Command

Quote from Kiramander >>

Was the "and ends their turn" always part of it? This basically puts one enemy prone (if desired) for the entire party to come by, hit and they can't do anything about it. You could get a dozen or so strikes at advantage on the target. Like I said...a level 1 party can take out a level 20 monster with a 1st level spell. How is that balanced?

Yes, that has always been part of this spell in 5th edition.

I think you're vastly overestimating the practical impact of a creature being Prone for a round, especially a high-level enemy that has legendary actions. It's extremely unlikely that a level 1 party would be able to eliminate a CR 20 monster in one round, even if they had advantage on all their attacks against it. And the spell does nothing at all if the target succeeds on the saving throw, which high-level monsters tend to be pretty good at.

I understand if different languages had trouble with this spell because of the "one word" bit. However that can be easily remedied with "one command", and having the creativity to use this spell in unorthodox ways WAS THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE SPELL WAS IT NOT?! Yeah this is going directly in the trash, literally no point to the spell now except for people who follow the rules to the T to a fault

Quote from shybread >>

Quote from Azlan >>

These designers are awful. They removed the creative aspect of this spell and the logical restrictions in favor of dumbed down multiple choice. Please stop treating us like morons.

 

They're not treating us like morons; they're treating us like we're going to exploit the functionality of an already great level 1 spell, and that's because a lot of players will try to. You've seen the jokes, you've heard the stories.

What do you mean exploit? You mean just using the spell as intended? It was made for you to make up your own command, and a couple of commands were given as example. Literally the whole point was to be creative with it. It's only as "exploitive" in the rules as casting a fire spell on a stick to make a torch. The game should reward creativity not punish it

If you Command a target to flee, the fastest available means to get away from you could be going off of a cliff. After all, a 100 foot drop beats 60 feet of dashing away

Does anything in this description specify it doesn't work on say... beasts? Old Command needed the target creature to understand your language, but this one doesn't

Quote from W01 >>

Does anything in this description specify it doesn't work on say... beasts? Old Command needed the target creature to understand your language, but this one doesn't

This version of the spell works on any creature.

right? its now arguably one of the strongest cc spells in the game

RAW? yes

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Freed5_The_Donkey_from_Floruda >>

About the option "approach" it says the target moves towards me and ends its turn if it's right next to me.

But it doesn't say anything about how like other spells that say "spends its movement" or "takes the dash action".  

It's easy To draw a conclusion that it uses all of its movement but because of the bad warding the target could just use its movement to move closer to me, not getting right next to me, and do whatever it wants to with its action and bonus action.

I get it that they say "ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet if you" to make it clear that it should not charge and crush into me but now it's not clear that the target should spend its whole turn for that like the other options.

Since it says the target has to move toward you "by the shortest and most direct route", by definition it has to get as close to you as it can. If it can get within 5 feet of you, then it has to end its turn there and not do anything else. If it can't get within 5 feet of you, it has to get as close as it can, but it can continue its turn as normal after that. Obviously this option isn't a great one to choose if the target is very far away from you.

Since it spent its action dashing, and have no movement left, RAW, it could only use its bonus action.

However, RAI, it doesn't get the bonus action either. It dashes, then ends its turn. This is how I rule it.

Quote from Satanihavet >>

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Freed5_The_Donkey_from_Floruda >>

About the option "approach" it says the target moves towards me and ends its turn if it's right next to me.

But it doesn't say anything about how like other spells that say "spends its movement" or "takes the dash action".  

It's easy To draw a conclusion that it uses all of its movement but because of the bad warding the target could just use its movement to move closer to me, not getting right next to me, and do whatever it wants to with its action and bonus action.

I get it that they say "ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet if you" to make it clear that it should not charge and crush into me but now it's not clear that the target should spend its whole turn for that like the other options.

Since it says the target has to move toward you "by the shortest and most direct route", by definition it has to get as close to you as it can. If it can get within 5 feet of you, then it has to end its turn there and not do anything else. If it can't get within 5 feet of you, it has to get as close as it can, but it can continue its turn as normal after that. Obviously this option isn't a great one to choose if the target is very far away from you.

