If a bodak or a medusa casts command and says "Behold!", would the target be forced to look at the caster on a failure or could the command be interpreted in a different way?
If a bodak or a medusa casts command and says "Behold!", would the target be forced to look at the caster on a failure or could the command be interpreted in a different way?
One could very easily just look in a different direction, "Behold"ing a different object.
verb (used with object), be·held, be·hold·ing. to observe; look at; see. interjection look; see:And, behold, three sentries of the King did appear.
---
Here's how I see it. The character/creature has FAILED their wisdom save on this spell. So I don't follow any shenanigans around attempts to further resist, liberal interpretations or letting them choose a little known interpretation of the word (or homophone).
BUT the spell does note that it has no affect if the creature doesn't understand your language. So there's no magical carrying of intent. I carry this further that if the character uses a word that the majority of creatures wouldn't recognise, then they follow it as though it were a different language. Obviously this can vary as while a goblin might not understand the word "Lament" a wizard likely would. I can easily believe that a goblin might well have heard and come to understand the world "Grovel" though. Setting can be important as well when words like "Twerk" could work in modern times but certainly not medieval scenarios.
At the end of the day I think the character/creature should follow what to THEM is the most obvious intention of the command.
-----
In your specific case of something asking you to effectively gaze upon it when doing so is harmful. Note the line in the "Command" spell: "The spell has no effect if [-] your command is directly harmful to it" Unless the character/creature wouldn't understand that following the command to "Behold" the creature would be harmful (Wisdom Survival or Intelligence Arcana roll maybe?) they would likely see the direct harm and ignore it as readily as a command to "Enter" when a dragon holds it maw open at ground level.
The part about the command being "DIRECTLY" harmful is supposed to prevent liberal interpretations of what might constitute as harmful but anyone who knows what can result from staring at these creatures (or walking into a dragon's maw) isn't going to have much issue regarding it as pretty direct.
If a bodak or a medusa casts command and says "Behold!", would the target be forced to look at the caster on a failure or could the command be interpreted in a different way?
One could very easily just look in a different direction, "Behold"ing a different object.
Supreme Cat-lover Of The First Grade
I AM A CAT PERSON. /\_____/\
She/her pronouns please. (=^.^=)
You generally just go to Dictionary definitions:
BEHOLD:
verb (used with object), be·held, be·hold·ing.
to observe; look at; see.
interjection
look; see:And, behold, three sentries of the King did appear.
---
Here's how I see it. The character/creature has FAILED their wisdom save on this spell. So I don't follow any shenanigans around attempts to further resist, liberal interpretations or letting them choose a little known interpretation of the word (or homophone).
BUT the spell does note that it has no affect if the creature doesn't understand your language. So there's no magical carrying of intent. I carry this further that if the character uses a word that the majority of creatures wouldn't recognise, then they follow it as though it were a different language. Obviously this can vary as while a goblin might not understand the word "Lament" a wizard likely would. I can easily believe that a goblin might well have heard and come to understand the world "Grovel" though. Setting can be important as well when words like "Twerk" could work in modern times but certainly not medieval scenarios.
At the end of the day I think the character/creature should follow what to THEM is the most obvious intention of the command.
-----
In your specific case of something asking you to effectively gaze upon it when doing so is harmful. Note the line in the "Command" spell:
"The spell has no effect if [-] your command is directly harmful to it"
Unless the character/creature wouldn't understand that following the command to "Behold" the creature would be harmful (Wisdom Survival or Intelligence Arcana roll maybe?) they would likely see the direct harm and ignore it as readily as a command to "Enter" when a dragon holds it maw open at ground level.
The part about the command being "DIRECTLY" harmful is supposed to prevent liberal interpretations of what might constitute as harmful but anyone who knows what can result from staring at these creatures (or walking into a dragon's maw) isn't going to have much issue regarding it as pretty direct.
Ah, I didn't realize the command couldn't be directly harmful. Well, that settles it.