D&D (2024) Command is the Perfect Encapsulation of Everything I Don't Like About 5.5e

Not enough of them.


New to D&D.

The majority of 5e players and DMs started with 5e
The majority of 5e's veteran DMs are DMs who learned on their own or via YT by "trial by fire".

That's why they want to lock down rules. They had to learn to DM as noobs with rules lawyers, munchkins, silly geese, and problematics with little help and a terribly organized DMG.


You got it backwards.

WOTC designed 5e to attract 1e, 2e, and 3e fans. They failed. So 5e DMs had to teach themselves.

This why 5e has a rep of being terrible to DM.
Ok, and now those DMs have been DMing for a while (up to a decade if they started in 5e) and can teach others. Or is that not veteran enough for you? How much experience does a DM need to meet your criteria as an experienced DM?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Rules will never make a game interesting for me. The stories that we create at the table are what makes it interesting.
Then what difference does it make to you what game you're playing? Why advocate for any particular rule set if none of them generate interest on their own?
 


Here are some creative attempts I've seen in play:

Daydream - to stop concentration
Surrender - used against a leader during a standoff/negotiation after she asked for the party to surrender
Swim - got an enemy to jump in a moat taking him essentially out of the fight
Lie - This was used interrogating a prisoner to make an enemy being interrogated lie, thereby knowing the truth. (failed due to a save)
Breathe - Attempted to force a Dragon to use his breath weapon in a location near no allies (failed due to save .... but he breathed anyway)
Regurgitate - attempted to be used to make a purple worm throw up a party member. Failed because of the language requirement (failed)
A favorite with my group is "Cooperate," especially when paired with zone of truth.
 

If it is a controlled mount I would think that would dismount while the mount is stopped. Given the way movement works in 5E that will always be that way technically at the start of the turn.
I was simply responding to the example as given by Lanefan, where he hoped for a target that was moving at considerable speed--specifically with the intent of harming the rider when they dismounted.

Here are some creative attempts I've seen in play:

Daydream - to stop concentration
Surrender - used against a leader during a standoff/negotiation after she asked for the party to surrender
Swim - got an enemy to jump in a moat taking him essentially out of the fight
Lie - This was used interrogating a prisoner to make an enemy being interrogated lie, thereby knowing the truth. (failed due to a save)
Breathe - Attempted to force a Dragon to use his breath weapon in a location near no allies (failed due to save .... but he breathed anyway)
Regurgitate - attempted to be used to make a purple worm throw up a party member. Failed because of the language requirement (failed)
Okay! Some of these are much better. "Surrender" still seems to me pretty verboten, since the spell only works for six seconds. "Lie" is more than a bit risky. Just because someone tells a lie, doesn't mean the exact opposite of what they said is true, unless you have very carefully worded your questions--creative, perhaps, but not nearly as useful as you might think. "Breathe" is too non-specific; unless the dragon literally can't reach anyone, that could instead draw the breath to you (since, per the rules, movement can be freely blended with actions).

And that last one already would have failed anyway, so...not really a useful example of a better command?

So I'll grant Daydream as a clearly useful thing to do, and Lie as a risky but potentially useful thing. The others either don't work (Surrender/Regurgitate) or are much too specific (Swim/Breathe). Which...again, is sort of the point I was making. People frequently see more creativity in the 5.0 wording than is actually there, because they ignore the "not harmful" limitation, or the language limitation, or expect rather a lot out of

Even with Swim, for example, I could easily see a 5.0 DM saying, "He attempts to start swimming, but since he isn't in water right now, nothing happens." Which would be effectively equivalent to just telling the target to "wait." The caster assumed--and, IMO, the DM very generously granted--that "Swim" would entail the additional idea, "get to a place where you can swim". That's something that could easily result in a multi-minute back-and-forth between a DM and player because the player believes command carries those extra implications and the DM doesn't.
 

5e is VERY popular with players,

But it is well known to suck to DM until you learn tricks, drop hard restrictions, or have previous DM knowledge.
But this leads to a critical question: Is it popular specifically for all the exact things it is? Or is it popular for other reasons, with the exact details being secondary or even irrelevant?

Because the key problem with the "it's popular" argument is that it only has force when you add the extra premise: "And it would cease to be that popular if you changed anything about it."

It becomes substantially weaker when you don't allow that assumption. You already know that I don't allow it.
 

That's something that could easily result in a multi-minute back-and-forth between a DM and player because the player believes command carries those extra implications and the DM doesn't.
I have one player who is particularly likely to try this kind of thing. But he will find as many edge cases and interesting uses for his character's powers and abilities as he possibly can prior to play, so we can have the discussion when there is no time pressure. If he comes up with something in the middle of the session, we are highly unlikely to spend minutes discussing it, unless we're in a slow-paced planning period already.

If it's the middle of combat, or any situation where the game needs to move forward, then we'll have a quick discussion, I'll make a ruling if necessary, and then we move on. If it needs further thought, I will mention at the time that my immediate ruling (whether in the player's favour or not) will need to be reassessed in more detail after the session.

None of us consider five minutes arguing about rule interpretations to be a valuable use of our time when there is actual gaming that could be happening, so we simply don't waste our time having those arguments during the game.
 

None of us consider five minutes arguing about rule interpretations to be a valuable use of our time when there is actual gaming that could be happening, so we simply don't waste our time having those arguments during the game.
That's great!

It's also not, in my experience, representative of the typical D&D player that makes use of these edge-case spells. And it emphatically isn't the case that typical players pick through and analyze such things well in advance during downtime and then bring it up to the DM before play. I've literally only seen people do that with the edition that must not be named.
 



Remove ads

Top