Since it spent its action dashing, and have no movement left, RAW, it could only use its bonus action.

 

However, RAI, it doesn't get the bonus action either. It dashes, then ends its turn. This is how I rule it.

I'm not convinced that's the actual intent, but it's a reasonable house rule.

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Satanihavet >>

Since it spent its action dashing, and have no movement left, RAW, it could only use its bonus action.

 

However, RAI, it doesn't get the bonus action either. It dashes, then ends its turn. This is how I rule it.

I'm not convinced that's the actual intent, but it's a reasonable house rule.

I think that's the intent with all the commands.

It executes the command --> then the creature loses what's left of its turn.

Approach is the only command not following that pattern, which I think is due to sloppy wording instead of intent.

Quote from Satanihavet >>

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Satanihavet >>

Since it spent its action dashing, and have no movement left, RAW, it could only use its bonus action.

 

However, RAI, it doesn't get the bonus action either. It dashes, then ends its turn. This is how I rule it.

I'm not convinced that's the actual intent, but it's a reasonable house rule.

I think that's the intent with all the commands.

It executes the command --> then the creature loses what's left of its turn.

Approach is the only command not following that pattern, which I think is due to sloppy wording instead of intent.

I see where you're coming from, but I would still argue that if they intended for all the options to be the form of "do the thing, then immediately end your turn without doing anything else", they would've explicitly said that as a general statement outside the list of options.

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Satanihavet >>

Quote from wagnarokkr >>

Quote from Satanihavet >>

Since it spent its action dashing, and have no movement left, RAW, it could only use its bonus action.

 

However, RAI, it doesn't get the bonus action either. It dashes, then ends its turn. This is how I rule it.

I'm not convinced that's the actual intent, but it's a reasonable house rule.

I think that's the intent with all the commands.

It executes the command --> then the creature loses what's left of its turn.

Approach is the only command not following that pattern, which I think is due to sloppy wording instead of intent.

I see where you're coming from, but I would still argue that if they intended for all the options to be the form of "do the thing, then immediately end your turn without doing anything else", they would've explicitly said that as a general statement outside the list of options.

Are you for real?

---------------------------------------------------------------

Halt. On its turn, the target doesn’t move and takes no action or Bonus Action.

• It does nothing.
• It ends its turn, losing what's left of it's actions.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Grovel. The target has the Prone condition and then ends its turn.

• It grovels (prone condition).
• It ends its turn, losing what's left of it's actions.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Flee. The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means.

• It moves as far away as it can, dashing, creating maximum distance (spending its turn).
• It ends its turn, losing what's left of it's actions.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Drop. The target drops whatever it is holding and then ends its turn.

• Disarmed.
• It ends its turn, losing what's left of it's actions.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Approach. The target moves toward you by the shortest and most direct route, ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet of you.

Approach. Can reach you.

• It spends its movement to reach you, dashing if it has to.
• It ends its turn, losing what's left of it's actions.

Approach. Can not reach you.

• It spends its movement, and dashes, to reach you.
• Suddenly, its fee to do whatever it likes.

---------------------------------------------------------------

In all examples except where approaching from too far, including approach where it reaches you, they lose their turn. That's the whole point of the spell. How do you not see the pattern? How can some one be so fundamentally naive that they think all spells are perfectly written without flaws? How can some one play a game without critical thought and cognitive flexibilty, playing every rule verbatim? Don't you think that this spell, which has been around for a while, have been re-worked, over and over? Snippets of text copy-pasted from earlier games into newer editions, with ample opportunity to get parts of a spell description slightly wrong or incomplete?

 3.5 command

If it wasn't for the fact that I've read your other 800 comments, I would think you were trolling. In the beginning, I thought it was a positive thing that you were out here, helping the noobs with basic questions. Now, not so much.

Take a breath. Please.

As I said, I understand your logic, and running it that way is perfectly reasonable. I've never had anyone actually use the "Approach" version in a game I was running, but in practice I'd probably run it that way too. All I said was that I wasn't sure that was the original intent of whoever wrote it.