D&D 5E Mind Blank against Command

[Maxperson]

Sure, and that's absolutely my experience as well. However, there's an excluded middle that was jumped over like they were playing a game of "the floor is lava".

Lava gnomes! cough sorry. Reflex.

The options are not: A) hyper-focused and precise rules for everything, or; B) vague, easily abused rules.

I agree with there being a middle ground. I don't think that B is much of an issue with 5e, though. Players can't abuse rules very easily because there's a DM to make rulings.

You can write precise rules that are broadly applicable. Something as simple as "all spells of the enchantment school are considered charms" would have worked. They actually did this in the description of the enchantment school, but because it's in natural language instead of rules-speak, there's enough wiggle room for the lawyers. So here we are. Having an argument about how a clearly mind-altering spell isn't actually a mind-altering spell because the rules aren't written precisely enough.

And by the guy who says 5e keeps the rules lawyers at bay. The irony is strong. On the other hand, most of these arguments occur on the forums which bears little resemblance to a game being played.

 

[Lyxen]

It's a rulings over rules edition. It doesn't need to be written there. It's clear that RAI is for mind blank to stop mind affecting spells. It's clear that despite nothing being written into command about being mind affecting, that it is. I would rule that mind blank stops command, because that makes the most sense.

I agree with most of this except for the underlined part above. It's obvious to you, and from history I would have a tendency to agree with you, but from a pure 5e perspective, mind affecting spells are usually categorised as using the charmed condition, and command does not.

Again, I'm would probably rule the same way that you do, I'm just pointing out that from RAW, it's not the case (but you know me as well, RAW is not the most important thing for me, but it is for some people).

But it's not a question of the relative power of the spells, and it's not a question of the spell school...

 

[Lyxen]

I agree with there being a middle ground. I don't think that B is much of an issue with 5e, though. Players can't abuse rules very easily because there's a DM to make rulings.

Exactly, back to the basics of a TTRPG, a contrario to table to combat board games...

And by the guy who says 5e keeps the rules lawyers at bay. The irony is strong. On the other hand, most of these arguments occur on the forums which bears little resemblance to a game being played.

I think you misunderstand me, I'm just trying to present all perspectives so that DMs know what they can expect, while at the same time thinking that some arguments are plainly wrong, like the one about "all enchantments".

 

[Maxperson]

I agree with most of this except for the underlined part above. It's obvious to you, and from history I would have a tendency to agree with you, but from a pure 5e perspective, mind affecting spells are usually categorised as using the charmed condition, and command does not.

Lack of the charmed condition does not equal not mind affecting. 5e is filled with exceptions and contradictions. Just look at the thread on which magic items need attunement.

Command is a 1st level ENCHANTMENT that requires a WISDOM save. It's very clearly mind affecting. If it wasn't, it would require a dex, con or strength save. Int, wis and cha are mental saves. Anything require those saves affects the mind in some way, and is therefore mind affecting.

 

[Maxperson]

I think you misunderstand me, I'm just trying to present all perspectives so that DMs know what they can expect, while at the same time thinking that some arguments are plainly wrong, like the one about "all enchantments".

"Enchantment spells affect the minds of others, influencing or controlling their behavior. Such spells can make enemies see the caster as a friend, force creatures to take a course of action, or even control another creature like a puppet."

It's right there on page 203 of the PHB. Affects the minds = mind affecting. Controlling behavior. Forcing a course of action. That's the Command spell. A mind affecting enchantment that controls the behavior of the target, forcing a course of action.

 

[Lyxen]

"Enchantment spells affect the minds of others, influencing or controlling their behavior. Such spells can make enemies see the caster as a friend, force creatures to take a course of action, or even control another creature like a puppet."

It's right there on page 203 of the PHB. Affects the minds = mind affecting. Controlling behavior. Forcing a course of action. That's the Command spell. A mind affecting enchantment that controls the behavior of the target, forcing a course of action.

Again, enchantment does not mean mind affecting (Hex, Hold Person which has a Wisdom spell as well). And it could be argued that Command "control(s) another creature like a puppet", in which case it affects just the body, like hold person which paralyses it.

Just to be clear, I'm not discussing your interpretation which would probably in the end be mine as well, but there are others which are closer to the RAW if not the RAI and in any case the history of the spell as being mind affecting.

 

[Maxperson]

Here's a list of mind affecting enchantments that do not have the charmed condition.

Animal Messenger
Antipathy/Sympathy
Bane
Bless
Calm Emotions
Command
Compelled Duel
Compulsion - which is interesting in that it does not charm the target, but won't affect a target that cannot be charmed.
Confusion

I'm stopping at C, because my point has been made. Up to this point there are about twice as many mind affecting spells that do not charm as there are that do.

 

[Maxperson]

Again, enchantment does not mean mind affecting (Hex, Hold Person which has a Wisdom spell as well). And it could be argued that Command "control(s) another creature like a puppet", in which case it affects just the body, like hold person which paralyses it.

Just to be clear, I'm not discussing your interpretation which would probably in the end be mine as well, but there are others which are closer to the RAW if not the RAI and in any case the history of the spell as being mind affecting.

Both Hex and Hold Person affect the mind.

Hex affects the mind of the target, causing him to have disadvantage with a chosen ability. The necrotic damage should be necromancy, but spells are just one school in 5e and they went with the mind affecting portion, not the necromantic portion.

Hold Person causes a mental paralysis. Since it's an enchantment, it is mind affecting and paralyzes by shutting down the target's ability to use his mind to move his body. Had it been a physical paralysis, the save would have been strength or constitution and probably transmutation school.

 

[Lyxen]

Here's a list of mind affecting enchantments that do not have the charmed condition.

Animal Messenger
Antipathy/Sympathy
Bane
Bless
Calm Emotions
Command
Compelled Duel
Compulsion - which is interesting in that it does not charm the target, but won't affect a target that cannot be charmed.
Confusion

I'm stopping at C, because my point has been made. Up to this point there are about twice as many mind affecting spells that do not charm as there are that do.

Some of these don't have to be mind affecting, you know, you are colouring your list with your bias: Bane, Bless, animal messenger, compelled duel, etc. could be simply "body puppet" spells rather than mind affecting ones, or simply divine effects in the case of Bane and Bless.

As for confusion, it clearly says "This spell assaults and twists creatures' minds", so it's clearly affecting the mind.

 

[Maxperson]

Some of these don't have to be mind affecting, you know, you are colouring your list with your bias: Bane, Bless, animal messenger, compelled duel, etc. could be simply "body puppet" spells rather than mind affecting ones, or simply divine effects in the case of Bane and Bless.

It doesn't matter if they have to be mind affecting. The rule is that they ARE mind affecting. We have a situation where you have to go out of your way to declare that you know better than the rule and that the rule is wrong, without language supporting you, in order to say that they are not mind affecting. Whereas all I have to do is understand that the rule applies to all enchantments and explain it mentally.

Both the rule and Occam's Razor say you are wrong. The simplest explanation is that the rule is correct and enchantments are mind affecting in some way. Every spell I listed is either clearly mind affecting or can easily be explained in a mind affecting way. You have to defy both the rule and Occam's Razor to come up with a non-mind affecting explanation.

As for confusion, it clearly says "This spell assaults and twists creatures' minds", so it's clearly affecting the mind.

But it doesn't charm. All enchantment spells are mind affecting per the rule. All that's left to do is come up with how they are mind affecting for those spells that don't get specific with that portion, if it's even necessary.