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

[Micah Sweet]

When half of your customer base are completely new to the game you have to tell them directly how the game is supposed to work. And if you're not willing to do that you have to put in hard limitations to save themselves.

And the fact that WotC refuses to do the first thing is another reason why I want nothing more to do with their game.

 

[mellored]

IMO, the biggest issue with command is how big of a gap it can be between expectations. Part of the 2024 goal is to get rid of the 'DM may I' ability.

Any DM can wiggle out of any Command with a little of their own creativity. 1 word is not clear. For instance, if a player tells a murder suspect to confess, the DM decides what that means.

DM1: I killed him.
DM2: I didn't like that guy.
DM3:


A secondary issue is that it's more powerful for players (not characters) who have a larger vocabulary. Telling a king to Abdicate or to Perendinate is not something many players are capable of.

Third, this is powerful mind control for a level 1 spell.

 

[KYRON45]

And the fact that WotC refuses to do the first thing is another reason why I want nothing more to do with their game.

You are aware that this is a thread about their game though right?

 

[Micah Sweet]

You are aware that this is a thread about their game though right?

Sure, but I have no intention of playing it. It's just the topic du jour, and I enjoy game theory and design. If everybody wasn't talking about 5.5, I likely wouldn't be either. But they are.

 

[Remathilis]

I don't see anything in any version of the Command spell description that says the intent of the spell is to get an opponent in combat to waste a turn. Spells do what the flavor descriptor says they do, or why is that descriptor even present? This is exactly the problem I had with 4e. The flavor descriptor was clearly presented as an afterthought that didn't really matter. It looks like 5.5 is going that same way.

Would you accept any Command where the target dies from the action either directly (autodawiniate) or indirectly (defenestrate)? Because that is against the spirit of the spell as I've seen it. All the suggested (now only) options so not do anything more powerful than force movement (towards, away, or prone) or waste an action doing something counterproductive.

 

[Remathilis]

The thing is you have to remember you have a new generation of DMs where a quarter of them think that a natural 20 on a persuasion role means that you can persuade King to give up their crown.

I'm generally a "Rule of Cool" DM but the two things I cannot stand are "nat 20 always succeed" style skill checks and "called shots" that debilitate foes (I shoot his throat so he can't cast spells). Why have rules if every player can just do whatever they want whenever they want?

 

[Oofta]

I understand; however, the DM violated both RAI and RAW in your scenario and was just a jerk. Unless it was a friend, I would have found another game. If a friend or if I thought the DM was salvageable, then I would have talked to them in private.

As a DM, I always make it clear that a player should address things with me if there is a concern and I consistently ask for feedback from them on how the game is running.

But some of the examples are making the same assumptions, that the caster decides how to implement the command not the target. If you follow that philosophy what the DM did was par for the course.

 

[Remathilis]

Sure, but I have no intention of playing it. It's just the topic du jour, and I enjoy game theory and design. If everybody wasn't talking about 5.5, I likely wouldn't be either. But they are.

I'm sure my momma said something about everyone jumping off a bridge once. Maybe she was casting Command?

 

[Minigiant]

And the fact that WotC refuses to do the first thing is another reason why I want nothing more to do with their game.

They won't do it because the old guard does not like being told what to do.

That is the crux of the issue.

You have different demographics and constituencies in your customer base and half of them want something and the other half want to direct opposite of it.

 

[Minigiant]

I'm generally a "Rule of Cool" DM but the two things I cannot stand are "nat 20 always succeed" style skill checks and "called shots" that debilitate foes (I shoot his throat so he can't cast spells). Why have rules if every player can just do whatever they want whenever they want?

Because no one tells them is a bad idea until they do it enough and realize it's a bad idea.

Despite what people say the vast majority of visible DM advice for many decades was to not help people or to tell them to "run the game exactly how I do".

DM advice only recently became majority friendly when you get folk became the main content creators and advice givers.