D&D 5E (2024) Changes to the Command spell and its use at the table.

[ECMO3]

I'm interested: if you were DMing and had a caster give the command "flee," and I responded with my character doing the spiral gimmick, how would you rule?

I would rule that is not the "fastest available means" moreover you would not tell me anything if you failed the save, I would tell you where you are going. I don't believe the being that failed the save has any agency here.

Let's assume my character has the "fly" spell active and so can turn with no loss of movement. Literal wording: "Flee. The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means." Check; nothing there about achieving the maximum distance from you.

So this relies on an alternative and admittedly ambiguous definition of the sentence and phrasing.

the wording is:

".. moving away from you by the fastest available means."

The spell clearly requires this. If you interpret the term "fastest" as a magnitude which only applies to the means then it is simply the fastest speed you can obtain regardless of direction and the direction can be any that is away. If you interpret it as a vector quantity measured in a specific direction, which is certainly what is intended IMO, then spiraling around is not the "fastest" unless there is something that restricts you from moving away in a linear fashion.

To illustrate this if we are in NYC and I say to get in your car and drive to LA by the "fastest available means" you could take that to mean drive your car as fast as it will possibly go but not necessarily in the direction that gets you closest to LA, or you could take it to mean drive it in the manner and route that gets you to LA the fastest. Your interpretation is consistent with the former, mine is consistent with the latter.

Moving as fast as possible in a fashion that also moves you some amount further away is not the same moving away as fast as possible and I think the spell requires the latter.

So suffice it to say I think this interpretation could be a RAW interpretation, but I do not agree with it and it is not the only possible one.

I will also add that accepting that definition here could also affect other spells including Fear, Dissonant Whispers and Compulsion.

My ruling would be simple: "Don't be dumb; your character tries to get away to the best of their ability given their circumstances, because that's what fleeing is." But I will always default to narrative coherence over RAW.

I think the specific hypotheticals we are talking about now are strawmen that I have never seen in play, which were originally proposed by people who's real purpose is to present an argument to weaken the spell in highly situational circumstances that do rarely occur (i.e. running across lava or off of a cliff).

I think the designers did not intend to have people use the spell to find a secret door or difficult terrain and I've never seen that done. If the invisible wall situation happened in my game I probably would not even remember it or this thread. But I think the designers very much do intend to have people run across lava or off a cliff if these are the fastest means and they even changed the specifics and took out wording regarding self harm to facilitate exactly that.

If you accept that, then the rest of the hypothetical examples I commented on are just consistent application of the mechanics to satisfy those hypothetical strawmen.

But if you insist on RAW, wouldn't you have to agree to the silly spiral or the hidden door?

No.

 

[ECMO3]

Yeah. What I said.

No you said they could "divine" an invisible wall. They absolutely can not do that with this spell. No way. They would not know an invisibile wall was there even as they were running around it, or even after they ran around it and it was their turn.

Perhaps they could metagame and determine there was an invisible wall, but that is not the same as divining it.

No Divining at all!

Yeah. And the enchantment will have them bump against the wall.

And for some reason it won't make you run off a cliff if said wall wasn't there?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No you said they could "divine" an invisible wall. They absolutely can not do that with this spell. No way. They would not know an invisibile wall was there even as they were running around it, or even after they ran around it and it was their turn.

Perhaps they could metagame and determine there was an invisible wall, but that is not the same as divining it.

No Divining at all!




And for some reason it won't make you run off a cliff if said wall wasn't there?

Because the cliff is not invisivle...

As I said. Can't help you. You clearly don't want to see the problem.

 

[ECMO3]

Because the cliff is not invisivle...

As I said. Can't help you. You clearly don't want to see the problem.

There is no problem.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

There is no problem.

Not for me, not for you. We had one if we ever sat at the same table.

 

[Lanefan]

No I never said that. The magic forces and individual to move away at the fastest possible, if that is around an invisible wall that is what happens.

It is not guiding at all, as you said it is not a divinination! It is an enchantment; it is moving the recipients feet or flapping its wings or whatever and forcing it to move.

Now that's another interesting, if likely incorrect, interpretation - that the magic is directly causing the feet to move or the wings to flap, as opposed to the magic merely compelling the target to flee (or grovel, or whatever) like any other compulsion effect and leaving the actual running-flying bits up to the target's brain and physiology to sort out.

