You speak a one-word command to a creature you can see within range. The target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or follow the command on its next turn. The spell has no effect if the target is undead, if it doesn't understand your language, or if your command is directly harmful to it.
Some typical commands and their effects follow. You might issue a command other than one described here. If you do so, the DM determines how the target behaves. If the target can't follow your command, the spell ends.
Approach. The target moves toward you by the shortest and most direct route, ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet of you.
Drop. The target drops whatever it is holding and then ends its turn.
Flee. The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means.
Grovel. The target falls prone and then ends its turn.
Halt. The target doesn't move and takes no actions. A flying creature stays aloft, provided that it is able to do so. If it must move to stay aloft, it flies the minimum distance needed to remain in the air.
At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, you can affect one additional creature for each slot level above 1st. The creatures must be within 30 feet of each other when you target them.
I think that's a fun idea, but RAW the verbal component of the spell is one specific word. The DM has full latitude to make you specify which word is the command word, or worse, choose for you. Trying to get around the one-word limitation is trying to make the spell more powerful than it is.
How the **** do i buy this
Going prone is used as an example of a possible command.
I don't think they exactly meant making the command word more than one sentence, rather hiding the command word in a regular sentence. After all, just saying "Break" to someone seems suspicious, and if you want to take those extra measures, hiding your spell in a sentence seems useful
Suspicious? It's a magic spell that compels people to do something. There's no hiding it. You can't secretly command someone. Even if you somehow sneak the word into the sentence, MAGIC is still going to COMPEL them to do something, and they'll know it.
"You speak a one-word command to a creature you can see within range...You might issue a command other than one described here. If you do so, the GM determines how the target behaves."
As always, you should talk with your GM about how they'll rule something, but RAW gives the GM full latitude on how this works.
If a player at my table tried to work the command into the sentence in order to lead the target to a more specific interpretation, such as the example "That’s a nice wand would be a shame if you were to *BREAK* it," I'd either just pick the first verb "shame," or I would allow "break," but I'd ignore the sentence and think about how I would interpret the word by itself, as the spell states.
In the case of break? The target would probably sit down and relax and take a break.
EDIT: It's a first level spell. Let's not forget that.
I can't add this spell to my character's sheet. Am I doing something wrong?
I am a bit confused about the limitations of command. How does it affect the psyche?
I think it is op if you can just say fear and the enemy gets frightened. I do not think that fear hurts the enemy, but I want to hear the opinion of others.
- A frightened creature has disadvantage on ability checks and attack rolls while the source of its fear is within line of sight.
- The creature can't willingly move closer to the source of its fear .
PS. Sorry for grammatical errors, and thanks in advance
@MrHippo
The issue with this command would be that the spell lasts for one turn and the creature cannot take other actions. This means that imposing disadvantage or the movement restriction of the Frightened condition would not be able to come into play. The specific word that would impart this effect would probably also be "Cower".
If there is a feature that requires the target to be frightened, then this could be a one turn activation, but beyond that, you would be better served by using the "kneel" or "flee" commands suggested by the spell.
Thanks for the response.
It was very helpful. It's always good to know a spells limitations.
No problem! The spell does have limitations but it can reward a creative player. The dm always gets the final call, so its best to just try to explain what you would like to happen and see if the dm will allow it -- just don't cause conflict by repeating a request that has been denied.
Consider using these options (at your dm's discretion, of course):
Throw: why just drop the item where they can pick it up the next turn?
Drink: most creatures cant tell what a potion or flask of liquid is, so it is not apparent that it is harmful. Consider holding out a weird potion and using command to make the target drink it.
Betray: having an enemy switch sides for a turn can be helpful in many ways. Even if your dm wont allow the spell to make the target attack an ally, if you command a cultist to betray, they might be able to disrupt the ritual or free a hostage.
Give: because we all want the mcguffin
Surrender: it only lasts a turn, but your ally can get some shackles on them.
Gloat/monologue: have the bad guy tell you their plan
Hug: have a target grapple the nearest creature for a turn
Submit: have them choose to fail the next saving throw. Good chance this one will be denied, but it can give you two chances at getting that perfect spell in place.
