the money to the first beggar you see" -- OK, much more reasonable. "Sell what you have and give the money to the poor" is an extreme but not unheard of form of charity, and a member of a Knightly Order might feel honor bound to do such things.
But "give some poor person who has no means of keeping it and will probably be killed by it the first time he attempts to ride it your war horse" is utterly unreasonable, and although it may be RAW, as a DM, I would rule such a suggestion is absurd, not reasonable. This is a case in which the book is just plain wrong, IMO.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I'd have thought a better use is "That bloke standing right next to you is really a doppelganger. Fireball the bastard before he kills the lot of you!" Then watch the hilarity as the rest of the party scatter.
I have to say that the only two times I've wheeled suggestion out on adventurers it failed miserably. The first time it got counterspelled. The second time it was dispelled as soon as I mentioned one of the fighters feeling ants clambering about under his armour and he really needed to get out of it NOW.
The best uses I've seen of it from players have all been altering perceptions rather than outright commands. That worked especially for a sorcerer with silent spell. The player was very adept at dropping suggestions into the conversation and getting his own way. It didn't always work, for example trying to do it during a reception held in a palace warded by an arch-mage to make anyone casting a spell glow bright pink. He was about as popular as an incel discovered in a nightclub with Rohypnol.
The major problem of trying to use it on spellcasters is that they'll often have a decent wisdom save. Throw elves with advantage on saves against charm spells into the mix and you might as well say sod it and cast web instead.
But... again, why would it be reasonable to suspect that someone who has not been out of your sight for 3 days in this dungeon, is now suddenly a doppelganger?
If the party has been facing multiple shape-shifted enemies in this dungeon, then yes, 100% reasonable. If they have never even met a doppelganger before and might not even know what one is, then I'm not sure why it would be reasonable to assume someone in the party who you have known for a long time and who has not been out of your sight long enough to be replaced, would suddenly now be a doppelganger.
Maybe I'm being overly strict in my interpretation of the word "reasonable" (especially given their example, which is thoroughly UN-reasonable to me).... But I wouldn't even try to suggest this to the party while playing an enemy NPC, unless there was some sort of logical foundation as to why it would be reasonable for this to be happening.
So what is a "reasonable" suggestion? You are in a fight with an enemy spellcaster. He turns to your spellcaster and suggests, "It is pointless to cast spells at me, as I will just counterspell them -- you should use your dagger instead." To me, that is reasonable. You know he is a spellcaster. It is not out of line that he can counter your spells. If he can, it would waste a spell slot to try and attack him with a spell (at least potentially, depending on conditions, like spell level and whatnot). And if you have a dagger, it might well be more practical to stab him with it than try to cast a spell at him.
Or maybe, "This battle is turning against you. It would be safer to find somewhere to hide than keep fighting." If, in fact, it is a tough battle (NOT reasonable if it is one goblin vs. 6 level 10s and the other 20 goblins are dead on the floor).
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
So basically anything that is not immediately, directly harmful is reasonable?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Not by my interpretation. I also don't think the book's interpretation would support that position either, as the example of giving away the war horse to the beggar used a knight, not say an assassin or a thief.
If suggestion could work for "anything that does not directly harm you", why would they stipulate "that is reasonable." Not directly harming you is specific enough that no further additional information would be needed.
My definition of "reasonable" is rather more restrictive than what the people who wrote the PHB seem to use as its definition, but I think both they and I would agree that just "not directly harming yourself" is not the same thing as "doing something that seems reasonable." Lots of things don't directly harm you but are completely UN-reasonable to do.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
"There is a monstrous parasite that has made it's way into your stomach, you must cut it out now or you will die." Reasonable?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
The spell specifically states that any attempt to make the target harm itself "ends the spell." So whether it sounds reasonable or not, it would end the spell to tell someone to cut out something from its own abdomen.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.