 

[Lanefan]

I would rule that is not the "fastest available means" moreover you would not tell me anything if you failed the save, I would tell you where you are going. I don't believe the being that failed the save has any agency here.

Which tells me you're ruling the fleeing is uncontrolled, as if in complete mindless panic.

As long as that's the basis you've got this sat on, it makes a lot more sense. I rule that fright-causing spells like Spook (I think it's called Fear now, same idea) or Cloak of Fear cause mindless fleeing, so I'm used to this idea.

I think the argument many are presenting here, though, including me to some extent, is that for a bunch of reasons the fleeing caused by Command: Flee is not mindless panic. We've already determined, I think, that Command doesn't impose the frightened condition and thus a "fearless" effect won't stop it, and as 5e is all about "conditions" either the condition is in effect or it is not. And if the target isn't frightened then a great deal more control over its actions is retained...other than having to get away from the caster.

Where it gets messy for me is that if it's not a capital-f Fright-based effect, what is it? It's not a compulsion, similar to Suggestion, 'cause if it was then things that defeat charms and compulsions should also stop Command...but they don't. So it Command a corner case that doesn't fit with anything else?

 

[Clint_L]

The spell clearly requires this. If you interpret the term "fastest" as a magnitude which only applies to the means then it is simply the fastest speed you can obtain regardless of direction and the direction can be any that is away. If you interpret it as a vector quantity measured in a specific direction, which is certainly what is intended IMO, then spiraling around is not the "fastest" unless there is something that restricts you from moving away in a linear fashion.

To illustrate this if we are in NYC say to get in your car and drive to LA by the "fastest available means" you could take that to mean drive your car as fast as it will possibly go but not necessarily in the direction that gets you closest to LA, or you could take it to mean drive it in the manner that gets you to LA the fastest. Your interpretation is consistent with the former, mine is consistent with the latter.

But the spell says nothing about a destination, so that analogy doesn't work.

If a creature has access to a spell like Plane Shift, does Command suddenly become like a level 1 Banishment?

 

[ECMO3]

Now that's another interesting, if likely incorrect, interpretation - that the magic is directly causing the feet to move or the wings to flap, as opposed to the magic merely compelling the target to flee (or grovel, or whatever) like any other compulsion effect and leaving the actual running-flying bits up to the target's brain and physiology to sort out.

It is an enchantment, of course it is, just like with Hold Person, or Compulsion, or Tasha's Hideous Laughter, or Dissonant Whispers. These are all enchantments that are forcing the creature to do specific things.

And even if you don't subscribe to that, the idea that you have the agency to not do something required by the spell because it would be bad is ridiculous. It is a combat spell, it will always be bad if you fail!

 

[ECMO3]

But the spell says nothing about a destination, so that analogy doesn't work.

It says "away from [the caster]" the direction is away.

Change the analogy a little a nuclear weapon is about to land in the city and I tell you - "Get in your car and drive away from here by the fastest means available" Your interpretation is driving 150mph in a circle which are slightly ever widening meets that requirement and follows those directions. I think in terms of the strict literal meaning of the words in quotes it does, but it is not consistent with my intepretation of what the sentance actually means.

If a creature has access to a spell like Plane Shift, does Command suddenly become like a level 1 Banishment?

No, it specifically says you spend your turn "moving", these things require an action. This is also why you can't open a door that requires the utilize action or cast misty step or cast teleport or Haste. Those things are not movement.

You can do things which can be done as part of movement, for example drawing a weapon or calling out instructions to another PC or using your interaction. If you are concentrating on Conjure Celestial you could move the Celestial to a new position to hurt enemies or heal allies as that is part of your movement per the wording of the spell.

If you were incorporeal, like if the target is a ghost it absolutely would go through a wall. If the target had the ability to shift into the border ethereal without an action or bonus action it would be open to interpretation, but I don't actually think that puts you further away than being on the material plane in the same place, but I could see that you could argue it would (and most enemies would choose to anyway).

If you are standing in front of a portal that you do not need a Utilize or Magic action to go through, then yes I think you would run through it to whatever plane is on the other side.

These are all highly situational strawmen that are being thrown up though.

If the spell was worded differently and it said you need to take an action to get as far away as you can possibly get, then yes you would need to cast those, but that would actually be way OP and would be substantially different mechanically.