As a DM (and as many others do), I consider the command to be the verbal component. You may notice every spell that involves you speaking has a verbal component. In my games, I try to incorporate the components into the actual spell. Example: the Identify spell requires material components which are an owl feather and pearl of a certain value, a somatic component, and a verbal component. I describe this as follows:
"The arcane collector takes the ancient knife which you obtained and carries it to his desk. After he gently sets it down, he opens a small box next to his lamp and withdraws a stunningly beautiful pearl. He holds it to his eye with his other hand on the blade and says 'reveal to me the truth,' and the pearl shines dimly and turns transparent. The arcane collector peers at the knife for a short time before the pearl returns to its chromatic luster. He returns the blade to you and says "I am sorry to inform you that it is just a normal old dagger"'
The material component is clear. It uses the components save for the feather for two reasons. The first is the use of an arcane focus. The second is because I am simply stuck with the feather's purpose. Jot down what you learned with a quill maybe?
The verbal is also clear. It is a command that starts the spell. it doesn't have to be those words specifically.
The somatic has two parts. Somatic just means that there are gestures. Standing there and pointing is a gesture so you don't have to be sitting there flailing your arms around. In this spell, the first component is holding the pearl up to your eye. The second is touching the item, which is what the spell says you have to do, that goes back to what I was saying about how the spells tell you what the components are.
Honestly, it really depends on what the character thinks. If the character truly believes that it will die if it drops its weapon, I could understand it not falling to the effects of the spell; however, if this little halfling is about to be smashed by an orc's large hammer, and the halfling commands the orc to "drop" it would work. additionally, you could potentially use some convincing: "look little goblin, we do not wish any harm upon you. If you could simply lower your weapon. We could come to an understanding." And as I say lower I cast command. Now I can roll a persuasion check to see if I convinced him I wasn't a threat.
I think you're giving too much weight to the consciousness of the target. The way I see it is that you're pushing a single thought into their mind that is overriding everything else in that moment. To the target it seems like their own thought. This spell only lasts a round, a few seconds of real time. That's enough to disorient someone to get them to do one thing. The reason they wouldn't cause direct harm to themselves is because that would never be one of their own thoughts. A beast is never going to bite themselves hard enough to cause injury, a person wouldn't stab themselves.
A thought like dropping what you're holding might be something a person would do that's not directly hurting them, even during a battle. Maybe your weapon broke, maybe you need your hands free to do some other important task like help an ally or climbing something.
Real world example, ever been holding something, like a pen, and it just falls out of your hand? Sort of like you forget that you need to keep holding it? That's how I see this spell working.
Using this spell with Booming Blade and the War Caster feat would be really effective on enemies in melee.
Action: Command "Flee", causing the target to use their full turn to move away as fast as possible.
Reaction: Cast Booming Blade, thanks to War Caster allowing a spell when an attack of opportunity is provoked. The bonus damage is guaranteed due to the creature having to continue to move away as fast as possible.
The potential is doubled with Polearm Master, assuming the melee enemy would need to move back in range during a later round, in which you'll have another reaction.
Unlikely to work. While flee would cause them to run away, they would use the disengage action to do so safely.
What you are looking for is the Suggestion spell. A full sentence of context to make the "command" make sense is likely treading too much on a higher level spell. A one word command means it should make sense without context.
Although an older question, something to keep in mind for a situation like this. Yes, your target would have to hear you. Language wouldn't matter if they didn't have to hear the command. There would be no concern about understanding, if they didn't have to hear it. Telepathy would be a way many DMs might let you get by on that aspect as another mentioned.
Secondly, without subtle spell metamagic or something similar, even if the target didn't see or hear your spellcasting, those around you would. Unless you are in the balcony above the target, or in some other way obscured, party goers near you would hear your chanting and see your forceful gesticulating. At best expect a DM to require performance and deception of some kind to obfuscate the task.
In earlier editions of the game, there was an obvious, physical manifestation with spellcasting. A glowing pulse of energy, a growing thrum of power around the caster, static cling centered around the caster, or even a pungent smell which made the mystic work obvious to most onlookers. Don't be surprised if many have that expectation in their games.
Fleeing doesn't directly harm them, not anymore than "Approach" would. Seeing as "Flee" is an actual example command word, and says, "spend its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means", not the safest, I would think it's pretty clear that they would have to use their action to dash, rather than disengage. Spending a turn means they can't do anything else on their turn.
That's not unreasonable either. I could see both results as DM interpretations. None of the other options involve inciting damage though. It's unlikely the spell as a first level control spell was designed with the expectation of triggering OAs. "Approach" wouldn't reasonably command someone to move through an open fire if they can go around it, despite it being a longer path. Why would "Flee" encourage the same effect by triggering an OA when it didn't have to? The target still recognizes danger and would be putting itself in harm by fulfilling those types of command.
underrated comment...nice one!